The URL can be used to link to this page

02/28/2002 ,TFILE COPY ' .. �RAtlDTERR CE February,Z$,2002 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace California 92313-5295„ Civic Center (909)824-6621 Fax(909)783-7629 Fax(909)783-2600 CITY 'OF GRAND TERRACE . Dan Buchanan Mayor CRA/CITY;COUNCIL : = Lee Ann Garcia ` Mayor ProTem" _ - REGULAR 'MEETINGS Hcrm'a'nHilkey TH DAND4Thsdas� 6;0Donti 2N 0 Maryetta Ferre• y a Council Members I - Thomas I Schwab' 'City Manager '-Council Chambers Grand Terr-ace Civic Center i 22795`Barton Road; -92313"-5295 Grand Terrace, CA CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS FEBRUARY 28, 2002 GRAND TERRACE CIVIC CENTER 5:00 P.M. 22795 Barton Road THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMPLIES WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990.IF YOU REQUIRE SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING, PLEASE CALL THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT(909)824-6621 AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. IF YOU DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL DURING THE MEETING, OTHER THAN UNDER PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU ARE ASKED TO PLEASE COMPLETE A REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM AVAILABLE AT THE ENTRANCE AND PRESENT IT TO THE CITY CLERK. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED UPON BY THE MAYOR AT THE APPROPRIATE TLNIE. * Call to Order- * Invocation- * Pledge of Allegiance- * Roll Call- STAFF COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS --TRECOMMENDATION ACTION CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING- 5:00 P.M. 1. Grand Terrace Consolidated Capital Improvement Program (CIP)Priority List CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1. Approval of 02-14-2002 Minutes Approve 2. Check Register CR0204 Approve 3. Mid Year Budget:Adjustments - FY 01-02 Approve ADJOURN COMML�tITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 1. Items to Delete 2 SPECLAL PRESENTATIONS A. SANBAG-Measure I Presentation B. Commendation-Patrizia Materassi 3. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and noncontroversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. Any Council Member,Staff Member,or Citizen may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion. A. Approval of Check Register CO204 Approve B. Ratify 02-28-2002 CRA Action C. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda D. Approval of 02-14-2002 Minutes Approve E. Mid Year Budget Adjustments-FY 01-02 Approve i i COUNCIL AGENDA 02-28-2002 PAGE 2 OF 2 AGENDA ITEMS STAFF COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS ACTION F. Geographic Information'System(GIS)Program Status 4. PUBLIC COMMENT 5. ORAL REPORTS A. Commttee Reports 1. Crime Prevention Committee a. Minutes of October 8, 2001 and November 12, 2001 Accept 2. Emergency Operations Comtmttee a. Minutes of January 7, 2002 Accept B. Council Reports i 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Community Development Block Grant Funding Awards Authorize 2002-2003 Program Year Approve B. Proposed Updated Housing Element-Resolution Approving the Updated;Housing Element,GPA-01-01 Pending Approval by the State Department of Housing and Community Development 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS_None 8. NEW BUSINESS A. Northwest Corner Parking at Mt. Vernon/Grand Terrace Direction Road B. Waste Disposal Agreement Amendment- San Bernardino Authorize County 9. CLOSED SESSION-Nonel ADJOUPLN1 THE NEXT CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE HELD ON THURSDAY,MARCH 14,'2002. ..................................................................................................................... AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS FOR THE 03-14-2002 MEETING MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BY NOON 03-07-2002. GRAND TeRR cE Community Development Department - STAFF REPORT CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X ) MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 2002 FUNDING REQUIRED: ( ) NO FUNDING REQUIRED : (X) SUBJECT: Grand Terrace Consolidated Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Priority List RECOMMENDATION: Please prioritize projects and return to Staff as soon as possible for tabulation, review, and approval at the workshop. BACKGROUND/PROPOSAL: Staff and the City Council have worked hard to prioritize all City Capital Improvement ` Projects to provide guidance to Staff in three major areas: 1. To prepare the Measure I CIP, the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP) submittal for Grand Terrace, and the Circulation Fee CIP. 2. To assist with budget decisions. 3. To prioritize projects for which•grants are to be pursued. Therefore, this document is inclusive of all transportation and non-transportation Capital Projects. APPROVAUNEXT STEPS: 1. Complete priortization of projects and return to staff prior to the workshop. 2. Conduct workshop for review and potential approval of the priority list. 3. Onde the prioritization is approved, Staff should process a Resolution for the formal approval of the Circulation Fee CIP. Even though--the Fee Ordinance will eventually be amended to reflect the City Council's desires, the Circulation Fee CIP is required to be in place to regulate fees already collected and fees to be collected in the interim. (Craig Neustaedter and Larry Ronnow should join forces on this subject). 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92313-5295 • (909) 824-6621 i 4. Prioritization will be reflected in the actual five year Grand Terrace Consolidated CIP Spreadsheet, listing projects descriptions and costs, and graphic illustration; including all city programs, i.e., Measure I, RTIP, etc. This will likely be put together by the Community and Economic Development Staff. 5. The plan is for the CIP Spreadsheet to be incorporated into an overall GT Consolidated C;IP Packet (John Donlevy's original packet), with tabs and text description for each program, along with the financial/fiscal/feasibility evaluation report as a reality check and plan of action. i This project is "work in progress". Please feel free to add or delete, and make any alterations. Steve Berry will be at the workshop and will respond to any questions on projects included in priority list items: la, lb, Ic, le, If, Ilia, Illb, Illc, Illd, and Ille. Jerry Glander will also be available to answer any question with regard to items: Id. I will be available to respond to questions for all other items, which include the bike lanes and safe routes to school. j I We are looking forward to receiving your prioritizations as soon as, possible so that we can tabulate it and bring a revised priority sheet to the meeting. Attachment: GT Consolidated CIP Priority List I i t I, j i I ' I , I I � i j I , I j I i I l 2 GT CONSOLIDATED CIP - UPDATED TALLY SHEET CATEGORY i c� a ;= o �. m J = O I. STREET IMPROVEMENTS a. Traffic Signals T1 (e) - Mt. Vernon Rd. @ De Berry , ffNjA St. NA T2 - Union Pacific Railroad Bridge at irton Rd. 1 - . 3 (e) - Barton Rd. @ Grand Terrace Rd. & Honey Hills Dr. , T4 (e) - Mt. Vernon Rd. @ Canal St. I ► 2 T5 (e) - Michigan @ Commerce Wy. 1 5 T6 (e) - Barton Rd. @ Palm Ave. 1, I T7 (e) - Mt. Vernon Rd. @ Pico St. I I 3 T8 (e) - Mt. Vernon Rd. @ Van I 6 Buren b. Traffic Synchronization/Video i Detection T9 - Barton Rd. & Canal St. I 2 intersection 710 - Barton Rd. & Mt. Vernon 1 __itersection T11 - Barton Rd. & Preston j 3 l intersection C. Rehab ! Maintenance - GPTF ' NA M1 - Minona Dr. from Kingston to Eton Dr. NA M2 - Holly St. from Eton to Arliss Dr. NA M3 - Fairburn Dr. from Kingston to Miriam Wy. M4 - Arliss Ct. to Arliss Dr. to north 1 end I M5 - Arliss Dell to Arlis Dr. to north 2 end I i M6 - Arliss Dr. to Arliss Dell to Eton 3 M7 - Arliss Dr. from Preston to Arliss I 4 Dell 5 M8 - Arliss Dr. from Eton to Arliss Wy. 6 M9 - Michigan from Flamingo to Pico I 1 St. St. I 7 M10 - Michigan from Pico St. to Van i Buren 1 CATEGORY I = C C 1 ` _ O MI I - Citywide I I 8 MI — Raven Wy from Wilmac Ave. 9 to Oriole Ave i I M13 — Raven Wy. from Michigan St. 10 to Vivienda Ave. M14 — Vivienda Ave. from Tanager 11 St. to Pico St. M15 (e) — Michigan St., Pico St., I Delete ' Garden Ave., Flamingo St., Raven Wy., Tanager St., Fremontia Ave. MI6 (e) — Arliss Dr., Eton Dr., I Delete M17 (e) — Canal St., Newport Ave., I Delete Vivienda Ave. i MIS (e) — Dos Rios, Warbler, ; Delete Westwood, Oriole Ave. I MIS - Barton Rd. from 1-215 to ! 12 bridge M20 - Mt. Vernon Rd. from Pico St. to ! 13 Minona Dr. M21 - Barton Rd. from Preston St. to I 14 Mt. Vernon Rd. I I d. Capacity Enhancing (Arterials or Intersections) i All (e) - Union Pacific Railroad { NA Bridge at Barton Rd. Al2 (e) - Iowa St. @ Main St. j I NA Intersection 1 A13 (e) - Barton Rd. @ Vivienda I I i NA A14 (e) - Michigan @ Barton Rd to I NA Commerce Wy. I 1 A15 (e) - Mt. Vernon Rd. from Grand ; 1 Terrace Rd. & Canal St. (city entry) to , I ! 300' south A16 (e) - Michigan from Commerce ! i 6 Wy. to DeBerry St. I i A17 (e) - Barton Rd. @ I- j 2 215 Overcrossing A18 (e) - Commerce Wy. from I 4 900' north of DeBerry to Pico St. A19 (e) - Commerce Wy. from Pico i ; 5 St. to Main i 2 CATEGORY T s` Q E o °' L I � J 1 = cII 0 I j � I i A110 (e) - Main St. from S 1=.R R to I NA S.P.R.R. j All (e) - Main St. from 650 west of NA. Michigan to Michigan All (e) - Barton Rd. from Honey Hills Dr, to northeast City Limits I 7 113 (e) - Barton Rd. from S.P R.R. -__1 1-215 over-crossing g A114 (e) - Mt. Vernon Rd. from Grand Terrace Rd. to north City Limits 3 All (e) - Mt. Vernon Rd. from Barton Rd. to 700' north to Minona A116 (e) - Mt. Vernon Rd. from Raven St. to Pico St. 110 All — Gtade Separation at Main St. & Iowa 11 e. Traffic Calming — GPTF TC1 (e) - Pico St. @ Mt. Vernon Ave. 1 westbound TC2 (e) — Pico St. @ Mt. Vernon Ave. 2 astbound TC3 (e) - Van Buren @ Mt. Vernon 3 Ave. westbound TC4 (e) - Van Buren @ Mt. Vernon j I 4 Ave. eastbound I TC5 (e) - DeBerry St @ Mt. Vernon I I 5 Ave eastbound TC6 De Berry St. @ Mt. Vernon WB j 6 TC7 Michigan @ Pico EB I 7 TC8 Michigan @ Van Buren EB g TC9 Michigan @ De Berry EB I g f. Signage & Beautification i ! S11 (e) - Barton Rd. & Michigan Ave. j S12 (e) - Barton Rd. & Canal St ! I S13 (e) - Barton Rd. & Mt. Vernon Rd ! S14 (e) - Barton Rd. & Preston St S15 — northeast Corner of Mt Vernon Ave. & Barton Rd. S16 — Identification Signs for GT Commercial / industrial area I S17 — Caltrans Interstate 215 signs i 3 CATEGORY = E o J 0 co > O S18 — Commercial corridors / ! parkways along Barton Rd. and Mt. Vernon Ave. g. Safe Routes to School,— GPTF ! SR1 - Michigan from Commerce Wy. to Van Buren St. SR2 (e) - Michigan from: 1). ' Commerce Wy. to De Berry St. 2). I i Pico St. to Main St. SR3 - Brentwood from Mt. Vernon I Ave. to Preston St. SR4 - Grand Terrace Rd. from Barton I i ! Rd. to Terrace View Elementary i School SR5 — Grand Terrace Rd. from Terrace View Elementary School to Mt. Vernon Ave. h. Traffic Safety TS1 - Median island at Barton Rd. II. BIKE LANES i BL1 (e) - Staging Areas Project, NA Realignment of Grand Terrace Rd. Rd., city entry signs at Barton Rd. Rd. ! & Main St. BL2 (e) - Both sides of Michigan from i Barton Rd. to Commerce Wy. and future extension to Main St..; (Class II) BL3 (e) - Barton Rd. from Mt. Vernon I ! Rd. to westerly city limits (Class II) BL4 (e) - Along Gage Canal from Inortherly city limits to southerly city I t limits (Class 1) BL5 (e) - Mt. Vernon Rd. from Barton Rd. to northerly city limits (Class 11) BLS (e) - Mt. Vernon Rd. northbound from Main St. to Pico St. (Class 11) j BLT - Bikelanes & Pedestrian walks j Citywide , ! 4 CATEGORY _ c Q E c �+ Q = I O I III. OTHERS a. Facilities & Parks ! i FP1 - Library FP2 — Senior Center Improvements FP3 (e) - Richard Rollins/Terrace ' Hills Rehab 4 (e) - Pico Park Expansion ! I FP5 (e) - Petta Park Construction I FP6 - Directly above Wren, Finch, DeBerry and Cardinal Streets. — Wilderness Park i FP7 - Community Center/ Gymnasium FP8 - "Town Square" City Center for i Economic & Cultural purposes i b. Sewer SE1 (e) — Citywide Sewer Improvements (to be developed) _ i c. Drainage i DR1 (e) — Citywide Drainage Improvements i DR2 - Canal St. Storm Culvert DR3 - Mt. Vernon — City Center to De Berry St. MR5 4 - Oriole Ave — Tanager to Pico - Pico St — Oriole to Mt. Vernon I I I Rd. DR6 - Pico St — Reed to Michigan 1 Ave. DR7 - Mt. Vernon Ave. —Van Buren to Main St. i I DR8 - Michigan Ave.- Main St. to Pico ; St. DR9 - Michigan Ave. —Pico St to Van i Buren DR10 - Van Buren-Michigan Ave. to flood control f I d. Equipment e. Underground Utilities I i 5 I A = Funds have already been allocated. Project is in process. (e)= Exhibit Map has been provided, (See Attachment D). One of Six City Council top Priorities as voted on April 6, 2001, see attached. CF= Project will be partially funded by Circulation Fees. Ml= Previously committed for Measure I Funds to be re-evaluated by October, 2001. RTIP= Previously committed RTIP project, to be re-evaluated by October, 2001. GPTF= Capital Improvements recommended by the General Plan Task Force adopted by Resolution on November of 1997. OS= General Plan Open Space Element refers to a Historical /Youth Center alternative for Petta Park Design. PC= Planning Commission recommendation TBD= To Be Determined i I_ 6 PENDING C R A APPROVAL CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES REGUL AR MEETING - FEBRUARY 14, 2002 A regular meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency, City of Grand Terrace, was held in the Council Chambers,Grand Terrace Civic Center,22795 Barton Road,Grand Terrace,California, on February 14, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Dan Buchanan, Chairman Lee Ann Garcia, Vice-Chairwoman Herman Hilkey, Agency Member Don Larkin, Agency Member Maryetta Ferre, Agency Member Tom Schwab, Executive Director Brenda Stanfill, City Clerk Patrizia Materassi, Community and Economic Development Director Larry Ronnow, Finance Director Jerry Glander, Building & Safety Director Lt. Hector Guerra, Sheriff's Department ABSENT: Steve Berry, Assistant City Manager John Harper, City Attorney APPROVAL OF 01-24-2002 MINUTES CRC,-2002-07 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER HILKEY,SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER FERRE, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the January 24, 2002 Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes. CHECK REGISTER CR0203 CR.A-2002-08 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER LARKIN, SECOND BY VICE- CHAIRWOMA_\ GARCIA, CARRIED 5-0, to approve check register CR0203. ANNUAL STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY CRA-2002-09 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER HILKEY,SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER FERRE, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt the Annual Statement of Investment Policy. ANNUAL FINAINTCIAL REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUKE 30. 2001 CRA-2002-10 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER FERRE,SECOND BY VICE-CHAIRWOMAN GARCIA,CARRIED 5-0,to accept the Audited Financial Statements of the CRA of CRA AGENDA REM NO. i i Community Redevelopment agency Nf:nutes February 14,2002 Page 2 the City of Grand Terrace for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2001. COMBINED CASH AND INVESTMENTS TREASURY FOR QUARTER ENDED DECEMBER 31. 2001 I CRA-2002-11 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER LARKIN, CARRIED 5-0, to accept the Combined Cash and Investments Treasury Report for the Quarter Ended December 31, 2001. Chairman Buchanan adjourned the Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 7:15 p.m. until the next CRA/City Council Meeting scheduled to be held on Thursday, February 28, 2002 at 5:00 p.m. j SECRETARY of the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace i CHAIRMAN of the Community Redevelopment ` Agency of the City of Grand Terrace i i I i I ; ' i ,.J...%.J �6.; o'ti At,r Jai. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE _- COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 2002 CHECK REGISTER NO: CR0204 OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF: FEBRUARY 28, 2002 CHECK# VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 13902 STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND JANUARY WORKERS COMPENSATION INS. 617.73 09 13903 TEXACO FUEL-CODE ENFORCEMENT & HOUSING '13904 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY ELECTRICITY-22850 LA PAIX REHAB 1.48 13905 HOME DEPOT FLASH LIGHTS & BATTERIES 43.97 46612 BOISE CASCADE OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES 159.49 46613 DAN BUCHANAN FEBRUARY AGENCY STIPEND 150.00 46617 CLEANING SERVICES CLEANING SERVICES-BUILDING & SAFETY 100.00 46621 DANKA OFFICE IMAGING COMPANY BASIC FEE & PER COPY COPIER FEES 64.69 46625 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS JANUARY SERVICES 5,904.00 46627 MARYETTA FERRE' FEBRUARY AGENCY STIPEND 150.00 46632 G.T. FIRE & RESCUE ASSOCIATION JAN. & FEB. LARKIN STIPEND DONATION 300.00 46633 LEE ANN GARCIA FEBRUARY AGENCY STIPEND 150.00 46635 HERMAN HILKEY FEBRUARY AGENCY STIPEND 150.00 n 46641 JEFF GOLLIHAR PLANNING SERVICES 216 THROUGH 2119102 682.00 46652 RIVERSIDE HIGHLAND WATER COMPANY WATER-REHAB HOUSES 211.64 a 259.91 n 46661 STAPLES CREDIT PLAN OFFICE SUPPLIES & CAMERA L7 46663 U.S. BANK TRUST N.A. TAB 1993 SERIES A & B BOND INTEREST 288,580.50 m 46665 WESTERN EXTERMINATORS MONTHLY PEST CONTROL 32.00 Z p 918977 U.S. BANK TRUST N.A. FEBRUARY BOND LEASE PAYMENT 23,430.63 a . z 0 1 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 2002 CHECK REGISTER NO: CR0204 OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF: FEBRUARY 28, 2002 TOTAL $321,035.13 1 CERTIFY THAT,TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE,THE AFORE LISTED CHECKS FOR PAYMENT OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIABILITIES HAVE BEEN AUDITED BY ME AND ARE NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE OPERATION OF T AGENCY. THOMAS SCHWAB CITY MANAGER l 2 Community redevelopment Agency of GLAND TERRACE STAFF REPORT Finance Department C�Tr GROND TERR C CR-k ITEM ( \) COUNCIL ITEM ( ) MEETI`G DATE : February 2S. 2002 AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT: MID YEAR BUDGET -ADJUSTMENTS -FY 01-02 FL`NTDr\G REQUIRED _XX NO FUN-DING REQUIRED City staff conducts an annual mid-year budget review to make anv necessary adjustments that are needed as a result of unanticipated conditions and events. Identified revenue and expense adjustments are presented on Schedule A and Schedule B of the follo,,t ing pages, along with justification on separate inemo. The Agencv Board passed the FY 2001-2002 Budget in June of 2001. Dunng the first seven and one half irionths of FY 2001-2002. a total of S60,84- additional appropriations «ere made for Redevelopment purposes. Schedule C. YTD Expenditure Adjustments, lists these items along with those o the City. Additionall%. a %lid Year Fund Balance Analysis is attached All fund balances appear to be in line with «hat Staff anticipated. ADJUSTMENTS TO REVENUE ESTIMATES On Schedule.4, Staff requests the reduction of S 190.000 from CRA Project Fund interest income based on the September defeasance of TA 1993 Series B bonds in excess of S5 million. -1- CRA AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 i I Community Redevelopment Agency of GRAND TERRACE Page 2 Mid Year Budget Adjustments ADJUSTMENTS TO BUDGETED EXPENDITURES As a result of the defeasance, S4,626,461 of pre-,iously available fund balance is no longer available for appropriation. Conversely, due to the defeasance, total debt service requirement for the current fiscal year has been reduced by$219,593. Lastly, staff is requesting a small additional appropnation of S 1,200 to fund a much-needed component of our GIS and Finance database systems for the tracking,of our sales tax revenue. There is additional information attached on this item. Total Agency and,City midyear adjustments are listed on Schedule B. i Staff Recommends that Agency Board adjust the FY 2001-2002 Budget by : 1) Decreasing Estimated Revenues in the Project Fund by the S190,000 as listed on Schedule A. ?) Reduce available Project Fund fund balance by$4,626,461, resulting from the defeasance of TA 1993 Series B bonds, as shown on Schedule B. 3) Reduce appropriation for TA 93 Series B interest debt service by S219,593, resulting from the defeasance and sho«n on Schedule B. 4) Appropriate $1,200 for sales tax tracking softtivare and updates as shown on Schedule B. I I ' I I I City of Grand Terrace Finance Department Memorandum To: Tom Schwab Redevelopment Agency Board From: Larry Ronnow Subject: `lid-Year Adjustments - Redevelopment Date: February 19, 2002 I am requesting revenue estimate revisions for the following accounts: 32-600-01, Interest Income - $190,000 Reduction Due to the defeasance of TA 93 Series B bonds in September of 2001 amounting to S5,080,606, the interest income on idle project funds used to defease the bonds must also be reduced. The rate originally used ,;vas a nov,- high 4.5%, so this same rate was used on the defeased amount for 10 months interest. I am also requesting the following expenditure or fund balance adjustments: 32-010-00, CR_A, Project Fund Cash - $4,626,461 Reduction This entry is required to reduce a�-ailable project cash and fund balance accordingly. The difference between this amount and the defeased amount above came from the debt service resen-e and redemption fund held by the fiscal agent. 33-300-203, TA 1993 Debt Service - $219,593 Reduction Debt service for this fiscal year is reduced by the above amount. 32-370-255, Contract Services - S1,200 Reference the attached from.HdL. this appropriation is requested by both Finance and Community Development/GIS for enhancing our statistical database. HdL does an outstanding job of reporting sales tax data in a user-friendly format. The City has utilized their services in the past for sales tax audits of all businesses within city limits. !H! -13-2002 F, 05 ;7 P11 HdL Companies N0, G:-13617726 1134,449 ff� I 1340 Valley Vista Drive, Suite 200 Diamond Bar, California 91765 909 861 4335 Fax 909 861-7726 Facsimile Tr of - To: Larry Ronnoev Fax: (909) 783-2600 From: Lloyd de Llamas Date: 1/17/02 Re: Sales Tax Software Pages: 4 Here is the ,contract proposal for soft%�are that }'ou reque oaded on net�ork and have used it in other cities. It is waded based, can be l tions �i ithin the es includes all: sellers permit registra oitseprch bumesses` b}t taff t street allocation for each business. It allo«,s s address, account number business name and business type.breakout aoftlsreciis it c print out a variety of reports o� sales edt�ouiland updi date with,the most recent geographic; areas. Each quarter, allocations and all registration changes. cation of It is usefiil,for budgeting, economic development strategies ess license and . It :5 \erg businesses;in town that have a sales tax permit but no bus user friendly but does come with training and manuals. Not bad for a S: 00 per i month! j �I This message is intended for the use of the individual or t`tv to nder applicable law. ifu e reader aof this-rnessa;er.stn'0 that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclo pp the intended recipient, yot are her notified that ;:ny d:ssemination, distribution or copying et th's con'•rr-`Cati?.' is prohibazd. If you recei�cd this message in error, please ,otify us immediatel} by telephone . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . City of Grand Terrace SCHEDULE A CRA of Grand Terrace Midyear Budget Ad'lustment Requests-Revenue Estimates Fiscal Year 2001-2002 (7/1/01 to 6/30/2002) Account Description Amount 1) Adjust Estimated Revenue for unanticipated 10-300-21 CLEEP Grant $ 33,652 California Law Enforcement Equipment Program High Technology Grant 2) Adjust Estimated Rental Revenue for 10-600-05 Rent-City Facilities 13,200 AT&T Antenna Site 3) Adjust Revenue for additional COPS allocation 14-300-01 COPS Grant 70,223 (Citizens'Option For Public Safety-AB3229) 4) Adjust Estimated Revenue for unanticipated 17-500-03 Vehicle Code Fines 10,000 Vehicle Codes Fines 5) Reduce CRA Project Fund Interest Income 32-600-01 Interest Income (190,000) Due To Cash Outlay for 93 Bond Defeasance 6) Carry-over Estimate for Bike Lane Grants 44-300-01 Art 3 Bike Lane Grant 309,350 Not Received in Prior Year GRAND TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS $ 246,425 Schedule A- Mid Year Revenue Adjustments 0102m dadj City of Grand Terrace SCHEDULE B CRA of Grand Terrace Midyear Budget Adiustment Requests -EXPENDITURES Fiscal Year 2001-2002 (7/1/01 to 6130/2002) - - Account Description Amount 1) Additional appropriation for City Newsletter 10-125-213 Newsletter $ 2,950 2) Adjust available fund balance for defeasance 32-010-00 CRA Project Cash 4,626,461 of TAB 93 B Bonds in Sept 01 3) Reduce TAB 93 B Debt Service resulting 33-300-203 TAB 1993 Debt Service (219,593) from defeasance 4) Xerox 5053 Copier lease&maint payments 10-190-700 Copier Lease 6,000 not sufficiently budgeted 5) Appropriate funds for city decals- 10-180-220 Special Dept Expense 1,696 Community Services 6) Appropriation for Sales Tax Software Svs 32-370-255 Contract Services 1,200 7) Additional appropriations requested by 10-110-270 Council Travel 2,000 City Manager's Office 10-110-220 Special Dept Expense 400 10-120-230 Personnel Advertising 1,700 GRAND TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS $ 4,422,814 Schedule B - Mid Yea;. =::penditure Adjustments 0102midadj SCHEDULE C CITY OF GRAND TERRACE& REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS FY 2001-2062 (711101 TO 211412002) DATE REV EXPEND DESCRIPTIONS ACCOUNT 6/28/01 city $ 11,800 Increase Animal Control Agreement, not incl in adopted budget 10-190-256 6/28/01 city 108,535 Record COLA, Merit, PERS&Benefits Adjustments. 10-XXX-XXX 6/28/01 city 2,232 Record COLA, Merit, PERS& Benefits Adjustments 21-XXX-XXX 6/28101 cra 5,068 Record COLA, Merit, PERS& Benefits Adjustments 32-370-XXX 6/28/01 cra 15,311 Record COLA, Merit, PERS& Benefits Adjustments 34-400-XXX _ 6/28/01 cra 4,331 Record COLA, Merit, PERS& Benefits Adjustments 34-800-XXX 6/28101 city _ 5,400 Record Car Allowance Increase 10-XXX-273 8/9/01 city 18,500 Continued Appropriation - Barham Contract 10-370-255 8/9/01 cra 5,000 Keyser Marston- La Mesa RV 32-370-255 8/9/01, cra 2,600 Grocery Market Demand Analysis 32-370-255 8/23/01 city 35,000 Palm Avenue Storm Drain 12-903-704 9/27/01 city 3,000 Spring Mountain Ranch Traffic Study 10-370-255 9/27/01 cra 15,000 Continued Appropriation - DeCrinis&Co : Pass-through Analysis 32-370-250 9/27/01 city 4,715 Traffic Data Device-from CLEEP Grant funds 10-410-701 12/13/01 cra 13,537 Reappropriate for North-South Corridor Study 32-600-201 2/14/02 city 925 925 Appropriation for Floor Cleaning Machine& Donation 10-180-701 2/14/02 city 96,489 Transfer AB2928 for Bike Lane Project Local Funding 11-999-999 2/14/02 city z;� 16,946 Transfer AB2766 for Bike Lane Project Local Funding 15-500-607 2/14/02 city 15,000 Transfer from Gen Fund for Bike Lane Project Local Funding 10-999-999 2/14/02 city 128,435 186,532 Record Additional Local Funding Revenue &Addit Project Cost 44-200-620 $1291360 $ 665,921 $ 925 $ 167,875 General Fund 35,000 Storm Drain 2,232 Sewer 96,489 AB2928 16,946 AQMD 128,435 186,532 Bike Lane Projects 41,205 CRA Project 15,311 CRA Housing 4,331 CRA Code Enf $129,360 $ 565,921 Schedule C - YTD Revenue/Expenditure Adjustments 0102midadj.xls Available FY ' FY FY FY FY Midyear Midyear Projected :ITY AND CRA OF GRAND TERRACE FUND 2001-2002 2001-2002 2001-2002 2001-2002 2001-2002 Revenue& Appropriations Available kNALYSIS AVAILABLE FUND BALANC BALANCE Revenues Transfers In Appropriations Transfers Out Adjustments Transfers In Transfers Out FUND PROJECTED THROUGH 6/30/2002 6/30101 (Estimated) (Estimated) (Budgeted) (Budgeted) As of 2114102 Adjustments Adjustments BALANCE (Audited) (Schedule C) (Schedule A) (Schedule B) 6/30102 GENERAL FUND-Undesig.;Unresrv" 1,530,131 3,093,008 (2,952,647) (166,950) 46,852 (14,746) 1,535,648 3ENERAL FUND-Designated 925,558 NIA N/A NIA NIA 925,558 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 2,455,689 3,093,008 (2,952,647) (166.950) 46,852 (14,746) 2;461,206 Street Fund 237,108 36,273 0 (96,489) 176,892 Storm Drain Fund 107,255 9,500 (34,888) (36,000) 46,867 Sark Fund 15,612 1,300 0 16,912 NB 3229 COPS Fund 147,237 33,280 (66,471) 70,223 184,269 5,ir Quality Improvement Fund 69,780 16,250 (6,915) (23,054) (16,946) 39,115 Sass Tax Fund 126,119 235,925 (273,694) 88,350 'Frafflc Safety Fund 65,008 17,600 (4,873) 10,000 87,635 Measure 1 Fund 778,456 149,000 (166,658) (171,897) 588,901 Naste Water Disposal Fund 1,432,095 1,130,975 (989,749) (2,232) 1,571,089 _SCPG/LGHTG Assessment Dist 1,103 14,417 (17,334) (1,814) 3ike Lane Capital Fund (4,957) 0 63,064 (309,350) (58,097) 309,350 0 Street Improvement Projects 0 0 221,875 (221,875) 0 0 3arton Rd. Bridge Project 5,937 90,009 5,491 (95,500) 5,937 FOTAL OTHER FUNDS 2,980,753 1,734,429 290,420 (2,187,307) (194,951) (208,764) 389,573 0 2,804,153 :;APITAL PROJECTS FUND 6,449,064 225,000 (234,649) (95,469) (41,205) (190.000) (4,627,661) 485,080 7EBT SERVICE FUND 0 1,230,066 (2,804,885) (629,800) 219,593 14,974 _OW& MODERATE HOUSING __ 3,978,684 _ 498,100_ __ 629,800____ (1,553,717)_ __ _ (19,642) -3,533,225 TOTAL CRA FUNDS 9,427,748 3,061,166 6291806 (4,593,251) (725,269) __ __(60,847) _ (190,000) (4;408,068) -4,033,279 -- TOTAL-ALL FUNDS 14,864,190 8,780,603 920,220 (9,733,205) (920,220) (436,561) 246,425 (4,422,814) 9,298,638 MID-YEAR FUND BALANCE ANALYSIS I CITY OF GRAND TERRACE FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002 BUDGET ESTIMATED REVENUE SUMMARY MID YEAR BUDGET REVEIW FUND 2001-2002 Subsequent MID YEAR 2001-2002 NUMBER TITLE Estimated Adjustments Adjustments Revised 10 GENERAL FUND 3,093,008 925 46,852 3,140,785 r 11 STREET FUND 36,273 0 0 36,273 12 STORM DRAIN 9,600 0 0 9,500 13 PARK FUND 1,300 0 0 1,300 14 SLESF AB3229 FUND 33,280 0 70,223 103,503 15 AIR QUALITY 16,250 0 0 16,250 16 GAS TAX FUND 235,925 0 0 236,926 17 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND 17,500 0 10,000 27,500 20 MEASURE"1" 149,000 0 0 149,000 21 WASTEWATER FUND 1,130,975 0 0 1,130,976 26 LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING 14,417 0 0 14,417 TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 1,644,420 0 , 80,223 1,724,643 32 CRA CAPITAL PROJECTS 226,000 0 (190,000) 36,000 33 CRA DEBT SERVICE 3,230,066 0 0 3,230,066 34 LOW AND MOD FUND 1,127,900 0 0 1,127,900 TOTAL CRA FUNDS 4,582,966 0 (190,000) 4,392,966 44 BIKE LANE FUND 63,054 128,435 309,350 600,839 46 STREET PROJECTS 221,875 0 0 221,875 47 BARTON ROAD BRIDGE PROJECT 95,500 0 0 95,600 TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS 380,429 128,435 309,350 818,214 TOTAL REVENUE 9,700,823 129,3601 246,425 10,076,608 'INCLUDES INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND LOANS 2/19/2002 - REVENUE SUMMARY CITY OF GRAND TERRACE/ COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF GRAND TERRACE EXPENDITURE SUMMARY A B C D E F ADOPTED RE-APPROP ADDITIONAL SUBSEQUENT PROPOSED MID-YEAR BUDGET OUTSTANDING APPROP. REVISED %nD-YEAR REVISED 01-02 ENCUMBRANCES YTD BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FUND- BY DEPARTMENT g7/1/01 01-02 01-02 ADJUST. 01-02 10-110 CITY COUNCIL 38,810 38,810 2,400 41,210 10-120 CITY MANAGER 195,200 9,126 204,326 1,700 206,026 10-125 CITY CLERK 138,842 11,477 150,319 2,950 153,269 10-140 FINANCE 271,074 20,461 291,535 291,535 10-160 CITY ATTORNEY 20,000 20,000 20,000 10-172 BUILDING AND SAFETY 43,452 2,910 46,362 46,362 10-175 PUBLIC WORKS 34,722 116 2,929 37,767 37,767 10-180 COMMUNITY SERVICES 280,844 13,912 294,756 1,696 296,452 10-190 NON-DEPARTMENTAL 242,901 26,800 269,701 6,000 275,701 10-370 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 235,334 5,044 36,234 276,612 276,612 10-380 MIS 85,074 1,906 2,365 89,345 89,345 10-410 LAW ENFORCEMENT 1,050,203 4,715 1,054,918 1,054,918 10-440 CHILD CARE SERVICES 785,372 730 34,151 820,273 820,273 10-450 PARK MAINTENANCE 114,159 2,795 116,954 116,954 10-631 STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE 6,000 6,000 6,000 10-801 PLANNING COMMISSION 5,100 5,100 5,100 10-804 HISTORICALICULTURAL CMM 1,200 1,200 1,200 ' 10-805 SENIOR CrTLZEN'S PROGRAM 20,100 20,100 20,100 10-808 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CM 5,500 445 5,945 5,945 COST ALLOCATION (621,240) (621,240) (621,240) TOTAL GENERALFUND '2,952,647 8,261 167,875 3,128,783 14,746 3,143,529 11-XXX STREET FUND 0 96,489 96,489 96,489 12-XXX STORM DRAIN FUND 27,400 35,000 62,400 62,400 13-XXX PARK FUND 0 0 0 14-XXX SLESF(AB3229 COPS)FUND 66,312 66,312 66,312 15-XXX AIR QUALITY FUND 25,504 16,946 42,450 42,450 16-XXX GAS TAX FUND 219,500 219,500 219,500 17-XXX TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND 4,465 4,465 4,465 j 20-XXX MEASURE I FUND 126,000 126,000 126,000 21-XXX WASTE WATER DISPOSAL FND 909,900 2,232 - 912,132 912,132 26-XXX LIGHTING&LNDSCPG ASSTMT 13,902 13,902 13,902 i COST ALLOCATION 190,653 190,653 190,653 TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 1,583,636 0 150,667 1,734,303 0 1,734,303 ! I 32-200 CRA GEN.OPS/CAP FUND 109,704 13,537 123,241 1,200 124,441 32-370 CRA GEN.IECON DEV 209,605 27,668 237,273 237,273 1 33-XXX CRA DEBT SERVICE 3,184,828 3,184,828 (219,593) 2,965,235 34-400 LOW MOD HOUSING FUND 1,311,955 43,340 15,311 1,370,606 1,370,606 34-800 LOW MOD-CODE ENFORCEMT. 71,864 4,331 76,195 769195 COST ALLOCATION 430,587 430,587 430,587 TOTAL CRA FUNDS 5,318,543 43,340 60,847 5,379,390 (218,393) 5,204,337 i 44-XXX CAPITAL PROJECT-BIKE LANE 309,350 17,073 186,532 512,955 512,955 46-XXX CAPITAL IMPROV-STREETS 221,875 221,875 221,875 47-XXX BARTON BRIDGE PROJECT 95,500 95,500 95,500 TOTAL CAPITAL IMPRV FUNDS 626,725 17,073 186,532 813,257 0 8309330 TOTAL ALL FUNDS 109481,551 68,674 565,9211 11,047,472 (203,647)1 10,912,499 Expenditure Summary Available FY - FY FY FY FY Midyear Midyear Projected CITY AND CRA OF GRAND TERRACE FUND 2001-2002 2001-2002 2001-2002 2001-2002 2001-2002 Revenue& Appropriations Available ANALYSIS AVAILABLE FUND BALANC BALANCE Revenues Transfers In Appropriations Transfers Out Adjustments Transfers In Transfers Out FUND PROJECTED THROUGH 6/3012002 6130101 (Estimated) (Estimated (Budgeted) (Budgeted) Schedule C) (Schedule A) (Schedule B) BALANCE (Audited) GENERAL FUND -Undesig.,Unresry 1,530,131 3.093,008 (2,952,647) (166,950) 46,852 (14,746) 1,535,648 GENERAL FUND -Designated 925,558 NIA NIA NIA NIA 925,558 TOTAL GENERALFUND 2,455,689 3,093,008 (2,952,6471 (166,950) 46,852 (14,746) 2,461,206 73 0 (96,489) 176,892 237,108 36,2 - Street Fund 35,000) 46,867 Storm Drain Fund 107,255 9,500 (34,888) ( 16,912 Park Fund 15,612 1,300 0 AB 3229 COPS Fund 147,237 33,280 (66,471) 70,223 184,269 Air Quality Improvement Fund 69,780 16,250 (6,915) (23,054) (16,946) 39,115 Gas Tax Fund 126.119 235,925 (273,694) 88,350 635 Traffic Safety Fund 65,008 17,500 (4,873) 10,000 88,901 Measure I Fund 778,456 149,000 (166,658) (171,897)- 5571,08 ( Waste Water Disposal Fund 1,432,095 1,130,975 (989,749) (2,232) 1, , LSCPG/LGHTG Assessment Dist 1,103 14,417 (17,334) 1,81414) Bike Lane Capital Fund-, (4,957) 0 63,054 (309,350) (58,097) 309,350 0 0 0 ° Street Improvement Projects- 0 0 221,875 (221,875) 5,937 Barton Rd. Bridge Project 5,937 90,009 5,491 (95,500) TOTAL OTHER FUNDS 2,980,753 1,734,429 290,420 (2,187,307) (194,951) (208,764) 389,573 0 2,804,153 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 5,449,064 225,000 (234,649) (95,469) (41,205) (190,000) (4 6 , , 27661) 485080 DEBT SERVICE FUND 0 3,230,066 (2,804,885) (629,800) 974 LOW& MODERATE HOUSING 3,978,684 498,100 629,800 (1,553,717) (19,642) 3,533,225 TOTAL CRA FUNDS 9,427,748 3,953,166 629,800 (4,593,251) (725,269) (60,847) (190,000) (4,408,068) 4,033,279 TOTAL-ALL FUNDS 14,864,190 8,780,603 920,220 (9,733,205) (920,220) (436,561) 246,425 (4;422,814) 9,298,638 MID-YEAR FUND BALANCE ANALYSIS t �.l..y. L..L i.Irrn011Hl. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 2002 CHECK REGISTER NO: CO204 OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF: FEBRUARY 28, 2002 AMOUNT CHECK NO. VENDOR � DESCRIPTION. 4,306.29 13901 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM PERS FOR PAYROLL ENDED 2/1/02 4,306.29 13902 STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND UEL JANUARY Y VERKERS HICLES ESCOMPENSATION INS. 399.74 13903 TEXACO 13904 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY ELECTRICITY-STREET LIGHTS, CITY BUILDINGS 4,328- 1 13905 HOME DEPOT BARTON RD. REHAB PLANTING 50.00 13906 .TRACEY MARTINEZ BIRTHDAY BONUS AXLE REPLACEMENT ON LAWNMOWER 3,049.84 46609 AA EQUIPMENT RENTALS 14.44 46610 A-T,„& T LONG DISTANCE PHONE CHARGES REROOF-CHILD CARE BUILDING 8,095.00 46611 BELL ROOF COMPANY 229.77 46612 BOISE CASCADE OFFICE PRODUCTS -OFFICE SUPPLIES 250.00 46613 -DAN BUCHANAN FEBRUARY COUNCIL STIPEND 50.00 ' 46614 CA MUNICIPAL BUSINESS TAX ASSOCIATION 2002 ANNUAL RENEWAL-RONNOW 161.00 46615 CA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1215 SIGNAL ENERGY & MAINTENANCE 32.00 46616 CA STATE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EMPLOYEE BACKGROUND CHECKS 32.51 n 46618 COLLEEN EbMUNDSON REIMBURSE SUPPLIES-CITY BIRTHDAY O 180.00 0 46619 COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SERVICES JANUARY PLANNING SERVICES 241.40 Z 46620 DAILY JOURNAL CORPORATION LEGAL AD-BIKE STAGING AREAS 52.92 n 46621 DANKA OFFICE IMAGING COMPANY BASIC FEE & PER COPY COPIER FEES 4Z �JO 1 r' 46622 DFM ASSOCIATES 2002 CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS CODE - T' 46623 DICKSON COMPANY JANUARY STREET SWEEPING 2,364.00 m46624 DUNN-EDWARDS COMPANY MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 6 . 0 Z 46626, FEDEX DOCUMENT DELIVERY 37.04 b 46627 MARYETTA FERRE' FEBRUARY COUNCIL STIPEND 192.00. 00 46628 FOX OCCUPATIONAL MEDICAL CENTER PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS 35 m 46629 J. R. FREEMAN COMPANY PETTY CASH RECONCILIATION ENVELOPES 35.16 E: 46630 FRUIT GROWERS SUPPLY PARK MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 81.53 Z O � J CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 2002 CHECK REGISTER NO: CO204 OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF: FEBRUARY 28, 2002 CHECK NO. VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 46631 200 G.T. AREA CHAMBER OF-COMMERCE _ FEBRUARY CHAMBER NEWSLETTER SUBSIDY .00 46632 G.T. FIRE & RESCUE ASSOCIATION JAN. & FEB. LARKIN STIPEND DONATION 200.00 46633 LEE ANN GARCIA FEBRUARY COUNCIL STIPEND 250.00 46634 HARPER & BURNS LLPN JANUARY LEGAL SERVICES 1,611.25 46635 HERMAN HILKEY FEB. COUNCIL STIPEND & EXPENSE REIMBURSEM 271.00 46636 HINDERLITER, deLLAMAS &ASSOC. TAX RECOVERY CONTINGENCY FEE 77.42 46637 HYDRO-SCAPE PRODUCTS INC. IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 145.59 46638 INMARK DATE SET-PAID STAMP 26.96 46639 INTERSTATE BRANDS CORPORATION BREAD PRODUCTS-CHILD CARE 26.99 46640 JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS INC. NEW EDEN FILE SERVER LEASE 291.32 46642 JERRY'S AUTO SERVICE REPLACE BELTS-CHILD CARE VAN 149.80 46643 DON LARKIN FEBRUARY COUNCIL STIPEND 150.00 46644 LAWNMOWER CENTER LAWNMOWER REPAIRS 138.74 46645 LEGEND BUILDING MAINTENANCE JANUARY LIBRARY JANITORIAL SERVICE 200.00 46646 MARY BAEZ DROPPED FROM CHILD CARE PROGRAM 7/9/01 228.26 46647 MIRACLE MILE CAR WASH CAR WASHES 8.00 46648 MIRACLE PLAYGROUND SALES PLAYGROUND IMPROVEMENTS-CHILD CARE 10,605.27 46649 PACIFIC BELL DEC./JAN. INSTALL & SERVICE FOR DSL 523.88 46650 PACIFIC BELL PHONE CHARGES-CITY FACILITIES 118.84 46651 PETTY CASH-CHILD CARE REIMBURSE PETTY CASH 284.83 46652 RIVERSIDE HIGHLAND WATER COMPANY WATER-CITY PARKS & BUILDINGS 3,817.13 46653 S.B. COUNTY AUDITOR/CONTROLLER JANUARY BOOKING FEE CHARGES 2,555.52 46654 S.B. COUNTY ASSESSOR ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAP UPDATES 1.50 - 46655 S.B. COUNTY SHERIFF MARCH SHERIFF SERVICES-& 2ND QUARTER OVER 93,420.41 46656 S.B. COUNTY VEHICLE SERVICES ROAD REPAIR SUPPLIES/EQUIPMENT 209.55 46657 S.B. COUNTY WASTE SYSTEMS DIVISION JANUARY DUMP CHARGES 806.49 46658 SCHOOL-AGE NOTES SUBSCRIPTION RENEWAL-CHILD CARE 26.95 2 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE REGISTER NO: CO204 CHECK DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 2002 " OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF: FEBRUARY 28, 2002 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT CHECK NO. VENDOR TINY TOT SUPPLIES 198.42 46659 SMART & FINAL IRIS COMPANY 555.42 46660 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY NATURAL GAS-CITY FACILITIES 69.85 46661 STAPLES CREDIT PLAN OFFICE SUPPLIES FOOD SUPPLIES-CHILD CARE 1,192.00 46662 SYSCO 92.00 46664 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT FAX NOTIFICATION-DIG ALERT 46665 WESTERN EXTERMINATORS MONTHLY PEST CONTROL-CITY BUILDINGS 158.00 46666 YOSEMITE WATER BOTTLED WATER-CITY FACILITIES 1 39.75 58.00 sf TOTAL $148,083.98 I CERTIFY THAT,TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE,THE AFORE LISTED CHECKS FOR PAYMENT OF CITY =` LIABILITIES HAVE BEEN AUDITED BY ME AND ARE NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE OPERATION OF THE CITY. THOMAS SCHWAB CITY MANAGER 3 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CITY U,C,L APPR%0" %L CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - February 14, 2002 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order in the Council Chambers,Grand Terrace Civic'Center,22795 Barton Road,Grand Terrace,California,on February 14, 2002, at 5:00 p.m. PRESENT: Dan Buchanan, Mayor Lee Ann Garcia, Mayor Pro Tern. Herman Hilkey, Councilmember Don Larkin, Councilmember Maryetta Ferr6, Councilmember Tom Schwab, City Manager Brenda Stanfill, City Clerk Patrizia Materassi, Community and Economic Development Director Larry Ronnow, Finance Director Jerry Glander, Building R Safety Director Lt. Hector Guerra, Sheriffs Department ABSENT: Steve Berry, Assistant City Manager John Harper, City Attorney A Budget Workshop began at 5:00 p.m.to discuss the priorities of the Council. It was the consensus of the City Council that the following list is their priorities for FY 2002/2003 and that they will review the list once again in 6 months: 1. Improve City Image through City Entries Grand Terrace Road at Mt. Vernon Avenue Southern City Boundaries Entries 2. Pursue Funds for a New Library 3. Create a Comprehensive Plan for Economic Development 4. Continue to Maintain a Positive Relationship with Colton Joint Unified School District by holding Annual Meetings to discuss current issues involving both the City and the District. 