Loading...
09/13/1982 GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 The Grand Terrace Planning Commission regular meeting of Sep- tember 13 , 1982 was called to order at 7 : 00 P .M . in the Terrace View Elementary School Multi - Purpose Room , 22731 Grand Terrace Road , Grand Terrace , California by Chairman Douglas E . Erway . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE : Led by Commissioner Munson ROLL CALL : Commissioners Present : Andress , Bartel , Cole , DeBenedet , Erway , McDowell , Munson and Smith Commissioners Absent : Collins (excused ) Others Present : Virginia Farmer, Planning Director Joseph Kicak , City Engineer John Harper, City Attorney Gloria Flood , Planning Secretary MINUTES : The minutes of the Joint City Council and Planning Commission Meeting of July 12 , 1982 were approved as submitted . PCM 82-59 MOTION by Commissioner Andress , seconded by Commissioner DeBenedet and passed by an 8-0 VOTE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 12 , 1982 AS SUBMITTED . MINUTES : The minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 2 , 1982 were approved as submitted . PCM 82-60 MOTION by Commissioner Munson , seconded by Commissioner Cole and passed by an 8-0 VOTE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 2 , 1982 AS SUBMITTED . MINUTES : Minutes of the Adjourned Regular Meeting of August 16 , 1982 were approved as submitted . PCM 82-61 MOTION by Commissioner DeBenedet , seconded by Commissioner Smith and passed by an 8-0 VOTE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 16 , 1982 AS SUBMITTED. GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 1 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 NEW BUSINESS : ITEMS #1 & #2 USE PERMIT 82- 1 CONCURRENT WITH SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW NO . SA 82-12 THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF SAN BERNARDINO Southeast corner Pico Street and Oriole Avenue Virginia Farmer, Planning Director , presented the staff report . The project is a Use Permit and Site Plan and Architectural Review for Church , Parish Hall and a Rectory in the R- 1-1400 zone . This use is allowed under Use Permit in a residential zone . The building is 4800 square feet . It seats 308 people with 77 parking spaces required . The ingress and egress is from Oriole Avenue . Charles Brown , Architect , 647 Main Street , Riverside , stated that what is displayed is the Master Plan of what is proposed . The Church is small yet they have plans for growth in the future . The traffic is not an everyday activity . Notice having been given as required by law , the public hearing was opened by Chairman Erway . The Chairman requested those in favor or in opposition to come forward , give their names and addresses before speaking . Barney Karger, 11668 Bernardo Way , Grand Terrace . He stated he feels the church is an improvement to the area . He is concerned however about the improvements on Pico Street and Oriole Avenue . He further said he is concerned about the sewer and water going up Pico Street . Joseph Kicak , City Engineer , replied staff is not recommending any improvements to Pico Street but is recommending dedication and improvements on Oriole Avenue . He said only a small portion of the acreage is being improved at this time because of a provision in the ordinance that allows the City to require staged improvements . Staff has required improvements to the frontage being developed . At the time additional development takes place Pico Street frontage will be developed . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 2 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 Commissioner Smith asked about the sewer system . Mr . Kicak stated the sewer line is located on Oriole Avenue at the present time . Richard Vaughn , 12716 Oriole Avenue , Grand Terrace . He stated Oriole Avenue is quite narrow and feels the additional traffic of 77 cars would be a hazard to the children along that street . He requested that the street be widen if used for ingress and egress to this property . Glenn Nichols , 12730 Oriole Avenue , Grand Terrace , expressed his concern about traffic flow problems along the narrow street and feels it would be a hazard to exit onto Oriole Avenue . Brian Coburn , 12770 Oriole Avenue , Grand Terrace , asked if it was possible to put the exit and entrance on Pico Street and keep the main flow of traffic on Pico Street . Ed Brown , 12756 Oriole Avenue , Grand Terrace . He stated he shares the same concerns as the other neighbors . Ed Albriqston , 12796 Oriole Avenue , Grand Terrace . He stated his concern about the effect of the traffic on the neighborhood . John Lotspeich , 22680 Tanager Street , Grand Terrace . He expressed concern over the traffic flow pattern and feels the traffic should exit onto Pico Street . Cybil Carhart , corner of Raven Way and Oriole Avenue , Grand Terrace . She stated she is opposed to the project because of the traffic due to the narrowness of the street . Ed Brown , 12756 Oriole Avenue , Grand Terrace , he expressed concern over the drainage of the lot . Bill McKeever , 12714 Blue Mountain Court , Grand Terrace , stated he is a member of the church . He was involved in developing the plot plans and phasing plans for this project . The traffic concern these people have is also a concern of his . At this time Oriole Avenue is 28 feet from the curb to the edge of the pavement and then there is a dike that handles some drainage out of the orange groves . The toe of the dike is right at the edge of the pavement . There is no shoulder on any side whatsoever. So in effect right now there are 28 feet of pavement with cars parked on one side . It does make it difficult for two way traffic to get through there . He proposed to add four feet of pavement between the project on Pico Street on the east side and also to add a six foot graded shoulder to eliminate the physical constriction . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 3 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 Commissioner DeBenedet asked if Oriole Avenue could be fully improved on the east side all the way to Pico Street . Mr . McKeever answered that strictly from a budget standpoint the church is trying to provide enough paving to handle the traffic and it recognizes the problem. The proposal is to mitigate the traffic problem . Any improvement that the church must add once the 32 feet is reached is the parking lane . If the street is widened to 32 feet and posted for no parking on the east side there is actually the same amount of travel way as if it were fully improved and allows cars to park on the east side . Commissioner DeBenedet asked if it is possible to put a drive- way through the back because evidently there is a need for it . Mr. McKeever stated eventually they will but they don ' t know exactly what elevation it has to be set . If the church put in a driveway to Pico Street , it would end up tearing it out later when the ultimate construction is done . Commissioner McDowell asked that drainage be addressed . Mr. McKeever stated drainage coming off the mountain comes down through the houses to the east and is handled in a drainage easement that cuts in a diagonal across the northeasterly corner of the ten acres the church owns . That drainage comes and goes into a catch basin on Blue Mountain Court and comes out a pipe and goes diagonal across the corner . It actually enters Pico Street before it gets to Oriole Avenue . Commissioner Bartel asked how much the drainage from this project would increase the runoff going down Pico Street . Mr . McKeever asked if this was considering the entire drainage area or just the five acres being developed? Commissioner Bartel answered just considering the five acres being developed . Mr. McKeever answered Pico handles a lot of water . It is a water carrying street . It is planned that way . You are looking at five acres that we plan to develop over a period of between 10 and 15 years . We will increase the run off about 15% on an area that may be 2% of the total drainage area . Commissioner Cole asked about the drainage channel handling the run off from the orange grove to the south presently . What is going to happen to that when you block it off? Mr . McKeever stated the run off would be handled in the street . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 4 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 Commissioner Cole asked if based on the number you have attending the church regularly now is 77 spaces going to be adequate or are they going to start parking in the street? Mr . McKeever stated right now they were using the auditorium at the junior high school and they are probably not running more than 30 cars . Charles Brown , Architect , said that Mr . McKeever addressed concerns brought up by the neighbors and said he had nothing more to add . Commissioner DeBenedet asked about overhangs on the building . Commissioner DeBenedet stated buildings should have a minimum of two feet overhang and asked if that was possible . Mr . Brown stated it was possible . His feeling was that he was trying to keep more of a Spanish motif similiar to the churches across the street from the meeting room. He conceded that he could possibly have some type of plaster detail at the eave line . This is something he could do and keep his cost down . Commissioner DeBenedet stated he would like to see some overhang . Chairman Erway asked if this Commission were to impose an obligation on the church to put an overhang would that materially damage this project in anyway that Mr . Brown is aware of. Mr . Brown stated he didn ' t think so . He felt it had no benefit to the building as far as energy saving . Length of overhang is a matter of opinion . There being no one else wishing to speak in favor or in opposition to this project , the public hearing was closed . COMMISSION ACTION : ITEM #1 PCM 82-62 MOTION by Commissioner Smith , seconded by Commissioner Munson and passed by an 8-0 VOTE TO ADOPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND BASED ON THE MATERIAL IN THE STAFF PRESENTATION , REPORT AND TESTIMONY RECEIVED , MOVE TO APPROVE USE PERMIT 82- 1 INCLUDING THE FINDINGS AS WRITTEN IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 5 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 ITEM #2 PCM 82-63 MOTION by Commissioner McDowell , seconded by Commissioner DeBenedet and passed by an 8-0 VOTE TO REQUIRE AN OVERHANG TWO FEET WIDE . Commissioner Munson asked what the material for the shoulder would be and how it would be maintained . Joseph Kicak , City Engineer, stated Mr . McKeever said the four additional feet they are proposing would be paved which means the total width would be 32 feet providing for an eight foot parking lane plus two 12 foot lanes . Mr . Kicak also understood him to say that the additional 6 feet that he proposed to grade would not be paved . He is also concerned that the six foot area be posted for no parking . To summarize what we are looking at is 32 feet of paved section , two 12 foot lanes , one in each direction plus a graded shoulder . The paving and shoulder should be a condition of approval on the Site Plan . Commissioner Munson asked if this would be subject to the elements so to speak . Mr . Kicak answered yes it would be subject to the elements . He said there was certain concern expressed about drainage . The requirements from Engineering were somewhat general with respect to drainage . Commissioner Smith asked about parking in the graded area . Who has the jurisdiction on that . Mr. Kicak stated that the City has the jurisdiction . If the Planning Commission wished to recommend to the City Council in this motion that there be no parking in that particular area the City Council will consider it . The City Council will have it posted . Commissioner Andress stated that he hoped the Commission was not setting a precedent . That budgetary constraints are not a reason for not complying with safety concerns of the neighborhood . PCM 82-64 MOTION by Commissioner McDowell , seconded by Commissioner Bartel and passed by an 8-0 VOTE TO ADOPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND BASED ON THE MATERIAL IN THE STAFF PRESENTATION , REPORT AND TESTIMONY RECEIVED, MOVED TO APPROVE SA 82- 12 , INCLUDING THE FINDINGS AS WRITTEN IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, AS AMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND AMENDED BY THE CITY ENGINEER TO REQUIRE PAVING AND A GRADED SHOULDER ALONG THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE OF ORIOLE AVENUE . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 6 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 ADD ON ITEM : Chairman Erway stated that Commissioner Smith brought to the Commissioners ' attention the fact that she had visited the Griffin Tract which is off Palm Avenue . She explained what she saw so the City Engineer could tell the Commission about the grading in Tract 9772- 1 . Joseph Kicak , City Engineer explained the situation in detail . Chairman Erway stated that only one or two of the Commissioners had an opportunity to look at Tract 9772- 1 and directed other Commissioners to return to the next meeting with questions if any more explanation seems in order . Commissioner Cole stated he has not seen the site but asked if the pad elevation was constructed according to group grading plan . Mr . Kicak stated it was . -------------------------------------------------------- -- ----- ITEM #3 INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING ON STREETS AND ROAD BEAUTIFICATION Chairman Erway announced the hearing is to receive public input and suggestions from citizens regarding median strips , parking , landscaping , parkway landscaping , City entrance monuments , visibility , safety , and turn pockets . Chairman Erway invited the public to speak on City Beautification . Rex Edmundson , 22111 Newport , Grand Terrace , stated he had a business on Barton Road at 22484 . He is opposed to median strips with left turns . Beautification of Barton Road is fine for sidewalks so children get out of the street . He feels that is something that could be done for the children walking to school . As far as business is concerned medians with left turn lanes are going to make a hardship for business on Barton Road . Chairman Erway asked Mr . Edmundson if he had any recommendation for Mt . Vernon . Mr . Edmundson stated he is opposed to median strips . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 7 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 Dr . William E . Darwin , 22633 Raven Way . His business is on Barton Road at 22284 . He is against median strips anywhere on Barton Road or Mt . Vernon . The blocks are too long . Medians could cause a decrease in the property values along Barton Road because of the limitation of getting in and out of the property . One other point is in case of accident . One or two minutes could save somebody ' s life and if a paramedic has to drive around a long time , it could really cause a problem. He favors curbs and gutters on Barton Road and keeping children off the streets . Molly Morton , 12286 Michigan , Grand Terrace . She stated that sidewalks should be put in for the children ' s safety but would like to make the recommendation that the sidewalks go to the curb and not have a parkway . The parkway is expensive to maintain . Consider having sidewalks directly to the curb . Leon Olszewski , 12458 Michigan Avenue , Grand Terrace , asked what plans for beautification are being made for Michigan . He wants curbs and gutters on Michigan Avenue . LaVerna Francisco , 22300 Barton Road , Grand Terrace , stated she is opposed to medians on Barton Road . Mary Lou Williams , 22270 Barton Road , Grand Terrace . She stated she is opposed to median strips . It would decrease property value and increase the traffic . She wants sidewalks and other beautification . Dr. Darwin spoke again . He said another problem on Barton Road would be the original cost of installation of medians . He would substitute curbs , gutters , and sidewalks on Barton Road . Dennis Evans , 22064 De Berry , Grand Terrace . He opposed improve- ments on the west side of Michigan . Is concerned with future traffic if a shopping mall is constructed on C-2 land adjacent to the freeway . Helen Springfield , 22273 Barton Road , Grand Terrace , stated she is opposed to a center divider and one reason she is opposed , is because in the 1930 ' s and 1940 ' s she had a business on Rosemead and Beverly Boulevard in Los Angeles County . They put a center divider down Rosemead and cut off business 50% and in several years she had to move . Lee Parker , 22219 Barton Road , Grand Terrace , stated he is opposed to a center divider because there is too much traffic going up and down at speeds that exceed the speed limit . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 8 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION : Commissioner McDowell requested the City Engineer to provide the Commission with the rule or ordinance on sidewalks and their proximity to the street and also , the plans for the development on Michigan . Joseph Kicak , City Engineer , stated when San Bernardino County had jurisdiction over this area their standard allowed and sometimes required sidewalk adjacent to the property line leaving a parkway between curb and sidewalk . Since that time the City Council adopted a policy to install sidewalks adjacent to the curb and in all of the subdivisions to be constructed . With respect to Michigan Street , the City has budgeted for this year improvements on Michigan Street between Barton Road and DeBerry . Chairman Erway stated the object is to set another date for further consideration of this matter and hopefully more members of the public will be in attendance . Chairman Erway set the next public hearing for this item on September 20 , 1982 . ----------- ---------------------------------------------------- ITEM #4 ZO AMENDMENT 82-1 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE - PLANNING DEPARTMENT Amend title in Chapter 9 Ordinance 57 to read Commercial Planned Development Virginia Farmer , Planning Director, presented the staff report . The item is a routine item to change the title and name in Chapter 9 of the Zone Ordinance from "Town Center" to "Commercial Planned Development . " Every place that Town Center or TC District appears is to be changed to Commercial Planned Develop- ment or CPD District . Notice having been given as required by law , the public hearing was opened . Ed Courtney , 22074 DeBerry Street , Grand Terrace . He stated he is in opposition to this seemingly ignominous proposal . He GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 9 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 testified as follows : Lets clear the air here . The first , the only reason for changing this zoning is simply to clear the way for the development of a shopping center, a large shopping center . I and several other members of the audience attended the combined meeting of the City Council and the Community Redevelopment Agency last Thursday . We heard Mr . Gobar , a gentleman out of Los Angeles , who was hired to the tune of $17 ,000 by the City of Grand Terrace to produce a report which satisfied its requirements . That is to say it was commissioned by the Community Redevelopment Agency, who we learned that evening had decided that the City of Grand Terrace needs a gigantic shopping center . And so Mr . Gobar was commissioned to do this report . Lo and behold , he did in fact find that a gigantic shopping center in this particular area would provide the City of Grand Terrace with certain funds which they feel are necessary for them to have . Now I have some questions . First of which is , what about the water in the area ? We know that the City of Grand Terrace is supplied by Riverside-Highland Water Company , which is a stock company . So presumably in this area , there would be stock for the Riverside-Highland . But can in fact the Riverside-Highland provide this water? A development of the size that is being proposed will require a great deal of water . Are the mains going to have to be enlarged? If so , who is going to pay for that? Is that going to be a shared cost to other stockholders or is this to be strictly borne by the developer? What about sewage ? In the past , the City of Grand Terrace and the City of Colton who provides the sewer service do not have exactly the most aimiable relations . In fact there was a time when they didn ' t even speak to each other . And now we are going to ask the City of Colton to provide sewerage for a gigantic shopping center, which would be in direct competition with their proposed area , which undoubtably would be Cooley Ranch . Are they going to take kindly to this ? Are they going to take legal action against this ? Has anybody contacted the City of Colton ? If they do go along with this proposal , my next question is . . .who will pay for relocating the sewers ? Is this going to be a bond action or strictly going to be borne by the City and to be borne by the developer? A large development such as this will require that streets be widened . Have studies been done on this ? What kind of traffic for a proposed development such as this is entailed? How many cars are going to be going up and down DeBerry Street ? Right now DeBerry Street is residential street of residential size to handle residential traffic . Should it become a freeway off ramp it certainly will be necessary to widen the street . There is just so much widening you can do without disturbing the peaceful , useful residents in this area . Are you going to GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 10 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 take the streets right back down to the sidewalks , back to inside the sidewalks , the parkway? There is only a legal limit to the street size inside of the parkway . Which is the inside of the sidewalk in that area . That is definitely going to compact the residents . I think we have a legitimate concern in this regard . Lastly , has anybody really considered the feeling of the residents in this area ? When I moved into this area I knew that down to the end of my street was commercial property . I accepted that . We had some traffic from the storage place down there . There was no contemplation of a super regional shopping center . I seriously , very seriously doubt that I would have purchased my property if I had known this would arise in the future . I think some of the other people feel that way too . But have the residents in the adjoining area really had a chance to voice their opinions ? I think a lot people ha , ha ' d this proposal when it first came up . Well there were a few real estate agents behind it and we all know that . But did they really push it through ? Certainly . Form a Redevelop- ment Agency Committee , they can certainly get on the City Council agenda , they can certainly hire a fancy report from Los Angeles , they can certainly attempt to get the zoning changed by the Planning Commission . It is very possible that the residents don ' t realize what is going on . Now we have maybe six people at the City Council meeting . Well there are more than that here and I am here to tell you that if I have any- thing to say about it , there will be a whole lot more at the next meeting . I would suggest that you purchase some chairs and I suggest also , that the people in the additional areas be given a chance , a real chance , not just at this particular moment to voice their opinions . Because right here we have just the people that are immediately impacted . There is opposition , we won ' t rest . Chairman Erway stated that the Planning Commission is considering only the Amendment to Chapter 9 of Ordinance 57 at this time . John Harper , City Attorney, stated that the Planning Commission is considering the change of one word to another word . That uses currently permitted will be permitted under the new term . It is not a zone change . That is what I need to emphasize to you . It is merely a change in the title of the zone . COMMISSION DISCUSSION AND ACTION : Commissioner Smith said she felt it would be helpful to the audience to explain to them that one of the reasons for changing the terms is because a commercial development is not necessarily GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 11 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 in the center of town and we felt that the term "Town Center" is misleading . The term " Commercial Planned Development" concerns any planned commercial development regardless of its location in the City . The amendment is a matter of semantics . Joe Rubo , 12640 Garden Avenue , Grand Terrace . He stated he is confused by the matter of semantics . He said , the gentleman behind him hit the rail right on the head . The gentleman who spoke previously got him confused . He stated that everyone is concerned about the fact that we don ' t want any semantics or legal lies whatever slipped passed us . What we want to do is let people know that we are not really in favor of a shopping center whether it is called a town center or something else . We are really concerned that it is just too close to home and I don ' t think that Grand Terrace will really benefit by this . Like I say I am not sure what this is all about but I just want to say this before I walk out the door and somebody says they didn ' t understand it and we passed and slipped it in . Chairman Erway stated the proposed amendment amends the Zoning Ordinance to give a new title to a Chapter and changes some words from "Town Center District " to " Commercial Planned Development District . " The next item on the agenda is the over- lay for the C-2 land , which is not the item the Planning Commission is addressing . PCM 82-65 MOTION by Commission Munson , seconded by Commissioner McDowell and passed by an 8-0 VOTE TO ADOPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION , AND BASED ON THE MATERIAL IN THE STAFF REPORT , PRESENTATION AND THE TESTIMONY RECEIVED, FURTHER MOVED TO APPROVE ZO AMENDMENT 82- 1 INCLUDING THE FINDINGS AS STATED IN THE STAFF REPORT . -- ------------------------------------------------------------- ITEM #5 ZONE CHANGE 82-4 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE - PLANNING DEPARTMENT Placement of Chapter 9 Ordinance 57 overlay provisions to C-2 land west of 15E Freeway, south of Barton Road westerly of Michigan and northerly of Pico Street Chairman Erway announced that the proposed Zone Change is for the placement of the provisions of Chapter 9 Ordinance 57 on C-2 land as shown in the staff report . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 12 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 Virginia Farmer, Planning Director , presented the staff report . She stated that the C-2 land adjacent to the freeway, south of Barton Road , and west of Michigan is proposed for zoning to "Town Center" to be known as " Commercial Planned Development . " Land on Van Buren , owned by Wilden Pump and Engineering , which is on the south side of the street , is to be omitted . Staff is requesting at this time that if the Planning Commission imposes Commercial Planned Development zone on the C-2 land , that Wilden ' s land be omitted from the motion and at the appropriate time , by motion their zoning be changed to the M- R zone , a Commercial Manufacturing zone . This action would be consistent with the General Plan . It allows Wilden Pump and Engineering to implement its development plans and complete its ultimate build-out in an orderly manner . The Commercial Planned Development zone would allow the City to retain more control over the sorts of development which would take place . That is , design of infrastructure which means streets , sewer , water , and gas . It also allows the City to provide proper buffer zones , ingress and egress from any proposed future development . The zoning will require the minimum preferred development to be 30 acre increments . Also , this zoning provides more control for the benefit of the surrounding land owners . Chairman Erway stated that the land under consideration is currently land that people in the audience appear to be interested in . Also , Chairman Erway asked staff if the land is currently zoned C-2 . Mrs . Farmer stated it is currently zoned C-2 and can be developed in anyway commercially that is allowed in that zone subject to Site Plan Review . Chairman Erway asked if the proposed CPD Zone changes any of the uses that can be made on the C-2 land . Mrs . Farmer replied the proposed zoning changes how that land can be developed and provides for more orderly development . It provides more protection to the surrounding properties in terms of traffic and control of ingress and egress from the area . Commissioner Smith asked what restrictions wouldthe proposed zoning place on development . Mrs . Farmer said there would be restrictions on development plans that the Planning Commission and City Council impose . The proposed zoning would allow for a certain amount of clustering and patterns of traffic , buildings and discourage checkerboard type of development . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 13 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13, 1982 Commissioner Smith asked if proposed action would restrict the individual property owner from developing his property without consultation with surrounding property owners . Mrs . Farmer stated yes it would . It could require that plans not the phasing itself be in a minimum of 30 acre increments . Development phasing is allowed under this overlay. Commissioner Munson questioned the 30 acres . Let ' s say assuming I am a property owner and I own 2 acres . Once I abide by plans for the streets , the building code , the building design and the business I have planned to put into that area is it acceptable to go ahead and build on my two acres ? Or do I have to be part of 30 acres ? Does it have to be developed at one time? Mrs . Farmer said development plans could be 30 acres and phasing would then be allowed and the smaller ownerships could build on their land . Commissioner Smith questioned Commissioner McDowell as Chairman of the Economic Development Committee . As we recall in the early stages of your committee work you discussed plans , the desires of the property owners and tried to get some sort of consensus whether or not they would go along with a development is that correct ? And how much success did you have on this ? Commissioner McDowell answered there was not one dissenting vote of the property owners . He added the best way to stop all development is to go down and buy all that property . Those who don ' t want the City to develop it , just go buy it and then you can keep it in weeds as it is now , an eyesore next to the freeway . Notice having been given as required by law , the public hearing was opened . The Chairman invited those in favor or opposed to the Zone Change to come forward , give their name and address before speaking . Max Archer , 12490 Michigan , Grand Terrace . He stated at the present time he is building onto his market . He asked if under the new zoning he will be able to enlarge it for further use ? Mrs . Farmer said that he had one of the special conditions like Wilden Pump and Engineering . You need an exception to the zoning to continue your development . She said we can remove your parcels by motion and you will remain C-2 and continue your development . Mr . Archer asked what he had to do so that his property can remain in the C-2 zone . Mrs . Farmer stated he could request it . Mr. Archer then asked that his parcel be removed . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 14 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13, 1982 Samuel Crowe , Attorney at Law , 1131 West Sixth Street , Ontario , representing Wilden Pump and Engineering on Van Buren Street in Grand Terrace . He agreed with staff ' s proposal to delete the land on which Wilden is located . It is approximately six acres . He said the reason why the property should be deleted from the overlay zone is that it is substantially built-out . Wilden is one of the old companies in the area . Since 1977 it has quadroupled its size and sales . Until recently Wilden believed its land to be located in the M- R zone . We think that staff' s recommendation is correct and request M-R zoning on the land . Mr . Crowe then requested the Planning Commission give considera- tion to staff ' s recommendation and remove the property from the proposed development overlay . Dennis Cardoza , Terrace Properties , Grand Terrace represents the 9 acres north of De Berry along the freeway . He said he has been concerned over the last ten months or so that the City develop a specific plan with some detail . Mr . Cardoza testified as follows : From what I understand you are trying to designate the type of uses that are going to be put in specific areas . Many Cities that I have gone into have developed checkerboard areas and have haphazard development . I am concerned that something adverse to what I hope to put in is constructed . I would plan our nine acres in a design appropriate with the rest of the area if the overlay zone is approved . But until I know how the rest of the area is going to be developed , I have to be very concerned , waiting for the City to come up with a specific plan . For those people who are very concerned in here for what is going on in the area , rather than be upset you ought to work 100% with the City on making sure the plans suit the City ' s needs . The overlay allows the City to judge what type of development to put in there rather than planning say a grocery store for instance . Once everyone gets together , on what they would like to see out there , I could sit down and say okay that is what they want to see . Then we will design our property to fit those needs . I would really like to see everyone work together and know once everything is planned then I can come in and meet the City ' s needs without having the City saying no that is not what we