5. Improve overall Communication %within the City 6. Increase Level of Law Enforcement 7. Improve City Image through Overall Beautification 8. Promote Development at Barton Road and Mt. Vernon Intersection 9. Establish and Build a Community/Cultural Center/Activities 10. Establish an Economic Development Assistance Team 11. Cooperative Arrangement with Colton on the improvement of Mt. Vernon from Grand Terrace Road to Washington. COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM N0.13D i Council Minutes February 14. 2002 Page 2 Mayor Buchanan adjourned the Budget 1t'orkshop at 7:00 p.m. The City Council Meeting was opened with invocation by Councilman Herman Hilkey, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilman Don Larkin. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS The Miss Grand Terrace Queens for the 2001-2002 year presented the City Council with a Photo to hang up at City Hall. 2A. Proclamation - Stater Brothers Markets Mayor Pro Tern Garcia read a Proclamation congratulating Stater Brothers Market upon celebrating its 65`h Golden Anniversary of sen-ing Southern California Families with quality merchandise at the lowest possible prices and wishing them continued success serving their valued customers in the future. 1 CONSENT CALENDAR CC-2002-06 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER LARKIN,SECOND BY COUNCELMEMBER HILKEY, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the following consent calendar items with the removal of item 3E, 3H, and 3K: 3A. Approval of Check Register CO203 3B. Ratify 02-14-2002 CRA Action 3C. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda 3D. Approval of 01-24-2002 Minutes 3F. ,Annual Statement of Investment Policy 3G. 'Annual Financial Report for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2001 3I. Combined Cash and Investments Treasury Report for Quarter Ended December 31, 2001 3J. Right-of-Way Dedication North Easterly Corner Grand Terrace Road(Honey 'Hill Drive i ITEMS REMOVED.FROM CONSENT CALENDAR 3E. Phase III Bicycle and Pedestrian Staging Areas and Grand Terrace Road Realignment j Contract Award CC-2002-07 MOTION BY COUNCIL.MEMBER HILK.EY, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCLA, CARRIED 5-0, to proceed with Option A and appropriate S 15,000.00, award the Phase III Bicycle and Pedestrian Staging Areas and Grand Terrace Road Council Minutes February 14. 2002 Page Realignment Contract to Ayala Construction,and direct staff to consider the General Fund for appropriation. 3H. Purchase of Floor Cleaning Equipment for the Grand Terrace Community Pride Program CC-2002-08 MOTION BY COUNCL\IEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER LARKIN, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the purchase of a floor machine and steam cleaner and appropriation of $925 from account 10-180-710 and to reimburse account 10-700-01 with the donation from JoAnn Johnson. 3K. 23190 Westwood Street Conditional Encroachment Agreement-Berdj and Deborah Seuylemezian CC-2002-09 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY,SECOND BY COUNCU-MEMBER LARKIN, CARRIED 4-0-0-1 (COUNICILMEMBER FERRE ABSTAINED), to accept the Conditional Encroachment Agreement from Berdj and Deborah Seuylemezian and direct the City Clerk to record said agreement. PUBLIC CONINIENT -None OR-kL REPORTS 5A. Committee Reports 1. Historical and Cultural Activities Committee a. Minutes of January 7, 2002 CC-2002-10 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER LARKIN,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER FERRE, CARRIED 5-0,to accept the January 7,2002 Minutes of the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee. COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Buchanan, attended the Chamber of Commerce Ribbon Cutting Ceremony at the newly re-opened Baskets Ahh La Cart. He commended the owners on setting their shop up and they had a great ribbon cutting ceremony and encouraged everyone to check out their shop. He reported that on Saturday, the Chamber of Commerce will be hosting a ribbon cutting for the Grand Opening of the new Karate Studio on Michigan Avenue at 12 noon. The Chamber of Commerce held a great mixer that was hosted by the City of Grand Terrace on February 6`h. There was food available from local establishments and prizes'were given away. It was very well attended by local business community as well as the regional VIP's. Council Minutes February 14, 2002 Page 4 He commended the Chamber of Commerce and City Staff for putting on such a wonderful event. Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, reported that the National Education Association, California Teacher's Association and the Association of Colton Educators will be having a Read Across America Project:on March 1, 2002. She expressed her appreciation for the Chamber mixer that was held at City Hall and felt that it was a fantastic event. She reported that there was a wonderful article in the Sun Newspaper on Monday February 4, 2002 about every day heroes and it was about JoAnn Johnson "Volunteer Found Herself In Right Place At the Right Time." She thanked JoAnn for all her time and commitment to the City of Grand Terrace. She wished everyone a Happy Valentine's Day. Councilmember Hilkey, he requested that the City look at the lights on Main Street in Corona. Omnitrans is going to give a couple of presentations on Omnilink. He reported that SANBAG approved $60,000 to fund software so tickets issued by cameras can quickly be downloaded to the District Attorney's Office. He indicated that he feels it may be a good time to look at this type of cameras at all of our intersections. He asked Council if they were interested in this type of cameras. It was the consensus of the Council to look into the electronic ticketing and determine if it would be feasible for the City. Councilmember Larkin, commended JoAnn Johnson on the article that was in the Sun. Colton Police Chief Patrick Crowe passed away and requested that the City adjourn the meeting in his honor. He indicated that the Council had their priority workshop and that he felt that it is something good for the City. It allows for the opportunity for the Council to discuss w ith the staff what they would like to see happening in the future. They have established some priorities, which we are still working on and we have accomplished some of them. One of the priorities for the upcoming year is to improve communications within the City in an effort to give people a better understanding on what is going on. The other priority that Council added is to look into increasing law enforcement and protection. He attended the Chamber mixer and felt that it was an excellent event that was very well attended. He reported that on the agenda for the February 28`h meeting there will be an item on the agenda regarding the no parking on the northeast corner of Mt. Vernon and Grand Terrace Road. He wished everyone a Happy Valentine's Day. Councilmember Ferr6, reported that she attended San Bernardino County Gangs & Drug Task Force Meeting where they were given a presentation on a program that shows troubled youth that there is a world outside of their neighborhoods. She indicated that they are seeing results from this program. She also attended the Inland Empire Economic,Partnership Meeting where they discussed two issues that they have targeted to address 1)Transportation Council Minutes February 14, 2002 Paoe and 2)Education and Workforce Development. She reported that she and her husband Frank were the high bidders for the Valentine's Day Fundraiser Dinner. She indicated that it was a great deal of fun and that they were served an unbelievable dinner. She is very impressed with our local fire department and their community involvement. PUBLIC HEARING -None UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEN;' BUSINESS 8A. Legislative Update CC-2002-11 MOTION BY hLAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEM-BER FERRE,CARRIED 5-0,to ratify the Legislative Task Force"2002-2003 Legislative Priorities" seek to have $1,200 or more placed into the City budget for legislative lobbying trips to Sacramento and have a Legislative Update agenda item on the first meeting of each month. CLOSED SESSION 9A. Personnel Negotiations 9B. Potential Litigation Spring Mountain Ranch Mayor Buchanan indicated that he will be abstaining from discussion of Potential Litigation Spring Mountain Ranch. Mavor Pro Tem Garcia announced that the Council met in Closed Session to discuss Personnel Negotiations and Potential Litigation Spring Mountain Ranch and that there was no reportable action taken. ORDER OF ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pro Tem. Garcia adjourned the City Council Meeting at 8:50 p.m. in memory and honor of Patrick Crowe,until the next CRAICity Council Meeting which is scheduled to be held on Thursday, February 28, 2002 at 5:00 p.m. CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace i STAFF REPORT Finance Department CIT704 GR6ND TERR CE CRa ITEM( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X ) MEETI`G DATE : February 2S. 2002 AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT. MID YEAR BL-DGET ADJUSTMENTS -FY 01-02 FLNDr\G REQUIRED NO FLIDING REQliIRED City staff conducts an annual mid-vear budget review to make any necessary adjustments that are needed as a result of unanticipated conditions and events. Identified revenue and expense adjustments along with any justifications are presented on Schedule A and Schedule B of the follo«ving pages. Council passed the FY 2001-2002 Budget on June 28, 2001. From July 1, 2001 through February 14, 2002, a total of S565,921 additional appropriations were made; S167,875 from the General Fund. S337,199 from Special Revenue and Capital Improvement Funds. and S60,847 from CRA Funds. These appropriations are listed on Schedule C "Budget Adjustments FY 2001-2002. Additionally, a Mid Year Fund Balance Analysis is attached. All fund balances appear to be in line with Staff estimates. ADJUSTMENTS TO REVENUE ESTIMATES S 103,875 consists of actual reimbursements or grants received year to date. Also included on Schedule,4 are unanticipated rental revenue and vehicle code fines over the prior year. Of the total. a reduction of S190.000 interest income pertains to the Redevelopment Agency. By fund type, the balance is S46,852 General Fund, S80,223 Special Revenue Funds and S309,350 Capital Project Funds. -1- COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NC. Page 2 Mid Year Budget Adjustments ADJUSTMENTS TO BUDGETED EXPENDITURES S14,746 in General Fund additional appropriations consists of small operational costs, including funds for the City Newsletter, copier lease, city decals and administrative espenses These are shopvn on Schedule B and further described in separate memorandum. Staff Recommends Council approval of the following 2001-02 Budget Adjustments 1) Increase Estimated Revenues by S33,652 in the General Fund for California Law Enforcement Equipment Program Grant as shown on Schedule _4. 2) Increase Estimated Revenues by S13,200 in the General Fund for rental revenue from AT&T as outlined in Schedule A. 3) Increase Estimated COPS Grant Revenue by S70,223 and, Veh-cle Code Fines for S 10,000, on Schedule A. 4) Reinstate the Bike Lane Grant Funds in the current fiscal year as they were not received or requisitioned in the prior year: $309,350 as shown on Schedule A. 5) Appropriate S 14,746 for miscellaneous General Fund administrative items as listed on Schedule B. City of Grand Terrace Finance Department Memorandum To__ Tom Schwab City Council From: Larry Ronnow Subject: Mid-Year Adjustments - City Date: February 19, 2002 _ I am requesting revenue estimate revisions for the following accounts: 10-300-21, CLEEP Grant - $339652 ' We received S 104,684 last year; did not officially anticipate additional funds. 10'.-600-05, Rent —City Facilities - S13,200 At time of budget preparation, this revenue for the AT&T Antenna Site rental was not included. This fiscal rear we will receive 11 months @ $1=;200 per month. 147300-01, COPS Grant - $70,223 It was not determined at budget time if we would receive a similar amount as was received last fiscal year. Prior to last year, the City averaged S30,100 for four fiscal years. Last year -,ve received $100,014. This adjustment brings our estimate up to last year's_level, and it %vas received in October. 17-500-03, Vehicle Code Fines - S10,000 Increase based on revenues received by mid-year as compared to last fiscal year. 44-300-01, Art 3 Bike Lane Grant — $309,350 This is a carry-over from last year since funds have not yet been requested. In addition to the above City revenue adjustments, I am requesting the, following expenditure adjustments: 10-125-213, Newsletter - $2,950 The City Newsletter has been traditionally funded 50% each through the City Clerk's Department and Oil Recycling grant funds. The latter have been depleted and alternative funds must be appropriated. This amount includes an additional $70 per month for two-color copy. 10-190-700, Copier Lease - $6,000 , This item was not flagged for budget; covers the Xerox 5053 Copier lease and maintenance. 10-180-220, Special Dept Expense - 51,696 Steve Berry has requested this item for the purchase of cite decals. It includes fifty 7 inch, and fifty 12 inch diameter decals. They have not been ordered for 20 years. 10-110-270, Council Travel - $2,000 10-110-220, Special Dept Expense - $400 10-120-230, Advertising - $1,700 See attached memo. i ��sa�scr S - O GROND TER MEMO To: Larry Ronnow From: Tom Schwab Subject: Mid-Year Adjustment Requests Date: February 14, 2002 I am requesting mid-year adjustments to three accounts and.they are as follows. budget '01-'02 acct# mid year request $7,250.00 10-110-270 $2,000.00' to cover any travel for 4.5 mos. Council Travel $1,000.00 10-110-220 $400.00, special/unanticipated expenses that might occur Council Spec. $1,000.00 10-1207.230 $1,700.00 may have to advertise for planning director Advertising NOTE THAT THESE AMOUNTS COVER TI1E OVERAGES AS WELL AS PROVIDE A MODEST REPLENISHMENT FOR FUTURE NEEDS THIS FISCAL YEAR. TS:JV City of Grand Terrace SCHEDULE A CRA of Grand Terrace Midyear Budget Adjustment Requests -Revenue Estimates Fiscal Year 2001-2002(7/1/01 to 6/30/2002) Account Description Amount 1) Adjust Estimated Revenue for unanticipated 10-300-21 CLEEP Grant $ 33,652 California Law Enforcement Equipment Program High Technology Grant 2) Adjust Estimated Rental Revenue for 10-600-05 Rent-City Facilities 13,200 AT&T Antenna Site 3) Adjust Revenue for additional COPS allocation 14-300-01 COPS Grant 70,223 (Citizens'Option For Public Safety-AB3229) 4) Adjust Estimated Revenue for unanticipated 17-500-03 Vehicle Code Fines 10,000 Vehicle Codes Fines 5) Reduce CRA Project Fund Interest Income 32-600-01 Interest Income (190,000) Due To Cash Outlay for 93 Bond Defeasance 6) Carry-over Estimate for Bike Lane Grants 44-300-01 Art 3 Bike Lane Grant 309,350 Not Received in Prior Year GRAND TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS Schedule A- Mid Year Revenue Adjustments 0102midadi i 1 City of Grand Terrace SCHEDULE B CRA of Grand Terrace Midyear Budget Adiustment Requests EXPENDITURES Fiscal Year 2001-2002(7/1101 to 6/30/2002) Account Description Amount 1) Additional appropriation for City Newsletter 10-125-213 Newsletter $ 2,950 2) Adjust available fund balance for defeasance 32-010-00 CRA Project Cash 4,626,461 of TAB 93 B Bonds in Sept 01 3) Reduce TAB 93 B Debt Service resulting 33-300-203 TAB 1993 Debt Service (219.593) from_defeasance -4) Xerox 5053 Copier lease&maint payments 10-190-700 Copier Lease 6,000 not sufficiently budgeted 5) Appropriate funds for city decals- 10-180-220 Special Dept Expense 1,696 Community Services. v 6) Appropriation for Sales Tax Software Svs 32-.370-255 Contract Services 1,200 7) Additional appropriations requested by 10-110-270 Council Travel 2,000 City Manager's Office 10-110-220 Special Dept Expense. 400 10-120-230 Personnel Advertising 1,700 GRAND TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS $ 4,422,814 r._L__i 1_ r) R e: SCHEDULE C CITY OF-GRAND TERRACE& REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS FY 2001-2002(711/01 TO 211412002) DATE REV EXPEND DESCRIPTIONS ACCOUNT 6/28/01 city $ 11,800 Increase Animal Control Agreement, not incl in adopted budget 10-190-256 6/28/01 - city 108,535 Record COLA, Merit, PERS&.Benefits Adjustments 10-XXX-XXX 6/28/01-city^- - - 2-232 Record COLA, Merit, PERS&Benefits Adjustments 21-XXX-XXX 6/28/01 cra 5,068 Record COLA, Merit, PERS&Benefits Adjustments 32-370-XXX 6/28/01 cra 15,311 Record COLA, Merit, PERS&Benefits Adjustments 34-400-XXX 6/28/01 cra 4,331 Record COLA, Merit, PERS&Benefits Adjustments 34-800-XXX 6/28/01 city 5,400 Record Car Allowance Increase 10-XXX-273 8/9/01 city 18,500 Continued Appropriation- Barham Contract 1-0-370-255 8/9/01 cra 5,000 Keyser Marston-La Mesa RV 32-370-255 8/9/01 cra 2,600 Grocery Market Demand Analysis 32-370-255 8/23/01 city 35,000 Palm Avenue Storm brain. 12-903-704 .--- - -9/27/01 city 3,000 -Spring Mountain Ranch Traffic,Study 10-370-255 9/27/01 cra 15,000 Continued Appropriation-DeCrinis &'Co : Pass-through Analysis' 32-370-250 9/27/01 city 4,715 Traffic Data Device-from CLEEP Grant funds 10-410-701 12/13/01 cra 13,537 Reappropriate for North-South Corridor Study 32-600-201 2/14/02 city 925 925 Appropriation for Floor Cleaning Machine& Donation 10-180-701 2/14/02 city 96,489 Transfer AB2928 for Bike Lane Project Local Funding 11-999-999 2/14/02 city 16,946 Transfer AB2766 for Bike Lane Project Local Funding 15-500-607 2/14/02 city 15,000 Transfer from Gen Fund for Bike Lane Project Local Funding 10-999-999 2/14/02 city 128,435 186,532 Record Additional Local Funding Revenue&Addit Project Cost 44-20.0-620 $129,360 $ 565,921 $ 925 $ 167,875 General Fund ------- ---- - - - - - 35,000 Storm Drain - - - 2,232 �Sewer - - - - - -- - - ---- - - -- -- ----- ----------- - _ -96,489 AB2928-- 16,946 AQMD 128,435 186,532 Bike Lane Projects 41,205 CRA Project 15,311 CRA Housing -__4,331__CRA-Code Enf $129,360 $ 565,921 ; Crharhila r`-_VTr) Ravonioo !GvnanAifiira Arlhiefmonfe 114117mi'l.e rli vl� i - Available FY FY FY FY FY Midyear Midyear Projected CITY AND CRA OF GRAND TERRACE FUND 2001-2002 2001-2002 2001-2002 2001-2002 2001-2002 Revenue& Appropriations Available 4NALYSIS AVAILABLE FUND BALANC BALANCE Revenues Transfers In Appropriations Transfers Out _Adjustments Transfers In Transfers Out FUND PROJECTED THROUGH 6/30/2002 6/30101 (Estimated) (Estimated) (Budgeted) (Budgeted) (schedule C)of 2114102 Adjustments (Schedule A) Adjustm(Schedulents B61 0 02E (Audited) GENERAL FUND -Undesig.,Unresry 1,530,131 3,093,008 (2,952,647) (166,950) 46,852 (14,746) 1,535,648NIA NIA 925,558 GENERAL FUND -Designated 925,558 -NIA NIA TOTAL GENERAL FUND 2,455,689 3.093,008 (2,952,647) M66,950) 46,852 (14,746) 2,461,206 237,108 36,273 0 (96,489) 176,892 Street Fund 35,000) 46,867 ( Storm Drain Fund 107,255 9,500 (34,888) 16,912 Park Fund 15,612 1,300 0 AB 3229 COPS Fund 147,237 33,280 (66,471) 70,223 184,269 6 915 23,054 16,946 39,115 Air Quality Improvement Fund 69,780 16,250 ( � ) ( ) ( ) 88,350 , Gas Tax Fund 126,119 235,925 (273,694) y Traffic Safety Fund 65,008 17,500 (4,873) _ 10,000 87,635 Measure I Fund 778,456 149,000 (166,658) (171,897) 588,901 Waste Water Disposal Fund 1,432,095 1,130.975 (989,749) (2,232) 1,571,089 ; LSCPG/LGHTG Assessment Dist 1,103 14,417 (17,334) (1,814) [like Lane Capital Fund (4,957) 0 63,054 (309,350) (58,097) 309,350 0 Street Improvement Projects 0 0 221,875 (221,875) 0 0 Barton Rd. Bridge Project 5,937 90,009 5,491 (95,600) 5,937 TOTAL OTHER FUNDS 2,980,753 1,734,429 290,420 (2,187,307) (194,951) (208,764) 389,573 0 2,804,153 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 5,449,064 225,000 (234,649) (95,469) (41,205) (190,000) (4,627,661) 485,080 DEBT SERVICE FUND ', 0 3,230,066 (2,804,885) r (629,000) , 219,593 14,974 LOW& MODERATE HOUSING 3,978,684 498,100 629,800 (1,553,717) (19,642) 3,533,225 TOTAL CRA FUNDS 9,427,748 3,953,166 629,800 (4,593;251) (725,269) (60,847) (190,000) (4,408,068) 4,033,279 TOTAL-ALL FUNDS 14,864,190 8,780,603 920,220 (9,733,205) (920,220) (436,561) 246,425 (4,422,814) 9,298,638 MID-YFAR FUND BALANCE ANALYSIS I ' I I 1c CITY OF GRAND TERRACE FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002- BUDGET ESTIMATED REVENUE SUMMARY" JJ MID YEAR BUDGET REVEIW FUND 2001-2002 Subsequent MID YEAR 2001-2002 NUMBER TITLE -Estimated Adjustments Adjustments' Revised 10 GENERAL FUND 3,093,008 925 46,852 3,140,785 11 STREET FUND 36,273 0 0 36,273 12 STORM DRAIN ! 9,500 0 0 9,500 13 PARK FUND 1,300 rt 0 0 1,300 14 SLESF AB3229 FUND 33,280 0 70i,223 103,503' 15 AIR QUALITY 16,250 0 0 16,260 16 GAS TAX FUND 235,925 _: 0 0 235,925 17 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND 17,600 0 101,000 27,500 . 20 MEASURE "1" 149,000 0 0 149,000 21 WASTEWATER'FUND 1,130,975 0 0 1,130,975�' 26 LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING 14,417 0 0 14,417 TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 1,644,420 0 80',223 1,724,643 I 32 CRA-CAPITAL PROJECTS 225,000 0 (190,000) 35,000., 33 CRA DEBT SERVICE 3,230,066 0 j 0 3,230,066 34 LOW AND MOD FUND 1,127,900 0 0 1,127,900, TOTAL CRA FUNDS 4,682,966 0 (190„000) 4,392,966 a _ I 44 BIKE LANE FUND 63,054 128,435 3091,350 500,839 46 STREET PROJECTS 221,876 0 1 0 221,876; 47 BARTON ROAD BRIDGE PROJECT 96,506 0 1 0 95,500 TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS 380,429 �128,435 309,350 818,214', TOTAL REVENUE 9,700,823 129,360 246,425 ;10,076,60811 I � � I `INCLUDES INTERFUND TRANSFERS AND LOANS - 2/19/2002 - REVENUE SUMMARY , i CITY OF GRA'�ID TERRACE / COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF GRAND TERRACE EXPENDITURE SUNIMI ARY D E F I ADOPTED RE-APPROP ADDITIONAL SUBSEQUENT PROPOSED MID-YEAR I BUDGET OUTSTANDING APPROP. REVISED NUD-YEAR REVISED 01-02 EINCL-,0R.M4CFS YTD BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET FUND- BY DEPARTMENT Q7/1/ot 01-02 01-02 ADJUST. 01-02 10-110 CITY COUNCIL 38,810 38,810 2,400 41,2101 10-120 CITY MANAGER 195,200 9,126 204,326 1,700 206,026� 10.125 CITY CLERK 138,842 11,477 150,319 2,950 153,269 271 074 20,461 291,535 291,535! 10.140 FINANCE 1 10-160 CITY ATTORNEY 20,000 20,000 20,0001 172 BUILDING AND SAFETY 43,452 2,9I0 46,362 46,3621 �175 PUBLIC WORKS 34,722 116 2,929 37,767 37,767 10-180 COMMUNITY SERVICES 280,844 13,912 294,756 1,696 296,4521 10-190 NON-DEPARTMENTAL 242,901 26,800 269,701 6,000 275,7011 10-370 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 235,334 5,044 36,234 276,612 276,612 10-380 MIS 85,074 1,906 2,365 89,345 89,345 10-410 LAW ENFORCEMENT 1,050,203 4,715 1,054,918 1,054,918i 10-440 CHILD CARE SERVICES 785,372 750 34,151 820,273 820,273 10-450 PARK MAINTENANCE 114,159 2,795 116,954 116,954: 6 10-631 STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE 6,000 000 6,000? 10-801 PLANNING COMMISSION 5,100 5,100 5,1001 10-804 HISTORICAIJCULTURAL CMM 1,200 1,200 1,2001 10-805 SENIOR CITIZEN'S PROGRAM 20,100 20,100 20,100 10-808 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CM 5,500 445 5,945 5,945 1 COST ALLOCATION (621,240) (621,240) (621,240)i TOTAL GENERAL FUND 2,952,647 8,261 167,875 3,128,783 14,746 3,143,529 I_XXX STREET FUND 0 96,489 96,489 96 4891 12-XXX STORM DRAIN FUND 27,400 35,000 62,400 62,400 13-XXX PARK FUND 0 0 0 1 14-XXX SLESF(AB3229 COPS)FUND 66,312 66,312 66,312 1 15-XXX AIR QUALITY FUND 25,504 16,946 42,450 42,450 16-XXX GAS TAX FUND 219,500 219,500 219,500' 17-XXX TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND 4,465 4,465 4,465 20-XXX MEASURE I FUND 126,000 126,000 126,000 21-XXX WASTE WATER DISPOSAL FND 909,900 2,232 912,132 912,1321 26-XXX LIGHTING&LNDSCPG ASSTMT 13,902 13,902 13,902; COST ALLOCATION 190,653 190,653 190,653 TOTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS 1,583,636 ol 150,667 1,734,303 0 1,734,303 32-200 CRA GEN.OPSICAP FUND 109,704 13,537 123,241 1,200 124,441 32-370 CRA GEN.IECON DEV 209,605 27,668 237,273 237,273' 33-XXX CRA DEBT SERVICE 3,184,828 3,184,828 (219,593) 2,965,2351 34-400 LOW MOD HOUSING FUND 1,311,955 43,340 15,311 1,370,606 1,370,606; 34-800 LOW MOD-CODE ENFORCEMT. 71,864 4,331 76,195 76,1951 COST ALLOCATION 430,587 430,587 4301387 TOTAL CRAFUNDS 5,318,543 43,340 60.847 5,379,390 (218,393) 5,204,337, 44-XXX CAPITAL PROJECT-BIKE LANE 309,350 17,073 186,532 512,955 512,935; 46-XXX CAPITAL IMPROV-STREETS 221,875 221,875 221,875' 47-XXX BARTON BRIDGE PROJECT 95,500 1 95,500 95,300 TOTAL CAPITAL IMPRV FUNDS 626,725 17,073 186,532 813,257 0 830,330' TOTAL ALL FUNDS 10,481,551 68,674 565,921 11,047,472 {203,647) 10,912,499 Expenditure Summary C,T11 GRAM TD ERR C CominUnity Development Department STAFF REPORT CRA ITEM ( COUNCIL ITEM (X ) MEETING DATE: February 28, 2002 FUNDING REQUIRED: NO FUNDING REQUIRED : ► SUBJECT: Geographic Information System (GIS) Program Status RECOMMENDATION: Receh a and File Achievements: Since we received a large grant to develop the City's GIS (Geographic Information System), it has proven to be an indispensable tool for conducting City business. Initially, the GIS was used for high level analysis of infrastructure, and for generating maps and displays illustrating various aspects of the City. Over the last year, the GIS has been further implemented on the public counter in City Hall; used as a daily tool to provide information to City Staff and citizens. The following information (data layers) is available at the public counter for free at this time (See attachment A): l. Property data—acreage, zoning, ownership, building square footage and year built 2. Sewer lines. se,,yer laterals, sewer easements, and manhole covers as well as digital scans of all sewer as-built drawings 3. Aerial photos for any property in the City of Grand Terrace 4. Streets centerlines, street right-of-ways, railroads and rail spurs 5. Core commercial buildings with photographs The GIS is actively being used b,, Steve Berry, Assistant City Manager for various public improvements, Roberto Hernandez for Code Enforcement, John Lampe for both current and advance planning cases, and by Steve Cumblidge and Jeff Gollihar for public information and research at the front counter. Drago Barbu actively maintains the GIS and performs high level analyses for a variety of projects. The GIS has been used extensively by Steve Cumblidge in the Community and Economic Development Department for querying land availability and -producing maps and displays to facilitate the City's Economic Development Program (See attachments B-1 through B-5). Dragos Barbu has been maintaining the GIS data on the City's network and has used the GIS to illustrate the City's Capital Improvement Program. 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, Cali forniaQ9 11C R5 AWNVA 1 Now 3F I Also in the last year, the sewer line data mapping project initiated by former Assistant City Manager John Donlevy has been completed. with all sewer lir.es having been mapped and made viewable as a data layer in the GIS. All sewer plans have been scanned and can be viewed in electronic format as well. A desired goal was to have data available in the field for use in emergencies, for regular maintenance, etc... This has vet to be implemented due to changes in staffing. What Comes Next? Keeping the GIS data up to date: GIS has become an indispensable tool for Grand Terrace. but it needs continued update and maintenance. The initial set of GIS information (data) wvaj developed in 1998 and remains largely the same today. The City- has subscribed with the San Bernardino Count- Geographic Information Management Systems (GIMS) for updates to N arious data layers. principally the parcel data layer. However. GIy1S is having difficult,, with their staffing and funding levels. and is seriously behind in producing updated data for the count: as a whole. The City has not received an update from San Bernardino County GIMS since 1999. Fortunately, Grand Terrace has not changed greatly since 1999. and staff is managing to cope as best as possible with the changes that have occurred. The City does subscribe with a private company for current parcel ownership data (Property Pro) for use until Count, nets its act together. Steve Cumblidge in the CEDD has linked the purchased Property Pro data with the City's parcel data to provide more accurate ownership data. He has also been updating data, cleaning up existing data layers, and developing new data lavers where and when possible. The City acquired digital aerial ortho-photos in 1998. which are a principal component of the City's GIS. The digital aerials are used to underlay the map layers and help greatly to understand the relationships between the digital map information and the actual built environment. A number of houses and buildings ha-,e been constructed since 1998, as well as numerous room additions, patio covers, etc., which are not represented by the aerial photos. The Citv should begin to budget for new digital aerial ortho-photos within the next two budget years. Keeping the GIS Software up-to-date: - GIS software is very expensive The initial software acquisition (ArcVie,,, A_rcInfo and ArcIMS, etc...) was covered b% a generous grant from ESRI secured by Dragos Barbu in 1998. Annual maintenance has been paid for by the City in order to keep technical support and to receive periodic upgrades and technical fixes to existing software. However. as with all technology, GIS software is constantly evolving and ch:aging. and ESRI has extensively redesigned their GIS software within the last year (_AxcGIS) to include more tools and more features than we have now. The City will have to upgrade to current software in order to keep up with latest advances in GIS technology. Staff is working with ESRI to identify the most cost effective way to keep the Cit,,-'s GIS software current. Fortunately, past expenditures for maintenance means upgrades will not cost full price. Acquiring more data: The Year 2000 Census data will be acquired to illustrate the population and income characteristics for Grand Terrace and surrounding areas. This data is needed to show the economic development potential of Grand Terrace to potential businesses and developers. The Riverside Highland Water Company has provided the water system data in CAD (Computer Aided Drafting) format. Staff will be converting water system cad file data to GIS data so it will be viewable as an additional data layer in the GIS. Staff is also studying the best way to develop a digital terrain model so that the City can be modeled in three dimensions for drainage and perhaps view shed analyses. Expanded uses proposed for the GIS: Staff is considering where to deploy GIS within the City when time and computer/software assets become available, as well as for uses thatwill make a positive impact. One location for GIS would be at the Building Department Public Counter and add building permit activity tracking to the GIS data to further expedite deg elopment processing. Another use will be to develop a Code Enforcement data layer to identify any geographic patterns to code .violations and develop enforcement focus areas. And still another project in development is to use GIS in conjunction with Finance Department for business license tracking and business license data layer to assure that business license registration fees, and ultimately to determine that the City is receiving all sales taxes it is due. Enterprise Wide GIS: - A key goal for the next ,ear will be to establish GIS for intra-net use in City Hall to make GIS available to all City Staff as a regular tool. The City can utilize recent software advancements to provide GIS services to more computers and users in a cost effective manner with little need for extensive staff training on complicated software. GIS on the Citv Website: The big goal is to make the City's GIS property information with zoning information, etc., available and interactive to the general public over the internet. Staff is researching several key advancements in GIS-on-the-Web technology. ESRI has developed software to put GIS on the web, but it is not easily implemented out-of-the-box. Right now only larger cities with big information technology departments/budgets (i.e. Riverside, San Bernardino, Rancho Cucamonga) with programming capabilities have been able to put GIS on the web. At this time, putting Grand Terrace's GIS on the inter eet would require a large financial investment on the part of the City. Initial estimates are in the S?0.000 range. There are also issues regarding what level of data should be made viewable to the general public. However. in spite of these obstacles, staff will continue to follow developments in technology to identify the most cost effective wa} to achieve this goal. Furthermore, decisions about the structure and content of data are being made with the ultimate goal of putting appropriate information on the web. Staff will continue with scanning of public documents in digital form for ultimate availability on the Web. For example, the City's Zoning Code and the Barton Road Specific Plan documents have been scanned and adapted to digital format (Adobe PDF) by Steve Cumblidge. The City's General Plan and the conditions of approval for key deN elopment projects are targeted for digital conversion into internet ready format. This report shows the progress the City has made with its GIS program, in spite of having a small staff "ith many diverging demands on their available time. This report spells out some ambitious goals staff believes the GIS program should be evolving towards. These'goals are in line with the City Council goal of improved communications with the community, by providing widely available geographic and related information to enable staff to do their job more efficiently and effectively, as well as providing similar t},pes of information to the citizens of Grand Terrace via the Internet. Respectfully prepared by: Steven Cumblidge Assistant Planner Approved by: Patrizia Materassi Communit, and Economic Development Director Attachments: A—example of information available to public at front counter. B-1 —map produced for economic development packet B-2— B-5 - target area detail maps y i - !—�i"l*� .� � ' V��s ,zl t � � 1 � E'— �Jr,,*t�,'�i t•�• '� 4 �U�l.�l.. k 2� • �� r � T otf i7 r X� fE 1•'t' .r _• � �4� t� '•.�;Y., � 'i r} s � . :gip 11 J�s l �•�'�"„P4R�,,,,� <-t't't y`4+flN .1 �1.,�'S ,,'L,t�`;iF'}�t1C�,4y�+}ylS��ft�tf4�'+, '! �r �f rlt.' rycr�7kt.• '+%"r ! _` �}�x• �x 1{6 s ; t t }< i ,„h'�A� r"#'t 'Wr`!x•� �''. t`+ !�'t � v' n:,•.�.,r) J ,� a s�r-i. � � .+ fi�'fix J. r .-. � �,. <._.w• ..' y�'-,ly� i�'iu '�'� �^ . +t rip? ya,� �...:r.. ..,�• t'— -...i•✓ +i.+'�r IY.'� >I ,•'� �. ;� !.; `s y . 41 ^ Sj"'l�^ jt �. . r's �..'h?t• �j�j�^"}..} 1;Y 'ly t!'�S: '(Y�A� L[!1' �7 �+'+ J= •' J..,�1, ,. ,,+t`•- *r', �.+ :�—,—_' _ "Gay a .. .y..,J� �ra.'��j+ 35iLY•%•+. ..t. `' d� � .. ,� I 1 41 I I , I. I I I d E. -[ ,.ri '.`�t"['"Y,t t .r $fir •: ��'1;�{+•'it�s,.`r� .<.; r f 1} �4y1 a. ' ✓} •.� 4 f *"SPr,yfiSA r�. {}C �+ si�a,,.e��,J.Y*,,,,1.,,,�eyra. 't � Y' "�. � r 4 ,�r+ �Y �", r,�K 1 �� , ;t�� tw� .t�i'�''i }i)t :.• ,Y t y 4 t I { � 1 ,� �.�•,�„ �.4T.� 4 ( !F, � ��,t4�1'I £.i� t,�J' 1 �1 Cna t"1 1� I ' 1}EF'L f L %'t' ■1 i' w-*i I zy^ I' r±i itf'.: t Y Q ,4�[t �y.,Y�'11�. I .•�.�,,1 k �r ktrc ¢rr..l.', ,k�� x �(k> '��4k � r +S+y) r�, --.a '�1'[ti�' �• -� q.�; ,}'-y"'t��!t', '{..,.'k� t�I w. �i�•.�"`rt t � !r (`i K ,}' ^�; '%� ...a Y.;-�--tl•� �,,.. y ten•.. � � h D t �' �+f, 7t+ �'� .�} I+ U�� a .wl A.t( o-•- r .r. �-% •## y y a �,7� �L—7�'. >��t�� i}+. :",1,, {�k Il i1 'tC v k"^�'. �,}'x �,.rrr t �,:,. ��'�S � 1'� ` S , '+ �r f r s��5�• •'•s:> ��f t4 I:(�! *� ! i � �'y, x;. 1 w ...! • ` t fir. P''u nt :-r r3 I. t;l • " nt '1'� `. r C , [• 1 �ti�t'� ! r'f' `#' 3 �r � ?.f''i4'r tn•,•��b• �t,a+,lf ,;4t.6� r}t, {i Ml i y s+tip*" �h �t Gf� >c ;J `M ,?� , • '.� }}r r k�y�tM� • ..1�,`k. a• r•^.��," !. I� 4' ;r�' "FT.r,r;a y�'t" t�t, ': .. _k'� f 'i' ti o ,rs•r..'�"dt, n xft.`tlt ri+ a .r, yY N4 4 � F I rl r#, 1'I 1121 :.rt Vw ri,Y ', a' `�I k + • YC t �S { tt t, t e l o z, 3., _ , a t; �,,,, --�,, #J .: l;'� 'rs _ 1 a E i „+ ''.��- •Y. ' ti i � �aZ 1 �' e ��Jy ��t r F•:er�Mi'�1'... z�•�'v, a •httl(1 21' s -i r'" '1," • �k Y._ t r� :s<5�'d"�,�r t`+%�'��d �. It vtr F r! 1 i E d [Jl� 4 • �•,r o ,� v f. �F�E�. ' ^�' •tlt�. 7ty1j51��i�: til t ��'e?-�7+n��.. { tt�h,! •y 1�' ''.) 3 R �4 J. t7- GC �� + 4,,1 '+ '1ti-�rtlry; y\..*, �id *. ��i,"• 5} IS+ '1;1. ti '1j y� .�;,_ c"``:�t; \ykk � �,�t'e I��5.'�� 'S ti-�. I,rtt�•.• :�t>n'.�n,,.-. cj 'y�' 22��..,,� �, t,w w�fr: 4 t ��,•.' rt7j 1°q,y�tt rls.l;c��y i r 1 J/w '..r, IJ' Yll�L 1 J +��1 �..'i , '`."�.!•. •.J,,J ��! � .li.4` Y t 1, .1: .I d 'i•{ 4;�; �_,�',Q k? {'yY • IN 11""[ «s 3x''�Sr�.`: �(�t` t)h '+,�,a ` ate.`_ h,, '�.:t x �' .s y ..y ,!J F,"■ } t •`� s x'�+ ,,�/^�y', a .F t� �'z}'.e Z �!f �a• "t.,• *:� t, ,.r+.t,,. •OO's4 h ..�� ,� +! J .".+�i �'izi�.7. #a� ¢ Yr''~ (:7 ' S 4�.rh''Ca " E .�' �'�� 'tx$ 2r"•+ar �■ � 4+ {' r��-.,3, ��f ''!f 'v�4�v Y . {} r r� t ! n I55��', r3�' 1{ r G�t ,5`�kX ;i..3, t M3 t; Y )t ! 4t Z•I`,� +r 'tA+ + 4 1 t,!k k r"rr,+ �u. ,. + F ;$ r.. ++ty }S�y t;,. t v�,� <. h''�Y t • �F"�r�#.; ).• 1y • x i�r y1 t �`t Z t r}', '�{ t.+ .t R� 7 r ., r�)�r`t l.�v., t L ,fit �.^^. r; I �ty tiy.ti. :.! 'Fy�'Y��ty.. rc � .•,' Y �+�.r •�1�;�n�hr. t+'''- } a'.r°i :!Y' 4 C t1 J 't r f � r a 4""t ,4(.r. 1. � I 1 � :A.q�+• 1 e1'!�fT.""""'ry. t'' '� Sr .•r 'r.li 'i i .'�"1! �VCr�; r � .} 1,k�.e '� J 'f"! s3_p �t.: 7.,' �� : ;S SAX �.,• !„l•.y n ',a3��'- � ,��+`�J•X^'�x� � )7#x+N,"'} y_ + �4 i;.' i a"".'riS&- , �:'.. µ 7[. rr t�k 1' t $ i5 S z+� h .riyfs ati?'• ! ly K' ' T� a• r3 yI 444 r; 'R Y ,.�1�. .r. •fi, a ch •'9 � �: GSA!�, -s4 { ti5 s'" �jlii „+{��)� : j�t!'��•C'�3.', ,,.,y t ��r,�`s�` y� "��2�� ;rr �}' yam, ;�,�y., F A{Il.ia 1 1'f: I.-- �ri.•• ♦Z .4• 4 sbrt•� �1IIr tn+t�'_.�r fl,'f.�r t.�')^�li'''ro' �t,� .#�.r w�;.'u`"�F't•x J°'� fit�, . ' a„ _t r �...�.-~r4� .�q r 'tc�' .)t r�' If r 1+ r 1 ta•y i' s ! . � ��. i X •• r ,,a „.,t r ,•�..ryj�.�'r .1, �S{', l 1,_ t, "�'z � '�f4'f J si`a�r�, 1..'vfr�„�,,a+ r ) �'}t .y,* r'i ;.13''3 r. - , �} I tr; 'li „✓'l,i t ,1� .' a � C - `'tl .y,•:5�� s+�'{ st f t. .,4�tlr�1� ��t J7 5r+:.i t� rt~�S° �•34��s aiy�:�� + { ,.;� , 1 y�r�,. H• � `.[.S :. (^ 4'�. 1.1jy ICC]Nr 1 :IA,r+ .+ x'r ai t�i' 4.�kr 15 ! r �{lr C. ,�■ � 'k ��' � � y k�.�� M��}r r��4.r '�„�a,,,t � i� i rS L x�t 4 ,"�fi.�r� 4jt;,,�� t'x�•�(�.,I�' ��' ? ...,u �[r, ✓�'"tt`a gX't"S 1,�{ye ��r`C"-.,J`;' 4 t7ri ��i -' _ 'x"� • i.i �/ i7` {"t' k't.? t t h4�" � k,lw}�1(4 t ke4;, h �.,.. •,r ,� S}�7� ",'�j�j �,3`Qr�� ,f�i l.tXillrJ,�j,.�15 , Ll,.i t � ti •t t_1:1:"'��. r �c�. ,.�I .rV { ' ;. �r ' 1w_ p .L4f t Sbt -r "� /l k �.: } �.�� Cv kn.{ �:•y>, � <.��Ffi t\ v • rA; ��K`r-':k'r y` �S�•itil:? �� _'• '` M1.#. �,y r♦��` / r • ��" t t :.3.• < Yti`�' ..y^ �"t+ M� # l��Kn+ [.a '''L t 7' •w1! r�' \�\y i ^//!�(�. �' � r�hTrr�,` C.' T� �.�r� a' .s�*t'�. �lY�'!^,1 t� �'']ty�•� 1` �` (H�i.w.tf Y ��`1`I. �! +' �, ■ }J1, 7 4 L �4•,,,...{{{A t �`• k�• ��N 4 ..,�'' /. +p'!'' - , ,,.5 '4F ti{ I u, t\ • '/ + z,rIJQ K 4 i .� "'[+,`i. ,}c t fi fj'� °� � c._ �\'1 1, r \ y4•r�! t ,�'�'s'' r r ��s.".p k � 1 1'...�5=++e� ".�;;4 ', }'y r. +� �,.�l�.fi „��..eyl � .,CIy.r "�� ,t7�`4+"1y`YN,�:4 .r'+'f 1{�"1r 4 }+.,�4 ! i r S� Sn� •F: sy z�F :��C�` {' 1�i �'"`1�':,. .� "'.TO '� y va+ ,_ .•s. �/ :r�rt .t„ � '��x J"rt, x�� f��"� r �s 7��cr`,�„i.,��• /t i Y; ;�/ '�, k�y v r, }i�a ..''i✓S4� 1�1%k`�'jr.�,.r "CY,�4t f� t` R �f'rs:'�: 'Sr ;�t wr• S�'��J. �.. • 14 li�, Y.{.� ►e• ,,.riC,t:.+l�r'�j'`er.: � ;� ••,9.�y�1`y'�` �.2w. iyy,, �+:nMr is ,r + ~•� f t j�� .7. � ) .y'} f. �,h�a .j� td�.� t kY>•,(�f t } � J^•/' .Y�jM� .y'V"��. �"'1 �'; t e 4 i . ■ hY 4��n=s J` • . � a a a � 1 • M • r � LE—.- MN ■ 'iY hC�r 2 Y y •S i-Sy s� �: • is I =t'' F- •11 ` • is u • • � ' Grand Te� ace • .� . i • c N' '* �= 5.r"�G'y, jam.•... c,,f d t_�u•.r v'w'-.,�,r T� +F<4.'tsI Etlitfl o � �i,3 ,.�r � r Yt `,'� �s v■ -`�b �s2„ �ar ,. �r - � �. ''' } f��...a„ - is R 'd/ ."+,. x�F F4 "Y"�'S:s L: / �-a`'■'-.. �r"'• ■ -tom !, Tvn:Mr. {.c.. h .tT: ■ r F z � `- ' f r . H ` . .�•s I '� { t._: ♦ .'+-. },- j /. jAa +I r 9 C �.. � +''l 4'3 <:i.-ic ;. .',. ' 'i�''.. Y J ,r 1'' 1� - ,,,.#.`*'r"t��y�► - - 2.1 • 'r - "f +� `"t y :. .r' h ` "4. ;!�J 'fp ', ` e`l V�,_ f•.Li tp�► t2, a �. � 3 '� � k�_:�{.; 11 f`1 t 1 1 '- .,,ll*r' �#.�� - , � - ,�.a` fi s'�' ��'j �!� � R• d 111-t,.t 11 tk■ -�1 r �tiy'KK,• ■,�' t{ 1.3 f Q$ 'Q 9 Wy urn 1.1 3,.. 1 t �1. 1- h .e.•.. }., t,ll �k;,,�f }x a,�4 s�'t� �l.�,,- a�_ �,1 �A+- :1 ''- l.T�\!t`�,��;. < C:. ,..a �� '��i�7*' � .�Lt��irl• �x��,�'_ .a-n"!` � t^"K '& �•� £'� � �.. _Y" ;., +•ter t�- ...._r yt L £`•. s r ��h - �..,�-, S} r•�. r 'S r r `a� .yt-. x� r -�� tyr.�; ,�-. + } .a, i; 't �,�",_ F i j`'•�;�}��.: .'t�� '.- 397 � �-0 4:'17Jr �c1„Aa '�"s''4 irt.�iy�.��.`:�� f�.€-�xx` '�-wY*#�• % xr � t( �� J�`-= '"� 'F.r ' 319'• "3;c� � ��`L i+.d-'`� r� �,w 7�.xt t � war��}��I�t` �',� ri'.. � 1 �./ �J " ~ �Fd � ■ii a:-1 r�. 1 1<" �ii�d5�"y,_,Llr'4 � f;fe -.t- 'hv 'y.' wpm 96 CPA t 0.� 3` i *: r.S. r,,,a.. V '.• _ s. th iz•� f. d; r .. • rj - . 13 .70 �- -y � ryii1i �' °y-.�«".r �•'�,� YF:,.r't�`"F6 �-. ��•�• rI br 'y'`"]rr� �• 'r.X;.Tt �•: r....cs•• y .,+�k15 < .�,.a3$ +��-rs''r• � �,��,5 tL r�.r l+1 +,s`�,y°"�r3:°f a��,,�". ��,y r,�1 �� . '� �.'T.t6s�'�I■/:r''"r� ��,, j�.E�' r4 �ix �"�'{ 1�"�{�,�,.:'� � �{,rr- � - ��y-v,- - �_. 00, a k r M . ys '. v'�. F .1 k•x r `C S: r4. ° t� '• -.'.�..r c.Y, � K.t.�,rs`.� ._ � 7z a r,�..¢ 1 i.x}Y` '�e-' r -�'. fir„' ,_� �.°, �. � �♦$ 'V -.�z��, � a < Yes xt 1`'� �-. r t.k.,... Y♦7 'r �5.y� .'�.' y,�+ �;,,�, + }1, "a�.c<'�> yx�'r•: ✓'..`�.�� r.a-.�,��x{r.. a^f=� •:X..-1.' .�'a}{x,��.,.5, _ -�..'s,— �.,= t.LZ- �f. � "A 3: z�� 4�� y—�a<'a�,�C ,� �'' � U ar,"rr {x h' � {:��}, •�::tr 4 -�,t-, �w .. tb �' .�Tt `'F� '� } .r -s- � ��s�;;. ;� �i'- � �y.♦� -e*'� `♦�-',4�3c�'�� t'( e.'* ram''�.r �` ::�;�x'"�' �, �s.,,��' 'T-. �+'�,�+♦z ti ,L' - ; %,- � �d z�• SSS',r .4• {" r-r-. .�- r�,�6s� � r ��.*{ t'�; .yrhYt.r �,♦ 7` ', $..�� -,�� ,5 3' �3i+�r�� r" ,+.7'...1 'Y�,�-G' - ' '`� i(•;�" F �-.� ��i��`�R +"y r-,�S.� `r�'"t �`k,.;r _� �!:`,'�i�„�.r� �`� rc i Y� ��^s�J S ,;..:�,•c..-s'^a•' " K- �3 +':. ° .'� _'r`.�, � .s F� C �+.,j'' r � *,.t� .a a,.° _ ',�-r�'. -•'s'_ er,a.,. -'e`:: L . ems-• - i • • • • - ' r r • - r - • . • r • _ • • r r • r see • r • • r .ac is,: rJXT:, '�ri:x'�-.. .t"•y'k �'Ytsa ,.�s.. t !�`� t_r,7E'"�,3 fi t�r �, `F ' 't''' .b S-`^-s: � : '2`4c '.�rc,",r`e�F��' �'�s��.�''i't F�J"t �'r .r s• `y"v�� r �e�err'_ Y f�1„ #�''x •�V t t Y ��'F�y m ' �-x''"i:�" !j��;�.� �-.r. 'cr.f 3�v. {y'•�'4.,, ,_�� f I l) •:. is-�o ��t' ,��v t� � ■' S f ' - ,fir ,ram"{ c�� t ^t L,� �;9:•y�i` �,,.�� f .��_ - Cst''r� �,l 4� � ��'�x. J c � �� Y�• -n.,�,.1�•r_ r �3>�d � �f♦ '* Ab ?^�"�, ?'�� i, r.� s r,^€ .t_ x.ky` r�f4x--'a-•-�'- �� ma's �-s a 3 99 ac /� '�. * 6� Ji Mtn 14 J � •► rC�r€' .rt`i r'�7. ice+ y`' i 'f``?�T F' f �� k,r �, �.r y �� s■(�`r.4 �,� � �"��Awl W<� '"'� �� '`.+ ,r�4r F��.� - !� ij it ( r -Fs l ygj '.a-. •-s:- :, tti �`' � r �"' e* ,v - .: r`t w ,AF1 _may x17 '��".--gsr mot.�- 3 I• o {.f ` i�.' • sti L T F ` c��`) _ }�� r ,.'. yy �'fl�r r� ��t, �i � �� .P"�r, ;`�� + � �� f •ZC Y'+111~ � `�;t'��j�jJ✓ �� J— l^t - M�, `. rr oad , w+ - �iSt _ ��•a � 1a.�5"3�'71�t _ '.`?'j��.- ate- -i'-7''"t3''`�"•ur4. �r •X'fr �'..•3F.f ? �4 -r3-'" I ��s a - _' "`i..j Fi `� .CfJ � `•'1'f 'n � Sri `' � ��, Qe iuu a.r :i i1All oldao will a�4. FF■■Tt�- JJJ f�M,�.:.�' u= � �� j: �.�.c: �J t T t y F„i -. a f_ �' rim... •� �' °''•' i .. _ t ••J .p r;. f. '„ y ``` `tsr- T4u 3. ',�.. a"s.`,� a �._ ?�-` "Y s:' .te';� ` r�fr. p�f -rf;?:i xt�,'d's",✓.+ft^s 6�-.�a.FA..;�ii'. ;;fig .ax- i VA — dp .+aavv t c#s Y � All � �� : ' " ' 3 {PARCEL 6 fPAR. �L :$yi ;x T �.« 98'.. f: � .•1r'w:+:t '� - xQ;ri,.'�'x+.�s�.t.:s�.tr�xt: 7 .� S�'��'x. � r27. +1 + =acres f� acres' ._, .�c a. K �' i.��yi... �_.d.L t' I - �" Y' L -. t 7 _ � • v r� -+K� i,s �"- �:. �,�i� x r r,;�fs+ �1 � �L' � ;^.Sn x! �' e.s. 3•:t �i'S��J: �.0 t - `� � rX PARCEL , tltl 3 '°'',_ - I`Y� , �' to :y'. .e n' �3A'Z'�,�,•.�:, . m '' y '$..rpa +�- i `��.+J""E'S,�'�f" Z.� •-�� ';r_- s e/£n a-4 f "f "'�.. C .�' 4 -�,Xk l .-'4'}J ( •r•-- •57 .x,.. �R•;n y„ 7�.. `%�, 3 Y I!3. s'.=4,.. j}t j #^ t •j>,.cL• k. .r, r.•a,,,,a- T+rF .j'` t, =5. � ..: �� LF Y L1 f� e• � �#2 � ,s S� '� � �y"-t' �, {'r� '1 �r1 � �. 88 - acr MA f.�( K .44 t -?; (3 «, f- ...o ^Cw�- ] �., R• �� .1'. ' �'S, �Ys;g d Y + "'"' '•J'! ' s �t.. t '�� 3� }�� ,,. r r ,s-R, " �' ti�, v 4 I t l'/�'��'sf -.j �g a � !'" f .r•- :: �r t �t ..7...� � � "�e7° a ' Y'r',y� �4-.�'�- � -n� �: � ----------- • - - - - • • • - - 1 111 • � 1 011 • CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CRIME PREVENTION COMMITTEE F E B 1 2002 Regular Meeting MINUTES October 8. 2001 CI j T 0 ER.K The Grand Terrace Crime Prevention Committee met for the regular monthhy meeting at the Senior Center. Grand Terrace, California at 1800 hours. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Philomene Spisak, JoAnn Johnson, Vice Chairperson, Dottie Raborn. Lewis Neeb and Dick Rollins. MEMBERS ABSENT: Claire McElwee out of town CITY STAFF/SHERIFF'S DEPT: None GUEST PRESENT: Bob Stewart, Citizen Patrol representative. AGENDA: The agenda was reNiewed by the members present. Motion was made by JoAnn Johnson to accept with Dottie Rabom making the second. The motion carried unanimously. MINUTES: The minutes of the meeting of September 10, 2001 were distributed to the members present for their review and approval. Dottie Raborn made the motion to accept as written with JoAnn Johnson making the second. The motion carried. CORRESPONDENCE: There has been no correspondence received by the Committee. BUDGET: Dottie Raborn reported that the budget amount still remained at S8.948.40 was indicated last month. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None NEW BUSINESS: Discussion regarding the planning of Grand Terrace Days for the next yea_ should begin as soon as possible and why it is so important. Chairperson Philomene Spisak stated that an Action Item had been prepared for the Council in regard to the problems of parking along Newport Ave. opposite the Edison property. The Citizen Patrol has contributed S250.00 for candy for the upcoming Halloween Haunt program to be sponsored by the Woman's Club of Gran: Terrace to be held at the Pico Park on Halloween night from 1700 hours until 2000 hours. It was reported that the Citizen Patrol had accumulated 296 hours for the month of August and another 306 hours for the month of September mal:in, a total of 2415 hours for the year 2001. COUNCIL AGENDA ITE':i : 0.F)a) G There being no further business to discuss the meeting was adjourned at 1910 hours. Respectfully submitted RICHARD ROLLINS Recording Secretary CF GRAND _ CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CRIME PREVENTION COMMITTEE FEB 1 --31J2 Regular Meeting MINUTES - November 12, 2001 The Grand Terrace Crime Prevention Committee met for the regular meeting at the Senior Center Meeting was called to order at 6 20 p.m. by Chairperson, Philomene Spisak. MEMBERS PRESENT were Philomene Spisak, Chairperson, JoAnn Johnson, Dottie Raborn and Claire McElwee. MEMBERS ABSENT - Secretary, Dick Rollins and Lew Neeb CITY STAFF/SHERIFF'S DEPT. - None GUESTS PRESENT- Bob Stewart, Citizen Patrol . AGENDA was approved with motion by Dottie Raborn and second by Claire McElwee. MINUTES for the meeting of October 8th were not available, so will be approved at a later date PUBLIC COMMENT - None. CORRESPONDENCE -None. BUDGET-No changes. Computers have been down. Report given by Dottie Raborn. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Swindles a. One member reported that their check card number had been lifted at the Arco Station b. Several withdrawals had been made within a very short time c..Police report was taken and card discontinued Don't leave your check card unattended. d. New telephone scam was discussed, whereby victim is asked to use telephone keypad to respond to survey questions e Numbers actually allow caller to bill phone calls to your number B. Regular/Alternate Member Vacancies - Nothing new C. Pneumatic Jacks for Patrol Cars - Nothing new D. Grand Terrace Days -Nothing new NEW BUSINESS A. Crime Prevention Planning - Nothing new B. Parking along Newport Avenue a. Council and Staff looking into curb painting on Newport. C. December Meeting a. Motion made by Jo Ann to cancel December meeting. b Second by Dottie, with no dissention, carried c. Next Crime Prevention meeting to be January 14, 2002. REPORTS A. Summary of Law Enforcement Activity - 'gone Tanya absent. B. Citizen Patrol Report a. Hours for October 276. Total for this year 2691 b It is very difficult to cover shifts with present membership. C. Other Community Programs a. Halloween Haunt went very well Lots of candy and pencils 350 hot dogs sold. D. Member Reports a. Claire reported on vandalism at the Catholic church on Oriole. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:07 p m. Respectfully Submitted, �I Acting Secret, JoAnn Johnson CITY OF GRAND TERRACE EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CONINMITTEE Regular Meeting ^ — NILNUTES January 7, 2002 The Grand Terrace Emergency Operations Committee met for the Regular Meeting in the Emergency Operations Center at 22795 Barton Road, Building 3 at Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. by Vic Pfennighausen, since Chairperson, Sonia Aiken and Vice Chairperson, Richard Haubert were both absent . MEMBERS PRESENT were Vic Pfennighausen, Gary Eldridge, Robert Souter and JoAnn Johnson. METNIBERS ABSENT - Sonia Aiken and Richard Haubert CITY STAFF - None. GUESTS PRESENT - None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of December 3, 2001 was given, followed b,,• discussion on the following a. We need to have a full understanding on the use of the EOC trailer b. EOC equipment is intended for use only by EOC. c. The small bus offered is not acceptable for several reasons. (upkeep and use of natural gas) d. Possibly offer bus to Fire Department. e. Trailer is ideal. Need to get it back and install equipment, or f. Gary suggested possibly looking into getting larger trailer and installing generator and other g. Suggest Steve check out larger trailer at some of the R.V dealers LLAISON REPORT a. Internet service company has cable ready to hook up within a week b The rest of the city facilities are hooked up already EOC SET-UP TRAINING - Went through Operations Box. a. Telephone missing b. Pencils, tape, note pads, stapler, staples and remover, all ok. c Pens should be replaced. d. Note book and in and out baskets ok. e. Several lists need to be updated. (call out, phones, flow charts) f Forms (at least 5 of each) Incident planning, Assignment lists, Check In and Organization assignments, Incident objectives and Organization assignments, Purchase requisitions. g Suggest flashlight, batteries, small first aid kit and Kleenex be added to each box. COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO.c-)A - ` EQUIPNIENT AND FACILITIES REPORT a. .-%ll equipment is "orking well b Computer should be ready soon. c Much has been done around city hall (lighting, bushes, planters, etc ) d Community Pride Program, paid for in part by License Plate holders, Home of Distinction, and many other things going on. OLD BUSINESS a. Fire Department did check our first aid hits and they are all good NEW BUSVgESS - None MEMBERS REPORTS AND COMMENTS - None ADJOURNMENT at 7 55 p m. i Respectfully submitted, jJoAnn Jo son, Secretary NEXT MEETING NV ELL BE JANUARY 7, 2002AT 7 p.m. RAND TERR C Community Services Department Staff Report i1fEETLNG DATE: Februar} 28, 2002 SUBJECT: CDBG FUNDING AWARDS 2002-2003 PROGRAM YEAR FUNDING AUTHORIZATION REQUIRED BACKGROUND: The City of Grand Terrace is under contract with the County of San Bernardino Department of Economic and Community Development (ECD) who is responsible for the review and compliance of programs conducted within Grand Terrace. This includes not only the conduct of the grant process, but the administration of project implementation and compliance. The County has a process which it follows the guidelines of HUD in requiring public hearings and input into the grant allocation process for these funds. For Grand Terrace, this includes a public hearing, submittal of recommended projects to ECD who qualifies eligible programs, then returns those to the City for prioritization and funding. Additionally, during the grant process, outside agencies may submit projects directly to the County, however the final determination of the spending of the City allocation is with the purview of the City Council. The City receives a total of$38,000 each year. At present, the City of Grand Terrace has balance of approximately $170,000. DISCUSSION The County has completed its application process and submitted a listing of eligible projects which have requested funding from the Grand Terrace Allocation. The City Council is now responsible for determining funding and sending this information to the County for adoption. Staff is recommending funding as follows: 1. Capital Project for the Grand Terrace Senior Center a. Design, engineer, and construct curb, gutter, and sidewalk along a 700-foot section of Grand Terrace Road. The total allocation is $72,000. STAFF RECOMMEN-DATION: That the City Council: 1. Conduct a Public Hearing on the recommended allocation of CDBG Funds for the 2002-03 Program Year: and 2. Authorize Staff to submit the Funding List to the County of San Bernardino Department of Economic and Community Development COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO, I J FISCAL IMPACT: The action will authorize the expenditure of 2002-03 CDBG Funds and potentially the Un- programmed Funds on account with the County of San Bernardino. ATTACMNIENT 1. Eligible Projects List 2. Applications- Copies of the complete applications submitted by applicants are available for public review in the City Clerk's Office. ?1012002 4 3(,:05 I'M I've 24 San Bernardino County ELIGIBLE Proposals Department of Economic and Community Development ELIGIBLE Proposals Grand Terrace 2002-2003 CDBG Proposals by Benefit Area Applicant: Project/ Log Primary Benefit Area/ Activity Eligibility M&O Request/ Community Request Dist Comments No. Description: Benefit Eligibility Commit Percent 28019 Grand Terrace San Bernardino County Library N $11,735 Grand Terrace $5,000 3 Public Service. Limited to Continuation of Literacy lid Kicczykowski,County Librarian $5,000 'rota} $5,000 illiterate persons. Cunrtilativc Education at Grand'terrace ( )- 909 387-5721 42.0% CDBG funding $26,400. Branch Library 104 West Fourth Street Current CDBG allocation. San Bernardino,CA 92415-0035 $4,200. CDBG balance(as of 24 C'I'R 201(e) 12/0 0- $5,010.41. 24 CI-R 208(a)(2)(1)(A) 28193 Redlands After School Growth (ASG) N $229,500 Redlands $1 14,750 3 Public Service- Would require Expand the"After School Sharon Greene, Project Director $229,500 Loma Linda $38,250 documentation of at least 51% Growth" Youth Education& (909)793-2380 100.0% Highland $38,250 low/moderate income status of Recreational Program -Jesus P.O.Box 2320 Grand Terrace — $38,250 individuals served. Joy.lubilee Fellowship, Redlands,CA 92374 Total $229,500 Redlands 24 (TR 201(e) 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(B) 28260 Grand Terrace City of Grand Terrace N $78,560 Grand Terrace $72,300 3 Davis Bacon Wage Curb,Gutter and Sidewalk Steve Berry, Assistant City Manager $72,300 'Total $72,300 Requirements may increase Improvements-Grand Terrace (909)430-2226 92 0°/) costs. Senior Center 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace,CA 92313 2-1,CI-R 201(c) 24 (TR 208(a)(2)(i)(A) Totals for Grand Terrace Count: 3 Amount: $115,550 Proj Tot $306,800 2i6n002 4.36-19 ISM San Bernardino County Page 's ELIGIBLE, Proposals Department of I+;conomic and Community Development ELIGIBLE, Proposals Grand Terrace 2002-2003 CDBG Proposals by Benefit Area Applicant. Project/ Log Primary l3cnefil Arca/ Activity Eligibility M&O Request/ Community Request Dtsl C 0111mCnlS No. Description 13cnelill•ligibility Commit Percent 28004 Multi-District Asian-American Resource Center, Inc. N $31,500 Fit'th District $15,000 Public Service Would require Continuation of fiduc,ttionaI & Rasmey Sam, Executive Director $22,000 Colton $3,000 documentation of at least 511ib 383-0164 G9 0% Loma I.+niLi $2,000 low/nuideralc income status of, Vocational Training Service- (909)- Asian American Resource 11.0. Box 9863 Grand'rerriice $2,000_ individuals served. Center. San Bernardino,CA 92427 Total $22,000 24 CFR 201(e) 24 CFIt 208(a)(2)(i)(C) 28039 Multi-District San Bernardino Sexual Assault n $85,377 First District $12,500 6 Public Service Limited to Initiate Sexual Assault Services, Inc $67,500 Third District $10,()0() low/mod income victims of Stallings,b•' Response"Team (SAR"(') CandyStallin�ti, Executive Director 79.0% Fifth District $5,000 sexual abuse/assault. Program- San Bernardino (909)885-8884 Second District $5,000 Sexual Assault Services 505 N Arrowhead Ave., Ste 100 Lonui Linda $5,000 San Bernardino,CA 92401-1221 Highland $5,000 24 CFR 201(e) Grand Terrace - $5,000 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(C.) Colton $5,000 Big Bear Lake $5,000 Barstow $5,000 Adclanto $5,000 Total $67,500 2/0i20024.3o I'"'"' San Bei,—,.-dino County ELIGIBLE Proposals Department of Economic and Community Development ELIGIBLE Proposals p p Grand Terrace 2002-2003 CDBG Proposals by Benefit Area Applicant: Project/ Log Primary Benefit Area/ Activity Eligibility M&O Request/ Community Request Dist Comments No. Description: Benefit Eligibility Commit Percent 28061 Multi-District Fontana Native Allier Indian Cir., Inc. N $17,900 'Third District $I,I ti9 t, Public Seri ire Cunuilative Continuation of Fontana Carol Ray, Executive Director $8,950 Filth District $597 prior CDBG funding- S 19,030 Native American Indian (909 8574-9660 49.0%, Finirth District $597 Current CIA16 allocation ) Second Uistiirt $5'tl $l,(144 Ilni•xprnilcd balanir Center Cultural Education 1'.O. Box 1258 I-ontana,CA 92334-1258 First District $597 as of 12/01 $1,044 Forum Scrvt�cs Town of Yucca Vallcy $597 24 C'I'R 201(c) 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(C) Yucaipa $597 Twewyninc Pahns $597 Redlands $597 Montclair $597 Loma Linda $597 I Itghlaiid $597 Griurd Tcrracc $597 Colton $597 Total $8,950 28063 Multi-District Steelworkers Oldtinters Foundation N $287,689 Filth District $25,000 6 Public Service Services „ Expand Mmor I Ionic Repair Mike Milton,Administrator $90,000 Second District $15,000 limited to serving the elderly 909 822-4493 31.0`Y,, Yuciulm $10,000 Services fur Senior Cltirens 6U ( ) Years and Older- 8572 Sierra Avenue Colton $10,000 Steelworkers Oldtinter Fontana,CA 92335-3840 1fighland $7,000 20l CFR c Redlands $5,000 Foundation 24 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(A) Loma Linda $5,000 Gritnd'Tcrracc $5,000 ('Irmo lulls $t,w)O Dcl Rosa $2,500 Arrowhead Suhurhan h $2,500 Total $90,000 - 2/6/2002 4.36:19 I'M San Bernardino County Page .0 ELIGIBLE Proposals Department of Economic and Community Development ELIGIBLE Proposals Grand Terrace 2002-2003 CDBG Proposals by Benefit Area Applicant: Project/ Log Primary Benefit Area/ Aclivrly Eligibility M&O Request/ Comnuumty Request Dist Comments No. Description- Benefit Filgibilily Commit Percent 28069 Multi-District Legal Aid Society of'San Bernardino, N $396,000 Fifth District $50,000 6 Public service. Would rcqurre Continuation of'Legal Aid Ire $164,000 "Third District $50,000 documentation of at least 51'%i Services to indigmit Clients- Roberta I. Shouse, Executive Director 41 0"/, Fourth District $25,000 low/moderate income status of Legal Aid Society of San (909) 1H l-4011 Second Disti O $2s,000 tii.i. Bernardino 354 W. Sixth Street Yucaipa $3,000 proposal 1/283 1 3 for San Bernardino,CA 92401 Redlands $3,000 information on First District 24 CFR 201(e) Grand Terrace $3,000 legal Aid services. 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(C) Colton $3,000 Highland $2,000 Total $164,000_ 28086 Multi-District Adopt-A-BIkc/Computer N $57,737 Montclair $4,500 6 Public Service. Cumulative Continuation of Adopt-A- Charlotte Ellison,President/CEO $22,000 1ighland $4,500 prior CDBG funding. $69,500 Bike/Computer Program - (909) 888-1695 38.0% Grand Terrace $4,500 Current CDBG allocation. Fifth District I I I I I larris Street Colton $4,500 $12,500 Unexpended CDBG San Bernardino,CA 92411 Fifth District $2,000 balance as of 12/01. $339. 24 C1:R 201(e) Second District $2,000 24 CPR 208(a)(2)(i)(B) Total $22,000 28090 Multi-District Partnerships Willi Industry N $47,180 Redlands $3,774 6 Public Service Would be Vocational Training,and Job Katie Bodily, Program Director $11,795 Yucaipa $1,887 hmited to serving severcly Placement Services to Spanish (909)890-1315 25 0°/, Highland $1,533 disabled adults only. Speaking Adults with 1906 Commerce Center East Montclair $1,297 Disabilities - Parinerhips With Suite 211 Third District $709 Industry San Bernardino,CA 92409 Second DIS(rlct $708 24 CI'R 201(c) Loom Linda $708 24 C'hlt 208(a)(2)(i)(A) Colton $472Fifth District $354 Grand Terrace $354 Total $11,795 _ 2/6/2002 4.36.20 I'M all Be ,t'dlil0 �.OUllty Page RI ELIGIBLE Proposals Department of Economic anti Community Development ELIGIBLE PI-OPOS,11s Grand "Terrace 2002-2003 CDBG Proposals by Benefit Area Applicaiil. Project/ Log Primary Bcncfit Area/ Activity Eligibility M&O Request/ Community Request Dist Comments No. Description: Benefit Eligibility Commit Percent 28097 Multi-District A1-Shifa, Inc. N $111,000 Fifth District $67,000 6 Public Service. Cumulative Continuation of Free ilealth Sahibzada Muzafforuddin,Office $91,000 Second District $10,000 prior CD13G funding: Clinic Services-AI-Shifa, Manager 81.0% Fourth District $5,000 $125,000 Current CDi3G Muscoy (909)473-0600 Colton $3.000 allocation. $45.108 2034 13 Mallory Street Redlands $2,000 Unexpended CDBG balwice as San Bernardino,CA 92407 Grand Terrace $2,000 of 12/01- $45,108. 24 CFR 201(c) Highland _ $2,000 24 (TR 208(a)(2)(i)(11) Total $91,0()0 28098 Multi-District Volunteer Center of,Inland Empire, inc. N $16,399 Yucaipa $900 6 Public SCr\•iCe \Vould require Mentoring Program 1br Youth Robin Kelley, Executive Director $6,000 Redlands $900 documentation of (Men(orees)anti Adults (909) 884-2556 36.0% Loma Linda $900 low/imoderale income status of (Mentors)- Volunteer Center 255 North "D" Street Iighland $900 parsons saved. of Inland Empire Suite 311 Colton $900 San Bernardino,CA 92401 Third District $550 (:rand•1•errace $500 24 C'I�It 201(c) I•ilih District $300 -, 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(13) Second District $150 Total - - $6,000 28105 Multi-District Elder Citizen Protection Services, inc. N $382,200 Yucaipa $4,500 6 Public Service Clirilrllati\'e Continuation of Shoppin '4 Tralan 1'. Green, Chamnan of the Board $20,000 Redlands $4,500 prior CDB(i funding $12,650 Seniors Program - H(ler h C FO 5 0%, 1ighland $3,500 Current ('i)BG allocatimm, Citizens Protection Services, (909)799-7327 M„nirLur $2,500 $11,050 1 ('1)11(1 Inc. 1540 Barton Road,/1171 Loina Linda $2,500 balance as of I2/01 $9,393 Redlands, CA 92373 Colton $2,000 24 CPR 201(e) Grand Terrace $500 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(A) Total $20,000 2/0/2002 4:36:20 PM San Bernardino County t'qi"C. .'- ELIGIBLE Proposals Department of Economic and Community Development ELIGIBLE Proposals Grand Terrace 2002-2003 CDBG Proposals by Benefit Area Applicant. Project/ Log Primary 13cnelit Area/ Activity Eligibility M&O Request/ Community Request Dist C'omiliews No. Description- Benefit Eligibility Commit Percent 28119 Multi-Disvict Children's Fund, Inc. N $8O,000 Callon $2,500 6 Public Scrvicc Would rcalun'C Continuation ol'Al-Risk Bonnie O'Connor, Fxeculive Director $20,000 Adclnnio $2,400 documcniatoin of low/nu,d Children Resource (909)387-4949 22 0%, Yucaipa $2,000 ntconic and rcxidency ni Distribution Program - 395 North An-owhcad Avenue Twentynine Palms $2,000 County CDI1G participating Children's Fund Second Floor Redlands $2,000 communities. San Bernardino,CA 92415-0132 San Bernardino $2,000 24 CTR 201(e) Barstow $2,000 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(B) "Town of,Yucca Valley $I,000 Montclair $1,000 Chino hills $I,000 Big Bear I.;ike $1,000 Loma Linda $500 Grand Tcrracc $500 Needles $100 Total $20,000 r 2i6i2002 4 36:20 rM San Be,...::rdiuo County Page .9� ELIGIBLE Proposals Department of Economic and Community Development ELIGIBLE I'ropo'suls Grand Terrace 2002-2003 CDBG Proposals by Benefit Area Applicant- Project/ Log Primary Benefit Area/ Activity Eligibility M&O Request/ Community Request Dist Comments No. Description. Benefit Eligibility Commit Percent 28177 Multi-District Mail 4 Me Club N $150,000 Redlands $4,000 6 Public Service. Would require Mail 4 Me Club- Message Susan Zador, Incorporator and rounder $75,000 Barstow $4,000 documentation of at least 51 Service Program for Children (909 794-9676 50.0% Big Bear Lake $4,000 low/mod income clientele. ) Chino Bills $4,000 Through Mail and the Internet, P.O. Box 7355 Redlands, ('A 92371 Colton $4,000 Mentrmc Crand'Ferrnce $4,00024 C1�R 2U I(c) 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(B) Ilighland $4,000 Loma Linda $4,000 Adelanto $4.000 Nccdlcs $4,000 Fitih District $4,000 Twcntynnic Palms $4,000 Yucaipa $4,000 Town of Yucca Valley $4,000 First District $4,000 Third District $4,000 Montclair $4,000 Second Disirict $3,500 Fourth District $3,500 Total $75,000 2/6/2002 4.36:20 I'M San Bernardino County Pagc 84 ELIGIBLE Proposals Department of Economic and Community Development ELIGIBLE Proposals Grand Terrace 2002-2003 CDBG Proposals by Benefit Area Applicant. Project/ Log Primary Benefit Area/ Activity Eligibility M&O Request/ Community Request Dist Comments No. Description: Benefit f:llgibility Commit Percent 28192 Multi-District San Bernardino C'hlld Advocacy N $87,957 Filth Disuricl $S,000 6 Plibile Service Services Con( of,Sall Progrllll, hie $50,000 1.11111111 Disilik'1 hilowd Io allusi-d 1111d Bernarduw Child Advocacy f;enne' Miller, 1.xecu(lvc 1)u'eclor 56.0%, I'hn11 1)1;1110 ncglce Icd i IId111i n Services for Abused and (909)981-6760 Second District $5,000 Neglccled Childreu 1'0 Box 10930 First Dlslru:l $ ,000 San Bernardino,CA 92413-0930 Yucaipa $44,000 24 CFR 201(c) Redlands $4,000 Montclair $4,000 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(A) Loma Linda $4,000 1ighland $3,000 Colton $2,000 13arstow $2,000 Grand Terrace $1,000 Chino lulls $1,000 Total $50,000 28204 Multi-District CSI) N $1,915,295 Fifth District $24,950 6 Public Service Services Expand the Congregate and Carolyn Debcvec, Staff Analyst $90,750 Third District $20,450 limited to Senior Citizens. hlonle Hound Ucllvcrcd Mcals (909) 891-3862 4 0"/, ('upon $16,050 by Upgrading Equipment al 686 E. Mill St. Twenlynine i'alms $10,450 Seriph Nu(rilion Pro granis San Bernardino,CA 92415 0610 'town of,yucrl Valley $8,400 CSI ) 24 CT R 201(c) Redlands $4;150 24 CI'R 208(a)(2)(I)(A) Grano Terrace $3,500Yucaipa $2,500 Total $90,750 28205 Multi-District San Bernardino Comrnuiloy Service N $80,000 Fifth District $20,000 6 Public Service. Limited to Legal Immigration Services lOr Center, hic $60,000 Second District $15,000 victims of donlestic violence - Battered Women- San Jose Cisneros,Board Member 75 0% Third District $5,000 Eligibility sublect to matching Bernardino Com1nu111ty (909)885-1992 Redlands $5,000 Funds In proportion to non- Service Center, Sail Bernardino 560 N. Arrowhead Avenue,119A highland $5,000 Coun(y CDBG resluients San Bernardino,CA 92401 Grand Terrace $5,000 served. 24 CFR 201(e) Colton $5,000 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(A) Total $60,000 2/6/2002 4:36:20 I'M San lief, •dino County ELIGIBLE Proposals Department of Economic and Community Development ELIGIBLE Proposals Grand Terrace 2002-2003 CDBG Proposals by Benefit Area Applicant: Project/ Log Primary Benefit Area/ Activity Eligibility M&O RequesU Community Request Dist Comments No. Description. Benefit Eligibility Commit Percent 28206 Multi-District Blessed Ilope Shelter, Inc. N $90,000 Redlands $15,000 6 Public Service- Services Expand Social Care Services Jerry Martin, Project Director $90,0()0 West Fontaiui $10,000 limited lu abused chddren and 909 425-0990 100 0°/, Yucaipa homeless homeless persons. to Abused and Neglected ( ) Filth Uistricl $5,000 Child and Homeless Persons- 12261 Wabash Avenue 131csscd I lope Fellowship Redlands,CA 92372 Muscoy $5,000 24 CFR 201(c) Mcniolle $5,000 24 CFR 208(a)(2)(i)(A) Cresthnc $5,000 Runnilig Sprinl,s $5,000 Montclair $5,000 Loma Linda $5,000 Highland $5,000 Grand Terrace $5,000 Colton $5,000 Chino lulls $5,000 Total $90,000 _ Totals for Grand Terrace Count: 16 Amount: $42,451 Proj Tot y±888,995 UTERR Community Dex'eioplllZnt Department STAFF REPORT I CRA ITEM ( COUNCIL ITEM (X ) MEETING DATE: February 28, 2002 FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED X SUBJECT: Public Hearing for the Proposed Updated Housing Element RECOMMENDATION: -Open the Public Hearing on the Updated Housing Element, GPA-01-01 and E-01-10; Receive any testimony; Tentatively approve .the Updated Housing Element by Resolution pending review and certification by the State Department of Housing and Urban Development (HCD); Continue the public hearing to an unspecified date to adopt the Updated Housing Element by Ordinance following certification by HCD; and Approve the Negative Declaration Background: The Updated Housing Element has been prepared by Joann Lombardo, housing consultant to the City, in accordance with State law and,the City's General Plan. (Please see Attachment 1 for the Updated Housing Element.) Joann will present the staff report on the'Updated Housing Element to the Council at the meeting. The element,has been prepared in response to State law'that requires the Housing Element to be updated every five years. The updated element,when approved, will satisfy the requirement of State law that the City have an updated Housing Element-for the period of_1998 to 2005. The Planning Commission recommended on January 17, 2002, following a public hearing, that the City Council approve the Updated Housing Element for the period of 1998-2005. (Please see Attachment 2 for a copy of the staff report to Planning Commission on the Updated Housing Element). This Housing Element Update documents the efforts of the City of Grand Terrace to identify and meet its housing needs for the 1998-2005 planning period. The City's identified housing needs include a need for senior citizen housing, first-time homeowner assistance and housing maintenance. To address these needs, as well as those established by the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), Grand Terrace has adopted an agressive program to meet the needs of all its special needs and income groups. Specifically, the City of Grand Terrace Housing Program for 1998-2005, contains the following commitments: 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace. California 4a94 NDAMM NO. �� • The City has reinstated an affordability clause for the 111 units at the Highland apartments. From previous RDA commitments, housing set-aside funds were used to refinance the Highlands Apartments. Constructed during the last planning period with the help of City-provided bond financing and density bonuses, 111 of the 556 Highlands Apartments units were designated for low and moderate income households. At-risk of returning to market rate, the City entered into an agreement with the owners of the Highlands Apartments, providing low interest financing in return for a commitment to retain the 111 as affordable to low and moderate income households for a period of 30 years, or until 2031. • The City has residentially zoned sites that could yield up to 870 additional housing units to which water provision and sewer capacity need to be reserved. Of these units, up to 480 units could be affordable to low and moderate income households (reference Table 12). • The City will initiate a zoning amendment to rezone Site No. 6 on Figure 2, or other appropriate site if this proves infeasible, to R3*with a density of 20 units/acre and potential density bonus up to 25 units/acre which would qualify the units as very low income housing from HCD's perspective. • The City will commit up to $250,000 of housing set-aside funds to the "Habitat for Humanity" for the development of low-income housing. • The City expects at least 170 very low income units to be provided at build out of the community. These very low income units would consist of the balance of Site No. 6, RY units, transitional housing (in the form of residential care facilities), and potential second units (reference Table 13). • The City has established a Housing Office for the administration and monitoring of low and moderate income housing opportunities. The City plans to continue operation of this Housing Office through the planning period. • The City Housing Office has continued operation of its first-time homebuyer purchase program which has resulted in the rehabilitation of substandard single family units, and their resale to low and moderate income homeowners.To date, 38 homes have been rehabilitated and sold to qualified low and moderate income households, 27 of which occurred during this planning period. The City plans to continue and expand this program during the planning period as needed to meet the community's low and moderate income housing needs, as described in this Housing Element. • The City Housing Office has utilized redevelopment tax increment funds to initiate a rehabilitation loan program to provide financial assistance to homeowners needing to repair and maintain their homes. To date, the City rehab loan program has assisted 133 households, consisting of 105 moderate income households, 22 low income households and 6 very low income households, four of which occurred during this planning period The City plans to continue and expand this program during the planning period as needed to meet the community's low and moderate income housing needs, as described in this Housing Element. • The City will initiate a zoning amendment to include mixed use development in the downtown This amendment to the Barton Road Specific Plan will allow mixed use development consisting of both medium/high density residential and commercial. The City has allocated redevelopment tax increment funds and will offer bond financing to qualified developers interested in undertaking a mixed use residential development that will permit approximately 50 — 75 senior citizen town homes development, provided 30% (15- 20) of the units are affordable to very low income senior households. Following the Council's tentative approval of the Updated Housing Element by Resolution (Please see Attachment 3), it will be transmitted to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)which is required by law to review and comment on the updated element and certify it if in that agency's estimation the element meet the requirements of State law. Once that process is completed,the public hearing on the Updated Housing Element will be continued so that final approval by the City Council can take place and the element can be adopted by ordinance. As required by law, the continued public hearing will be renoticed. Also included for your review are the proposed Ordinance (Please see Attachment 4)to adopt the Updated Housing Element, once it is certified by the State and the proposed Negative Declaration/Initial Study (Please see Attachment 5) which will be approved when the ordinance is adopted. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council tentatively approve the Updated Housing Element by Resolution; that the approved Updated Housing Element be transmitted to the State Department of Housing and Community Development; and that the public hearing for the updated element be continued to a date uncertain in order to give final approval following its State review and adoption by Ordinance. Respectfully submitted, Approved by: YJn mpe Patrizia Materassi e Planner Community and Economic Development Director PM:JL:ji Attachment: Attachment 1: Updated Housing Element dated February 28, 2002 Attachment 2: Planning Commission report on Updated Housing Element dated January 17, 2002 Attachment 3: Resolution Approving the Updated Housing Element pending State review Attachment 4: Draft Ordinance for the adoption of the Updated Housing Element at a later date Attachment 5• Proposed Negative Declaration and Initial Study c:WtyFiles\JOHN\Housing\counciIhou sing.rpt i i I I I I -- I I I PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE City Council Public Hearing February 28, 2002 ATTACHMENT 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION I 11. REVIEW OF ELEMENT AND PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS 11 III. COMMUNITY PROFILE 13 A. Population Trends and Projections 13 B. Household Size 14 C. Ethnicity 14 D. Age Characteristics 15 E. Income Characteristics 16 F. Historic Residential Construction Trends 17 G. Age of Residential Structures 19 " H. Overcrowding 19 1. Vacancy Rates 20 J. Housing Affordability 21 IV. HOUSING NEEDS 24 A. SCAG Regional Housing Needs Assessment 24 B. Land Inventory 25 C. Need for Replacement Housing 30 D. Special Housing Needs 31 1. The Elderly/Handicapped 31 2. Large Families 32 3. Households Headed by Women 32 4. Farm worker Housing 32 5. Homeless Persons and Families 32 E. At Risk 34 V. CONSTRAINTS 37 A. Phvsical Constraints 37 B. Market Constraints 37 C. Governmental Constraints 3 1. Land Use Controls 39 2. Building Codes 43 3. Development Fees 43 4. Permit Processing 45 5. Service and Facility Infrastructure 45 6. Utilization of State and Federal Assistance Programs 45 7. Jobs/Housing Balance 46 NZ. THE HOUSING GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES 47 A. Housing Availability and Production 47 B. Housing Affordability 48 C. Housing Condition 50 NTI. THE HOUSING PROGRAM 52 A. Actions in Support of Housing Availability and Production 53 B. Actions in Support of Housing Affordability 55 C. Actions in Support of Maintaining & Improving Housing 56 Conditions 58 D. Anticipated Accomplishments E. Priorities 60 `"III. OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENERGY CONSERVATION 61 A. Insulation and Weatherproofing 61 B. Natural Lighting 61 C. Solar Energy 61 D. Water Conservation 62 E. Energy, Audits 62 F. New Construction 62 IX. FINANCING RESOURCES 63 _ A. HOME Funds 63 B. Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) 63 C. Section 108 Program 64 D. Section 8 Rental Assistance Payments/Housing Certificates 64 E., Section 202/811 Housing for Elderly or Handicapped Housing 64 F. California Housing Finance Agency (CHFA) G. Lois Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Program 6� H. Multifamily Mortgage Revenue Bonds 65 I. Housing Action Resource Trust 66 J. Senior Home Repair Program 66 LIST OF TABLES Table No. Description Page I Housing Goals and Actual Accomplishments 1984-1996 12 2 Comparative Population and Housing Data for Grand Terrace 14 3 Ethnic Composition of Grand Terrace Population: 1990 City of Grand Terrace 15 4 Age of Population for City of Grand Terrace, County of San 16 Bernardino and State of California - 1990 Census Data 5 Household Income in Grand Terrace: 1990 Census Data 17 6 Residential Building Permits — 1989 — 1996 18 7 Dwelling Unit Types in Grand'Terrace and Selected Cities: 18 1990 Census Data 8 Overcrowding Information: 1990 Census City of Grand Terrace 20 9 City of Grand Terrace Affordable Housing Prices and Rents by Income Group: 2000 22 10 Housing Affordability for City of Grand Terrace, San Bernardino 23 County and State of California— 1990 Census 11 City of Grand Terrace RHNA New Housing Construction Needs by Income Group 25 12 City of Grand Terrace Potential New Development Sites for 2001 28 13 Very Low Income Units Cite Expects to be Provided 29 14 Checklist to confirm Lack of At-risk Units Pursuant to 36 Government Code Section 85583 (A)(8) 15 City of Grand Terrace Residential (Single and Multifamily) 44 Development Fees 16 New Construction Housing Goals and Anticipated 58 Accomplishments 17 Combined Housing Goals and Anticipated Accomplishments 1998 59 - 2005 LIST OF FIGURES Figure No. Description Page 1 Vicinity Map 7 2 Potential New Development Areas 27 I. INTRODUCTION Conclusions and Findings This Housing Element Update documents the efforts of the City of Grand Terrace to identify and meet its housing needs for the 1998-2005 planning period. The City's identified housing needs include a need for senior citizen housing, first-time homeowner assistance and housing maintenance. To address these needs, as Nvell as those established by the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), Grand Terrace has adopted an agressive program to meet the needs of all its special needs and income groups. Specifically, the City of Grand Terrace Housing Program for 1998-2005, contains the following commitments: • The City has reinstated an affordability clause for the 111 units at the Highlands Apartments. From previous RDA commitments, housing set-aside funds were used to refinance the Highlands Apartments. Constructed during the last planning period with the help of City-provided bond financing and density bonuses, 111 of the 556 Highlands Apartments units were designated for low and moderate income households. At-risk of returning to market rate, the City entered into an agreement with the owners of the Highlands Apartments, providing low interest financing in return for a commitment to retain the 111 as affordable to low and moderate income households for a period of 30 years, or until 2031. • The City has residentially zoned sites that could yield up to 870 additional housing units to which water provision and sewer capacity need to be reserved. Of these units, up to 480 units could be affordable to low and moderate income households (reference Table 12). • The City will initiate a zoning amendment to rezone Site No. 6 on Figure 2, or other appropriate site is this proves infeasible, to R3+with a density of 20 units/acre and with potential density bonus up to 25 units/acre which would qualify the units as very low income housing from HCD's perspective. • The City «ill commit up to $250,000 of housing set-aside funds to be committed to the "Habitat for Humanity" for the development of low-income housing. • The City expects at least 170 very low income units to be provided at build out of the community. These very low income units would consist of the balance of Site No. 6, R3+ units, transitional housing (in the form of additional residential care facilities), and second units (reference Table 13). • The City has established a Housing Office for the administration and monitoring of low and moderate income housing opportunities. The City plans to continue operation of this Housing Office through the planning period. • The Cite Housing Office has continued operation of its first-time homebuyer purchase program ,which has resulted in the rehabilitation of substandard single family units, and their resale to low and moderate income homeowners. To date, 38 homes have been rehabilitated and sold to qualified low and moderate income households, 27 of which occurred during this planning period. The City plans to continue and expand this program during the planning period as needed to meet the community's low and moderate income housing needs, as described in this Housing Element. • The City Housing Office has utilized redevelopment tax increment funds to initiate a City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) rehabilitation loan program to provide financial assistance to homeowners needing to repair and maintain their homes. To date, the Cit-, rehab loan program has assisted 133 households. consisting of 105 moderate income households, 22 low income households and 6 very low income households, four of which occurred during this planning period. The City plans to continue and expand this program during the plan-ling period as needed to meet the community's low and moderate income housing needs. as described in this Housing Element. The City will initiate a zoning amendment to include mixed use development in the downtown. This amendment to the Barton Road Specific Plan will allow mixed use development consisting of both medium/high density residential and commercial. The City has allocated redevelopment tax increment funds and will offer bond financing to qualified developers interested in undertaking a mixed use residential development that will permit approximately 50 — 75 senior citizen town home developments, provided 30% (15- 20) of the units are affordable to very low income senior households. Communitv Overview Grand Terrace is a 3.6 square mile community, with an estimated population of about 11,8501. It lies between two mountain ridges. To the east is Blue Mountain, and to the Nvest are the La Loma Hills. The City incorporated in 1978. becoming the 16th city in San Bernardino County. General location of the City is depicted in Figure 1,Vicinity Map. Figure 1,Vicinity Map - mom % �f r' d�� ' - 5 G n doe rr a'ce �PaUn s Barton Rd j 1 y r 11 T-1—05rirnerc5 Y �Demo St T.er-rate-HI 5- ro t l L;�L� i ` I m C0- munit';4— r�k $.fir a5 �g1 > Par(r---i— � Kentf�ld� � j Lark S4 9j f _ { A 4• � � Dove�•�• � i an Ee -tint,�irto 10 dSt T 'liver=si[1,e ~- L Authorization and Content Adequate housing for families and individuals of all.economic levels has become an important issue for State and Local governments. The issue has grown in complexity due to rising costs and increasing competition for physical and financial resources in both the public and the private sectors. State of California Department of Finance City/Counn,Population.January 1,2001 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) In response to this concern, the California Legislature amended the Go,,ernment Code in 1980 to require each local community to include a specific analysis of its housing needs and.a realistic set of programs designed to meet those needs.in a Housing Element of its General Plan. The requirements Of the law are prefaced by several statements of State policy set forth in Section 65580 of the Government Code: ... The availability of housing is of vital statewide importance. and the early attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every California family is a priority of the highest order." "... Local and State governments have a responsibility to use the powers vested in them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community." The legislature recognizes that in carrying out this responsibility, each local government also has the responsibility to consider economic, environmental, and fiscal factors and community goals set forth in the general plan and to cooperate ,vith other local governments and the State in addressing regional housing needs." The law requires each locality to accomplish the following tasks: Identify and analyze the current and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community. Evaluate current and potential constraints to meeting those needs, constraints due both to operations of the marketplace and to operations of government. Inventory and assess the availability of land suitable for residential use and of opportunities for energy conservation in residential development. Set forth goals, objectives. policies and programs which are responsive to the identified housing needs, governmental and non-governmental constraints, and identified housing opportunities. This Housing Element Update has been prepared in accordance with applicable State lacy. It has also been prepared consistent with the City of Grand Terrace General Plan and the community's vision of its housing needs and objectives. This conununity vision has been substantiated by a citizens surveN and meetings of the City General Plan Task Force, conducted between 1997-1999, and further supported by a recent public hearing before the Planning Conunission and a strategy approval by the City Council. Accordingly, this Housing Element examines Grand Terrace's housing needs as they exist today, and projects future housing needs It sets forth statements of community goals, objectives and policies concerning those needs. It includes a housing program responsive to current and future needs, consistent with available resources. The housing program covers the planning period from 1998- 2005, detailing a schedule of actions the community)is undertaking or plans to undertake to achieve City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) its housing goals and objectives. Upon implementation of these actions, the City of Grand Terrace will have satisfied its local housing needs through build-out. and its regional housing needs through the planning period. State law recognizes that housing needs may exceed available resources, a recognition most critical in this day of uncertainties as to public fiscal resources and a changing private sector investment climate. As a result, the methods for achieving the City's objectives, as stated today, may be less relevant tomorrow or a,,ear from tomorrow. Indeed. the City's ability to meet its objectives may be profoundly affected by future programmatic and funding changes expected at the Federal and State levels. Therefore, it is intended that this Housing Element be reviewed annually and be updated and modified every five years to remain relevant and useful to decision makers, the private sector, and the community. The next review and revision of the Housing Element shall be in conformance Nvith Government Code Section 65588 or its applicable amendments. Relationship to Other Elements and Plans The California Government Code requires internal consistency among the various elements of a general plan. Section 65300.5 of the Go%errunent Code states that the general plan and the parts and elements thereof shall comprise an integrated and internally consistent and compatible statement of policies. All other elements of the Grand Terrace General Plan have been recently or are in the process of being updated. The City undertook its current 1989-1998 Housing Element, adopted by the City Council May 27. 