want . Or put in something and then have someone develop the property next door in a use that will completely distract from what I have . Dennis Evans , 22064 DeBerry , Grand Terrace . He said that there was a presentation given to landowners that owned the land that was undeveloped last October . The question was put to them something to the effect that if the price was right would you sell your land ? They were never specifically asked if they were pro or con for any commercial development in the area or anything else of that nature . There was no response by the people in the audience at that time . The comment was made after that something to the effect , well because they did not respond you can take GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 15 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 that as an affirmative answer . There was no affirmative answer . I think anybody would be foolish not to sell property if the price was right . So I would just like that clarification . You can understand we do not have too much control on the zoning and what ' s going to go into the particular area . However , I think it is a little naive to think after you have read Mr . Gobar ' s report that the only financially feasible profitable thing to go in there is a large metropolitan type shopping mall . He indicated last Thursday to the CRA that it would be anchored by such stores as Bullocks ' , Robinson ' s , and Nordstrom ' s . Also , what came out at that particular meeting at the time of his report was that a shopping mall of that particular size would consist of approximately 100 acres . He also suggested that if land was purchased that the outlyning areas which it would encompass at this particular time would be south of Pico , east of Michigan all the way up to Barton for anticipated growth of any subsidary businesses that might want to go in . So I think everybody that lives anywhere south of Barton , west of Michigan better be darn well concerned because as we found out Edison has refused to sell their land . So we are shifting everything north . We know that we have at this point 66 vacant acres north of Pico , west of Michigan to Barton . That leaves 33 acres that are occupied at this particular time . If this mall is going to materialize that means that somebody is going to lose their home because the issue came up of eminent domain . The CRA has indicated no we won ' t take your property . However , we found out that the City said yes through the City Attorney . So I think a lot of us living down there right now are going to be really concerned as to what is going to happen and I think the citizens of Grand Terrace because it is not only us that live in that particular area but everybody that lives west of Mt . Vernon , south of Barton Road is going to have to be concerned when you take into consideration traffic . Mr . McDowell ' s report I believe reflects one of the malls that they surveyed . They had traffic or people coming in somewhere in the vicinity of 35 , 000 people . That is triple the population of our City . I don ' t think the people of Grand Terrace are going to sit there and see the traffic . And it would be very foolish not to think that Barton Road and Mt . Vernon is not going to be directly affected , and also people who live along Michigan right now on the east side if this materializes are going to be looking at four lane raised islands if their property isn ' t purchased . So everybody up to Mt . Vernon is going to be concerned about traffic . Their street , I am sure , isn ' t going to be able to handle it at this particular point . So although I don ' t have any control over C-2 , our main concern is to see Grand Terrace develop in an orderly fashion . And as it is right now , an orderly fashion from the $ 17 , 000 study that was done ( I don ' t think it was authorized by the citizens ) shows that the only way you are going to make money is to put a large mall in . There are a few interested people that sit on the City Council and other Committees that are interested in seeing this go . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 16 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 Tom Glasser , 22032 Tanager , Grand Terrace , testified as follows : This whole thing came to my attention a couple days ago . I read an article briefly in the newspaper and Mr . Evans called my attention to it the other day . So I read one of your reports , The Economic Development Committee ' s report and I am sure that I don ' t understand entirely what is going on . I gather there is some proposed change to the C-2 zone . Maybe not actually a change , an overlay I believe , the term was used . That would require development in not less than 30 acre parcels . I ' m sure that is correct but it seems to me that might be one way of greasing the path for the only feasible development of the area to be done by a company that can put in a shopping center of this magnitude . And from reading the report and some of the similiar shopping centers that were used by way of analogue I think it is clear to me that you are talking about a huge change in the City of Grand Terrace . I was just going to ask you , the members of the Commission whether a change of that magnitude can some way be put before the people of the City? I think a lot of us in this City and , I happen to live in an area very close to that area and I think even if I lived in the Honey Hills area I would have a feeling for Grand Terrace being more a semi -rural area , more of a residential area . I think if something of this size goes in , it is going to change the face of my City substantially . Isn ' t there anyway that you could take a poll or conduct a vote of the people in Grand Terrace before considering something of that nature ? I am asking a question ! Chairman Erway answered the City Council would be the organization to ask that of . Mr . Glasser asked if the purpose here tonight is just to debate or perhaps pass the overlay on the C-2 zone . Would this be the proper body to do what is necessary to try to compel an environmental impact report for something of that nature ? Chairman Erway stated this is the body which considers environmental impact reports . Mr . Glasser asked if a Negative Declaration has been adopted al ready . Chairman Erway answered no it has not . Mr . Glasser asked what needed to be done in order to ask your commission or compel your commission to have such a study? Chairman Erway deferred that matter to the City Attorney . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 17 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 John Harper , City Attorney , stated that there has to be a specific proposal . A developer has to come forward and say this is what I want to do on the property before the environmental assessment can adequately address what the effects of that might be . The zone change itself doesn ' t have any specific environmental impact . The overlay isn ' t changing the uses but at that point in time when there are changes whether it is the two acres that Commissioner Munson talked about or the nine acres one of the other gentlemen mentioned , at that point in time when any of it develops , there has to be an environmental assessment . I can ' t imagine a project of the magnitude that has been suggested here not requiring more than just an environmental assessment but rather an environmental impact report . Mr . Glasser then asked if it would be the City Council that is the body that you would raise the question of taking any change of that nature to the people by the way of a poll or a vote ? Chairman Erway answered it would have to be the City Council . Commissioner Munson asked to see the map of the boundaries of the C-2 zone . Mrs . Farmer stated it is the same map you have in your packets . Commissioner Munson questioned that acreage of the zone change . He then asked where the first 30 acre increment is to go in . Mrs . Farmer stated we have not gotten to the development stage yet . What we are doing Commissioner Munson is confusing the two things . The Economic Development Committee study with the total amount of property being considered for zoning . This property covers the property that is zoned C-2 in this particular area . The Committee studied the whole area but the whole area isn ' t available for development at this time . Some of it is owned by Edison and other land owners . A lot of the Edison property is developed and Edison is , as I understand it , ambivalent at this point . We don ' t know if they are going to sell or not . Commissioner Munson stated he is still not clear about "my two acres . " Like the gentlemen out there I admit if I had property in there I would be concerned because I think developed property is probably far more valuable than having a large developer come in and buy . And I just can ' t see that two acres . I ' m sorry I have been listening as this man talks about it . Commissioner Munson asked if the reason for this overlay is to have proper roads , lighting district , maybe . Is that the general reason for this overlay? GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMPASSION PAGE 18 OF23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 Mrs . Farmer answered yes , in part , it is to develop with good design . Commissioner Munson asked if the whole 30 acres has to be developed at the same time . Can this gentlemen develop nine acres ahead or behind the others ? Mrs . Farmer answered once he is in a development plan that is approved he can develop his nine acres. Councilwoman Phennighausen stated she had a point that she really needed to clarify and she didn ' t think we can really go on until I clarify it . Edison is not ambivalent about their property . Edison is definite the property is not on the market . The only thing they did say was that they cannot forsee the future and consequently they cannot say that it will never be available but , it is unequivocally , not available . Commissioner DeBenedet asked Mrs . Farmer to indicate on the transparency the nine acre parcel which was discussed . Commissioner Smith asked Mrs . Farmer to pinpoint the Wilden and Archer properties . Mrs . Farmer outlined the properties on the overhead transparency . Commissioner Smith asked the total acreage of the present C-2 area . Mrs . Farmer stated she didn ' t know the total acreage of the C-2 property . Mrs . May Wortz , 12615 Garden Way , Grand Terrace , stated she was wondering who owned the property on the tip of the cul -de-sac . Is that owned by Edison ? Mrs . Wortz stated there were buildings on the property and asked if that would be expanded . The question could not be answered . Mrs . Wortz stated she bought her property on Garden Way because that area is quiet and serene . And if you do build a shopping center there it is going to be just the opposite and we would not appreciate that . Commissioner McDowell stated that in the first place the shopping center will not go there . It would be planned industry with 25 feet of garden land between the west side of the public section and the first piece of light industry to the first tract houses . Much better than it looks now . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 19 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 Mrs . Wortz asked who will occupy it . Commissioner McDowell answered we don ' t know yet . I will tell you Inland Lumber owns the land and they will sell to the CRA . Polly Morton , no address given , stated she didn ' t receive the notice so she didn ' t know how extensive the zone change is . She had a question about the current residents , the homeowners in the area . Are they included in that C-2 overlay or is it just the undeveloped property? I noticed you had the hash mark lines but you didn ' t have the homes . Would that prevent home- owners from selling their individual property to anyone or are you stuck there in that home forever because you don ' t have 30 acres to sell to the developer or what . Chairman Erway stated he would defer that question to the Planning Director . Mrs . Farmer stated development may be in 30 acre increments . However , property can be sold . Mrs . Morton asked about the residences on DeBerry and Michigan are they part of that C-2 overlay? Mrs . Farmer stated only if they are presently zoned C-2 . John Harper stated that by taking the semantics out of the proposal that basically what the Planning Commission is considering is a zone change from existing C-2 to what was until tonight existing "TC-Town Center" and restrictions and permitted uses that are included in the Town Center Zone will now, if the Planning Commission passes this zone change be applied to what was formerly C-2 property . Among the existing requirements is that development be in minimum of 30 acre parcels . He said the statement is minimum acceptable development site shall be 30 acres . However , development may take place in lesser increments -which encompasses the 2 acres and 9 acres we have discussed previously . Commissioner DeBenedet asked that consideration of the zone change be postponed for another two weeks in order that the Commission have time to study the project . Chairman Erway asked staff if that would create any problems . Mrs . Farmer answered that it would not create any problems but staff has nothing more to add . John Harper stated that if the Planning Commission does decide to postpone a decision that the Public Hearing be continued two weeks . Commissioner Smith said that she would like to look at the long range view of the development of this property . If we do not get GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 