1999 and subsequently certified by the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). to achieve internal consistency among the various elements of its General Plan. The land use allocations contained in the Land Use Element of the General Plan are supportive of the policies and actions of this Housing Element Update and Aill provide adequate sites to accommodate projected new housing construction. Additionally, the infrastructure element of the General Plan proposes a transportation system which will provide adequate access to work centers, schools, shopping areas, and other destinations for both existing_ and future residents, while other elements of the General Plan relate to environmental quality, the preservation and conservation of natural resources, and public health and safety. As such. the various policies and programs recommended throughout the General Plan were taken into account during the preparation of this Housing Element. City Staff has reviewed the other updated elements of the General Plan. as well as those undergoing updates. Staff has determined that this Housing Element Update retains the internal consistency among the various elements of the Cit} General Plan The City will maintain this consistence as future General Plan amendments are processed by e%a,uating proposed amendments for consistence with the Housing Element and with all other elements of the General Plan. Citizen Participation This Housing Element was developed through the combined efforts of the City staff, the City General , Plan Task Force, the City Planning Commission, the City Council, and the City's consultants. Citizen input was received by means of workshops and public hearings conducted by the Planning Commission and City Council. The notices for these workshops and public hearings were published in a local newspaper and prominently posted at Cite Hall. the City Library and the local Post Office. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7.2002 In addition, a community survey was conducted in 1997 to ascertain community input regarding Grand Terrace housing needs and goals. This survey was mailed to a random sampling of 740 residents throughout the City. Twenty-two percent of those residents responded, providing City staff useful information regarding perceived housing needs and preferred-methods for addressing those needs. Input from the surveys as well as the community workshops and meetings are reflected in the City's adopted Housing Element and are carried forward in this Update. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) II. REVIEW OF ELEMENT AND PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS Review and Updating of Element To maintain the Housing Element as a viable working document it must be reviewed and updated periodically. Periodic review will allow the City to evaluate the progress made toward the attainment of established housing goals. It also will provide the City with an opportunity to adjust programs to respond to changing needs and/or fiscal conditions within the community. The Housing Program, contained in Section VII of this element. has been structured so as to facilitate performance evaluation. According to Housing Element law, the City of Grand Terrace is required to update its Housing Element as need dictates. but no less than once every five years. In addition to this periodic updating, the City will annually review and evaluate the effectiveness of its housing programs in accomplishing, established goals and policies. Opportunities for local residents to participate in the periodic review and updating of the Housing Element will continue to be provided through advertised meetings and/or hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council. Review of Past Accomplishments As part of the periodic review of the Housing Element, each local government is required to evaluate its progress toward achieving the goals contained in the previous Housing Element. This evaluation should include a discussion of the following: 1) the effectiveness of the Housing Element in the attainment of the State housing goal: 2) an analysis of the significant differences between what was projected and what was achieved; and 3) a description of how the goals, objectives, policies and programs of the updated element incorporate what has been learned from the results of the previous element. The differences between the projected goals and what was achieved is primarily measured by the Regional Housing Needs Allocation Model (RHNA). Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) establishes the RHNA for the Cit-, of Grand Terrace. The RHNA identifies the City's existing and future housing need broken down into four household income categories: "eery low" (less than 50% of the median income); "Iow" (50 to 80 percent of the median); "moderate" (80 to 120 percent of the median): and"upper" (more than 120 percent of the median). During the past planning period 1989-1997, the City of Grand Terrace met its RHNA goals for affordable housing by designating adequate sites for the construction of 255 affordable housing units. broken down as follows: 72 "Very low"; 83 "low", and 100 "moderate": however, only 32% of the 320 needed "upper" units, i.e., 102 "upper"units. were constructed. As shown in Table 1, 673 housing units were constructed in Grand Terrace between the years of 1989-1997. The RHNA goals for both low and moderate income units were well exceeded and nearly 32 percent of the needed upper income units were built. To satisfy the RHNA goals for low and very low income, the City provided a densin, bonus and mortgage revenue financing for the construction of the 556 unit Highlands Apartments project. The Highlands Apartments resulted in 445 new moderate income units, and 111 new units affordable to low income households. The City also has committed to rezoning the Barton Road Specific Plan to allow- mixed use residential uses mixed uses City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) in the commercial zone. a Table 1 Past Housing Goals and Actual Accomplishments 1989 — 1997 Income Number of Units Number of Units Category Units Needed Constructed/ of Household Per SCAG (1) Planned Difference 72 57 (2) 0 Very Low 15 (3) 83 Ill (4) + 28 Low 100 388 (5) + 288 Moderate 320 102 - 218 Upper Totals 575 673 + 98 Notes: (1) Estimated needs as determined by SCAG's Regional Housing Allocation Model for past planning period through 1997. (2) Very low income units constructed include 57 units at the Highlands Apartments with rental subsidy commitments. (3) Includes 15 senior citizen units planned as part of the Barton Road specific Plan Area,with rental subsidy commitments. (4) Includes the I I I low income units at the Highlands Apartments. (5) Includes the moderate income units at the Highlands Apartments(445 units minus the 57 subsidies to the very low). In addition. the Civ; has undertaken other specific actions during the past planning period to further the attainment of local housing goals. These actions are listed below and summarized in Section VII of this Update: • Establishment of a Housing Office for the administration and monitoring of low and moderate income housing opportunities. • Initiate and operate a first-time home buyer purchase program which has resulted in the rehabilitation of substandard single family units, and their resale to low and moderate income homeowners • Initiate and operate a rehabilitation loan program to provide financial assistance to homeowners needing to repair and maintain their homes. • Initiate local code amendments dealing with: second units; manufactured housing; amendment of the Barton Road Specific Plan to allow mixed use commercial development with medium/high density residential; and special development standards for senior citizen and other low and moderate income housing as means to facilitate the provision of affordable housing. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(Januar) 7,2002) III. CONIMUNITY PROFILE To effectively determine the present and future housing needs for the City of Grand Terrace, population variables, such as demographic and socio-economic characteristics and trends must first be analyzed. The following description of the community of the City of Grand Terrace is a capsulation of available data from the 1990 U.S. Census Report. projections from SCAG, and various other informational sources. Where available, information for the 2000 Census is provided. It is anticipated that the next update of the Housing Element (2005-2010) will contain the complete data from the 2000 Census. A. Population Trends and Projections The City of Grand Terrace was incorporated as a general law City on November 7, 1978. Since its incorporation in 1978, the City's population has grown 46.3 percent, from approximately 8.100 persons in 1978 to 11,626 persons in 20012. Most of this growth, over 75% of the population growth that has occurred after incorporation, occurred between 1978 and 1990, when the City's population reached 10.946'. Population forecasts through the year 2020 are presented in Table 2. B} the year 2020, Grand Terrace's residential conununity is expected to reach build-out, achieving a population of 14,396, a 24.9% increase over 2001 levels. Table 3, below, compares population growth and changes in the City of Grand Terrace with that for the County of San Bernardino for the ten-year period 1990-2000. During that time, the population in Grand Terrace increased by'6.2%, a very modest rate when compared to the 20.5% population growth experienced by the County overall 2 2000 U.S.Census 3 1990 U.S.Census City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Table 2 Comparative Population and Housing Data for Grand Terrace 1970-2020 1970 1980 1990 2000 2020 Population Total Population 5.901 8,498 10,946 11,626 14,396 Group Quarters - - 110 101 - Resident Population - - 10,836 11,525 Total Housing Units 1.917 3,282 4,059 4,458 5,511 Households 3,856 4,221 5,235 Household Size 3 14 2.76 2.81 2.75 2.75 Sources 1970 data is from the 1970 Census. 1980 data is from the 1980 Census. 1990 data is from the 1990 Census. 2001 data is from the 2000 Census. This estimate is substantially lower than the estimated 1996 population for the City of Grand Terrace. \\hich was recorded by the Department of Finance to be 13.350 in 1996. 2020 projection is from SLAG San Bernardino East Valley Model, 10/96. B. Household Size The City's population of 11.626 persons is estimated to reside in 4,221 households, an average of 2.75 persons per household. As presented in Table 2, above, household size, expressed as the average number of persons per dwelling unit, decreased from 3.14 persons per household in 1970 to 2.82 in 1996, to 2.75 persons in 2000. At build-out, the City is expected to have a total of 5,235 households with an average household size of 2.82 persons. C. Ethnicity The City of Grand Terrace is a predominately white community as indicated by the ethnic breakdown of population as contained in the 2000 Census. As presented in Table 3, Whites constitute 74 percent of the total population. Persons of Hispanic or Latino heritage and origin represent the next largest ethnic group, comprising 25 percent of Grand Terrace's population. Between 1990 and 2000, Grand Terrace experienced a modest decrease in the proportion of Whites compared to Hispanic or Latino populations. The proportions of Blacks. Asians and other ethnic groups in the City remained relatively unchanged during the 1990- 2000 period. Ethnicity for the County of San Bernardino is also presented in Table 3. Between 1990 and 2000, the County experienced a decrease in the proportion of Whites, from 73 percent to 59 percent, and an increase in Hispanic or Latino populations, from 27%to 39%. The City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) proportions of Blacks, Asians and other ethnic groups in the County remained relatively unchanged during the 1990-2000 period. Table 3 Ethnic Composition of City of Grand Terrace and Count}, Of San Bernardino - 1990 & 2000 Census City of Grand Terrace County of San Bernardino 1990 Census 2000 Census 1990 2000 Census Census Total Population 10,946 11,626 1,418,380 1,709,434 Percent Change in Total Population 1990- 2000 +6.29 o +20.5% White Po ulation 'Number of Residents 8,7791 8,575 1,035,3281 1,006,960 Percent of Total Population 80°0 74°0 730°i 59% Hispanic or Latino(of any race) Population Number of Residents 1,9911 2.9 44 378,582; 669,387 Percent of Total Population 18%1 259 0 270 o; 39% Black Po ulation \umber of Residents 4131 5371 114,9341 155,348 Percent of Total Population 4%1 50,o 80/0 9% Asian ' Number of Residents 6421 6531 54,7721 80,217 Percent of Total Population 6% 6°0 40 a! 5% Other Number of Residents 1861 16%1 213,346 466,909 Percent of Total Population 17% 16°0 15% 27% D. Age Characteristics The age distribution of population by age groups is an important factor in determining the general population make up and possible future housing needs. A breakdown of the City of Grand Terrace and San Bernardino County population by age for 1990 and 2000 is presented in Table 4. As seen in this table, the City of Grand Terrace age group 62 and over comprised 11 percent of the population according to the 1990 Census, and 13% according to the 2000 Census. Median age for the City increased from 32.2 years to 35.3 years between 1990 and 2000. Population of the County of San Bernardino as a whole is substantially younger than Grand Terrace. The County age group 62 and over comprised 8 percent of the population according to the 1990 Census, and 10% according to the 2000 Census. Median age for the County increased from 29.3 years to 30.3 years between 1990 and 2000. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Table 4 Age of Population for Grand Terrace and County of San Bernardino - 1990 & 2000 Census Cite of Grand Terrace Countyof San Bernardino 1990 Census 2000 Census 1990 Census 2000 Census Total Population 10,946 11,626 1,418,380 1,709,434 Population Under 5 Years Number of Residents 905 756 138,342 143,076 Percent of Total Population 8% 7% 10% 85 o Population 5-19 Years Number of Residents 2,141 2,627 300,881 463.192 Percent of Total Population 20°0 23% 21% 27% Population 62 Years and O,,er Number of Residents 1,206 1.476 113,470 175.783 Percent of Total Population 11% 13% 8% 1000 Population 65 and Over Number of Residents 1,019 1,245 12 9% %14 9 Percent of Total Population 9% 1 1% 9% °% Population Median Ate 1 32.2 35.3 29.3 30.3 E. Income Characteristics In 1990, 2,117 (54.4 percent) of Grand Terrace households were at the County median income or above; 1,484 (38 percent) were lower-income households (less that 80 percent of the County median). Presented in Table 5 is the income distribution for the City as reported by the 1990 Census. Income information for the Cit}. from the 2000 Census is not yet available. 4 S36,102 is 80 percent of the County median income as reported in the 1990 Census. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Table 5 HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN GRAND TERRACE 1990 CENSUS Income No. of Percent of Households Households Less than $ 5,000 51 1.3% $ 5,000 - $ 9,999 123 3.2% $ 10.000 - $14,999 135 3.5% $ 15.000 - $24,999 462 11.9% $ 25.000 - $34,999 592 15.2% $ 35.000 - 549,999 821 21.1% $ 50.000 - 574,999 971 25.0% $ 75.000 - $99,999 474 12.2% $100.000 - S 149,999 185 4.8% $150.000 or more 76 2.0% Total Households 3.890 100.0% Median Household Income 1 $45,127 F. Historic Residential Construction Trends Table 6 shows residential construction activity in Grand Terrace for the period from 1989 to 2001. This data is tabulated based on the 2000 Census housing unit count and City Building permit records since 1990. During this period, 685 units were constructed. However, during this planning from 1998 through 2001, only 27 single families home were constructed, four of which %were constructed by the City of Grand Terrace Redevelopment Agency through their first time homebuyer program. The rapid growth that has occurred in many San Bernardino County cities during this decade has by-passed Grand Terrace. As illustrated b} the 2000 State Department of Finance figures shoNvn in Table 7, 66 percent of Grand Terrace's housing units are single family; 28 percent is multifamily and 6 percent is mobile homes. These percentages of single family units relative to multifamily and mobile homes are fairly comparable to that of adjacent cities, including Colton, Loma Linda and Redlands. The overall percentage of single family homes in the County is 720X0. notable higher than Grand Terrace and the adjacent cities identified in Table 7. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 1.2002) Table 6 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS I\ GRAND TERRACE 1989-2001 Buildin Permits Issued er Year Cumulative Total DwellingUnits By Year Year Single Multi Family Total Single Multi Mobile Total Dwelling Family Dwelling Units Dwelling Family Family Homes Units Dwelling Units Dwelling Dwelling Units Constructed knits Units Existing Units Per 1990 Census (adjusted based on 2000 2.698 770 305 3,773 Census housing counts) 1989 0 246 246 2.698 1,016 305 4,019 1990 25 310 335 2.723 1,326 305 4,354 1991 37 0 37 2.-60 1,326 305 4,391 1992 9 0 9 -69 1.326 305 4,400 1993 7 0 7 2.-76 1.326 305 4,407 1994 7 0 7 -83 1.326 305 4,414 1995 4 0 4 2.787 1.326 305 4,418 1996 2 0 2 2.789 1,326 305 4,420 1997 11 0 11 2.800 1.326 305 4,431 1998 0 0 0 2 800 1.326 305 4,431 1999 24 0 24 2.824 1.326 305 4,455 2000 3 0 3 2.827 1,326 305 4,458 2001 0 0 0 2.827 1,326 305 4,458 Total 129 556 685 2.827 1,326 305 4,458 1989-2001 r -- Total 27 0 27 2.827 1.326 305 4,458 1998-2001 Table 7 Dwelling Unit Types in Grand Terrace, Selected Cities and the County of San Bernardino 2000 State of California Department of Finance Single Family � Multi-family Mobile Home Detached Attached 0; Single ' '- TO 4 5 Plus a o Multi- Homes % Mobile Total; Units Units Familv units ! Units family Homes Units; 6'o Grand Terrace 4,791; 2.976 184 66%1 186 1,155 28°0 290 00 Colton 15,9111 9,031, 475 60%1 1.2791 4.288 35% 838i - 7010 Loma Linda 8,208, 3,520i 793 53%, 1,0781 2,279' 41% 538i Redlands 24,7271 15,668; 1.038 68%1 2.4221 4,7081 29% 8911 4°'° 0 20% 44.8281 7°o Total County 610,3171 418,949 22.964 72/ 40,1171 83,459i City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) G. A¢e of Residential Structures The age of a structure has a significant effect on its physical condition. However, by itself, age is not a valid indicator of housing condition, since proper care and continued maintenance will extend the physical and economic life of a unit. One the other hand, a lack of normal maintenance coupled with an aging housing stock can lead to the serious deterioration of individual units and entire neighborhoods. According to the 1990 Census. approximately 2,277 units (56.1 percent of the City's housing stock) were more than 25 years old. Current City estimates indicate that approximately 65.8 percent of the City's current housing stock is in excess of 25 years of age. Recent data obtained by an exterior housing condition survey conducted in November of 1996, and updated in May 2001. found that none of the City's dwelling units were dilapidated (e.g., showing signs of major structural deficiencies, such as sagging roofline, sagging porch, or roof damage sufficient to permit water damage to structural elements). Proper and continued maintenance of older housing is important in extending the life of a home. It also is important in maintaining the general well-being of the surrounding neighborhoods. H. Overcrowding The size of residential structures (number of rooms excluding bathrooms, halls, closets, etc.) is an important factor in assessing whether the housing stock is adequately accommodating the community's population. An average size residential unit has five rooms (kitchen, dining/family room, living room and two bedrooms), according to the U.S. Census, and can accommodate a family of up to five without being considered overcrowded. According to the 1990 Census and as summarized in Table 8, only approximately 2 percent of all units in the City, were identified as overcrowded, as compared with 6 percent in the County. The 1990 Census data also suggests that there is little problem with overcrowding of either o«ner occupied or renter occupied housing units in Grand Terrace. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(JanuarN 7,2002) Table 8 OvercroNN ding Information for City of Grand Terrace and County of San Bernardino 1990 Census City of Grand County of San Bernardino Terrace Owne�Occu�pied nits 0 1.5 persons per room 2.710 200.604 1.51 or more persons per room 26 7.244 Renter Occupied Units 6.128 0 1.5 ersons er room 1.088 15 14361. 1.51 or more ersons er room 33 361 �11 Units o 1.5 ersons er room 3.798 356,732 1.51 or more ersons er room 59 21.605 Percent of units with 1.51 or 2% 6% more persons I. Vacancy Rates The residential vacanc,, rate, a translation of the number of unoccupied housing units on the market, is a good indicator of the balance between housing supple and demand in a community. When the demand for housing exceeds the available supply, the vacancy- rate will be low. Concomitantly, a low vacancy rate drives the cost of housing upward to the disadvantage of prospective buyers or renters. In a healthy housing market. the vacancy rate would be between 5.0 and 8.0 percent. These vacant units should be distributed across a variety of housing types, sizes, price ranges and locations within the Cit-,. This allows adequate selection opportunities for households seeking new residences. The,2000 State Department of Finance reports estimate a City-wide vacancy rate for Grand Terrace of 5.0 percent, suggesting a healthy balance between housing supply and demand. This rate compares favorably to the County, which was recorded by the State Department of Finance to have a overall vacancy rate of 14.5%. Cit)of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7.2002) J. Housing :affordability According to recent data from the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). the year 2000 median income for a four-person household in San Bernardino County is S47,4005. The Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in conjunction with HCD have developed the following income categories and their definitions, the 2000 income limits for a four-person household are indicated in parenthesis: • Very Low Income - less than 50 percent of the County median (less than $23,700) • Loxv Income - between 51 and 80 percent of the County median ($24,174 - $37,900) • Moderate Income - between 81 and 120 percent of the County median ($37,901 - $56,900) • Upper Income - greater than 120 percent of the County median ($56,901+) According to State and Federal standards for housing overpayment, a household should pay no more than 30 percent of its income on housing. Households paying greater than 30 percent have limited remaining income for other necessities such as food, clothing, and health care.. Upper Income households are generally capable of paying a larger proportion of their income for housing: therefore, estimates of housing overpayment generally focus on lower income groups. Based on these guidelines that households should not spend more than 30 percent of their gross income on housing, Table 9 estimates the maximum housing costs affordable to Very Low Income, Low Income and Moderate Income households in Grand Terrace. In the case of rent, the 30 percent does not include allowance for utilities that may impose additional costs to the renter of S50 to S100 per month, depending on which utilities the renter is responsible for paying. Renters may be required to cover water, sewer and trash pickup costs in addition to the usual electric. Ras and phone. The addition of these costs may cause rental of a unit that would otherwise be affordable to become a condition of overpayment. In the case of purchase. the 30 percent includes payment on principal and interest, and an assumed 1.25% allocation for taxes and homeo«-ner insurance. In actuality, taxes and insurance may exceed the assumed 1.25% in newer areas subject to assessments, Mello-Roos districts or high fire hazard. A 10 percent down payment and an 8 percent interest rate are assumed, reflecting 2000 market conditions. Maximum housing costs affordable to a Very Low Income four-person household are S77,300 to purchase a home and S590 per month to rent a home. For a Low Income four-person household the maximum affordable housing costs are S 123,600 to purchase a home and $944 per month to rent a home. For a Moderate Income four-person household the maximum affordable housing costs are $185,500 to purchase a home and S 1,416 per month to rent a , home. 5 Correspondence from Cathy E. Creswell,Acting Deputy Director, Division of Housing Policy Development, State of California Department of Community Development Dated March 2000. Ll City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January i.2002) Table 9 City of Grand Terrace Affordable Housing Prices and Rents by Income Group: 2000 Income Category Median Income Maximum Home Maximum Home (4-Person Household) Purchase Price Rental Rate [1] Very Low less than $23,700 $77,300 $590/month Low $23,201 - $37,900 $123,600 $944/month Moderate $37,901 - $56,900 $185,500 $1,416/month [1] HUD Affordability requirements,April 2001. Note: Calculation of affordable rent is based on a monthly payment of 30 percent of gross household income. Calculation of affordable home sales price based on downpayment of 10 percent,annual interest rate of 8 percent,30-year mortgage,and monthly payment of 30 percent of gross income. According to the 1990 Census,the median value of owner-occupied housing in Grand Terrace was $137,000, and the median monthly cost for rental units was $609. As presented in Table 10, the largest percentage of the City's housing stock(49 percent) was within the $100,000 to $149,000 range. More recent data obtained from classified ads in the local newspaper and Yahoo! Real Estate (June 2001) indicate that the current 2001 average sale price for a home in Grand Terrace is $147,000. This represents a modest increase of 7.2 percent in the average housing price from that reported by the 1990 Census. On an annual basis, this represents an average increase of 0.61 percent over the twelve year period. With typical terms of 20 percent down, a new home buyer purchasing an average-priced home of$147,000 with a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage at a 6.75 percent interest rate would have a monthly principal and interest payment of approximately $773 per month. Recent rental housing information obtained from classified ads in the local newspaper and Yahoo! Real Estate (June 2001) indicate that the average monthly rental rate for an apartment in Grand Terrace is $831. Depending on the age, size and amenities of the apartment, monthly rates range between$615 to $1,000. Because of the recent drop in mortgage interest rates to 6.75%, the monthly mortgage payment for purchasing an average home in Grand Terrace is less than the monthly rent. As indicated by current home sales and rental rates, there is a wide range of housing choices in Grand Terrace available to households in the low and moderate income ranges. However, the very low income households the City appear to be priced out of both the for-sale and rental market. 2.2 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Table 10 Housing Affordability for City of Grand Terrace, County of San Bernardino and State of California 1990 Census City of Grand County of San Bernardino State of California Terrace Median Value $137,000 $129,200 $195.500 (Owner-Occupied Units) Percent of Units by Price (Owner-Occupied Units) Less than$50,000 0.7% 3.4% 2.5% $50,000- $99,999 13.0% 27.7% 13.6% $100,000-$149,999 49.0% 32.7% 17.3% $150,000 -$199,999 25.0% 19.2% 18.2% $200,000- $299,999 8.3% 11.5% 24.5% $3000,000 and above 3.0% 5.5% 23.9% Total Owner-Renter 1,121 170,489 4,607,263 Median Monthly Rent $ 609 $489 $591 Percent of Units by Monthly Rent Less than $250 1.9% 7.9% 7.5% $250 -$499 2.5% 44.8% 31.5%11 $500-$749 5.7% 38.2% 38.5' $750-$999 13.0% 7.7% 15.2% $1,000 and above 1.9% 1.4% 7.4%11 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) v IV. HOUSING NEEDS The housing needs of a community revolve around: 1) the extent to which housing is and will be available to those who need it; 2) the degree to which available housing is and will be affordable by those who need it; and 3) the extent to which the housing stock of the community is in decent and standard condition. This section of the Housing Element sets forth Grand Terrace's housing needs, and identifies the needs of special population groups in the community, (i.e., the elderly, disabled and handicapped, large families, female-headed households, and homeless persons)to the extent that such data is available. Specific action programs included in this element are designed to update data and eliminate information gaps identified in this report. A. SCAG Regional Housing Needs Assessment State law requires jurisdictions to provide for their share of regional housing needs. As part of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) determines the housing growth needs by income category for cities within its jurisdiction, which includes the City of Grand Terrace. RHNA determinations for the City of Grand Terrace during this planning period through 2005 are presented in Table 11. As illustrated in the Table, Grand Terrace is required to provide opportunity for the construction of 244 new dwelling units during this planning period. Of these new units, 39 should be affordable to very low income households, 33 to low income households, 52 to moderate income households, and 120 to above moderate income households. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Table 11 City of Grand Terrace RHNA New Housing Construction Needs by Income Group Income Category Housing Unit Housing Unit Percent of Construction Need by Construction Need Need by Income Group by Income Group Income Group Current Planning Annual Need (1998- Period through 2005 2005)* Very Low(0-50%County median 39 5 16% income) Low(50-8%County median 33 4 14% income Moderate(80-120% County median 52 7 21% income Above Moderate (over 120%County 120 16 49% median income) Total Housing Unit Construction 244 33 100.00% Need *Note: The current 2005 Planning Period is calculated by SCAG over a 7.5 year period, from 1998-2005. B. Land Inventory Section 65583 (a)(B) of the Government Code requires an inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites, and sites having the potential for infill development, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites. Residential land uses occupy approximately 41 percent of the City's land area. The preponderance of residential uses are single-family, low density in nature. Single- family uses comprise 31 percent of the total City land area. Six percent of the City land area is devoted to multi-family uses, more than one unit per parcel. Mobile home uses constitute 26 acres or approximately one percent of the City6. Potential sites for the development of new housing consist of both vacant and partially developed properties. The general location of these sites is shown in Figure 2. A 6 Acreage estimates are from the City of Grand Terrace Master Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact Report (MEWEIR), January 1988. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) breakdown.of the number of units that could be realized on each of these sites, based on build out in accordance with the General Plan, is presented in Table 12. The total number of additional units that could be developed, as well as the number of units that could be affordable to low and moderate income households, are identified. 4 , City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) A one ME D I •7 - • . , , . GAAC:At . IO .III � _ .111� / ;• I�r=' ■■n■11111111139 iWJJas!■n■1 ulul•au:ul�c ■ u tl Cal . rr ■��:�e�� fir,? �( r �i W�� ii�i�� ♦♦�I►�1 ■i1,�\7��,2Z,.� �� ► ��if ► �� I .fir . :�� .�► �� t,�� •�� lop � �� _ >_ � is......■� m III �- ♦ �i . ♦ ♦ -. : � , ,s- C� '�i • :IIIIIL®\��.■, _-: iiii �1 �1 C= �i' • 11111111111` idyl �1■ _;: =11l�5�'�� '11 L•,- _�: /IIIIIl �� ') �' �.'L�,t7! . , �11!��!!1lI�I�■�u1! e� Illiu••• .�■��I1111111;s ..■ r��r.��=�'��r,�i 215 ■ ■e - • •• :� •1■ 11111e111 - - `/e 11 �1■ ■■n 11 L' E7�� : :j R �C ■IIII.IWA li 0 Moll 01 1%'! — ■t��■ rL A.A N •...a .— nuul►� �/ - - ..u■un■nnr.aunn. �w•IIII- '' , I— gem n- �4I1111111 C ran■o I.■ 0000 . . 11I • I11111111 iiunnn■ I III- Kale KIowa ale ■,��. �►1I 1■ 1■ � nl� �e.�� C unnnn■ - -193: Id/ � ■I1I111■■■l■41 ■IIIII.'t ■r II I111111 1; ■■■■■■■.m unp MIIIIIIIII IMP IRWIN_ m WE 0 1. -■ ll■ . r ,� raa ■III. , • '� Illllll C: ■Itllt■own i� 11111_d'.LLS171:__011111111IIIIIII■/`..I'. ■■■■■■also:■ -.11111t■■■■1 111■ I� ` 1�1�� `I� ■■■ ■ ■aa1111a1at■ Z .■■sI1■1■Io111■ ■1\� I �_�■� 111111I C11s■ �11 lel 'II■ ■ �.riWT 1•f li 1, •i■ s■■ISII■■1■ ssI ��' . - ■eLll ■= not annr i/ 11 ' ■uunnnl nuunul �■ •• • ■1 I.i• n. � . � ■nnunu■ �. unnun■ !- 1.�- ni �♦�II111 p ■unnnnu unnnlr : •' •• ' 1.4=ill _- 1 Is•- •':IIIIIIIIf.= ■I.I:r��Kf 1:19=U1 ■o/1s/1111111 �■■ �1�1111111►\� \ IN,�/,�/� 1111111111111■ /alsaaasat.� , _ w EMU. .1- - I�f . � I�ununnnln nll-1■ � • • . IN 11 - _ luul nu•Di N FIE �1„ nnnnna AN=C� 1nu111 -l� %,�►\►�t� Ina.\: /IIIIIn111 • ■� -• 1I n1111 • - nunnn�_.raE- ■� . :Wool �C �in■n :. .� �� -C n111n1\= ■NE f■/.■nnlu ��► • ••' • ■n■ nnI■nnn tel►'I:Y./IIl■■.■ = r♦ C�� ■It111■I1I1111• '?A ■ 1111110 - IIIIIII►� - nnnnnm u:dB �innn C C n ' �anoon :` ; IAnllnnnnunl nor norm.: I ■�, 11111\� . Illllllt�/Il11;11 I I III\ �IIIIIIIIIn1111 1111�/11n1nn Table 12 City of Grand Terrace Potential New Develo ment InfilI Sites -2001 Sites * Acres ** Zoning Existing Potential Total No. of Potential No. *** No. of No. of Potential New of New Units Units Affordable Units Affordable **** Adding Density Units from Bonus (25%-45%) Density ***** Bonuses ****** _ 1. 3.7 R3 5 44 55 11 2. 8.1 R1-20 0 16 16 0 3. 9.4 R1-20 5 8 8 0 4. 2.0 R2 0 18 23 5 5. 1.8 R3 0 22 28 6 6. 3.8 R3+ 0 76 95 95 7. 1.8 R3 0 22 28 6 8. 0.8 R3 0 10 13 3 9. 3.8 R3 0 46 58 12 10. 3.5 R3 2 42 53 11 11. 4.6 R1-7.2 1 18 18 0 12. 5.2 R1-7.2 14 14 14 0 13. 2.6 R1-7.2 0 10 10 0 14. 0.7 R2 1 6 8 2 15. 3.2 R1-20 1 13 13 0 16. 1.7 R1-7.2 2 7 7 0 17. 0.8 R1-7.2 1 3 3 0 18. 0.8 R1-7.2 0 3 3 0 19. 4.4 R1-7.2 2 18 18 0 20. 9.2 R3 0 110 138 28 21. 1.4 R3 2 17 21 4 22. 66.0 RH 0 70 70 0 23. 42.4 RH 0 25 25 0 24. 158.2 RH/RI-20 0 75 75 0 25. 9.0 RH/R1-20 0 35 35 0 26. 51 RH/R1-20 0 35 1 35 0 '"� S>,-�t�yy!.y"---_ "r==>'.ev� ::s;t�: '?��;�?Ts::�'-"'',�- �r,+�,r`k�; s�p,4-.�.,y. ��-. Totals 0 399:9 a _u _ u3 3;6 w? ,,- ¢73; $ 0 Y _ . Total Above Moderate Income Units (includes R1-7.2 ,R1- 350 20 and RH zoned sites) Total Moderate Income Units(includes R2 and R3 zoned 337 sites) Total Low Income Units (Total number of bonus units on R2 143 and R3 sites plus non-subsidized senior units in downtown) Total Very Low Income Units(Total number of R3+units, 223 residential care faciliites, second family units and subsidized senior citizen units in downtown) City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Table 12—Potential new Development Infill Sites—2001 (Continued) * Number refers to locations shown of Figure 2. ** Lot sizes more accurate since the last update of the City's Housing Element due to GIS technology. *** Zoning refers to existing zoning,proposed R3+ for site No.6 and for Sites 22 through 26 there is envisioned some sort of cluster'type development with density transfers **** Numbers of existing units based on survey taken from aerial photographs and from the field. ***** Numbers based on density bonuses taken with a minimum of 25% ****** Site No.6 at 25 units/acre which can qualify as vea low income Ine units. As can be seen in Table 12, up to 870 additional housing units could be constructed on available sites. Of these units, up to 189 units could be affordable to low and very low income households. Site No. 6, or another comparable site if this proves to be infeasible, is proposed to be rezoned to R3+which could be 25 dwelling units per acre with a density bonus and as such would be considered to be very low income housing. A portion(33 units) of these ver}- low income units (35%) on Site No. 6 are shown to be provided during this planning period on Table 13 below. The balance of these R3+units, 62 is expected to be provided at build-out as shown on Table 13. In addition to the units included in Table 12,the City is in the process of amending its Barton Road Specific Plan to allow mixed use development with medium/high density senior citizen housing to permit 50-75 units, with up to 20 units affordable to very low income senior households. Also, the City expects at least 108 additional very low income units to be provided at build out of the community. These very low income units would consist of transitional housing ( in the form of additional residential care facilities), and second units. A breakdown of these units by category is shown in Table 13. The number of these new, additional transitional units (54) is based on past and pending applications for residential care facilities in the City, and assumes nine new residential care facilities to be established prior to City build-out, with an average occupancy of 6 persons per facility. The number of new second units (54) is calculated at 2% of the existing single family homes in the City. It is anticipated that the second units would contain primarily single person households. Table 13 -Very Low Income Units Ci Expects to be Provided Type of Unit Very Low IncomeUnits City Expects to be Provided During this Planning Period Proposed Site No. 6 with R3+ zoning at 25 33 d.u./acre along Reed Avenue, north of De Be (35% during this planning period) Senior Citizen Units in Barton Road Specific 20 Plan (Downto«m) Area to be subsidized during this planning period Total 53 Type of Unit Total Number of Additional Units City Expects to be Provided at Build-out Balance of units on Site No. 6 with R3+zoning - at 25 d.u./acre along Reed Avenue, north of De 62 Berry —1 Transitional Housing 54 Second Units 54 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Total 170 It should be pointed out that the number of affordable units is based, in part, on the provision of density bonuses which, depending upon site characteristics and other circumstances, can range from 25 to 45 percent. This is due to the fact,that the City's density bonus program is two-fold, with the City allowing bonuses of up to 20 percent over the bonus (i.e., 25 percent) required under State law. In other words,bonuses of up to 45 percent of the density normally allowed by the underlying zone are possible when dealing with R3 zoned properties within the City. Moreover, as indicated in the Housing Program section of this element,the City is in the process of amending its zoning code to provide for density bonuses in all residential zones. In addition. this amendment will specify that density bonuses of up to 25 percent will be granted for residential projects if the units are rented to low and moderate income households for a period of 15 years, and up to 45 percent if the units are rented to low and very low income households for a period of 15 years. The provision of density bonuses is expected to be one of the primary ways in which affordable units will be constructed. Local experience has shown that this technique, in itself, is capable of generating affordable housing and particularly when coupled with below market rate bond financing or other incentives, as evidenced by the recent 556 unit Highlands Apartments project, constructed during the past planning area. The Highlands has resulted in 445 new units, and I I I new units affordable to low income households. While density bonuses will continue to be used to produce affordable housing, this is not the only means by which the City intends to address the low and moderate income housing needs identified in the RHNA. The City intends to supplement the use of density bonuses by expediting the processing of plans, waiving application fees for affordable housing developments, amending the Barton Road Specific Plan to allow a mix of commercial and residential development, establishing special development standards for senior citizen and other low and moderate income housing. The City's Redevelopment Agency also intends to use its 20 percent set-aside funds and mortgage revenue bonds to make the cost of new and resale housing more affordable to low and moderate income households (See Housing Programs, Section VII of this Housing Element). C. Need for Replacement Housing As discussed in Section III. G. of this Element, above, approximately 65.8 percent of the City's current housing stock is in excess of 25 years of age. However, none of these units were found to be dilapidated (e.g., showing signs of major structural deficiencies, such as sagging roofline, sagging porch, or roof damage sufficient to permit water damage to structural elements). During this planning period, the City demolished 4 abandoned, substandard single family housing units for health and safety reasons. These units were replaced through the City's first- time home-buyers program. These units have been sold to qualified low and moderate income households. SCAG has projected that no residential units will be lost during this planning period. 30 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) During this planning period, the City also has rehabilitated 23 single family homes through the first-time home-buyers program, and sold these units to qualified low and moderate income households. Another four single family homes have been rehabilitated through the City rehabilitation loan program that provides financial assistance to homeowners needing to repair and maintain their homes. D. Special Housing Needs In addition to the new housing construction needs estimates presented above, there are segments of the population that experience special housing needs. These groups include the elderly, the disabled, female-headed households and the homeless. The severity of these special needs within the City of Grand Terrace is discussed below. 1. The Elderly/Handicapped As reported by the 2000 Census, 1,245 persons, or approximately 10.7 percent of the population in Grand Terrace are over 65 years of age. This percentage is expected to increase during the next decade due to two factors: (1) the U.S. population nationwide is aging as the baby boom population(born between 1946 and 1964) approaches their senior years; and (2) many Grand Terrace long time residents choose to stay in the City7. The 1990 Census identified a total of 698 households (17.9 percent) which listed social security as the principal source of income. From this data, it can be inferred that there are likely to be a number of elderly persons needing some form of housing assistance. This view was supported by the recent community survey completed by the City in support of the existing Housing Element, in which the majority of respondents felt that the elderly were the largest single group needing housing assistance in Grand Terrace. Housing needs of the elderly usually revolve around issues of affordability, in that most elderly are on a fixed income while housing and other costs continue to rise. According to the 1990 Census, 198 persons, approximately 2 percent of the population in Grand Terrace, had significant physical disabilities. Of these disabled persons, 109 persons had transportation related disabilities, 114 had self care disabilities and 462 persons had work related disabilities. While the needs of certain handicapped individuals (i.e., blind, deaf or experiencing nervous disorders) may be met without special housing accommodations, persons with ambulatory disabilities often require specially designed barrier-free housing. Recognizing this situation,the City has included appropriate actions in the Housing Program section of this document. 2. Large Families 7 According to the 1990 Census most Grand Terrace households have resided in the City for over ten years. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) According to the 2000 census,the average family size in the City is 3.15. Data from the 1990 Census indicated that of the 3,857 households residing in the City of Grand Terrace in 1990, 453 (11.7 percent) were comprised of 5 or more persons. A large family household is defined as one with five or more members. Needs of large families generally center on overcrowding and affordability. The 1990 Census reported that 74 percent of the City's housing units have 5 or more rooms, indicating that large families in Grand Terrace are generally adequately housed. To ensure that adequate housing for large families is maintained, both the City and its Redevelopment Agency are taking steps to meet the needs of large families as discussed in the Housing Program section of this element. 3. Households Headed by Women According to the 2000 Census, 568 households (13.5 percent) of households residing in Grand Terrace are female-headed households. Of these households, 313 (7.5 percent of all households) are lower income and require assistance was not available. However, it is not uncommon for up to 20 percent of such households to need some form of housing assistance. If this figure is applicable to Grand Terrace,then approximately 114 households headed by women are in need of assistance. To ensure that adequate housing for low income female-headed households is available, both the City and its Redevelopment Agency are taking steps to meet these needs as discussed in the Housing Program section of this element. 4. Farm Worker Housing The California Government Code requires that the City of Grand Terrace consider local farm worker housing needs in formulating the Housing Element of its General Plan. The 1990 Census reported 0 farmworkers residing in Grand Terrace. This information was verified by discussions conducted in 1991 with the State Employment Development Department in San Bernardino and the San Bernardino County Housing Authority, both of which reported no farm worker households residing in the City. 5. Homeless Persons and Families Recent amendments to Housing Element Law require local governments to plan for the provision of shelters and transitional housing for homeless persons and families and the identification of adequate sites. A need is said to exist if one person in a locality is without shelter or if the type of shelter available is inappropriate. It should be mentioned that there is a difference between emergency shelter and transitional housing. Shelter provides an immediate short-term solution to the homeless, whereas transitional housing attempts to remove the basis for homelessness (i.e., lack of sufficient income for self support). Transitional housing can last as long as 18 months and generally includes integration with other social services and counseling programs to assist in the transition to self-sufficiency through the acquisition of a permanent income and housing. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) At present, there are two agencies that provide emergency shelter and/or short-term transitional housing for homeless persons originating from the City of Grand Terrace. These agencies are the Frazee/Highland Community Center and the Salvation Army. The Frazee/Highland Community Center currently operates three facilities: a main office located at 1140 West Mills Street, City of San Bernardino; a senior shelter located at 913 Delaware, City of Redlands; and a single-person and families shelter located at 7178 Palm Avenue, City of Highland. At present, the Frazzee;'Highland community Center provides shelter, clothing and food boxes to eligible applicants. The total bed capacity is 64 and the facility is currently operating at or near capacity. A center representative stated that a person in need is never turned away. A person is either served at the center or referred to the San Bernardino County Department of Public Social Services (DPSS). The Salvation Army operates the Hospitality House located at 845 W. Kingman Street, City of San Bernardino. This facility has a capacity of 70 beds. This new facility operates at, or near, capacity. The facility provides 3-day shelter housing and up to 90- day transitional housing for individuals seeking employment. Over-flow is referred to the Frazee/Highland Community Shelter and/or the County of San Bernardino Department of Public Social Services. Most importantly, there are currently 13 residential care facilities located within the City of Grand Terrace. The City has permitted these facilities to be established within its corporate boundaries in accordance with Section 1566.3 of the Health and Safety Code. According to HCD, these facilities meet the requirement for the provision of transitional housing as set forth in Section 65583 of the Government Code. Therefore, based on an occupancy-of six persons per facility, these facilities are providing important transitional housing for 78 persons. In an attempt to document the existence of homeless persons originating from the City of Grand Terrace, local public and private non-profit organizations, including the San Bernardino County Department of Economic and Community Development, were contacted. The Department indicated that they had no information of homeless persons originating from the City of Grand Terrace. This information was supported by recent discussions NNith the local Salvation Army and the Frazee/Highland Community Center; both facilities indicated that 1999 and 2000 intake application information identified no persons as originating from Grand Terrace. During the updating of this element, local social service agencies, the County Fire Department, the County Sheriffs Department, the City's Community Services Department and the City Manager's Office were contacted in order to document the presence of homeless persons within the City and/or the extent to which they have sought assistance from local agencies. Based on this investigation, it appears that no homeless persons originating from Grand Terrace have requested assistance. In regard to transitional housing,the existing residential care facilities within the City City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) may provide long-term transitional housing for homeless persons originating from Grand Terrace, should the need arise. In addition, based on past activity and pending applications, the City expects up to nine new residential care facilities to be established prior to City build-out. These facilities will provide transitional housing for up to 54 additional persons. Although there is currently no identified need for additional emergency shelter or transitional housing in Grand Terrace, both the City and its Redevelopment Agency are taking steps to meet the needs of large families as discussed in the Housing Program section of this element. These steps include the designation of municipal buildings for emergency shelter. The City Manager's Office has indicated that, should the need arise, existing public facilities, including City Hall and the City Yard, would be made available to provide emergency shelter. The City also will continue to coordinate with and support the efforts of the Frazee/Highland Community Center and the Salvation Army in order to ensure that the needs of any homeless persons in the Grand Terrace area are met to the extent possible. In addition, as the need requires, the City will: • Adopt an existing center to contribute to and/or have it be the regional center for the East Valley Local Coordinating Group, or construct a new regional shelter facility in one of the cities within the coalition. • Coordinate with local financial and real estate institutions in developing creative financing investments in the community with respect to affordable housing(e.g. redevelopment funding, private donation matching city donation, etc.). Participate in special programs, such as the Inland Harvest pickup and distribution of leftover foods from local restaurants, schools and social functions. • Contribute to address basic education or financing educational programs (basis household financing and budgeting). • Contribute to transportation services to and from educational facilities, self-help groups and jobs. • Organize distribution programs (coordinated program within each city- vouchers to provide the basic emergency services: food, shelter and clothing). E. At Risk HousinlZ As required by Government Code Section 65583,the City must analyze the extent to which low income, multi-family rental units are at risk of becoming market rate housing and, if necessary, develop programs to preserve or replace these assisted housing units. The multi- family units to be considered are any units that were constructed using various federal assistance programs, state or local mortgage revenue bonds, redevelopment tax increments, in- lieu fees or an inclusionary housing ordinance, or density bonuses. Low income multi-family housing is considered to be at risk if it is eligible to convert t non-low income housing due to: 1) the termination of a rental subsidy contract; 2) mortgage prepayment or 3)the expiration of City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) affordability restrictions. The time period that is to be considered in making this determination is the ten year period following the last mandated updating of the Housing Element, which in the case of Grand Terrace is 1989-99. Based on the information contained in the"Inventory of Federally Subsidized Low Income, Rental Units at Risk of Conversion," compiled by the California Housing Partnership Corporation, there are no federally assisted (HCD or FmHA), low income rental units within the City. Likewise, there are no low income rental units within the City that have been developed with the use of CDBG funds or as a result of an inclusionary housing ordinance. However, there are 111 low income rental units that were constructed using a combination of density bonuses and local multi-family revenue bond financing. These units are located in the Highlands Apartments, constructed by Forest City Development at 11750 Mt. Vernon Avenue. Information provided by HCD in its April 30, 1998 letter to the City, indicated that these units were scheduled to convert to market rate in 1999. (Reference Table 14, Checklist to Confirm Lack of At-Risk Units.) The original mortgage revenue bond issue for the Highlands Apartments, as guaranteed by the City, stipulated that the affordability controls imposed on these units would not begin to expire until the year 2020. However, this stipulation was not legally binding, and the Forest Management Company refinanced the bond. Since learning of the units at risk status, the City has successfully negotiating with the Forest Management Company to preserve the affordability of the 111 units. The City committed approximately $2,000,000 of its Redevelopment Agency housing set-aside funds to refinance the Highlands apartment through either a low-interest loan. In return, the Forest Management Company has committed to retaining the affordability of the 111 units at the Highlands Apartments for 30 years, through 2030. Consequently, there are no affordable units at-risk of converting to market rate during this planning period,through 2005. The City also is currently working to gain developer interested in building 75 low to moderate income senior multi-family units in Grand Terrace's downtown. The City has made commitments to provide Redevelopment Agency assistance and bond financing for the project. Because the project is located in the Barton Road Specific Plan area,the City is currently in the process of amending the Specific Plan to allow multi-family residential development on previously zoned"commercial"property. In return, the City will be requesting the developer to provide a minimum of 15-20 units at rents affordable to "very low" income senior citizen households. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Table 14 Checklist to Confirm Lack of At-risk Units Pursuant to Government Code Section 85583(A)(8) Jurisdiction: City of Grand Terrace Date: June 15 2001 1. HUD programs: Section 8 Lower-Income Rental Assistance project-based programs: New Construction Substantial or Moderate Rehabilitation Property Disposition Loan Management Set-aside Section 101 Rent Supplements Section 213 Cooperative Housing Insurance Section 221 (d)(3)Below-Market-interest-Rate Mortgage Insurance Program Section 236 Interest Reduction Payment Program Section 202 Direct Loans for Elderly or Handicapped 0 there are no such units for our jurisdiction listed in the Inventory of Federally Subsidized Rental Units At Risk of Conversion, 1990 or subsequent updated information made available by HPD. 2. Communily Development Block Grant program(CDBG) 0 jurisdiction has not used CDBG funds for multifamily rental units 3. Redevelopment programs X a) redevelopment funds have been used to refinance the Highlands Apartments, retaining the affordability of 111 units at the Apartments through 2030. _ b)other reasons: 4. FmHA Section 515 Rural Rental Housing Loans 0 jurisdiction has not been located in a qualifying rural FmHA area 5. State and local multifamily revenue bond programs X The mortgage revenue bond for 111 affordable units at the Highlands Apartment expired, but were replaced by Citv redevelopment financing, extending the affordability of these units through 2030. 6. Local in-lieu fee programs or inclusionary programs 0 jurisdiction has not had an in-lieu fee or inclusionary program 7. Developments which obtained a density bonus and direct government assistance Pursuant to Government Code Section 65916. X A density bonus was granted along with the mortgage revenue bond for the 111 affordable units at the Highlands Apartment. As indicated above,this affordability requirement was extended by City redevelopment financing through 2030. JO City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) V.- CONSTRAINTS The ability of the private and public sectors to provide adequate housing to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community is constrained by various interrelated factors. For ease of discussion,these factors have been divided into three categories: 1)physical constraints;.2) market constraints; and 3) governmental constraints. The extent to which these constraints are affecting the supply and affordability of housing in the City of Grand Terrace is discussed below. A. Physical Constraints A major constraint to the development of housing within the City of Grand Terrace is that two large portions of the remaining single-family designated properties are located in hillside areas. This hillside orientation severely constrains the development of affordable low- and moderate-income housing. Another physical constraint, is a low lying area adjacent to the Santa Ana River general bounded by the City's incorporated boundary line to the north and east, Vivienda Court to the south and Terrace Avenue to the west. This area is considered unsuitable for habitable structures because of potential flood danger. B. Market Constraints 1. Market Forces One of the major obstacles to providing housing to meet the need of all economic segments of the community is the nature of the housing market itself. The rate at which housing costs accelerated during the 1980's was a serious national problem. This problem was magnified in California as a whole, and particularly in communities such as Grand Terrace, where the desirability of the community further inflates costs. The primary factor driving market forces is location, and the setting and nature of Grand Terrace are not conducive to the provision of affordable housing. Grand Terrace is a rather small community of approximately 3.4 square miles,with no sphere of influence. The City is located on a topographic plateau, at a higher elevation than most of the surrounding cities, and enjoys a full panoramic view of the San Bernardino Mountains. Grand Terrace is located amidst the employment areas of the Cities of Riverside, Colton and San Bernardino and adjacent to the I-215 Freeway, a major commuting corridor to jobs in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Regionally, the Ontario area and Los Angeles to the west contain the bulk of industry and blue collar jobs. Grand Terrace is a bedroom community. Recent estimates by SCAG indicate there are 2,653 jobs currently within the City. The City's neighborhoods, its elderly residents and its younger commuting population are its greatest assets. Grand Terrace was incorporated approximately 20 years ago and since then has grown moderately by an average of three percent per year. Other cities in the area, like City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Moreno Valley, for instance, grew approximately 400 percent over this same period. Local government is stable, economical and efficient in taking care of streets, public facilities and utilities. Grand Terrace has the lowest crime rate among the cities in the region and is perceived as a very desirable place to live. However, not all is ideal in Grand Terrace, for the City is striving to create a commercial tax base and develop its industrial sector. County fees are increasing and property tax revenues are down as people default on loans in this recessionary economy. The City needs more revenue. Job creation and retention will increase in priority in coming years, particularly as the surrounding job markets mature. Since the recession of the early 1990's, housing in Grand Terrace has become more affordable. The average price of a single family house in the City increased by a very modest .61 percent per year during the period from 1989 through 2001 (reference Section III.J, above). In addition, the single family home sales to low and moderate income households have been assisted by the City's first time buyer purchase program, which rehabilitates and re-sells foreclosed homes to low and moderate income households. To date, 38 previously market rate homes have been rehabilitated and resold as affordable dwelling units. 2. Cost Factors a. Construction Costs The single largest cost associated with building a new house is the cost of building materials, comprising between 40 to 50 percent of the sales price of a home. According to construction industry indicators, overall construction costs rose over 30 percent during the past decade, with rising energy costs a significant contributor. Typical residential construction costs range from approximately $50 to $80 per square foot$. Lower housing costs can be achieved with the following factors: a) reduction in amenities and quality of building materials (above a minimum acceptability for health, safety, and adequate performance); b) availability of skilled construction crews who will work for less than union wages; and c) use of manufactured housing (including both mobile home and modular housing). An additional factor related to construction costs is the number of units built at the same time. As the number of units developed increases, construction costs over the entire development are generally reduced based on economies of scale. This reduction in costs is of particular benefit when density bonuses are utilized for the provision of affordable housing. 8"2001 Residential Construction Costs",Marshall&Swift,Inc. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) b. Land Costs In Grand Terrace, residential land cost vary depending on the cost of grading and infrastructure associated with proposed development on the site. According to information provided by local developers (May 2001), single-family zoned land ranges from $7 to $8 per square foot, and multifamily zoned land averages about $5 to $7 per square foot. C. Financing Home mortgage interest rates at the present time are relatively low. A fixed rate 30- year loan for a new home currently carries interest rates from 6.75%. Lower initial rates are available with Graduated Payment Mortgages (GPMs), Adjustable Rate Mortgages (ARMs), and Buy-Do«n Mortgages. Interest rates at the present time are not a constraint to affordable housing. Financing for both construction and long term mortgages is generally available in Grand Terrace subject to normal underwriting standards. However, a more critical impediment to homeownership involves both the affordability of the housing stock and the ability of potential buyers to fulfill down payment requirements. Typically, conventional home loans will require 10 to 20 percent of the sale price as a down payment, which is the largest constraint to first time homebuyers. The City's first time homebuyer program is directed at this problem and, to date, by providing more favorable down payment and financing terms, has 38 low to moderate income households purchase homes in the City. ' J 3. Vacancy Rate A market constraint that can affect the affordability as well as the availability of housing types, sizes,price ranges and locations is the housing market vacancy rate. As previously discussed in Section III, the City's overall vacancy rate was reported by the State Department of Finance to be 5.0 percent, a rate which suggest a healthy housing market balance of supply and demand. C. Governmental Constraints 1. Land Use Controls a. Density The Community Development Element of the Grand Terrace General Plan sets forth the City's policies for guiding local development. These policies,together with existing zoning, establish the amount and distribution of land to be allocated for various uses throughout the City. Residential development in the City of Grand Terrace is permitted under the following land use categories in accordance with the Land Use Element of the General Plan: 39 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Gross Allowable Land Use Allowable Density with Category Densily Density Bonus Low-Density Residential 1-5 Units/ 1-7 Units/ (R1-7,200, R1-10,000 & Net Acre Net Acre R1-20,000) Medium-Density Residential 1-12 Units/ 1-18 Units/ (R2 &R3) Net Acre Net Acre Pursuant to City Zoning Code Section 18.10.040, as amended in 1989, a density bonus of up to twenty percent (20%) may be approved with a conditional use permit or specific plan if various off-site improvements which benefit the general public are included in the project. In addition, a density bonus of at least twenty-five percent (25%) shall be approved if the proposed project meets the requirements of Chapter 4.2 of the California Government Code regarding dwelling units for low and moderate income households. Therefore, actual densities allowed may reach 16 to 18 units per acre when the topography, size and shape of lots will permit. While the amount of vacant land remaining within the City is minimal and is located in hillside areas, land with potential for redevelopment and infill housing is primarily found in the relatively flat areas of the City, where increased densities are feasible,thus providing adequate sites for the construction of affordable housing. In the past, these density bonuses have been applied only to multiple family projects in the R2 and R3 zones, mostly apartments, representing a constraint to the construction of affordable housing in the single family districts. During this planning period, the City proposes to adopt code amendments that will allow density bonuses in all residential zones in the City; and will clarify that density bonuses of up to 25 percent will be granted for residential projects if the units are rented to low and moderate income households for a period of 15 years, and up to 45 percent if the units are rented to low and very low income households for a period of 15 years. b. Development Standards The City's development standards are consistent with the parameters and policies established in the General Plan and reflect an attempt to balance housing needs with infrastructure capacities and environmental considerations. Standards regulating development within the City are similar to those being used by other surrounding communities and will not inhibit the development of a range of housing types within the City. A complete listing of the City's development standards,by zoning district, is available upon request. The densities in which the potential new housing sites identified in Figure 2 can be City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) developed will affect their housing unit production. However, these densities were not arbitrarily established but, rather, respond to prevailing natural conditions. Approximately 80 percent of the vacant, residentially designated land within the City exists as hillsides that are difficult and costly to develop. As such, these areas have been allocated for low density residential uses. Conversely, the relatively flat and more readily developable areas have been designated for higher density residential development. Moreover, recent experience has clearly shown that, with the application of density bonuses incorporated into the City's zoning code, affordable housing can be built under the densities established by the General Plan. C. Parking Standards Parking standards are currently similar to those used in other cities: a two-car garage required for each single family dwelling and 2 spaces required per unit for multiple family dwellings where one space shall be in a garage. Guest spaces are required in a ratio of one guest parking space per 4 mulitiple dwelling units. It does not appear that these standards have constrained affordable housing development in the past. However, in order to provide greater incentives for the construction of affordable housing, more flexible parking standards are now being considered for senior citizen and other low income housing. d. Open Space Exactions Open space exactions/setback requirements in Grand Terrace are also very similar to those used in other cities where the maximum lot coverage allowed varies from 40 to 60 percent of the lot, thereby providing: 1) sufficient usable open space, especially in backyards; 2) enough space for a car to park in the front driveway approach to the garage; and 3) enough separation between residences to ensure protection of privacy. In the case of multiple family housing, 40 percent open space is required to provide common social or recreational amenities/facilities for children, adults and elderly on- site. Our experience indicates that this standard has not been a deterrent to past affordable housing projects. e. Design Review Standards The City does not have design standards or guidelines which constrain development in its residential districts. Single and multi-family units are reviewed on a case-by-case basis for high quality construction and compatibility with existing surrounding architecture. The basic philosophy of the City's design review process is to arrive at a product that meets the City's goals and is financially feasible for the developer. Unlike larger cities, the City of Grand Terrace has only one board (i.e., its Planning Commission) which performs various review functions. Therefore, the design review process is shorter than in other cities in the area. On the other hand, in the past, many small projects required a public hearing. However,the City is currently processing code amendments to eliminate the public hearing requirement for small projects, such as room additions, accessory structures, etc. These projects will be processed City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) administratively by City staff. Other improvements that have been or are currently being made to streamline the design revie-w/permit process are: • Implementation of one-step revie« process whereby the applicant comes to one counter to receive information about the entire process. The Community and Economic Development Department (CEDD)—Planning Division routes the plans to other reviewing agencies and the case planner reports to the applicant within 30 days. 1 • Implementation of an applicant-friendly approach whereby staff provides significant attention to applicants, up front, to explain and inform them to the process and basically serve as an expediter instead of a regulator, while City standards are being enforced. When staff realizes that an applicant does not have sufficient funds to comply with City codes in constructing proposed improvements, staff directs the applicant to the City's rehabilitation loan officer to apply for a property rehabilitation loan. The property is inspected free of charge and the applicant receives direct personal assistance in preparing the necessary paperwork to verify loan eligibility and in preparing design plans for the improvements. • Implementation of a project management approach, whereby a case planner follows/monitors a project from initial sketches to issuance of a certificate of occupancy through all departments and agencies. This allows applicants to have more certainty about the status of their projects and to plan and acquire financing while a project is under review. The case planner is responsible for knowing the status of a project within the process at any point in time. This also assists the City in ensuring implementation of conditions of approval. • Implementation of easy to read"How to Do" lists for all requirements for planning and building plancheck, thereby facilitating submission of complete applications and saving applicants trips to the Community and Economic Development (CEDD)—Planning Division. In summary, any constraints posed by the design review/permit process in the past are being eliminated. f. Second Unit Ordinance During this planning period, the City has revised its second unit ordinance (Chapter 18.69 of Zoning Code) to ensure that specific standards meet State law and do not constrain the provision of affordable housing. g. Manufactured Housing The City of Grand Terrace Zoning Code, Chapter 18.66, addresses manufactured housing. During this,planning period,the City will revise this section of the Zoning 42 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Code Currently to permit manufactured housing in every residential zone. 2. Building Codes In addition to land use controls, local building codes also affect the cost of housing. Grand Terrace has adopted the Uniform Building Code which establishes minimum construction standards. These minimum standards cannot be revised to be less stringent without sacrificing basic safety considerations and amenities. No major reductions in construction costs are anticipated through revisions to local building codes. However, working within the framework of the existing codes, the City will continue to implement planning and development techniques that lower costs and facilitate new construction to the extent possible. 3. Development Fees As in the case of its processing requirements, the City's development fees are still quite low when compared with surrounding areas. A summary of development fees for the City is provided in Table 15. The fees that are charged by the City are a reflection of the time and effort that must be expended by City staff in order to properly review development plans. The City will continue to conduct periodic surveys (both formal and informal) of other cities in the Grand Terrace area to ensure that local processing costs do not become a constraint on housing production. City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Table 15 City of Grand Terrace Residential (Single and Multifamily) Development Fees Fee Name Fee Rate Application Final Review Map—Tract Map $2000 Tract or Parcel Map —Parcel Ma $1250 Park Capital Improvement and $414 per single family unit; $303 per Per dwelling unit Maintenance,fees multifamily or mobile home unit Street Capital Improvement and $600 per single family unit; $413 per Per dwelling unit Maintenance fees multifamily or mobile home unit Storm Drain Capital Improvement and $500 per single family unit; $450 per Per dwelling unit Maintenance fees multifamily or mobile home unit Sewer Facilities Connection Fees $3,000,plus360 for each additional Per dwelling Unit drainage fixture over 18 Building Permit Fees A sliding scale from$33 —$4,955, Per$value of based on valuation of construction from construction costs $500—$1,000,000 Electrical Permit Fees A sliding scale from $30 — $100 per Per service switch service switch depending on number of amperes Plumbing Permit Fees $10 per fixture or trap, $33 per sewer Per fixture connection, $15 per water heater Planning Fees Site and Architectural $200 Per development project Review Planning Fees Conditional Use Permit $260 -$2,000 based on size of Per development project develo ment Planning Fees Variance $300-$1,450 based on size of Per development project development Planning Fees General Plan $1900 Per development project Amendment Planning Fees Zoning Code $1350 Per development project Amendment Planning Fees Specific Plan $3000 plus staff time Per development project Planning Fees—Environmental $500 Per development project Review Negative Declaration Circulation Improvement Fees $1,250-$650, depending on location of Per development project development 44 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) 4. Permit Processing The processing time needed to obtain development permits and required approvals is often cited as a prime contributor to the high cost of housing. Additional time may be necessary for environmental review, depending on the location and nature of a project. Unnecessary delays will add to the cost of construction by increasing land holding costs. Interest payments and inflation. Although these review processes may take a substantial amount of time, they are necessary to integrate a new development into the local urban environment. In response to State law, California cities have been working to improve the efficiency of permit and review processes by providing one-stop processing, thereby eliminating duplication of effort. The passage of Assembly Bill 884, which took effect on January 1, 1978,has also helped to reduce government delays by: 1) limiting processing time in most cases to one year; and 2) eliminating some "red tape" by requiring agencies to specify the information required to complete an acceptable application. In Grand Terrace, the average processing time for a development application is 1-2 months. The City of Grand Terrace has fully implemented the provisions of AB 884, as well as more recent legislation requiring the establishment of "one-stop"permit coordination. Moreover, the City has established a site and architectural review board which consists of the members of the Planning Commission. This board meets at least once a month to review all new construction proposals. It should also be mentioned that, based on periodic surveys conducted by the City, local processing times are quite shorter than those experienced in surrounding communities. 5. Service and Facility Infrastructure Before a development permit is granted, it must be determined that public services and facility systems are adequate to accommodate any increased demand generated by a proposed project. At present, all vacant residentially designated land within the City is in close proximity to the infrastructure systems (i.e., utilities and streets necessary to provide service). While construction of local interior street and minor utility extensions would be required in some cases, the overall extent would not be great; the location of streets and utility lines is shown in Sections E and F of the Master Environmental Assessment included in the City's General Plan. No street extensions or major service system improvements would be necessary for development of multi-family designated areas directly adjacent to Mt. Vernon Avenue or single-family designated areas in the western portion of the City, west of the AT & SF railroad tracks. Service systems are adequate to provide for the higher densities expected to be associated with low- and moderate-income developments. 6. Utilization of State and Federal Assistance Programs The degree to which the City of Grand Terrace may participate in State and Federal City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) housing programs is constrained by the nature of those programs, eligibility requirements and funding limitations. The relatively high cost of housing in the City is somewhat of a deterrent to the use of certain programs, i.e., Section 8 Existing and Moderate Rehabilitation, CHFA Direct Lending, etc., by private developers/property owners. This is due to the relatively low housing costs (purchase price or rent) permitted under these programs. Recent and further proposed reductions in funding levels also represent an impediment to the utilization of these programs. 