20 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 a commitment by Robinsons or one of the better department stores and we find out that other property is going to be developed into a major shopping center , where does that leave us ? I think it would be best in our zoning if we leave ourself open for whatever type of orderly development that is economically feasible at any given time . Commissioner McDowell shared Mrs . Smith ' s sentiments . He said the thing about this is that I can ' t quite understand why we are making a big deal out of something that is going to make a lot of people money . Now let me tell you how : In the first place you do not pay any City taxes . You do not pay one cent of City taxes . You could live across the freeway in La Loma , in the county area for the same price you can here . But you don ' t get the services you get here . Now you are asking for sidewalks on Michigan Street . They want street lights and we want signals . We have been fighting to get a signal at the corner of Michigan and Main Street for two years . It took us two years to get the signal for the school . Do you know the City had to loan the State of California half of the money that goes into that thing ? Where are you going to get the money to do the things that you want to do ? You can ' t get blood out of a turnip I don ' t care how you try . If you don ' t develop this thing as we are planning to do it you may get a truck stop , a cement plant , or the other things that we have fought to keep away down there for the last ten years . You also will need money to do all the other things you are planning . There are Cities that have a development program and they get their free garbage pick- up . They have more policemen than we have and they have a lot of things that we could never get unless we have an outside means of income . In 1954 the City of Redlands was just a little town . They had no money . I lived on Pacific Street upon the hill . There was a fire at the other end of Pacific Street and the old fire engine couldn ' t make it up the hill and the house burned to the ground and two houses down also burned with it . The fire engine couldn ' t get up there because Redlands didn ' t have the money to buy an adequate fire engine . Some said we want to live a rural life here in Redlands . But they couldn ' t buy fire engines with that . So you know that they did ? They moved over into the Santa Ana Wash and annexed it . They leased the property to the Tri -City and other cement plants to get the money to make Redlands what it is today . Now there was an earlier question here about water . There is ample water as stated by the water company . We have all the water we need for development . There are no shared costs in it . If we go into this thing the CRA buys the land , some bond holder back in Maine may be contributing to it , you ' re not . You asked about sewage . Where are we going to get the sewer capacity? These are all good questions . We have plenty of sewage . Because Colton decided to ride on back of convenience and not keep up a GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 21 OF23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 sewage system of two million gallons or whatever it is , we are currently suffering . There is competition for our project . We were told that the Redlands district was going to compete for a major shopping center . But if they had made the study we did , they would find they shouldn ' t do it . Also let ' s talk about the traffic . I agree if we egress to a DeBerry Street off ramp , we may create problems . We could adopt the original Economic Development Committee Program which was to go off at Iowa and use the other streets in the area . I appreciate the attention with which Mr . Evans read our report . He attended several of our meetings . We appreciate it and think if everybody in this town read that report it would be the best thing that could happen . The night of the meeting with the landowners , the words were " is there anyone who would not sell ?" Not a hand went up . I would like to own the forty acres that Edison had down there . I would like to own the nine acres that somebody else has . But believe me if you are interested in Grand Terrace and its going forward , it is either going to go forward or it is going to stand still . If it stands still it is going to be absorbed by just what they wanted to put in down there before incorporation . I repeat again with tears in my eyes . I ask you think of Grand Terrace for 10 , 20 , 30 , 40 , 50 , 100 years from now and know that the City is fiscally responsible for what it is doing . The City cannot be responsible unless we do something like this . Chairman Erway asked about the Planning Commission options . John Harper stated the Planning Commission is considering the matter that is before it now and may amend the Zone Ordinance . Before taking a vote , the Planning Commission may continue the Zone Change to a date certain with the public hearing open with the intent of taking a vote at that time . Chairman Erway questioned the Commissioners . PCM 82-66 MOTION by Commissioner Andress , seconded by Commissioner Smith and passed by an 8-0 VOTE TO CONTINUE THE ZONE CHANGE WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN FOR THE PURPOSE OF FURTHER CONSIDERATION UNTIL OCTOBER 4 , 1982 AT 7 : 00 P . M . OR THEREAFTER . Dennis Evans , was recognized and stated he had no opposition to the continuation of the meeting . He said most of the people remaining in the audience live in the affected area . What Commissioner McDowell is talking about is that he wants a mall and is going to try to get it if he has any power . I am not going to be concerned about all the money because they are going to try to take our homes from us . That is what it is amounting to and it will get down to eminent domain . GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 22 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982 Judy Rinderhagen , 12783 Wilmac , Grand Terrace , Chairman of the Crime Prevention Committee stated she would like to see the continuation also , because there are definite problems in the park in the parking lot area with kids parking there and things that happen there and I feel certain that in a parking lot the size of a shopping center there is going to be an additional problem there , crime , traffic , etc . and I would like to be able to report something at that time . There being no further discussion , the meeting was adjourned to an adjourned regular meeting on September 20 , 1982 at Terrace View Elementary School . The meeting adjourned at 9 : 38 P . M . Respectfully submitted by , Virg ' i a Farmer Planning Director APPROVED : DOUG AS ERWAY , CHAIRMAN GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 23 OF 23 SEPTEMBER 13 , 1982