7. Jobs/Housing Balance In response to the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act, the State of California has formulated a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that sets forth the measures that are necessary to ensure the attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) contained in the Act. As a means of carrying out the SIP and ensuring that the NAAQS are attained in the South Coast Air Basin, in which the City of Grand Terrace is located,the Southern California Association of Governments and the South Coast Air Quality Management District have adopted a Regional Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The AQMP, in turn, requires all jurisdictions within the South Coast Air Basin to revise their general plans to be consistent with the SIP. A local general plan is consistent with the SIP if the development allowed thereunder is consistent with the jobs/housing balance ratios in the SIP. In responding to the requirements of the SIP, SCAG has formulated regional plans that address future job and housing growth within the region, by promoting the concept of balancing job growth and housing production with the various subregions of Southern California as a means of addressing serious air quality and transportation issues. The "Jobs/Housing Balance" concept forwards the idea that if people can live and work within the same community, the Southern California region as whole will benefit from reduced traffic congestion and improved air quality. As defined by SCAG, a balanced subregion or community is one having an employment to housing ratio of 1.2 jobs per dwelling unit. Recent SCAG data estimated that there are approximately 2,653 combined public and private sector jobs within the City of Grand Terrace. By comparison, there are currently 4,458 dwelling units within the City. This translates into an employment to housing ratio of 0.59 jobs per dwelling unit, and indicates that the City is "jobs poor" and"housing rich." Therefore, adherence to the jobs/housing balance ratios in the SIP represents an actual constraint on the expansion of housing opportunities within the City since the City is "jobs poor" and needs to stress the development of jobs, rather than housing. -76 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) VI. THE HOUSING GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES This section of the Housing Element sets forth the City's goals, objectives and policies relative to previously identified needs, recognizing the constraints that limit the City in its ability to affect local housing needs. Housing goals are statements of the aspirations of the community, and represent the ends to which housing efforts and resources are directed. Statements of objectives are more specific and provide guidelines for actions and later evaluation. Statements of policy are more specific still, and provide well-defined guidelines for decision making. The proper basis for any plan of action is a well-integrated set of goals. Such policy statements provide guidance to local decision makers in dealing with housing related issues and express the desires and aspirations of the community. The following goals are intended to give direction to the City's housing program: • Provide and encourage a supply of housing suitable to the needs and sufficient in number to serve existing and projected residents of Grand Terrace. • Promote and encourage housing opportunities, accessible to employment centers and quality community services for all economic segments of the community. • Promote and encourage housing opportunities regardless of age, sex, ethnic background, marital status, physical handicap or family size. • Promote and encourage the rehabilitation of deteriorated dwelling units, and the _ conservation of the currently sound housing stock. A. Housing Availability and Production Goal No. 1: Provide and encourage a supply of housing suitable to the needs and sufficient in number to serve existing and projected residents of Grand Terrace. ObLective 1.1: Promote and encourage construction of new housing units on suitable vacant and underutilized property until such time as all vacant or underutilized land had been developed. • -Policy 1.1.1: Promote and encourage development of housing which varies by type, design, form of ownership and size. • Policy 1.1.2: Maximize use of remaining vacant land suitable for residential development. -Policy 1.1.3: Promote and encourage infill housing development and more intensive use of underutilized land for residential construction. • Policy 1.1.4: Encourage the use of innovative land use techniques and 47 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) construction methods to minimize housing costs without compromising basic health, safety and aesthetic considerations. • Policy 1.1.5: Strive to provide incentives for and otherwise encourage the private development of new affordable housing for low- and moderate-income households. • Policy 1.1.6: Facilitate construction of low- and moderate-income housing to the extent possible. • Policy 1.1.7: Periodically reexamine local building and zoning codes for possible amendments to reduce construction costs without sacrificing basic health and safety considerations. Policy 1.1.8: Continue a policy of expeditious processing of residential development proposals and permits. • Objective 1.1.2: Seek HCD certification of the Housing Element in a manner consistent with the goals and objectives of the City General Plan. • Policy 1.2.1. Amend the Barton Road Specific Plan to promote a village atmosphere in the downtown that will encourage a mix of residential and commercial activity. • Policy 1.2.2: Promote mixed use development with senior citizen housing in the Barton Road Specific Plan areas. • Policy 1.2.3: Provide Redevelopment Agency assistance and bond financing to qualified developments to obtain new senior citizen housing in the Barton Road Specific Plan area. • Policy 1.2.3: Provide for a new zoning category, R3+, to permit a density of 25 units/acre with a density bonus which would qualify for very low income housing. Policv 1.2.4: Provide for housing set-aside funds to be committed to the "Habitat for Humanity" for the development of low-income housing. B. Housing Affordabilitv Goal No. 2: Promote and encourage housing opportunities, accessible to employment centers and quality community services for all economic segments of the community. Goal No. 2A: Promote and encourage housing opportunities regardless of age, sex, ethnic City of Grand Terrace 48 Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) background, marital status, physical handicap or family size. • Objective 2.1: Promote construction or availability of housing units affordable to all income groups, including those with incomes at or below 50 percent of County median income. • Policy 2.1.1: Continue a policy of expeditious processing of residential development proposals and permits. • Policy 2.1.2: Encourage a wide range of housing types,prices and ownership forms in new construction. • Policy 2.1.3: Emphasize and promote the role of the private sector in the construction of low- and moderate-income housing. • Policy 2.1.4: Support the development of cost saving and energy conserving construction techniques. • Policy 2.1.5: Assist private developers in identifying and preparing land suitable for lower-income housing developments. • Policy 2.1.6: Encourage the inclusion of units for low- and moderate-income families as part of private sponsored housing developments. • Policy 2.1.7: Support efforts of private lenders to provide alternative financing methods to make homeownership available to a greater number of households. • Policy 2.1.8: Streamline administrative procedures for granting approvals and permits and establish time limits for such approvals to minimize time, costs and uncertainty associated with development. • Policy 2.1.9: Provide zoning, subdivision and construction incentives to minimize the cost of new and rehabilitated units. • Policy 2.1.10: Promote mixed use development with senior citizen housing, 30% of which would be available to "very low" income households, in the Barton Road Specific Plan. • Policy 2.1.11: Provide Redevelopment Agency assistance and bond financing to qualified developments to obtain 15 - 20 units in the Barton Road Specific Plan area that are affordable to "very low" income senior citizen households. • Policy 2.1.12: Expend the entire excess surplus of the 20%housing set-aside fund, as required by CRL, for qualified low and moderate income housing activities. 49 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Policv 2.1_.13: Continue operation of the City Housing Office, established in 1995, to administer and monitor City housing programs to low and moderate income residents. Policv 2.1.14:. Commit existing and future housing set-aside dollars to continue and expand the City's existing first time home buyer assistance program as needed to meet the community's low and moderate income housing needs, as described in this Housing Element. Policy 2.1.15: Commit the City's Housing Office to seek available State grants to provide funds to qualified owners of mobilehomes for rehab or replacement purposes and to qualified buyers for the purchase of mobilehomes. Objective 2.2: Promote the affordability of existing housing units for low- and moderate-income households by capturing Federal housing assistance subsidies for the benefit of eligible City residents. • Policv 2.2.1: Actively assist the San Bernardino County Housing Authority in placing Section 8 certificates in the community. Policy 1.1.8: Maintain and enhance the low density character of existing residential neighborhoods. Policy 2.2.2: Investigate and pursue programs and funding sources designed to maintain and/or improve the affordability of existing housing units to low- and moderate-income households. C. Housing Condition Goal No. 3: Promote and encourage the rehabilitation of deteriorated dwelling units and the conservation of the currently sound housing stock. Objective 3.1: Promote the rehabilitation of deteriorated dwellings. Policy 3.1.1: Promote utilization of rehabilitation assistance programs to alleviate overcrowded conditions and to remove architectural barriers. • Policy 3.1.2: Encourage the rehabilitation of deteriorating owner-occupied and rental housing. Policy 3.1.3: Take action to promote the removal and replacement of those substandard units which cannot be rehabilitated. Policy '�.l_4: Upgrade community facilities and municipal services as community needs warrant. :p City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) • Policy_3.1_5: Encourage use of rehabilitation assistance programs to make residences more energy efficient. • Policy 3.1.6: Commit existing and future housing set-aside dollars to continue and expand the City's housing rehabilitation program as needed to meet the community's low and moderate income housing needs, as described in this Housing Element. • Objective 3.2: Promote maintenance of currently sound housing. • Policy 3.2.1: Utilize public information and assistance programs to encourage repair before deterioration occurs. • Policy 3_2.2: Monitor housing conditions in Grand Terrace annually. • Policy 3.2.3: Prevent the encroachment of incompatible uses into established residential neighborhoods. Policy 3.2.4: Sustain a high standard of maintenance for all publicly owned property. • Policy 3.2.5: Preserve the physical character of existing neighborhoods. • Policy_3.2_.6: Encourage the maintenance of sound owner-occupied and rental housing. • Policy 3.2.7: Maintain and enhance the low density character of existing residential neighborhoods, and higher density in the downtown area. 51 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) VII -THE HOUSING PROGRAM During the past few years, the City has experienced significant revenue shortfalls, causing each City department to cut costs and staff. Because of a reduction in the City Community and Economic Development (CEDD)—Planning Division staff, the City has progressed more slowly than anticipated in realizing certain goals and objectives of the Housing Element. However, the City is committed to implementing its Housing Element and will continue to allocate available staff resources to housing programs and policies. In preparing this Housing Element Update, the City re-examined the goals and policies that give direction to the City's housing programs, as well as the progress that has been made toward their attainment. The housing goals that were adopted as part of the City's existing certified Housing Element are responsive to the State housing goals and continue to reflect the desires and aspirations of the community. This updated element refines those goals and reaffirms the City's commitment to these State and local housing goals. This Housing Program sets forth a multi-year schedule of actions for Grand Terrace to implement housing policies and to achieve the City's housing goals and objectives. The anticipated impact, responsible agency, potential funding, and timetable for each action is discussed. The area of impact, i.e., City-wide or certain census tracts, has also been identified. The anticipated accomplishments have been quantified where possible. These estimates were generated on the basis of past performance as well as the resources that are available to the City for addressing local housing needs. In this respect,the anticipated accomplishments are realistic. A summary of quantifiable housing objectives is presented below. Upon implementation, the housing program presented in this document is intended to eliminate all identified existing housing needs in the City of Grand Terrace through City build-out, and all regional housing requirements for the City for the planning period 1998-2005. Major components of this housing program are as follows: • During the years 1998-2000, the City committed redevelopment housing set-aside funds to refinance the Highlands Apartments. Constructed during the last planning period with the help of City-provided bond financing and density bonuses, 111 of the 556 Highlands Apartments units were designated for low and moderate income households. At-risk of returning to market rate, the City entered into an agreement with the owners of the Highlands Apartments, providing low interest financing in return for a commitment to retain the 111 as affordable to low and moderate income households for a period of 30 years, or until 2031. • The City has residentially zoned sites that could yield up to 870 additional housing units. Of these units,up to 480 units could be affordable to low and moderate income households (reference Table 12). • The City will pursue increased residential densities and mixed uses in the downtown area by rezoning sites to higher density to provide more opportunities for low and moderate income 52 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) households. • The City expects at least 170 very low income units to be provided at build out of the community. These very low income units would consist of the balance of Site No. 6, R3+units, transitional housing (in the form of additional residential care facilities), and second units. A breakdown of these units by category is shown in Table 13, above. • The City has established a Housing Office for the administration and monitoring of low and moderate income housing opportunities. The City plans to continue operation of this Housing Office through the planning period. • The City Housing Office has continued operation of its first-time homebuyer purchase program which has resulted in the rehabilitation of substandard single family units, and their resale to low and moderate income homeowners. To date, 38 homes have been rehabilitated and sold to qualified low and moderate income households, 27 of which occurred during this planning period. The City plans to continue and expand this program during the planning period as needed to meet the community's low and moderate income housing needs, as described in this Housing Element. • The City Housing Office has utilized redevelopment tax increment funds to initiate a rehabilitation loan program to provide financial assistance to homeowners needing to repair and maintain their homes. To date,the City rehab loan program has assisted 133 households, consisting of 105 moderate income households, 22 low income households and 6 very low income households, four of which occurred during this planning period. The City plans to continue and expand this program during the planning period as needed to meet the community's low and moderate income housing needs, as described in this Housing Element. • The City has initiated a zoning amendment to include mixed use development in the downtown. This amendment to the Barton Road Specific Plan will allow mixed use development consisting of both medium/high density residential and commercial. The City has allocated redevelopment tax increment funds and will offer bond financing to qualified developers interested in undertaking a mixed use residential development that will permit approximately 50—75 senior citizen town home developments, provided 30% (15- 20) of the units are affordable to very low income senior households. • The City will initiate a zoning amendment to rezone Site No. 6 on Figure 2, or other appropriate site is this proves infeasible, to R3+with a density of 20 units/acre and with a density bonus to 25 units/acre which could qualify as very low income housing. • The City will provide up to $250,000 of housing set-aside funds to be committed to the"Habitat for Humanity" for the development of low-income housing. This housing program represents a continuing and meaningful effort on the part of the City of Grand Terrace to expand the local supply and affordability of housing. A. Actions in Support of Housing Availability and Production Action La: The City's Community and Economic Development Department(CEDD)—Planning Division and Building and Safety/Public Works/Housing Department (BS/PW/H) will continue to expedite the processing of plans for proposed housing projects that are affordable to low and moderate income households. [Timing: on-going] 53 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Action Lb: The City will implement an amendment the Barton Road Specific Plan to allow a mix of commercial and medium/high density residential development. [Timing: 2001-2003] Action 1.c: The City will implement Zoning Code provisions to allow for manufactured housing in all residential zones in accordance with State law. [Timing: 2002-2003] Action 1.d: The City will implement Zoning Code provisions that offer density bonuses in accordance with the requirements of State density bonus law. The density bonuses and incentives will be made available for any for-sale or rental, single family or multifamily development of five or more units, when requested by a developer who agrees to restrict affordability of the units for a minimum of 30 years, as follows: 20% of the total units affordable to lower income households; or 10% of the total units affordable to very-low income households; or 50% of the total units to Senior citizens. Additional incentives may include, but not be limited to, reduced site development standards or zoning code requirements, direct financial assistance,reduced, or deferred fees, approval of mixed- use zoning in conjunction with the housing development, or other regulatory incentive which would result in an identifiable cost avoidance or reduction, or a density bonus of more than 25%. Allocation of the specific additional incentives will be made on a case-by-case- basis, depending on resources available to the City from which to grant the incentive, and the particular needs of the development to ensure affordability. [Timing: 2002] Action Le: The City's Redevelopment Agency will continue to allocate funds, a process which began in 1993, for the upgrading and expansion of mobile home parks within the City. The City Manager's Office has solicited proposals for an initial project, but has yet to receive positive response from the mobile home park owners/residents. [Timing: on-going] Action Lf. The City Manager's Office will continue to offer low interest bond financing and redevelopment tax increment assistance in the form of land write down to qualified developers for the construction of mixed use senior development, with the expectation that at least 50-75 senior units will be provided and a requirement that 30% of the units (at least 20) will be affordable to the"very low" income. [Timing: on-going] Action 1.g: The Grand Terrace Redevelopment Agency, in conjunction with the City's CEDD- Planning Division and BS/PW/H-Building Division will prepare an annual report describing the results of the past year's progress in meeting the housing needs of the community. Specific quantifiable data is to be provided showing the proportion of units and households assisted and the number of units constructed, rehabilitated and conserved. [Timing: on-going] Action 1.h: The City Manager's office will continue to utilize the services of the Inland Mediation Board, through an existing contract with the County of San Bernardino, for fair housing, landlord tenant dispute resolution and senior shared housing. Monthly activity reports will be obtained from the Inland Mediation Board in order to monitor local compliance with fair housing laws. [Timing: on- going] 54 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Action Li: The City Manager's office will continue to utilize the services of the San Bernardino County Housing Resource Board, through an existing contract with the County of San Bernardino, to provide outreach and educational information on State and Federal fair housing laws. [Timing: on- going] Action l.i: The City Manager's office will pursue participation in the San Bernardino County Mortgage Revenue Bond Financing Programs for the development of single and multi-family housing (see descriptions of these prograns in Appendix D), if feasible, and as developer interest warrants. [Timing: 2002-2005] Action 11: The City's CEDD—Planning Division will continue to utilize the City's General Plan and Zoning Code to provide adequate, suitable sites for the development of approximately 1053 new housing units by build out of the community, 366 of which would be affordable to low and very low income households. [Timing: on-going] Action Lin: The City's CEDD—Planning Division will continue to create and maintain an inventory of vacant and underutilized sites suitable for housing development. This information will be distributed to developers in order to facilitate housing production. [Timing: on-going] Action 1. n: The City CEDD-Planning Division will intitiate an amendment to the City's Zoning Code to create a new R3+ zone with a density of 20 units/acre and with a density bonus to 25 units/acre to be utilized for very low income housing. This new zoning category will be appliced to Site No. 6 or other appropriate sites to meet the housing needs of the City. [Timing: 2002 -2003] Action 1. o: The City's Redevelopment Agency will allocate funds to be committed to the "Habitat for Humanity" for the development of low-income housing. [Timing: on-going] B. Actions in Support of Housing Affordability Action 2.a: Continue an outreach campaign to solicit participation of private developers in affordable housing programs. This will be accomplished by compiling and subsequently maintaining a roster of interested firms, which will be notified when opportunities arise. [Timing: on-going] Action 2.b: Continue participation in the Section 8 Leased Housing Assistance Program administered by San Bernardino County Housing Authority. This will be achieved through coordinated City and County community outreach. [Timing: on-going] Action 2.c: Continue operation of the City Housing Office, established in 1994,to administer and monitor City housing programs, and to provide information regarding various types of State and Federally funded housing programs available through the County of San Bernardino and the City of Grand Terrace. [Timing: on-going] Action 2.d: Continue to research the possibility of expanding Section 8, Leased Housing Assistance Program to include Section 8, existing funds to subsidize mobile home space rentals. [Timing: on- going] CitN of Grand Terrace 55 Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Action 2.e: Continue to utilize procedures for the provision of density bonuses or other incentives for housing development incorporating low- and moderate-income units. [Timing: on-going] Action 2.f. Federally-subsidized rental housing developments are not always financially feasible at current mortgage interest rates. In such situations, use the existing authorities of the Redevelopment Agency to issue tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds (SB 99) to provide below-market rate long-term financing for such projects. These funds should be used exclusively for low-income households. [Timing: on-going] Action 2.g: The City's Redevelopment Agency will issue tax exempt mortgage revenue bonds to provide long-term, below market rate financing for the construction of rental and sales housing affordable to low and moderate income households, if feasible, and as developer interest warrants. [Timing: completed in 1998 and on-going] Action 2.h: The City's CEDD—Planning Division will continue to process and approve requests for the establishment of residential care facilities, in accordance with Section 1566.3 of the Health and Safety code, as a means of providing long-term transitional housing for very low income persons. [Timing: on-going] Action 2.i: The City's CEDD—Planning Division will continue to participate in and provide staff support for the various homeless programs operated by the San Bernardino County Homeless Coalition. [Timing: on-going] Action 2.i: The City Manager's Office will offer to open facilities at City Hall and the City Yard to provide emergency shelter during times of extreme weather or hardship. [Timing: policy to be established and operation 2003-2005] Action 21: The City Housing Office will continue to promote and operate the first time buyer purchase assistance program to rehabilitate deteriorated single family homes and then resell the homes to qualified low and moderate income households. [Timing: on-going] Action 2.1: The City Housing Office will seek an available State grant to provide up to $20,000 to a qualified owner/buyer for the purpose of the rehab, replacement or purchase of a mobilehome with the remainder of the rehab, replacement or purchase costs to be provided by the owner/buyer of the mobilehome. C. Actions in Support of Maintaining and Improving,Housing Condition Action 3.a: The City Manager's Office has amended the guidelines for the Redevelopment Agency's residential rehabilitation program to include energy conservation measures as improvements eligible for assistance thereunder. [Timing: 1998 and on-going] Action 3.b: The City Manager's Office and the City's CED Department will provide public information and technical assistance intended to encourage the continued maintenance of currently sound housing. [Timing: on-going] 56 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Action 3.c: The City's Redevelopment Agency will continue to publicize and provide financial assistance for the rehabilitation of residences owned or occupied by low and moderate income persons. This financial assistance will be made available in the form of below market rate and deferred payment loans for home rehabilitation, matching grants for the rehabilitation of rental housing and funds for the Agency to purchase and rehabilitate housing for resale to low and moderate income households. Approximately $1,500,000 in housing set-aside funds have been allocated for this purpose. Objectives are to rehabilitate six units and conserve six units per year. [Timing: on- going] Action 3.d: The City's Redevelopment Agency will allocate funds for payment of required off-site improvements for affordable housing projects. [Timing: on-going] Action 3.e: The City's Redevelopment Agency will allow for the construction of bedroom additions with funding from its residential rehabilitation program when needed to eliminate overcrowding. [Timing: on-going] Action 3.a: The City's Redevelopment Agency will allow for architectural barriers to be removed with funding from its residential rehabilitation program in order to provide barrier-free housing for handicapped or disabled persons. [Timing: on-going] Action 3.h: The City's Redevelopment Agency will continue to monitor housing conditions throughout the City in order to establish target areas for rehabilitation efforts. [Timing: on-going] Action 3.i: the City's CEDD—Planning Division and BS/PW/H will review all changes in planned land uses to determine the cumulative impact on community facilities and municipal services, in order to assure that adequate facilities and service levels are provided to all residents. [Timing: on- going] Action 3.i: the City's Community Services Department and CEDD—Planning Division and BS/PW/H will continue existing code enforcement efforts and explore new methods for eliminating deteriorated or unsightly property conditions in residential areas. [Timing: on-going] Action 31: The City Manager's Office and the City's CEDD—Planning Division will assist in distributing information to the public regarding energy audits that are performed by the Southern California Edison Company. [Timing: on-going] Action 3.1: the City's BS/PW/H-Building Division will continue to require the incorporation of energy conserving appliances, fixtures and other devices into the design of new residential units as means to reduce long-term housing costs and enhance affordability. [Timing: on-going] Action 3.m: The City's BS/PW/H-Building Division will continue to require that all new residential development complies with the energy conservation requirements of Title 24 of the California Administrative Code as a means to lower long-term housing costs. [Timing: on-going] Action In: The City's CEDD will continue recommending that tall shady trees be planted on the 57 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) southwest exposure to minimize the use of energy and reduce housing costs. [Timing: on-going] D. Anticipated Accomplishments Focusing on the current planning period (1998-2005), a total of total of 379 additional units could be constructed. At least 256 of these units (68 percent of total units) could be affordable to very low, low and moderate income households. These estimates meet or exceed the housing needs identified in SCAG's RHNA. Table 16 New Construction Housing Goals and Anticipated Accomplishments 1998-2005 1. Income 2. Number of 3. Number of 4.Total 5.Difference 6.Total 7. Total Units Category Units Needed Units Already Units to be between Total Number of to be of Household per SCAG Provided this Provided this Number of Additional Provided this RHNA[1] Period[2] Period Units to be Units that Period Plus Provided and Could be Additional RHNA [31 Provided at Units that Build-out Could be Provided at Build-out Very Low 39 0 53 [4] 14 170 [6] 223 Low 33 0 50 [5] 17 93 [7] 143 Moderate 52 4 153 [5] 66 219 [7] 337 Upper 120 23 123 [5] 3 227 [7] 350 Totals 244 27 379 [5] 100 709 1053 Notes: 1. Estimated needs taken directly from SCAG's RHNA. 2. Number of units already provided reflects actual housing already constructed during this planing period. 3. Difference between number of units SCAG has determined to be needed and number that could be constructed in the City during this planning period. 4. Number of subsidized senior downtown units and R3+units to be provided this period from Table 13, above. 5. Assumes 35%of total units from Table 12 are constructed this period for low,moderate and above moderate income levels. 6. From Table 13, above. 7. Column 6 subtracted from total units numbers presented in Tables 12 and 13,above. These estimates reflect actual units already constructed during this planning period, plus City priority plans to provide units affordable to the very low income through density increases and senior citizen housing subsidies. As shown in Table 16, the actions presented in this Housing Element will generate an estimated 1053 additional housing units by build-out of the community. Of these units, 7703 units (67 percent of additional units)would be affordable to moderate, low and very City of Grand Terrace 58 Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) low income households. The City clearly,has adequate sites to accommodate its share of the regional need for very low, low, moderate and upper income housing. In addition to new construction accomplishments, the City of Grand Terrace expects to continue and expand its rehabilitation and conservation efforts, as needed to meet the communit-Cs low and moderate income housing needs, as described in this Housing Element. (See Table 17, below.) Focusing on the current planning period(1998-2005), the City expects that a total of 50 single family units will be rehabilitated. This estimate is based on current and projected activity of the City's first time home-buyer purchase assistance program and housing rehabilitation program. In addition, the City expects that a total of 665 single and multifamily units, representing approximately 15% of its existing housing stock, will be conserved through the continuing efforts of its code enforcement program. Table 17 Combined Housing Goals and Anticipated Accomplishments 1998-2005 Income Category New Construction Rehab [1] Conservation Very Low-Income 53 - 164 Low-Income 33 - 362 Moderate-Income 153 50 98 Above Moderate 39 - 41 TOTAL 278 50 665 [2] Note: Assumes 6 - 7 rehabilitated units per year during the 1998—2005 period. [1] During the current planning period (1998-2005),the City expects that a total of 50 single units will be rehabilitated. This estimate is based on current and projected activity of the City's first time home-buyer purchase assistance program and housing rehabilitation program. [2] Represents 15% of total existing housing stock E. Priorities As previously indicated, the ability of the City of Grand Terrace to affect local housing needs is limited by the resources available for this purpose. These resources include land, enabling legislation, political leverage or housing expertise, and funding. Local governments in particular are constrained by the availability of funding for housing- related activities. In order that available resources are used most effectively,thereby maximizing the benefits derived therefrom, a prioritization of local housing needs is essential as a guide in distributing those resources. Therefore, where conflict may arise in the implementation of this housing program, the City shall allocate its limited resources on the basis of the following priorities: Priority 1 Expansion of the local housing supply in terms of both market-rate and City of Grand Terrace 59 Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) affordable housing through mixed use development in the Barton Road Specific Plan area. Priority 2 Provide opportunities for rental subsidies, density bonuses and mortgage revenue bond financing at new multifamily developments to assist very low income households. Priority 3 Maintenance and improvement of the existing housing stock through continuance and expansion of the City's housing rehabilitation and code enforcement programs. Priority 4 Preservation of existing affordable housing opportunities through the continuance and expansion of the City's first time home buyer purchase assistance program. 60 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) VIII. OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENERGY CONSERVATION As non-renewable energy resources have been progressively depleted and energy costs continue to rise, homeowners have become increasingly aware of energy conserving measures primarily as a means to offset and control the rising costs of fuel. While the use of alternative energy sources is most advantageous in developing new housing, there are numerous energy conserving measures which can be retrofitted onto existing and older housing which conserve the use of non- renewable fuels and save money. These opportunities for energy conservation have been translated into actions in the preceding Housing Program section of this element(e.g., residential rehabilitation program expanded to include energy conservation measures as improvement eligible for assistance, incorporation of energy conserving appliances, fixtures and other devices into the design of new residential units, etc. A. Insulation and Weatherproofing Most older homes were built during times when there was little concern for the use of oil and natural gas for heating purposes. Additionally, the window and door opening fixtures were intended primarily for passage of light into the home. While many of these fixtures were designed to meet these basic requirements, minimal effort was expended to assure air-tight closures when both exterior doors and windows were closed. To conserve the heat generated by gas or oil fired heating units and minimize the heat loss ratio, older homes can be insulated in the attic space and exterior walls. Windows and exterior doors can also be fitted with air-tight devices, caulking, or other means to maximize heating and cooling efforts. B. Natural Lighting Daytime interior lighting costs can be significantly reduced or eliminated with the use of properly designed and located skylights. Skylights can be easily installed at reasonable expense in existing houses, thereby substantially reducing electricity costs and energy consumption. C. Solar Energy Solar energy is a practical, cost effective, and environmentally sound way to heat and cool a home. In California, with its plentiful year-round sunshine, the potential uses of solar energy are numerous. With proper building designs, this resource provides for cooling in the summer and heating in the winter; it can also heat water for domestic use and swimming pools and generate electricity. Unlike oil or natural gas, solar energy is an unlimited resource which will always be available. Once a solar system is installed, the only additional costs are for the maintenance or replacement of the system itself. The user is not subject to unpredictable 61 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) fuel price increases. Moreover, solar energy can be utilized without any serious safety or environmental concerns. Solar heating and cooling systems are of three general types: passive, active, or a combination thereof. In passive solar systems, the building structure itself is designed to collect the sun's energy, then store and circulate the resulting heat similar to a green house. Passive buildings are typically designed with a southerly orientation to maximize solar exposure, and constructed with dense materials such as concrete or adobe to better absorb the heat. Properly placed windows and overhanging eaves also contribute to keeping a house cool. Active systems collect and store solar energy in panels attached to the exterior of a house. This type of system utilizes mechanical fans or pumps to circulate the warm/cool air, while heated water can flow directly into a home's hot water system. Although passive systems generally maximize use of the sun's energy and are less costly to install, active systems have greater potential application to both cool and heat the house and provide hot water. This may mean lower energy costs for Grand Terrace residents presently dependent on conventional fuels. The City encourages the use of passive solar systems in new residential construction to improve energy efficiency for its citizens. D. Water Conservation Simple water conservation techniques can save a family thousands of gallons of water per year, plus many dollars in water and associated energy consumption costs. Many plumbing products are now available which eliminate unnecessary water waste by restricting the volume of water flow from faucets, shower heads, and toilets. The use of plant materials in residential landscaping that are well adapted to the climate in the Grand Terrace area can also measurably contribute to water conservation by reducing the need for irrigation, much of which is often lost through evaporation. ' A family can also save water by simply fixing dripping faucets and using water more conservatively. In addition, such conservation practices save on gas and electricity needed to heat water and the sewage system facilities needed to treat it. By encouraging residents to conserve water and retrofit existing plumbing fixtures with water saving devices, the City can greatly reduce its water consumption needs and expenses. E. Energy Audits The Southern California Edison Company provides energy audits to local residents on request. Many citizens are not aware of this program. The City will aid in expanding this program by supplying the public with pertinent information regarding the process including the appropriate contacts. Energy audits are extremely valuable in pinpointing specific areas in residences which are responsible for energy losses. The inspections also result in specific recommendations to remedy energy inefficiency. F. New Construction City of Grand Terrace 62 Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) The City of Grand Terrace will continue to require the incorporation of energy conserving appliances, fixtures, and other devices into the design of new residential units. The City will also continue to review new subdivisions to ensure that each lot optimizes proper solar access and orientation to the extent possible. Additionally, the City will consider enacting an ordinance that prohibits property owners from obstructing the solar access of their neighbors. Two State laws enacted in 1978 (the Solar Rights Act and the Solar Shade Control Act) offer a variety of methods to preserve solar access. IX. FINANCIAL RESOURCES In addition to the housing set aside funds pursuant to Community Redevelopment Law, there are a variety of potential funding sources available to support affordable housing in the City of Grand Terrace. They include the following: A. HOME Funds The Home Investment Partnership (HOME) Program is a federal program, created as a result of the National Housing Affordability Act of 1990. Under HOME, HUD awards funds to localities on the basis of a formula which takes into account tightness of the local housing market, inadequate housing, poverty and housing production costs. Localities must match HOME funds with 25% of funds from non-federal sources. HOME funding is provided to jurisdictions to assist either rental housing or home ownership through acquisition, construction, reconstruction, and/or rehabilitation of affordable housing. Also possible is tenant based rental assistance, property acquisition, site improvements, and other expenses related to the provision of affordable housing and for projects that serve a group identified as having a special need related to housing. B. Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) Through the federal CDBG program, HUD provides funds to local governments for funding a range of community development activities. CDBG grants are awarded to the City on a formula basis for housing activities, including acquisition, rehabilitation, home buyer assistance, economic development, homeless services and public services. CDBG funds are subject to certain restrictions and cannot be used for new construction of housing. CDBG grants benefit primarily persons/households with incomes not exceeding 80 percent of the County Median Family Income. City of Grand Terrace 63 Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) C. Section 108 Program Section 108 is the loan guarantee provision of the CDBG program. This provision provides communities with a source of financing for a variety of housing and economic development activities. All rules and requirements of the CDBG program apply, and therefore all projects and activities must principally benefit low and moderate income persons, aid in the elimination or prevention of blight, or meet urgent needs of the community. Monies received per the Section 108 loan guarantee program are limited to not more than 5 times the applicant's most recently approved CDBG amount, less prior Section 108 commitments. Activities eligible for these funds include: economic development activities eligible under CDBG; acquisition of real property; rehabilitation of publicly owned property; housing rehabilitation eligible under CDBG; construction, reconstruction or installation of public facilities; related relocation, clearance or installation of public facilities; payment of interest on the guaranteed loan and issuance costs of public offerings; debt service reserves; and public works and site improvements. Section 108 loans are secured and repaid by pledges of future and current CDBG funds. Additional security requirements may also be imposed on a case by case basis. D. Section 8 Rental Assistance Payments/Housing Certificates The federal Section 8 program provides rental assistance to low- and moderate-income families, elderly, and disabled persons who spend more than 50 percent of their monthly income on rent. The subsidy represents the difference between the excess of 50 percent of the recipients' monthly income and the federally approved fair market rents (FMR). In general, the FMR for an area is the amount that would be needed to rent privately owned, decent, safe and sanitary rental housing. Section 8 assistance is available in the following forms: • Section 8 Existing Housing Certificate Program. Under the certificate program, the landowner enters into a contract with the San Bernardino County Housing Authority which establishes limits for the rent which will be subsidized for the Very Low income unit to the Fair Market Rent. Eligible tenants must pay the highest of either 30 percent of adjusted income, 10 percent of gross income, or the portion of welfare assistance designated for housing. Housing subsidized through this program must meet standards of safety and sanitation established by HUD. r • Section 8 Existing Housing Voucher Program - This program is similar to the Certificate Program,however, rent for the units are not restricted. The tenant instead must pay the difference between the Fair Market Rent standard and the actual rent. The San Bernardino County Housing Authority manages approximately 107 Section 8 units in the cities of Grand Terrace and Chino combined. E. Section 202/811 Housing for Elderly or Handicapped Housing City of Grand Terrace 64 Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) Under this federally administered program, direct loans are made to eligible, private nonprofit organization and consumer operative sponsors to finance development of rental or cooperative housing facilities for occupancy by elderly or handicapped persons. The interest rates on such loans are determined annually. Section 8 funds are made available for all of the Section 202 units for the elderly. Rental assistance for 100 percent of the units for handicapped persons has also recently been made available. Section 811 can be used to develop group homes, independent living facilities, and intermediate care facilities. Private, nonprofit sponsors may qualify for Section 202 no interest capital financing loans. Households of one or more persons, the head of which is at least 62 years old or is a qualified non-elderly handicapped person between the ages of 18 and 62, are eligible to live in these units. There are currently no Section 202 projects in the City. The City of Ontario should encourage non-profit sponsors to make application for HUD Section 202 allocations for construction of rental housing for seniors and the handicapped and take all actions necessary to expedite processing and approval of such projects. F. California Housing Finance Agency (CHFA) CHFA is a state of California administered program that provides below market interest rate mortgage capital through the sale of tax-exempt notes and bonds. CHFA sells tax-exempt Mortgage Revenue Bonds to provide below market rate financing through approved private lenders to first-time homebuyers for the purchase of new or existing homes. The program operates through participating lenders who originate loans for CHFA purchase. CHFA assists nonprofit housing development corporations that acquire land,,provide building plans, and package loans for self-help housing. Families, under the supervision of nonprofit corporations, provide the majority of the construction labor. CHFA makes commitments to self-help corporations for low-interest mortgages and provides credit enhancements to lenders who provide construction financing and preferential interest rates. CHFA also operates a Multifamily Rental Housing Mortgage Loan Program. This program finances the construction or substantial rehabilitation of projects containing 20 or more units. 20 percent of the units in a project must be set aside for low income tenants at affordable rents for the greater of 15 years or as long as the mortgage is outstanding. A new program of CHFA is the HELP Program. This program provides low interest loan assistance to local governments to assist in the provision of affordable housing. Terms of the low interest loans are 3% simple interest per annum for up to ten years, with a maximum loan amount of$2,000,000 per project. G. Low Income Housing Tax Credit(LIHTC) Program This State program provides for federal tax credits for private developers and investors which agree to set aside all or a portion of their units for low income households and the elderly for no less than 15 years. A minimum of 20 percent of the units must be made available to 6,5 City of Grand Terrace Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) ' families whose income is less than 50 percent of the County median income or 40 percent of the units must be made available to families whose income is up to 80 percent of the median. Developers and investors must apply for an allocation of housing units from the State Allocation Committee, administered by the Tax Credit Allocation Committee. While the program is beneficial in adding low income housing units to the local housing stock, the statewide allocations are limited under this program and the application process is expensive for the developer. In addition, single resident and elderly rental projects are not competitive based on the State's selection criteria. The Redevelopment Agency will remain informed about this program and will make the benefits of this program known to developers and investors upon inquiry, potentially for multifamily projects which cater to larger families. H. Multifamily Mortgage Revenue Bonds Multifamily Mortgage Revenue Bonds, as discussed above, are used to finance construction and mortgage loans, as well as capital improvements for multifamily housing. Federal law requires 20 percent of the units in an assisted project to be reserved for lower income households, whose income does not exceed 80 percent of the median household income for the County. Additional state requirements regarding housing set-aside units are imposed on the project. Funding for this program is administered by the California Debt Limit allocation committee and has been extended indefinitely. I. Housing Action Resource Trust Housing Action Resource Trust (HART) is a California 501 (c) (3) nonprofit housing - development corporation that provides assistance to prospective homebuyers, including pre- purchase education and counseling, assistance in obtaining first mortgage financing, training in home repairs, and down payment assistance in the form of a grant to first time low and moderate income homebuyers. I Senior Home Repair Program This program is administered through the County of San Bernardino and is available for residents of San Bernardino County and cooperating cities. The purpose of the program is to provide eligible senior homeowners with a one-time grant in the form of labor and material to correct code violations and/or health and safety problems. City of Grand Terrace 66 Draft Housing Element Update(January 7,2002) ctTr 6RAHO TERR CE Community Developr--_ent Departr.ent TO: Planning Commission FROM: Community and Economic Development Department DATE: January 17, 2002 SUBJECT: GPA-01-01 and E-01-10, the Updated Housing Element of the General Plan for the period 1998 - 2005 and Proposed Negative Declaration APPLICANT: Community and Economic Development Department of the City of Grand Terrace LOCATION: Citywide RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing,receive testimony, close the public hearing and recommend to the City Council the approval of the Updated Housing Element of the General Plan for the period 1998 - 2005 .;..;.4..;.4.4.4.4..;..;..;.4.4.,.4.4.4..;..;..;..,..;..,..;..;..;..;..;..;.4.4..*.t4.+ Background: State law recognizes the vital role local governments play in the supply and affordability of housing. Each city or county in the State is required to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the city or county. The housing element is one of the seven mandated elements of the local general plan. Housing element law mandates that local governments adequately plan to meet the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community. The law states that in order for the private market to adequately address housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt land use plans, zoning and regulatory systems xhich provide opportunities for, and do not unnecessarily constrain, housing development. As a result, housing policy in California rests largely upon the effective implementation of local general plans and,in particular, local housing elements. Housing element law also requires the Department of Housing and Community Development(HCD)review local housing elements for compliance with State law and to report its written findings to the local government. ATTACHME T 2 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92313-5295 • (909) 824-6621 State law further requires that the Housing element be reviewed or updated "as frequently as appropriate" in order to evaluate progress made and an} changes in conditions affecting housing needs. The element must be revised as necessary with specific statutory schedules for the revisions as set out in the Government Code. The updated Housing Element has been prepared to satisfy the requirement that Housing Element for Grand Terrace be updated for the period of 1998 -2005. The existing Housing Element of the General Plan was approved by the City Council on May 13, 1999 following a finding by the California Department of Housing and Community Development(HCD)that the Element was in compliance with the State's housing law. The updated Housing Element will provide the opportunity for the City to evaluate the progress made toward the attainment of established housing goals and to adjust programs to respond to changing needs and/or fiscal conditions within the community. This Housing Element update has been prepared by Joann Lombardo, housing consultant to the City, in accordance with applicable State law and consistent with the City's General Plan and the community's vision of its housing goals and needs. The updated Element contains nine main discussion topics in conformance with State law and the General Plan guidelines for the Housing Element. Summary of the Updated Housing Element: Following an introduction, the updated Element discusses a review of past accomplishments from 1989 - 1997. The differences between the projected housing goals and what was achieved is primarily measured by the Regional Housing Needs Allocation Model (RHNA). The Southern California Association of Governments(SCAG)established the RHNA model for the City of Grand Terrace. During the past planning period 1989 - 1997,the City of Grand Terrace met its RHNA goals for affordable housing by designating adequate sites for the construction of 255, broken down as follow: 72 "very low"; 83 "low"; and 100 "moderate";however, only 32%of the 320 needed"upper"units, i.e. 102"upper"units,were constructed. In addition, the City has undertaken other specific actions during the past planning period to further its housing goals. Some of these actions include: • Initiate and operate a first-time buyer purchase program which has resulted in the rehabilitation of substandard single family units and their resale to low and moderate income homeowners. • Initiate and operate a rehabilitation load program to provide financial assistance to homeowners needing to repair and maintain their homes. Next the updated Housing Element provides a community profile of Grand Terrace. The City's population has grown 46.3 percent from 8,100 in 1978 to 11,626 in 2001. Most of this growth occurred between 1978 and 1990. By the year 2020 Grand Terrace's residential community is expected to reach build-out,achieving a population of 14,421,a 21.6%increase over 2001. In addition,the City's population is estimated to reside in 4,221 households with an average of 2.75 persons per household; at build-out in 2020 the average household size will increase to 2.82 persons. The profile further shows that the rapid growth that has occurred in many San Bernardino County cities during the past 10 years has mainly by-passed Grand Terrace. The existing housing stock in the City has continued to age. Current City estimates indicate that approximately 66 percent of the City's current housing stock is in excess of 25 years of age; however, "housing condition" surveys have found that none of the City's dwelling units -were dilapidated (e.g., showing signs of major structural deficiencies such as sagging roofline, sagging porch. or roof damage sufficient to permit water damage to structural elements.). The residential vacancy rate is a measure of the number of unoccupied housing units on the market and is a good indicator of the balance between housing supply and demand. A recent report from the State Department of Finance estimates a city-wide vacancy rate for Grand Terrace of 5.0 percent, suggesting a healthy balance between housing supply and demand. The discussion of the community profile concludes with housing affordability in Grand Terrace. As indicated by current home sales and rental rates within the City,there is a wide range of housing choices in the City available to households in the low and moderate income ranges. However, the very low income households in the City appear to be priced out of both the for-sale and rental market. The next major topic in the updated Housing Element concerns the City's housing needs. Part of the City's housing needs is based on the SCAG Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)determines the housing growth needs by income category for cities within its jurisdiction including Grand Terrace. Based on the RHNA determination for Grand Terrace, the City is required to provide opportunity for the construction of 244 new dwelling units during this planning period. Of these new units,39 should be affordable to very low income households,33 to low income households, 52 to moderate income households and 120 to above moderate income households. As part of the housing needs assessment, a land inventory was prepared of land suitable for residential development. The individual sites of the inventory are shown on Figure 2 of the updated Housing Element on page 25. This inventory is shown on Table 12. It shows that 659 additional units could be constructed on available sites. There will be enough sites to satisfy the housing needs of the various income groups with the exception of the above moderate income category. The updated Housing Element also discusses the housing needs of separate segments of the population such as the elderly/handicapped, large families, households headed by women and other groups. Various programs are cited in the Housing Programs discussion to deal with these special groups. The updated Housing Element contains four main housing goals together with various objectives and policies to obtain those goals. The four main housing goals are: • Provide and encourage a supply of housing suitable to the needs and sufficient in number to serve existing and projected residents of Grand Terrace. • Promote and encourage housing opportunities, accessible to employment centers and quality community services for all economic segments of the community. • Promote and encourage housing opportunities regardless of age, sex, ethnic background, marital status, physical handicap for family size. • Promote and encourage the rehabilitation of deteriorated dwelling units,and the conservation of the currently sound housing stock. The Housing Programs part of the updated Housing Element sets forth a multi-year schedule of actions for Grand Terrace to implement housing policies and to achieve the City's Housing Goals and objectives. Major components of this housing program are as follows: • The City has 23 available residential and mixed-use sites that could yield up to 659 additional housing units. Of these units, up to 189 units could be affordable to low and moderate income households, and up to 95 units could be affordable to very low income households. • R3+ is an new residential zoning category that will permit densities of up to 20 dwelling units per acre, and 25 dwelling un its per acre with density bonus provisions. This zoning designation is proposed for an existing 3.8 acre R3 zoned site located along Mirado Avenue, north of De Berry Street. • The Barton Road Specific Plan Office Professional (OP)zone will be amended in two locations to allow the development of residential care facilities. Two sites north of Barton Road and east of Preston Street are proposed for the rezoning. One of the sites is 0.8 acres and the other is I.I.acres. • A second unit ordinance consistent with State law has been adopted.Over 50 second units could be constructed providing opportunity for low-income housing. • Up to $250,000 of housing set-aside funds will be committed to "Habitat for Humanity" for the development of low-income housing. • The City has established a Housing Office for the administration and monitoring of low and moderate income housing opportunities. The City plans to continue operation of this Housing Office through the planning period. • The City Housing Office has continued operation of its first-time home buyer purchase program that has resulted in the rehabilitation of substandard single family units, and the resale to low and moderate income homeowners. To date,38 homes have been rehabilitated and sold to qualified low and moderate income households,27 of which occurred during this planning period. The City plans to continue and expand this program during the planning period as needed to meet the community's low and moderate-income housing needs. • The City Housing Office has utilized redevelopment tax increment funds to initiate a rehabilitation load program to provide financial assistance to homeowners needing to repair and maintain their homes. To date, the City rehab load program has assisted 133 households, consisting of 105 moderate income households,22 low income households and 6 very low income households, four of which occurred during this planning period. The City plans to continue and expand this program during the planning period as needed to meet the community's low and moderate-income housing needs. Lastly, the updated Housing Element discusses the anticipated accomplishments of the updated Element. Focusing on the current planning period(1998 -2005),a total of 278 additional units could be constructed. At least 239 of these units(86 percent of the total units)could be affordable to very low, low and moderate income households. These estimates meet or exceed the housing needs identified tin SCAG's RHNA,except in the upper income category which is expected to be 81 units short of SCAG's estimate. These estimates reflect actual units already constructed during this planing period. plus City priority plans to provide units affordable to the very low income though senior citizen housing subsidies. Once the updated Housing Element is approved by the Council,the updated Element will be sent to the State Department of Housing and Urban Development for review and certification. When the updated Element is certified the City will comply with State law in that is will have an updated and certified Housing Element.' Joann Lombardo,the housing consultant to the City,will be present at the public hearing on January 171 to present the updated Housing Element to the Planning Commission and to answer any questions the Planning Commission may have regarding the updated Element. Recommendation: The staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the updated Housing Element and recommend to the City Council that it adopt the proposed Ordinance calling for the approval and adoption of the proposed updated Housing Element as part of the General Plan of the City of Grand Terrace. Y SRe ctively ubmitted, ohn Lampe Associate Planner JL:jl Attachments: Proposed Ordinance to adopt the updated Housing Element(GPA-01-01)and approve the Negative Declaration(E-01-10) Proposed Updated Housing Element Proposed Negative Declaration and Initial Study cAMyFi1es\J0HN\Housingjgpa-01-01 housingcomm.rpt RESOLUTION NO. 02_ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE UPDATED HOUSING ELEMENT, GPA-01-01 PENDING APPROVAL BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, Joann Lombardo, housing consultant, has been retained by the City of Grand Terrace to update the Housing Element, and prepare it for the State's Housing -' and Community Development Department (HCD) certification; and WHEREAS, per State Law the General Plan is the top hierarchical document , providing guidance to the City's orderly growth and development; and WHEREAS, per State Law each element of the City General Plan shall be consistent with each of the others and all other City development documents shall be consistent with it also; and WHEREAS, per State law the General Plan shall be periodically updated.to reflect community values, City long term goals and reasonably current data. WHEREAS, an initial environmental study has been prepared for this project and a Negative Declaration has been noticed to all regional and local responsible agencies per t� the California Environmental Quality Act (CEPA); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at its meeting of January 17, 2002, held a properly notices public hearing for the review fo the updated Housing Element and recommended approval to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council, at its meeting of February 28, 2002, held a properly noticed public hearing for the approval of the Housing Element. WHEREAS, State law requires that the Updated Housing Element be submitted to the State Department of Housing and Community Developmentfor review and certification. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the Housing Element is consistent with all other General Plan Elements as they stand. 2. The Housing Element, as previously drafted and approved by the City, Council in 1999 did meet HCD's certification requirements and was certified. ATTACHMENT 3 3. Per State law the Housing Element must be periodically updated and that this updated Housing Element is for the period 1998 through 2005. 4. This updated Housing Element has been prepared in accordance with applicable State law; is consistent with all other elements of the General Plan as they stand; and is consistent with the approved General Plan Task Force Strategic Action Plan for the next 15 to 20 years. 5. The Housing Element incorporates new programs such as a) a strategy to preserve affordability of 111 rental housing units; b) subsidies for 20 senior citizen units in the downtown area; c) commit housing set-aside funds to the "Habitat for Humanity"; d) a proposed amendment to the City density bonus regulation to comply with State law; and e) amend the second family unit ordinance to comply with State law. 6. The Housing programs included in the Updated Housing Element will eliminate all identified existing housing needs in the City of Grand Terrace through City build-out and all regional housing requirements for the City for the planning period of 1998 - 2005. PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, California at a regular meeting held on the th day of , 2002. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace and Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof of the City Council thereof c:\MyFiles\JOHN\housing\gpa-01-01 housing resolution DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, GPU-01-01, AMENDING THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE CITY GENERAL PLAN AND APPROVING THE RELATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, E-01-10 WHEREAS, Joann Lombardo, housing consultant, has been retained by the City of.Grand Terrace to update the Housing Element, and prepare it for the State's Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) certification; and WHEREAS, per State Law the General Plan .is the top hierarchical document providing guidance to the City's orderly growth and development; and WHEREAS, per State Law each element of the City General Plan shall be consistent with each of the others and all other City development documents shall be consistent with it also; and WHEREAS, the Housing Element is consistentwith all other General Plan elements as they stand; and WHEREAS, per State law the General Plan shall be periodically updated to reflect community values, City long term goals and reasonably current data; and WHEREAS, the Housing Element, as previously drafted and approved by the City Council in 1999 did meet HCD's certification requirements and was certified; and WHEREAS, per State law the Housing Element must be periodically updated and that this updated"Housing Element is for the period 1998 through 2005; and WHEREAS, this updated Housing Element has been prepared in accordance with applicable State law; is consistent with all other elements of the General Plan as they stand; and is consistent with the approved General Plan Task Force Strategic Action Plan for the next 15 to 20 years; and WHEREAS,the Housing Element incorporates new programs such as a)a strategy to preserve affordability of 111 rental housing units; b) subsidies for 20 senior citizen units in the downtown area; c) commit housing set-aside funds to the"Habitat for Humanity"; d) a proposed amendment to the City density bonus regulation to comply with State law; and e) amend the second family unit ordinance to comply with State law; and ATTACHMENT 4 WHEREAS, the Housing programs included in the Housing Element will eliminate all identified existing he needs in the City of Grand Terrace through City build-out and all regional housing requirements for the City for the planning period of 1998 - 2005; and WHEREAS, an initial environmental study has been prepared for this project.and a Negative Declaration has been notices to all regional and local responsible agencies per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEPA); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at its meeting of January 17, 2002, held a properly notices public hearing for the review fo the updated Housing Element and recommended approval to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council, at its meeting of ,2002, held a;properly noticed public hearing forthe approval of the Housing Element and the respective Negative Declaration. NOW,THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Repeal the prior Housing Element contained in the City General Plan. Section 2: Adopt the updated Housing Element in full as incorporated hereby as Attachment "A" in this Ordinance. Section 3: Adopt the Negative Declaration, Attachment "B" " Section 4: Direct staff to amend any other City document, map or plan which is not in conformance with the adopted Housing Element. Section 5: Effective Date:This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31 st day of its adoption. Section 6: Posting: The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) public places within fifteen (15) days of its adoption, as designated for such purpose by the City Council. Section 7: First reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on the , 2002, and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the _th day of 2002. 1 � i ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace and of the Grand Terrace and of City Council thereof the City Council thereof I, BRENDA STANFILL, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, California„ do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held on the th day of 2002 by the following vote: AYES : NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: City Clerk Brenda Stanfill Approved as to form: City Attorney John Harper c:\MyFiles\JOHN\Housing\gpa-01-01 housingord.pro aq. -r NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT NEGATIVE DECLARATION Document Type: Negative Declaration Date: January 2, 2002 Project Title: City of Grand Terrace 2000 Housing Element Update Project Location: The City of Grand Terrace is located in the County of San Bernardino Description of Project: The City of Grand Terrrace has updated its Housing Element of the General Plan for the period 2000-2005 pursuant to Section 65580 of the California Government Code. This project Housing Element Update consists of five major components: ■ An analysis of the City's demographic and housing characteristics and trends. ■ A summary of the existing and projected housing needs of the City's households. ■ A review of potential market, governmental, and environmental constraints to meeting the City's identified housing needs. ■ An evaluation of resources available to address Grand Terrace's housing goals. 1 ■ A statement of the Housing Plan to address the City's identified housing needs, including housing goals, policies and programs. This project Housing Element Update has been prepared in accordance with applicable State law. It has also been prepared consistent with the City of Grand Terrace General Plan and the community's vision of its housing needs and objectives. Lead Agency: City of Grand Terrace ; Contact Person: Patrizia Materassi, Economic and Community Development Director (909) 824-6621. Address where document may be obtained: Copies of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and all documents referenced therein are available for review at the Community Development Department at the Grand Terrace Civic Center. Agency Name: City of Grand Terrace Location: ! 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, CA 92324. Public Review Period: Begins: January 2, 2002 Ends: February 14, 2002 Public Hearings/Meetings: Planning Commission—Thursday, January 17, 2002 City Council— Thursday, February 14, 2002 (Tentative) Anyone interested in the draft Negative Declaration or the project itself is invited to comment by written response n or before the lose of business on Thursday, February 14, 2002. Signature: i� trizia Materassi, Economilb and Community Development Director ATTACHMENT 5 i , 4 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE INITIAL STUDY for the Update to the Housing Element of the General Plan (1998-2005) December 26, 2001 City of Grand Terrace Community Development Department 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace 92324 (909) 824-6621 City of Grand Terrace TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. I. Introduction......................................................................................................................................1 2. Project Description..........................................................................N..............................................2 3. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected....................................................................................6 4. Environmental Determination..........................................................................................................7 S. Evaluation of Environmental Impacts..............................................................................................7 6. Environmental Impacts....................................................................................................................9 7. List of Preparers.........................................................................................................................................10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure No. Page No. 1. Location Map.....................................................................................................................................2 LIST OF TABLES Table No. Page No. 1. RHNA New Housing Construction Needs by Income Group Location Map....................................4 2. Combined Housing Goals and Anticipated Accomplishments 1998-2005 .......................................6 -- Housing Element Initial Study Page i City of Grand Terrace 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Project title: City of Grand Terrace Update to the Housing Element of the General Plan of the Planning Period 1998-2005. 2. Lead agency and project sponsor's name and address: City of Grand Terrace,Economic and Community Development Department, 22795 Barton Road,Grand Terrace, CA 92324. 3. Contact person and phone number: John Lampe, Associate Planner, City of Grand Terrace(909) 824-6621. 4. Project location: Citywide(See Figure 1, Project Location Map, below.) 5. General plan/zoning designations: varied. 6. Assessor Parcel Number: varied. Figure 1: Project Location — City of Grand Terrace AIN- s ee: Pa B rto d '�; --G er ce merce Way. y --Da e Tr-r e-H�r 5— j m Co. M nit' - _ t 51 > Par " - Lark m a Ian Ber•narr• ino ain• ouiver�i e i6an ra- _ay-. ' ------------- ----- -_- --- Housing Element Initial Study Page 2 Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE AND SCOPE This Initial Study is intended to serve as the environmental review of the proposed project, as required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. The proposed project to City of Grand Terrace Housing Element Update. Pursuant to Section 65580 of the State of California Government l.oae, each local community in the state must include a Housing Element within its General Plan. The Housing Element must provide a specific analysis of the community's housing needs and a realistic set of programs designed to meet those needs. In accordance with Section 15063 of the Guidelines for implementation of CEQA, the City of Grand Terrace is required to prepare an Initial Study to determine whether the proposed project (the Housing Element Update) may have a significant effect on the environment. This Initial Study is intended to be an informational document providing the City of Grand Terrace decision-makers, other public agencies, and the public with an objective assessment of the potential environmental impacts that could result from implementation of the Housing Element proposed policies and programs. The environmental analysis contained in this document indicates that there is no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of this finding, a Negative Declaration is being recommended for adoption by the City of Grand Terrace City Council. APPROVALS REQUIRED Pursuant to State housing element law, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is empowered to review the housing element of each community to ensure its compliance with State law. The City Council— will need to approve the Negative Declaration for the Housing Element and adopt the Housing Element. No other approvals will be required. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE The California Government Code requires internal consistency among the various elements of a general plan. Section 65300.5 of the Government Code states that the general plan and the parts and elements thereof shall comprise an integrated and internally consistent and compatible statement of policies. All other elements of the Grand Terrace General Plan have been recently or are in the process of being updated. Section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines permits an environmental document to incorporate by reference other documents that provide relevant data. This Initial Study adopts by reference the City of Grand Terrace General Plan. Housing Element Initial Study Page 1 City of Grand Terrace Table 1 City of Grand Terrace RHNA New Housing Construction Needs by Income Group Income Category Housing Unit Housing Unit Percent of Construction Need by Construction Need Need by Income Group by Income Group Income '- Group Current Planning Annual Need Period through 2005 (1998-2005)* Very Low(0-50% County median 39 5 16% income Low(50-8% County median 33 4 14% income Moderate(80-120%County median 52 7 21% income Above Moderate(over 120% 120 16 49% Coup median income) Total Housing Unit Construction 244 33 100.00% Need *Note: The current 2005 Planning Period is calculated by SCAG over a 7.5 year period,from 1998-2005. Local Housing Needs Assessment: Ardas of identified local housing needs in Grand Terrace include: ■ Housing availability and affordability for elderly households ` ■ Housing affordability for very low income households. ■ Housing rehabilitation of older single-family and multiple-family housing structures. The City is endeavoring to meet these identified local-housing needs through existing and planned housing programs. (See 1998-2005 Housing Program discussion, below.) Goals of the Housing Element Update: To address identified regional and local housing needs for this planning period(1998-2005),the City Housing Element Update establishes the following goals. ■ Provide and encourage a supply of housing suitable to the needs and sufficient in number to serve existing and projected residents of Grand Terrace. ■ Promote and encourage housing opportunities, accessible to employment centers and quality community services for all economic segments of the community. ■ Promote and encourage housing opportunities regardless of age, sex, ethnic background, marital status, physical handicap or family size. ■ Promote and encourage the rehabilitation of deteriorated dwelling units, and the conservation of the currently sound housing stock. Housing Element Initial Study Page 4 City of Grand Terrace 7. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation.) State Government Code Requirements: Section 65580 of the Government Code(Housing Element law) requires each locality to prepare a Housing Element to accomplish the following tasks: ■ Identify and to analyze the current and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community. ■ Evaluate current and potential constraints to meeting those needs, constraints due both to operation;, the marketplace and to operations of government. ■ Inventory and assess the availability of land suitable for residential use and of opportunities for energy conservation in residential development. ■ Set forth goals, objectives, policies and programs which are responsive to the identified housing needs, governmental and non-governmental constraints, and identified housing opportunities. This Housing Element Update covers the planning period from 1998-2005,detailing a schedule of actions the Grand Terrace community is undertaking or plans to undertake to achieve its housing goals and objectives. Further, the document updates and expands the City's adopted and certified 1997 Housing Element. Specifically, the proposed Housing Element Update contains the following updated information: SCAG Regional Housing Needs Assessment: State law requires jurisdictions to provide for their share -f regional housing needs. As part of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), the South California Association of Governments(SCAG)determines the housing growth needs by income category for cities within its jurisdiction, which includes the City of Grand Terrace. RHNA determinations for the City of Grand Terrace during this planning period through 2005 are presented in Table 1. The RHNA identifies the City's existing and future housing need broken down into four household income categories: "very low"(less than 50% of the median income); "low" (50 to 80 percent of the median); "moderate" (80 to 120 percent of the median); and"upper"(more than 120 percent of the median).As illustrated in the Table, Grand Terrace is required to provide opportunity for the construction of 244 new dwelling units during this planning period.Of these new housing units, 39 should be affordable to very low-income households, 33 to low income households, 52 to moderate-income households, and 120 to above moderate-income households. Housing Element Initial Study Page 3 City of Grand Terrace 1998-2005 Housing Program: The Housing Program sets forth a multi-year schedule of actions for Grand Terrace to implement housing policies and to achieve the City's housing goals and objectives. Upon implementation, the housing program is intended to eliminate all identified existing housing needs in the City of Grand Terrace through City build-out, and all regional housing requirements for the City for the planning period 1998-2005.Major components of this housing program are as follows: ■ The City has residentially zoned sites that could yield up to 659 additoinal housing units. Of these units, up to 189 units could be affordable to low and moderate income households and up to 95 units could be affordable to very low and low-income households. ■ R3+is a new residential zoning category that will permit densities of up to 20 dwelling units per acre and 25 dwelling units per acre with density bonus provisions. This zoning designation is proposed for an existing 3.8 acre R3 zoned site located along Reed Avenue,north of De Berry Street. ■ The Barton Road Speific Plan Office Professional(BRSP-OP)zoning category will be amended to allow for the development of residential care facilities within that category with the issuance of a condiitonal use permit. Two sites located south of Barton Road and on the west side of Preston Street have been identified which could be developed as residential care facilities under these new provisions. One of the iste is 0.8 acres and the other is 1.1 acres in size. ■ A second unit ordinance consistent with State law has been adopted. Over 50 second family units could be constructed providing an opportunity for low-income housing. ■ Up to $250,000 of housing set-aside funds will be committed to "Habitat for Humanity" for the development of low-income housing. ■ The City has established a Housing Office for the administration and monitoring of low and moderate income housing opportunities. The City plans to continue operation of this Housing Office through the planning period. ■ The City Housing Office has continued operation of its first-time home buyer purchase program that has resulted in the rehabilitation of substandard single family units, and their resale to low and moderate income homeowners. To date, 38 homes have been rehabilitated and sold to qualified low and moderate income households, 27 of which occurred during this planning period. The City plans to continue and expand this program during the planning period as needed to meet the community's low and moderate — income housing needs, as described in this Housing Element. ■ The City Housing Office has utilized redevelopment tax increment funds to initiate a rehabilitation loan program to provide financial assistance to homeowners needing to repair and maintain their homes. To date, the City rehab loan program has assisted 133 households, consisting of 105 moderate income households, 22 low income households and 6 very low income households, four of which occurred during this planning period. The City plans to continue and expand this program during the planning period as needed to meet the community's low and moderate income housing needs, as described in this Housing Element. ■ The City has initiated a zoning amendment to include mixed use development in the downtown. This amendment to the Barton Road Specific Plan will allow mixed use development consisting of both medium/high density residential and commercial. The City has allocated redevelopment tax increment funds and will offer bond financing to qualified developers interested in undertaking a mixed use residential development that will permit approximately 50 —75 senior citizen town home developments, provided 30% (15-20) of the units are affordable to very low income senior households. Through implementation of the 1998-2005 Housing Program, the City will endeavor to achieve the following accomplishments. Housing Element Initial Study Page 5 City of Grand Terrace Table 2 Combined Housing Goals and Anticipated Accomplishments 1998-2005 Income New Construction Rehab [2] Conservation Category Potential RHNA Housing Difference units to be Unit between constructed Construction potential during this Need by Income units to be planning Group constructed period [1] (see Table 1, and RHNA above) units required. Very Low- 40 39 +1 20 164 Income Low-Income 33 33 0 20 362 Moderate-Income 125 52 +73 110 98 Above Moderate 65 120 -55 - 41 TOTAL 263 244 +19 150 [3] 665 [4] Note: [1]Assumes approximately 40%of total potential new residential units(totaling approximately 659 units as described above)will be constructed during this planning period. [2]Assumes 20 rehabilitated units per year during the 1998—2005 period. [3]During the current planning period(1998-2005),the City expects that a total of 150 single and multifamily units will be rehabilitated. This estimate is based on current and projected activity of the City's first time homebuyer purchase assistance program and housing rehabilitation program. [4]Represents 15%of total existing housing stock 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Hazards&Hazard Materials ❑ Recreation ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑Transportation/Traffic ❑ Air Quality ❑ Land Use and Planning ❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Mandatory Findings of ❑ Cultural Resources ❑Noise Significance ❑ Geology/Soils(Liquefaction) ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Public Services Housing Element Initial Study Page 6 City of Grand Terrace 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: X I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measure described on the attached pages has been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment,but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable legal standards, and(b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,nothing further is required. Signature: Date: Printed Name: Patrizia Materassi Title: Director of Economic and CommunityDevelopment 5.0 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: An Environmental Checklist Form (Form) has been used to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The Form has been prepared by the Resources Agency of California to assist local governmental agencies, such as the City of Grand Terrace, in complying with the requirements of the Statutes and Guidelines for implementing the California Environmental Quality Act. In the Form, environmental effects are evaluated as follows: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in its response. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as Housing Element Initial Study Page 7 City of Grand Terrace general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is "Potentially Significant", "Less Than Significant With Mitigation", or "Less Than Significant". "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from an 'Earlier Analyses," as described in#5 below,may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: (a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. (b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. (c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts(e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. The explanation of each issue should identify: (a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any,used to evaluate each question. (b) The mitigation measure identified, if any,to reduce the impact to less than significance. Housing Element Initial Study Page 8 1 • i City of Grand Terrace 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation I. AESTHETICS. Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a X scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, X including but not limited to,trees,rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing X visual character and quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial X light or'glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? I. a),b))c),d). No Impact. Any housing development built in compliance with the Housing Element Update will be developed according to City Zoning Code requirements and consistent with the General Plan. No impacts relative to aesthetics are expected. H. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique X Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for X agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing X environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non- agricultural use? II a), b), c). No Impact. The City does not contain lands identified as a Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance ("Farmland"), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. Therefore, this environmental topic is not relevant to the project. Housing Element Initial Study Page 9 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Inco oration III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct X implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or x contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable X net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions with exceed quantitative thresholds for ozoneprecursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? III. a), b, c), d). No Impact. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has jurisdiction over the South Coast Air Basin, in which the City of Grand Terrace is located.The SCAQMD has developed, CEQA Air Quality Handbook(April 1993) to assist local jurisdictions determine if a potential project may e, significant air quality impacts. Any development that occurs pursuant to Housing Element policies will be reviewed and processed in accordance with City planning policies and the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. No impacts to air quality are expected to result from adoption of the Housing Element Update. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a X substantial number of people? III. e). No Impact. The proposed Housing Element Update will not generate objectionable odors; this environmental topic is not relevant to the project. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, X either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on X any riparian habitat or other sensitive Housing Element Initial Study Page 10 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Significant With Significant pact Impact Mitigation Impact Inco oration natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on X federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the X movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or X ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an X adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservancy Conservation Plan, or other approved local,regional, or'state habitat conservation plan? IV. a), b), c), d),e),J). No Impact. The project establishes housing policies for the City. It will not affect any identified biological resources. Housing development recommended 15y Elie Housing Element Update will be implemented through subsequent planning and environmental review. Therefore, there is no identified potential for the project to impact biological resources. V. CULTURAL AND RESOURCES. Would theproject: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in X the significant of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in x the significance of an archaeological Housing Element Initial Study Page 11 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Inco oration resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains including' x those interred outside of formal cemeteries? V. a), b), c), d),e),9. No Impact. The project establishes housing policies for the City. It will not affect any identified cultural resources. Housing development recommended by the Housing Element Update will be implemented through subsequent planning and environmental review. Therefore, there is no identified potential for the project to impact cultural resources. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to X potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or _ based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii Strong seismic ground shaking? X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, X including liquefaction? iv)Landslides? X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the X loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil X that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Housing Element Initial Study Page 12 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than Significant With Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation d) Be located on expansive soil, as X defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code(1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately X supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal ,systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? VI. a), b), c), d),e). No Impact. The project establishes housing policies for the City. It will not affect any identified geology and soils. Housing development that may occur as a result of the Housing Element Update recommendations will be implemented through subsequent planning and environmental review. Therefore, there is no identified potential for the project to im act geology and/or soils. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would theproject: a) Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public X or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident _ conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances,or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included X on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or,where such a plan has Housing Element Initial Study Page 13 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Inco oration not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Amendment Area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip,would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Amendment Area? g) Impair implementation of or physically X interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a X significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VII. a), b), c), d), e),,), g), h). No Impact. The project establishes housing policies for the City. There is no identified potential for the Housing Element Update to affect any identified hazards or cause hazardous conditions to occur. VIII.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste X discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater X supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g.,the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been anted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage X pattern of the site or area, including Housing Element Initial Study Page 14 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Significant With Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Inco oration through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage X pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which X would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Place housing within a 100-year flood X hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard X area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? h) Expose people or structures to a X significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? i Inundation by seiche or mudflow? X VII1 a), b), c), d), e),f), g), h), i). No Impact. The project establishes housing policies for the City. It will not impact any water quality standard, drainage pattern or other hydrological condition identified under this topic. Housing development that may occur as a result of the Housing Element Update recommendations will be implemented pursuant to City planning and building codes. Therefore, there is no identified potential for the project to impact hydrology or water quality. Housing Element Initial Study Page 15 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Inco oration IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING.Would the ro'ect: a) Physically divide an established X community? IX. a). No Impact. The City of Grand Terrace has prepared its Housing Element Update in accordance with applicable State law. It has also been prepared consistent with the City of Grand Terrace General Plan and community's vision of its housing needs and objectives. Accordingly, this Housing Element examines Gr.. Terrace's housing needs as they exist today, and projects future housing needs. It sets forth statements of community goals, objectives and policies concerning those needs. It includes a housing program responsive to current and future needs, consistent with available resources. The Update will not result in physical division of an established community. b) Conflict with any applicable land use X plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? I.Y. b). Less Than Significant. The Housing Element Update proposes changes to the Barton Road Specific Plan to permit mixed use and higher density housing within the downtown area. These changes will regi; both amendments to the Specific Plan and the General Plan Land Use Element. The public review ana approval process required to amend these documents will mitigate potential adverse impacts associated with conflicts with applicable land use plans and policies to less than significant levels. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the pro'ect: a) Result in the loss of availability of a X known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a X locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Housing Element Initial Study Page 16 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation X. a), b). No Impact. No mineral resources have been identified in the City, nor are they addressed relative to the Housing Element Update. This environmental topic is not relevant to the project. XI. NOISE. Would theproject: a) Exposure of persons to or generation X of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation X of excessive groundbome vibration or roundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject? d) A substantial temporary or periodic X increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without theproject? e) For a project located within an airport X land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of _ a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the Amendment Area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the Amendment Area to excessive noise levels? Xf a), b),c), d) e),J). No Impact VIII. a), b), c), d), e),j7, g), h), i). No Impact. The project establishes housing policies for the City. It will not cause excessive noise or impact established noise standards. Housing development that may occur as a result of the Housing Element Update recommendations will be implemented pursuant to City planning and building codes. Therefore, there is no identified potential for the project to impact noise. XII.POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would theproject: a) Induce substantial population growth in X an area, either directly(for example, b Housing Element Initial Study Page 17 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly(for example,through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XII. b), c). No Impact. To effectively determine the present and future housing needs for the City of Grand Terrace, population variables, such as demographic and socio-economic characteristics and trends, are analyzed in the Housing Element Update. The programs and policies of the Housing Element are consistent with local and regional population growth, and propose to ensure an adequate supply of affordable housing to meet the needs of the community's population. No adverse impacts relative to population or housing are expected to result from the Housing Element Update. XIII.PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically alt, governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant Environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fireprotection? X b) Policeprotection? X c) Schools? X d Parks? X e) Other public facilities? X XIII. a), b ,c , d, e . No Impact. The Housing Element is a policy document that analyzes housing need ) ) ) ) P g P Y Y g and promotes affordable housing. Any development that occurs pursuant to Housing Element policies will be consistent with City planning and building requirements. No impacts relative to public services will occur as a result of the Housing Element. XIV. RECREATION: a) Would the project increase the use of X existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b)Does the project include recreational X Housing Element Initial Study Page 18 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Significant With Significant pact Impact Mitigation Impact Inco oration facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XIV. a), b). No Impact. The Housing Element is a policy document that analyzes housing need and promotes affordable housing. Any development that occurs pursuant to Housing Element policies will be consistent with City planning and building requirements. No impacts relative to recreation will occur as a result of the Housing Element. XV.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would theproject: a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system(i.e.,result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips,the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, X including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a X design feature(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? X Result in inadequate parking capacity? X g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or X programs supporting alternative transportation(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks? XV. a), b, c), d), e),J),g). No Impact. The Housing Element Update is proposed consistent with state law and the City General Plan. It is a policy document and its adoption will not result in any action that will affect air quality. Housing development recommended by the Housing Element Update will be implemented through subsequent planning and environmental review. No impacts to transportation or traffic are expected to result from adoption of the Housing Element Update. Housing Element Initial Study Page 19 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than Significant With Significant No Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation XVI.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment X requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of X new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c)Result in a determination by the X wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project as projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? d) Require or result in the construction of X new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? e) Have sufficient water supplies X available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources,or new or expanded entitlements needed? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient X permitted capacity to accommodate the ro'ect's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state and local X statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVI. a), b), c), d), e),J), g). No Impact. The Housing Element is a policy document that analyzes housing need and promotes affordable housing. Any development that occurs pursuant to Housing Element policies will be consistent with City planning and building requirements. No impacts relative to utility or service systems will occur as a result of the Housing Element. Housing Element Initial Study Page 20 City of Grand Terrace Less Than Potentially Significant Less than No Significant With Significant pact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE A. Does the project have the potential to X substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or an endangered threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? XVII. A. No Impact. As discussed above, the Housing Element is a policy document that analyzes housing need and promotes affordable housing. Any development that occurs pursuant to Housing Element policies will be consistent with City planning and building requirements. Therefore, the project is not expected to substantially degrade the quality of the environment relative to species habitat or populations, or cultural resources. B. Does the project have impacts that are X individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Are the incremental effects of the project considerable when viewed in connection with those of past projects, those of other current projects, and those of probable future projects) XVII. A No Impact. As discussed above, potential project impacts relative to air quality and traffic, both individually and cumulatively, are not expected to be significant. C. Does the project have environmental X effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVII. C. No Impact. As discussed, above, the Housing Element is a policy document that analyzes housing need and promotes affordable housing. The project is not expected to cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Housing Element Initial Study Page 21 City of Grand Terrace 7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ■ Planning Consultant: Joann Lombardo, Comprehensive Planning Services ■ City Staff: Patrizia Materassi, Director of Economic and Community Development; John Lampe,Associate Planner Housing Element Initial Study Page 22 STAFF REPORT GRRND TERR C City Manager's Office CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE: February 28, 2002 SUBJECT: Northwest Corner Parking at Mt. Vernon/G.T. Road FUNDING REQUIRED ( ) NO FUNDING REQUIRED (X) Staff has received a request from Council Member Larkin to agendize the issue of no parking at the Northwest corner of Mt. Vernon and G.T. Road, sometimes referred to as lookout point. Some time ago the City was having problems with people parking vehicles at this corner for -- sale. The Council has since adopted an ordinance prohibiting vehicles for sale on private property. Currently the entire area is posted "no parking". If Council has new policy direction for Staff please discuss the issue and indicate the Council's desire. CC, -FN IL AQENIDA ITEM M01 c►TY STAFF REPORT GRAND TERR C City Manager's Office CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE: February 28, 2002 SUBJECT: Waste Disposal Agreement Amendment FUNDING REQUIRED ( ) NO FUNDING REQUIRED (X) In January 1998 the City of Grand Terrace and the County entered into a waste disposal agreement. The agreement allows the disposal of solid waste generated within the city limits of the City of Grand Terrace to be dedicated to the county landfill system. The agreement,is for a period of 15 years at a guaranteed starting rate at$29.50 with provisions for cost of living increases over the 15 year term. The current disposal,rate is $34.08 per ton. In March 2001 the County entered into a solid waste operations contract with Burtech Waste Industries. In an effort to capture waste that is currently leaving the County system a clause in the new contract allows the County contractor to bring back up to 300,000 tons of solid waste to the disposal system that is currently being exported outside the County. This currently exported waste is being brought back into the County at a preferential rate of$20.50/ton to be adjusted in the future in the same manner as the Cities do currently. The Cities contend-.that absent an agreement by the Cities that our current waste disposal agreement prohibits the County from allowing disposal of waste at this preferential fee without offering the'same fee to all the contracted cities. Currently the County and the Cities are disputing this contention. The 15 cities have been in negotiations with the County to determine an equitable way to allow this currently exported waste to be brought back into the system that would be beneficial to all the stakeholders, the County, and the Cities. In a formula developed for this new amendment the Cities and the County have agreed to split the additional incremental cash flow created by this transaction to be split evenly between the City and the County. The Cities would further allocate the fee to the 15 WDA cities; 50% based on a division equally among the Cities without regard for any other criteria, and 50% shall be divided among WDA Cities based on population on a per capita basis. The net per ton incremental cash flow is $6.47 of the$20.50 charged at the)gate. This will produce approximately $3.24/ton of City revenue assuming a total tonnage of 300,000 tons COUNCIL AGENDA 9TEM E�(O� 88 per year would yield approximately $1 million for the 15 WDA Cities. Based on the distribution forecast that is attached as Exhibit A the City of Grand Terrace would receive approximately$40,000 in annual new revenue from this source. The 15 WDA Cities believe that this amendment strikes a good balance that allows the County to profit by bringing currently exported waste back into the system and equitably shares the same with the Cities whom are full partners in the Waste Disposal Agreement. Currently as it is structured all 15 Cities must adopt this amendment by March 5' 2002 for it to become effective. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: STAFF RECOMMENDS COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO WASTE DISPOSAL AGREEMENT. FEB-13-2002 15:09 FROM-CITYOFYUCAIPA +9097909205 T-783' P-003/009 F-181 AMENDMENT No. 1 TO WASTE DISPOSAL AGREEMENT On , 199_ , the City of ("Gity") and the County of San Bernardino ("County") entered into a Waste Disposal Agreement (the "Waste Disposal Agreement ) which is hereby amended as of this day of , 2002 ("Amendment No. 1"), Recitals ` A. On March 27, 2001 the County entered into a Solid Waste Operations Contract ("Operations Contract; ) with Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc. ("Contractor"). During each fiscal year during the term of the Operations Contract, the Contractor has the right and the obligation to dispose of at least 250,000 but not more than 300,000 tons of solid waste to the Disposal System. In Amendment No. 3 to the Operations Contract, entered into on December 18, 2001- the amount of solid waste to be delivered for disposal in the Disposal System from Larch 5, 2002 to and through June 30, 2002 is at least 31,250 but not more than 150,000 tons of solid waste. B. The solid waste which may be delivered to the Disposal System by the Contractor is defined in Article 19 of the Operations Contract as solid waste that is, (i) allowed to be disposed of in the Disposal System pursuant to federal, state and local law; (ii) not being delivered to the Disposal System as of the date of the Operations Contract; (III) being processed at the West Valley Material Recovery ! Facility or the Robert A Nelson Transfer Station, and (iv) delivered to the Disposal System in transfer trailers. Such solid waste is referred to as the "Article 19 Solid Waste." C. The amount to be paid to the County by the Contractor for the disposal of Article 19 Solid Waste is $20.50 per ton, to be adjusted for Cost of Living increases in the same percentage amount as the actual change made to the per ton disposal fee charged by the County to Cities which have a Waste Disposal Agreement ("WDA") with the County pursuant to the "Calculation for Escalation" contained in Section 4.2 (6) of the WDA. Such per ton disposal fee is referred to as the "Article 19 Disposal Fee." D. The current Contract Rate payable by City to County for the disposal of solid waste under the Waste Disposal Agreement is higher than the Article 19 i Disposal Fee. E. City contends that absent agreement by the Cities to the contrary, Section 3 5(A) of the Waste Disposal Agreement prohibits the County from allowing the disposal of Article 19 Waste at the Article 19 Disposal Fee unless the County 1 8132v6 0245571004317 AM D 192928.3 rij FE6-13-2002 15:10 FROM-CITYOFYUCAIPA +9097909203 T-78$ P 004/009 F-181 makes available to the City a Contract Rate equal to the Article 19 Disposal Fee. The County disputes this contention F_ Notwithstanding their dispute, the County and City agree that there will be benefits to the Disposal System and accordingly to the County, as the owner/operator of the Disposal Systern, and to the City, as a user of the Disposal System, of accepting Article 19 Solid Waste for disposal In the Disposal System. Accordingly, on the terms provided herein, both City and County agree relative to the acceptance of Article 19 Solid Waste to a limited waiver of their respective rights and further, the County agrees to share a portion of such Article 19 Disposal Fee (the "Article 19 City Fee") with each city that entered into a Waste Disposal Agreement, including City ("WDA Cities"). G The purpose of this Amendment No_ 1 is to acknowledge that: (i) City agrees to waive its right under the provisions of Section 3.5(A) hereof with respect to the Operations Contract, including the right of the County to accept Article 19 Solid Waste on payment of Article 19 Disposal Fee without being required to offer to City to adjust the current or future Contract Rate to equal the Article 19 Disposal Fee; (ii) County agrees to waive any right it i nay have to accept Article 19 Solid Waste except as provided herein; and (N) that the County and City agree an the method of calculating and sharing with City its share from the receipt of the Article 19 Disposal Fee, as described herein. This Amendment No. 1 shall become effective only if and when all WDA Cities, including City, have adopted and executed a counterpart of this Amendment No. 1 without modifications and the County has adopted and executed each counterpart of this Amendment No. 1. Attached as Exhibit A is a list of WDA Cities and their respective share of Article 19 City Fee. H. Pursuant to Amendment No 3 to the Operations Contract, the County must mail notice to Contractor on or before March 5. 2002 of its decision to cancel the right of Contractor to deliver Article 19 Solid Waste to the Disposal System. If the County fails to take such action by such date (absent a further amendment of the Operations Contract to extend such date) then Contractor's rights to dispose of Article 19 Solid Waste in the Disposal System become effective. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the forgoing recitals and the following covenants and promises the parties agree as follows: 1. Limited Waiver of Ci `s Rights Under Wasta Delivery Agreement ana Right of County to Accept Article_1_9 Solid Waste_ The parties agree that, for the term of the Operations Contract (including any extensions of term currently contained in the Operations Contract) the County may accept Article 19 Solid Waste from Contractor for disposal in the Disposal System in the amount of at least 250,000 but not more than 300,000 tons of solid waste to the Disposal System and for the period of March 5, 2002 to and through June 30, 2002, iri the 2 8132v6 024537i,004317 AMD 162928.3 rli FEB-13-2002 I 10 FROM-CITYMUCAIPA +9097909203 T-783 P.005/009 F-181 amount of at least 31,250 but not more than 150,000 tons of solid waste. Upon payment of the Article 19 City Fee and satisfaction of the other requirements of the Operations Contract and of this Amendment No. 1, the County will not be required to offer City a Contract Rate equal to the Article 19 Disposal Fee in accordance with Section 3.5(A) of the Solid Waste Agreement, providesl that such acceptance of Article 19 Solid Waste will not impair the rights of the WDA Cities under the provisions of Section 3 5(S) of the Solid Waste Agreement. 2 Limited Waiver of County's Rights Under krVaste DeliverV Agreement and Right of County to Accept Article 19 Solid Waste. The parties agree that, for the term of the Operations Contract (including any extensions of term currently contained in the Operations Contract) the County agrees to accept Article 19 Solid Waste from Contractor for disposal in the Disposal System only in the amounts specified in paragraph 1 of this Amendment and only upon payment of the Article 19 City Fee and satisfaction of the other requirements of the Operations Contract and of this Amendment No. 1, 3. Calculation of Net Per Ton Article 19 Disposal Fee. For purposes if this Amendment, the Net Per Ton Article 19 Disposal Fee shall consist of the Article 19 Disposal Fee, then in effect, under the tents of the Operations Contract, less the following payments: (i) the amount of the required payment to Contractor for disposing of such Article 19 Solid Waste then in effect under the terms of the Operations Contract; (ii) the other specified payments to governmental agencies in the amounts then required (including any newly required payment or any payment made in substitution of an identified payment); and (iii) the amounts representing the allocation of costs for closure, postclosure maintenance and construction of addition disposal capacity (in the amount set forth on Exhibit "B." Such amount to remain fixed for the term of this Amendment. Formula: Article 19 Disposal Fee Less Payment under Operations Contract to Contractor Payment to California Integrated Waste Management Board Payment to Local Enforcement Agency Payment to the City of Fontana Any other payment required to be made to local, State or Federal Agencies relative to the disposal of solid waste or fees collected relative to such disposal ' Allocation of costs for Closure and Postelosure Allocation for costs of coTzstrLiction of Additional Capacity 3 8132v6024537)'004317 AMp 192928.3 rlj FEB-13-2002 I5:11 FROM-CITYOFYUCAIPA +MT909203 T-1783 P 006/009 F-181 Equals Net Per Ton Article 19 Disp.2 al Fee- * The parties acknowledge that the County currently owes $2.07per ton to the City of Rialto, as adjusted by the Cost of Living Index, but is not obligated to make any out of pocket payment of such amount until its Credit For Prepayment is exhausted, an event expected to occur in approximately 2000, at which time such payment will be applicable to the calculation of the Net Per Ton Article 19 Disposal Fee Exhibit B, attached hereto sets forth the calculation of the Net Per Ton Article 19 Disposal Fee in effect as of the date hereof. 4. Allocation of Article 19 City Fee;, In consideration of the agreements of the City hereunder, the County will pay to the WDA Cities, in the aggregate, 50% of the Net Per Ton Article 19 Disposal Fee for each ton of Article 19 Solid Waste accepted for disposal at the Disposal System, Such fee is referred to herein as the "Article 19 City Fee"_ The remaining 50% of the Net Per Ton Article 19 Disposal Fee is being retained by the County. The Article 19 City Fee may be used by each City as it shall deem appropriate, in its sole discretion The Article 19 City Fee shall be further allocated among each of the WDA Cities on the basis of two separate criteria- (i) 50% of the Article 19 City Fee shall be divided equally among the WDA Cities, without regard for any other iriteria; and (ii) 50% of the Article 19 City Fee shall be divided among the WDA Cities based on population, on a per capita basis, as published by the California Department of Finance, as of each May 1, each year during the term of the VVDA. The allocation of the Article 19 City tree among each WDA Cities for fiscal year 2001-02 is set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and made a part hereof. For illustration purposes only, 'Exhibit A assumes an Article 19 City Fee of $1,000,000. The City's share of the Article 19 City Fee shall be paid to City in quarterly payments, within forty five (45) days after the end of the calendar quarter (i.e,, March, June, September and December); pnwided that the payment for the fiscal year 2001-02 shall be paid in full on or before August 15, 2002. 5, Effective Date. This Amendment shall be effective if and only when all cities listed on Exhibit "A" have adopted and executed a counterpart of this Amendment No. 1 and such amendment has been adopted and executed by the County. In all events, the conditions in the forgoing sentence necessary for this Amendment No. 1 to be effective shall occur on or before March 5, 2002, a 8132v6 024537;004317 AMD 192928.3,1j FEB-13-2002 I5:12 FROM-CITYOFYUCAIPA I *9097909203 T-783 P,007/009 F-181 otherwise this Amendment No. 1 shall be null and void and without any effect whatsoever. G. No other amendments. Except as modified in this Amendment No. 1 (or in any prior amendment) all other terms and conditions of the Waste Disposal Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 5 a132v6 02453710043,17 AMD 192928.3 rlj M m m N N Exhibit"A" N CITY'S SHARE OF ARTICLE 19 CITY FEE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-02 T 0 15'Half of Flat Per 2"d Half CITY City__fee C9fy fee Population Oita% qt City fee Total T C 1 tipple Valley 6.66% $ 33 300-00 56,060 '6.62°fo $ 33,090 08 $ 66,390 08 a 2. Barstow 6-66 33,300.00 21,550 2.55 12,733 77 46,033.77 3- Big Bear Lake 6.66 33 300.00 5,625 0.66 3,323.78 36,623 78 4. Colton 6.66 33,300.00 49 050 5.80 28.983-37 62,283.37 5- Fontana 665 35,300.00 135A00 15-90 79,829.82 113,129.82 6 Grand Terrace 666 33,300-00 11,850 1.40 7,002.10 40,302.10 7. Hesperia 666 33,300-00 64,200 759 37,935.41 71.235.41 8 ;-Highland 6 66 33,300 OC 45,600 5 39 26 944 78 60.244 78 3 Loma Linda 6-66 33,300 00 19,400 2.29 11,463 35 44.763 35 10- Rialto 6.66 33,300.00 94,700 11 19 55,957 69 89,257 69 11. San Bemardino 6.66 33 300 00 190,200 22A7 112,388 10 145,685-10 N 12. Twentynine Palms 6.66 33 300-00 25 850 3.06 15,274.62 48,574-62 13 Victontille 6,66 33,300.00 67,600 7.99 39,944.46 73,244.46 14 Yucaipa 666 33,300.00 42,250 4.99 24,966.29 58:265.29 15 Yucca Valley 6.66 33,300 00 17,200 2.03268 10,163.38 _134fi3 38 m 100.00`/0 $499,500 00 $500,0 DO.00 $999,500.00 *Totals may not add up due to rounding up. A$i,000,000 Article 19 City Fee is assumed in this Exhibit for illustration purposes only o m 0 0 fl T aD 8132v6 0245371004317 AMD FEB-13-2002 15:13 FROM-CITYOFYUCAIPA +9097909203 T-783 P 009/009 F-181 Exhibit"B" NET PER TON ARTICLE 19 DISPOSAL FED AS OF THE DATE HEREOF Article 19 Disposal Fee $20,50 Less: Payment under Operations Contract to Contractor $ 6.50 Payment to California Integrated Waste Management Board $ 1.34 Payment to Local Enforcement Agency $ 0 78 Payment to the City of Fontana $ 2.07 Any other payment required to be made to local, State or Federal agencies relative to the disposal of solid waste Or fees collected relative to such disposal $ 0-00 Allocation of costs for closure and postclosure $ 0.34 Allocation of costs for construction of additional capacity $ 3.00 Net per ton Article 19 Disposal Fee $6.47 "Article -19 City Fee" consisting of 50% of the Net Per Ton Article 19 Disposal Fee $3.235 8132v6 0245371004317 AMD FEB-13-2002 16:58 FROM-CITYOFYUM P,1 +9097909203 T-798 P 002/002 F=201 IN WITNESS 'WI-11 REOF, the parties leave caused this Amendment to the Waste Disposal Agreement io be. executed by their drily authorized officers or representatives this day of 2002. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO By By Mayor Chairman, Board of Supervisors Date: Date: SIGNED AND CERTIFIED TPAT A COPY OF THIS AMENDMENT HAS BEEN DELI VtRED TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD J. RENNE BASTTAN Cleric of the Board of Supervisors Of llle County of San Bernardino ATTEST: By Clerk _ City Clc - Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM.: APPROVED AS TO FORIYI: CITY ATTOXNFY COUNTY COUNSEL SAN BLRNARDINTO COI.fN"'I'Y, CA By By Date: Date: