10/13/2005 'FILE -COPY
C,T.y .
GRAND TERR CE i OCtOUer 0,'2005 =
22795 Barton Road _
Grand Terrace =
California 92313-5295''
'Civic Center
'(909)824-6621 t
Fax(969)783-7629 ,
Fax(909)783-2600
Maryetta Ferre , CITY OF- GRAND TERRACE-' --`-' --,-',
Mayor
Bea Cortes.,
Mayor.Pro Tent - , -
'CRAJ.CITY COUNCIL
Herman.Hilkey
Lee Ann Garcia REGULAR-MEETINGS',"', ,.. Y
Jim Miller - - - '
Council Members- y
Thomas J.Schwab " 2ND ,AND 4TH Thursday - 6:00 p:m.`
City Manager _ -' r - - - - •,
Council Chambers''
-Grand,Terrace Cvie .Center
,22795 Barton-Road - '
i
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS OCTOBER 13,2005
GRAND TERRACE CIVIC CENTER 6:00 PM
22795 Barton Road
THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMPLIES WITH THE}AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT-OF 1990.IFYOU,
REQUIRE SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING, PLEASE'-ALL THE.CITY,CLERK'S.
OFFICE AT(909)824-6621 AT LEAST48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING. t
IF YOU,DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL DURING THE MEETING,PLEASE COMPLETE`AREQUEST
,TO FORM AVAILABLRAT THE ENTRANCE AND PRESENT IT TO.THE CITY CLERK. SPEAKERS WILT;
'BE CALLED UPON.BY THE MAYOR AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.`.
* Call to Order-
* Invocation-Pastor Rick Doucette, Calvary,The Brook Church
* Pledge of Allegiance-
t
* Roll Call-
1
STAFF COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEMS RECOMMENDATION ACTION
CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Approve
1. Approval of 09-22-2005 Minutes
2. Closed Session-Real Property Negotiations(GC 54956.8)
1. Purchase and Sale Agreement with Colton Joint Unified
School District
a. Property Address: 1167-151-58, 1167-151-59, 1167-151-
60,and 1167-151-63
b. Negotiating Parties:
1)Tom Schwab on behalf on the Agency
2)Bob Stranger on behalf of the Colton Joint Unified
School District
c. Areas of Negotiation:Price and Terms
ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
1. Items to Delete
2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS-None
COUNCIL AGENDA
10-13-2005 PAGE 2 OF 3
AGENDA ITEMS STAFF COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATIONS ACTION
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. Approve Check Register Dated October 13,2005 Approve
B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda
C. Approval of 09-22-2005 Minutes Approve
D. Authorization for Staff to Attend the League of California Authorize
Cities New Law and Election Seminar in Monterey,
December 7-9,2005
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the opportunity for members of the public to comment
on any items not appearing on the regular agenda. Because of
restrictions contained in California Law, the City Council is
prohibited from discussing or acting on any item not on the
agenda. The Mayor may request a brief response from staff
to questions raised during public comment.
5. REPORTS
A. Committee Reports
1. Historical and Cultural Activities Committee
a. Minutes of 09-12-2005 Accept
2. Emergency Operations Committee
a. Minutes of 09-06-05 Accept
b. Appoint Regular Member(Taylor) Appoint
B. Council Reports
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. A Resolution Approving Tentative Tract Map No. 04-01 Approve
(TTM 16624) for a 15 Unit Single Family Residential
Development with one Open Space Lot in the City of Grand
Terrace, California
An Ordinance Approving Specific Plan No. 04-02 (SP-04-
02) for a Lot Subdivision with 15 Single Family Detached
Units and One Open Space Lot on a Two Acre Site Located
on the North Side of De Berry Street Between the Gage
Canal on the West and Mt. Vernon on the East and
Environmental Review Case No.04-01(E-04-0 1)-Mitigated
Negative Declaration as Provided by the California
Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)
COUNCIL AGENDA
10-13-2005 PAGE 3 OF 3
AGENDA ITEMS STAFF COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATIONS ACTION
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS-None
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Request to Approve the Settlement and Release Agreement Approve
with Adelphia Cablevision Regarding the Underpayment of
Franchise Fees from 2001-2002
B. Schedule November and December City Council Meetings Schedule
9. CLOSED SESSION
A. Real Estate Negotiations-22874 Arliss
ADJOURN
THE NEXT CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE HELD
ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2005 AT 6:00 P.M.
.......................................................................................................................
AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS FOR THE 10-27-2005 MEETING
MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S
OFFICE BY NOON 10-20-2005.
CITY OF GRAND.TERRACE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING- SEPTEMBER 22, 2005
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 September 22, 2005 at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Maryetta Ferr6, Chairman
Herman Hilkey, Agency Member
Lee Ann Garcia, Agency Member
Jim Miller,Agency Member
Tom Schwab, Executive Director
Brenda Stanfill, City Clerk
Steve Berry, Assistant City Manager
Larry Ronnow, Finance Director
Jerry Glander,Building& Safety Director
John Harper, City Attorney
ABSENT: Bea Cortes, Vice-Chairman
Gary Koontz, Community Development Director
Lt. Hector Guerra, Sheriff's Department
APPROVAL OF 09-08-2005 MINUTES
CRA-2005-25 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER GARCIA,SECOND BY CHAIRMAN FERRE,
CARRIED 4-0-1-0(VICE-CHAIRMAN CORTES WAS ABSENT),to approve the
September 8, 2005 Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes.
Chairman Ferr6 adjourned the Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 6:15 p.m.,until the
next CRA/City Council Meeting scheduled to be held on Thursday, October 13,2005, at 6:00 p.m.
SECRETARY of the Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Grand Terrace
CHAIRMAN of the Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Grand Terrace
CRA AGENDA ITEM NO.
Check Register Dated October 13, 2005
t
vchlist Voucher List
Page: 1
10/05/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56277 9/15/2005 010344 WOLFPACK INS. SERVICES TRUST October 25 CORTES DENTAL INS
10-110-120-000-000 63.08
Total : 63.08
56278 9/16/2005 004587 MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK MHN MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK
10-180-142-000-000 16.70
10-370-142-000-000 7.73
10-380-142-000-000 5.58
10-440-142-000-000 156.08
10-450-142-000-000 5.58
21-572-142-000-000 5.57
32-370-142-000-000 2.35
34-400-142-000-000 18.52
34-800-142-000-000 11.15
10-120-142-000-000 11.15
10-125-142-000-000 11.15
10-140-142-000-000 16.68
10-172-142-000-000 2.91
10-175-142-000-000 2.35
Total : 273.50
56279 9/16/2005 005452 PACIFICARE OF CALIFORNIA PACIFICARE PACIFICARE HEALTH INS
10-175-142-000-000 - 208.77
10-180-142-000-000 676.52
10-370-142-000-000 537.19
10-380-142-000-000 265.43
10-440-142-000-000 726.89
10-450-142-000-000 222.85
21-572-142-000-000. 299.65
32-'370-142-000-000 153.48
34-400-142-000-000 1,027.73
10-022-63-00 61,297-31
10-120-142-000-000 599.32
10-125-142-000-000 445.70
10-140-142-000-000 1,028.31
10-172-142-000-000 260.96
Page: 1
—vehiist Voucher List Page: 2-
110/05/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account" Amount
56279 9/16/2005 005452 PACIFICARE OF CALIFORNIA (Continued) Total : 12,750.11
56280 9/16/2005 006772 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY std STANDARD INS- LIFE AND DISABILITY
10A 20-142-000-000 19.50
10-125-142-000-000 11.75
10-140-142-000-000 19.50
10-172-142-000-000 3.26
10-175-142-000-000- 2.60
10-180-142-000-000 18.88
10-370-142-000-000 9.10
10-380-142-000-000 6.50
10-440-142-000-000 70.25
10-450-142-000-000 6.50
21-572-142-000-000 5.87
32-370-142-000-000 2.60
34-400-142-000-000 14.94
34-800-142-000-000 13.00
10-022-63-00 1,216.00
Total : 1,420-.25
56281 9/16/2005 003420 INLAND COUNTIES INSURANCE SVCS dental DENTAL AND VISION FOR SEPT 2005
10-022-63-00 1,092.64
Total : 1,092.64
56282 9/20/2005 005702 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT 090905 PERS FOR PAYROLL END 9 9 05
10-022-62-00 12,109.42
Total : 12,109.42
56283 9/22/2005 010510 S.B. COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 09222005 Plan Review SP05-02/SA05-19
23-301-88-00 103.00
Total : 103.00
56284 9/28/2005 001907 COSTCO#478 0478 07 0204 1 CHILD CARE SUPPLIES
10-440-228-000-000 28.14
10-440-220-000-000 91.71
Total : 119.85
56285 9/28/2005 001907 COSTCO#478. 0478 08 0049 1 CHILD CARE SUPPLIES -
Page: 2
l
vchlist Voucher List Page: 3
10106/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description Account Amount
56285 9/28/2005 001907 COSTCO#478 (Continued)
10-440-228-000-000 80.65
_ 10-440-220-000-000 86.05
Total : 166.70
56286 9/28/2005 001206 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION Aug-Sept, 2005 Aug/Sept VISA charges
32-200-210-000-000 17.95
32-200-270-000-000 362.90
23-200-14-00 71.09
23-200-63-00 25.86
10-110-210-000-000 21.95
10-110-270-000-000 997.42
10-120-268-000-000 24.77
10-120-270-000-000 981.04
10-1 80-21 0-000-000 2.95
10-180-246-000-000 13.21
107180-268-000-000 146.32
10-180-272-000-000 527.23
10-380-249-000-000 595.77
10-440-2237000-000 261.06
10-440-228-000-000- 93.30
10-440-700-000-000 558.17
Total : 4,700.99
56287 9/29/2005 010063 BALLOON TEAM PROMOTIONS 09292005 Volunteer BBQ Balloons
10-125-222-000-000 38.79
Total : 38.79
56288 9/29/2005 001907 COSTCO#478 0478 15 0084 1c CHILD CARE SUPPLIES
10-440-228-000-000 39.98
10-440-220-000-000 95.70
Total : 135.68
56289 9/30/2006 010340 BLUE CROSS OF CALIFORNIA, PERS-CH 0016682011 CORTES BLUE CROSS
10-110-142-000-000 373.40
Total : 373.40
56290 9/30/2005 010164 GREAT-WEST 09 05 def comp DEF COMP FOR SEPT 2005 LOANS FOR OCT 05
Page: 3
—vehlest Voucher List Page: 4
10/Q512005-- v�_.4�07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56290 9/30/2005 010164 GREAT-WEST (Continued)
10-022-64-00 747.99
10-022-63-00 8,973.88
10-022-64-00 2,504.02
Total : 12,225.89
56291 10/3/2005 006315 ROLLINS, RICHARD 101105 BIRTHDAY BONUS
10-450-245-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
56292 10/3/2005 010545 JACKSON, TAMARA 101405 BIRTHDAY BONUS
10-440-110-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
56293 10/3/2005 010124 JACKSON, CANDICE 101805 BIRTHDAY BONUS
10-440-110-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
56294 10/3/2005 010125 BATES, DAWN 101805b BIRTHDAY BONUS
10-440-110-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
56295 10/3/2005 010546 MPOWER COMMUNICATIONS 387798/387767 .Aug/Sept. phone charges
1-0-440-235-000-000 626.23
10-805-235-000-000 59.55
10-450-235-000-000 _ 59.55
10-190-235-060-000 2,729.82
Total : 3,475.15
56296 10/3/2005 005702 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT 092305 PERS FOR PAYROLL END 9 23 05
10-022-62-00 12,831.40
Total : 12,831.40
56297 10/3/2005 010548 REDLANDS ESCROW 1167-141-08 DEPOSIT FOR ESCROW OF VACANT LAND
32-600-215-000-000 16,000.00
Total : 16,000.00
56298 10/4/2005 010290 KAISER PERMANENTE Oct. 5559630 HEALTH INS-LEE ANN GARCIA•
Page: 4
I `
vchlist bbucher List Page: 5
10/05/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56298 10/4/2005 010290 KAISER PERMANENTE (Continued)
10-110-142-000-000 265.43
10-110-120-000-000 31.35
Total : 296.78
56299. 10/4/2005 010550 ALL WAYS ENTERTAINMENT 1868 Magician-Halloween Haunt
23-200-64-00 300.00
Total : 300.00
56300 10/5/2005 006720 SO.CA.EDISON COMPANY Aug/Sept, 2005 Aug./Sept. Electricity
10-190-719-000-000 32.25
10-440-238-000-000 1,668.48
34-400-238-000-000 109.95
10-175-238-000-000 39.98
10-172-238-000-000 49.97
10-190-238-000-000 4,890.28
10-450-238-000-000 923.54
16-510-238-000-000 347.13
15-500-601-000-000 22.58
10-805-238-000-000 1,207.68
Total : 9,291.84
56301 10/1-3/2005 001024 ACCENT PRINT& DESIGN -250767 PRINTING
- 10-805-222-000-000 90.51
250775 Facility reservation forms
10-180-210-000-000 358.81
Total : 449.32
56302 10/13/2005 001040 ADDINGTON, MATTHEW Sept.,2005 Sept. Planning Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total :. 50.00
56303 10/13/2005 001072 ADT SECURITY SERVICES - 03465011 CHILD CARE MONITORING
10-440-247-000-000 375.00
Total : 375.00
56304 ' 10/13/2005 001045 ADVANCED COPY SYSTEMS 15520A 1 Printer toner cartridge
10-440-210-000-000 168.11
Page: 5
�_ chi Voucher List Page. 6
10/05/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56304 10/13/2005 001045 _ ADVANCED COPY SYSTEMS (Continued) Total : 168.11
56305 10/13/2005 010376 ARCADIS G & M INC. 0121213 CONSULTING SERVICES
32-600-208-000-000 501.82
Total : 501.82,
56306 10/1-3/2005 001381 BARHAM CONSULTING SVCS 53032 July/Aug services
- 10-175-255-000-000 3,525.00
21-021-40-00 100.00
53032a Corp Yard plan check
10-180-255-000-000 250.00
Total : 3,875.00
56307 10/13/2005 010070 BEARDSLEY, KEVIN 09202005 Council Mtg Video Service
10-125-250-000-000 350.00
Total : 350.00
56308. 10/13/2005 010084 BIDNEY, ROBERT Sept. 2005 Sept. Planning Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000_ 50.00
Total : 50.00
56309 10/13/2005~010538 BRAUNSTEIN, ELLEN 09202005 "Library"article for Blue Mtn
10-180-255-000-000 150.00
09203005 Miller Honey Story
10-180-255-000-000 150.00
Total : 300.00
56310 10/13/2005 001683 CA. STATE DEPT OF CONSERVATION 09202005 4TH QTR STRONG MTN/MAPPING
10-700-01 -3.99
23-200-21-00 79.70
Total : 75.71
56311 10/13/2005 001705 CA. STATE DEPT. OF JUSTICE 535719 - EMP BACKGROUND CHECKS
10-190-226-000-000 32.00
y
Total : 32.00
56312 10/13/2005 010493 CBIZ ACCOUNTING, TAX 21700 USER FEE STUDY
10-190-250-000-000 1,100.00
Page: 6
vchlist V'vucher List
Page: 7
10/05/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56312 10/13/2005 010493 CBIZ ACCOUNTING, TAX (Continued) Total : 1,100.00
56313 10/13/2005 001867 COMMERCIAL LANDSCAPE SUPPLY 139284 LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES
10-450-245-000-000 26.81
139321 LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES
10-450-245-000-000 239.38
139331 LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES
10-450-245-000-000 239.38 -
Total : 505.57
56314 10/13/2005 010086 COMSTOCK, TOM Sept. 2005 Sept. Planning Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
56315 10/13/2005 001930 DAILY JOURNAL CORPORATION B868294 PUBLIC HEARRING NOTICES-NEWSPAPER
y 10-370-230-000-000 254.20
B869575 PUBLIC-HEARRING NOTICES-NEWSPAPER
10-370=230-000-000 125.46
r
Total : 379.66
56316 10/13/2005 001942 DATA TICKET INC. 12455 PARTING CITE PROCESSING
10-140-255-000-000 100.00
Total : 100.00
56317 10/13/2005 001960 DELL MARKETING L.P. , F87341170 NEW SERVER W2K3 FOR ADP
10-140-700-000-000 257.95
H24615510 NEW SERVER W2K3 FOR ADP
10-140-700-000-000 , 18.39
H30725240 NEW SERVER W2K3 FOR ADP
10-140-700-000-000 5,267.10
Total : 5,543.44
56318 10/13/2005 003210 DEPT 32-2500233688 016968/7103841 SUPPLIES
10-180-245-000-000 112.89
19153/4061613 SUPPLIES
10-180-218-000-000 223.61
Page: 7
- ---- - ----- -- --- -- -- — - ------------- --- ----- ----- ---------- ---------------- ----
�vch ist Voucher List Page- 8
10/05/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
,Voucher— Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56318 10/13/2005 003210 DEPT 32-2500233683 (Continued)
20563/3014452 Code Enf. Wall Cabinets
34-800-210-000-000 161.09
22006/1297378 SUPPLIES,
10-180-245-000-000 23.58
27993/6090367 SUPPLIES
10-180-246-000-000 16.98
3249/0297735 SUPPLIES
10-440-245-000-000 11.04
3832/0049594 SUPPLIES - -
10-440-245-000-000 5.34
10-180-246-000-000 61.13
Total : 615.66
56319 10/13/2005 002165 DRUG ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM 5941 ON GOING WEED CONTROL AT CITY PARKS
10-450-245-000-000 500.00
- 5948 ON GOING WEED-CONTROL AT CITY PARKS
10-450-245-000-000 500.00
Total : 1,000.00
56320 10/13/2005 002187 DUNN-EDWARDS CORP. 00180176079 PAINT SUPPLIES
10-180-245-000-000 25.13
00180177689 PAINT SUPPLIES
10-180-245=000-000 29.50
Total : 54.63
56321 10/13/2005 002500 FIREMASTER 113147893 Fire Extinguisher Inspect/Maint
10-805-245-000-000 60.00
113147895 Fire Extinguisher Inspect/Maint
10-440-245-000-000 191.19
Total : 251.19
56322 10/13/2005 002740 FRUIT GROWERS SUPPLY 32074581 _ SUPPLIES -
10-450-245-000-000 33.60
32074626 SUPPLIES
- 10450-245-000-000 31.24
Page: 8
vchlist Voucher List
Page: 9
10/05/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56322 10/13/2005 002740 FRUIT GROWERS SUPPLY (Continued)
32074643 SUPPLIES
10-450-245-000-000 13.71
32074825 SUPPLIES
10-450-245-000-000 34.52
Total : 113.07
56323 10/13/2005 002901 G.T. AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 36891-unch Sept. Lunch-Ferre& Miller
10-110-270-000-000 16.00
4658-Lunch Aug. Chamber Luncheon
10-180-270-000-000 8.00
10-110-270-000-000 8.00
Total : 32.00
56324 10/13/2005 002930 GRAINGER 934-430013-3 Hour meter
10-808-246-000-000 55.79
Total : 55.79
56325 10/13/2005 003152 HARPER & BURNS LLPN Aug. 2005 August Services
10-160-250-000-000 2,998.75
Total : 2,998.75
56326 10/13/2005 010534 HEAD AND ASSOCIATES 0508418 APPRAISAL
10-180-255-000-000 400.00
Total : 400.00
56327 10/13/2005 003178 HENAGON LTD COLTON 37567 Sand-Rollins Park
10-450-245-000-000 71.12
Total : 71.12
56328 10/13/2005 003224 HYDRO-SCAPE PRODUCTS INC. 4107493-00 LANDSCAPE/MAINT SUPPLIES
10-450-245-000-000 47.93
4116669-00 LANDSCAPE/MAINT SUPPLIES
10-450-245-000-000 45.02
4120726-00 LANDSCAPE/MAINT SUPPLIES
10-450-245-000-000 29.73
Page: 9
---vchlest Voucher List Page: 40
----10/0512005--5:4 Y OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56328 10/13/2005 003224 HYDRO-SCAPE PRODUCTS INC. (Continued) Total : 122.68
56329 10/13/2006 006880 IDENTIX IDENTIFICATION SRVS Aug. 2005 Aug. fingerprinting-N. Sowell
10-440-228-000-000 97.00
Total : 97.00
56330 10/13/2005 003747 J & M TROPHIES 37467 2 engraved brass plates
10-125-2227000-000 10.78
10-110-220-000-000 10.77
Total : 21.55
56331 10/13/2005 003800 JAGUAR COMPUTER SYSTEMS INC 44202 INTERNET WEBSITE HOSTING
10-180-255-000-000 75:00
Total : 75.00
56332 10/13/2005 003850 JANWING 9050081 CLEANING SERVICES
34-400-246-000-000 150.00
Total : 150.00
56333 10/13/2005 004320 LAWNMOWER CENTER 19050 LAWNMOWER REPAIRS
10-180-246-000-000 78.51
19051 LAWNMOWER REPAIRS
- 10-180-246-000-000 52.30
19052 LAWNMOWER REPAIRS
10-180-246-000-000 18.45
19053 LAWNMOWER REPAIRS
10-180-246-000-000 109.65
19054 LAWNMOWER REPAIRS
10-180-246-000-000 68.28
19106 LAWNMOWER REPAIRS
10-180-246-000-000 45.43
4687 LAWNMOWER REPAIRS
10-180-246-000-000 12.91
Total : 385.53
56334 10/13/2005 004620 MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS 65795857 Aug/Sept phone charges
10-190-235-000-000 256.11
Page: 10
r �
vchlist �;"her List Page: 11
10/05/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56334 10/13/2005 004620 MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS (Continued) Total : 256.11
56335 10/13/2005 010546 MPOWER COMMUNICATIONS Oct. 2005 Oct. phone charges
10-190-235-000-000 1,358.27
10-440-235-000-000 317.09
10-805-235-000-000 30.26
10-450-235-000-000 30.26
Total : 1,735.88
56336 10/13/2005 010097 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 410575025-036 July/Aug Cell phones
10-440-235-000-000 49.64
10-180-240-000-000 665.81
Total : 715.45
56337 10/13/2005 010530 NORTHERN SAFETY CO. INC. 1012299200010 Maint safety supplies
10-180-245-000-000 161.81
Total : 161.81
56338 10/13/2005 001456 OFFICE MAX-A BOISE COMPANY 017413 Envelopes
10-190-211-000-000 126.72
707304 Drum kit
34-400-210-000-000 79.41
823732 Colored copy paper
10-440-210-000-000 75.85
881285 Office supplies
10-110-210-000-000 59.27
899690 Office supplies
10-140-210-000-000 95.70
904307 CREDIT-NONRETURN-ACCENT 5-PK
10-110=210-000-000 -2.37
909824 Office supplies
10-110-210-000-000 57.73
910734 Rubberbands
10-110-210-000-000 3.24
988008 Office supplies
10-140-210-000-000 7.61
Page: 11
-- 6� Voucher ListPage,�2
---10/05/2005-5:42w07P CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56338 10/13/2005 001456 OFFICE MAX-A BOISE COMPANY (Continued) Total : 503.16
56339 10/13/2005 005450 OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY SAU06425VA05 ELEVATOR MAINT
10-180-245-000-000 286.60
Total : 286.60
56340 10/13/2005 005537 PATTON SALES CORP 1155056 CNG station bollards
15-500-706-000-000 581.85
Total : 581.85
56341 10/13/2005 010348 PC MAGAZINE 10032005 25 Issues-D. Barbu
10-380-274-000-000 , 25.00
Total : 25.00
56342 10/13/2005 005584 PETTY CASH 09202005 Reimburse petty cash
10-120-270-000-000 9.00
10-140-270-000-000 17.00.
10-140-271-000-000. 24.30
10-180-245-000-000 14.37
10-180-272-000-000 2,68
10-190-210-000-000 26.95
10-190-211-000-000 74.38
10-190-220-000-000. 14.99
10-190-226-000-000 15.00
10-370-220-000-000 35.00.
10-370-271-000-000 9.72
10-808-246-000-000 22.50
16-900-254-000-000 12.91
34-400-210-000-000 10.17
34-400-219-000-000 22.95
Total : 311.92
56343 10/13/2005 005586 PETTY CASH 09272005 Reimburse petty cash
10-440-220-000-000 26.65
10-440-223-000-000 34.15
10-440-228-000-000 61.32
Total : 122.12
Page: 12
vchlist Wvucher List
Page: 13
10/05/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56344 10/13/2005 005688 PROTECTION ONE 2588440-2nd ALARM MONITORING
10-180-247-000-000 128.00
3020955=2nd ALARM MONITORING
10-172-246-000-000 21.25
10-175-246-000-000 21.25
34-400-246-000-000 41.50
30865992-2nd ALARM MONITORING
10-805-245-000-000 -99.00
Total : 311.00
56345 10/13/2005 005673 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATION 25788483-001 RENTAL OF EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES
10-180-240-000-000 763.95
Total : 763.95
56346 10/13/2005 010171 REPUBLIC ELECTRIC 8139 SIGNAL MAINTENANCE AND DAMAGE REPAIR
16-510-255-000-000 362.25
8140 SIGNAL MAINTENANCE AND DAMAGE REPAIR
16-510-255-000-000 - 431.01
Total : 793.26
56347 10/13/2005 006298 ROAD WORKS INC. 103805SC-1 ASPHALT CRACK SEALING
20-200-722-000-000 20,000.00
Total : 20,000.00
56348 10/13/2005 006310 ROADRUNNER STORAGE Unit 2009,#109 October Storage Fee
10-140-241-000-000 89.00
Total : 89.00
56349 10/13/2005 006341 ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP INC. Aug. 2005 TRACK TAX INCREMENT, PASS THRU, STMT OF
34-400-251-000-000 2,394.80
Total : 2,394.80
56350 10/13/2005 006505 S.B. COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 2005-07 July C. Care Diesel -
10-440,272-000-000 88.29
Total : 88.29
56351 10/13/2005 006565 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SUN S089988824A 8/24 Planner ad
10-120-230-000-000 216.68
- - - - - --- - -Page: 13
vehli Voucher List Page- 4-
- -10/0512-005--5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56351 10/13/2005 006565 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SUN (Continued) Total : 216.68
56352 10/13/2005 006435 SAN BERNARDINO, CITY OF 749 ANIMAL SHELTER SERVICES
10-190-256-000-000 495.50
Total : 495.50
56353 10/13/2005 006681 SMART& FINAL 4863 9/30/05 VOLUNTEER APPRECIATION BBQ
10-125-222-000-000 328_97
Total : 328.97
56354 10/13/2005 006780 STANFILL, BRENDA 10032005 Reimburse.volunteer supplies
10-125-222-000-000 40.17
Total : 40.17
56355 10/13/2005 006778 STAPLES CREDIT PLAN 562556 6 001 11 Fax machine/toner
34-400-219-000-000 . 280.11
609053 12 002 ° Office supplies
34-400-210-000-000 50.80
611585 13 003 C Office supplies
34-400-210-000-000 33.25
9156461822 Office Supplies
10-180-210-000-000 94.94
9156474626 Office supplies
10-370-210-000-000 119.36
Total : 578.46
56356 10/13/2005 010447 STUDIO 33 PRODUCTIONS 4001 SOUND SYSTEM FOR COMM CONCERT
23-200-63-00 800.00
Total : 800.00
56357 10/13/2005 006898 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF L.A. 509131271 9 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 8.27
5091406057 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 59.00
5091406065 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 400.24
Page: 14
vchlist J '
�oucher List Page: 15
10/05/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56357 10/13/2005 006898 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF L.A. (Continued)
5092106789 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 13.52
5092106797 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 494.29
5092613420 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 62.18
5092805695 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 86.68
5092805703 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 432.48
5092921187 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 39.10
Total : 1,595.76
56358 10/13/2005 010246 TEACHER SCHOOL SUPPLY 0036874-IN PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES
10-440-228-000-000 40.18
10-440-228-000-000 1.94
0038385-IN PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES -
10-440-228-000-000 29.99
10-440-228-000-000 2.32
Total : 74.43
56359 10/13/2005 007400 U. S. BANK TRUST N.A. 1570987 - Bond Admin Fee 9/05-8/06 PFA COP 1997
33-300-210-000-000 3,850.00
Total : -3,850.00
56360 10/13/2-005 007400 U. S. BANK TRUST N.A. 1571777 Bond Admin Fees CRA TAB 1993 A& B-
33-3007210-000-000 515.00
Total : 515.00
56361 10/13/2005 007220 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 2005090283 DIG ALERT MONTHLY SERVICE
16-900-220-000-000 69.75
Total : 69.75
56362 10/13/2005 001038 VERIZON WIRELESS-LA 1982054180 Sept/Oct cell phones-B&S
34-400-235-000-000 114.62
Page: 15
`ch Voucher List Page;--�6
----10/05/2005�42�7P CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56362 10/13/2005 001038 VERIZON WIRELESS-LA (Continued) Total : 114.62
56363 10/13/2005 010463 WEAVER ELECTRIC INC 00-1681 EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION
15-500-706-000-000 4,780.00
00-1682 POWER METER UPGRADE
10-180J06-000-000 2,500.00
Total : 7,280.00
56364 10/13/2005 007880 WEST GROUP 809756773 LEGISLATIVE UPDATES
10-125-250-000-000 141.76
Total : 141.70
56365 10/13/2005 010455 WESTERN HIGHWAY PRODUCTS INC 363861 SIGNS
16-900-220-000-000 2,427.61
363861 a Bal. due after P.O. 1292
- 16-900-220-000-000 78.47
Total : 2,506.08
56366 10/13/2005 007905 WHITLEY, BRIAN Sept. 2005 Sept. Planning Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
56367 10/13/2005 007920 WILLDAN 062-7810 Feb. Plan Review& Inspections
10-172-250-000-000 9,527.06
34-400-251=000-000 1,330.00
062-8192 Aug. Plan Rev& Inspections
10-172-250-000=000 966.19
34-400-251-000-000 1,645.00
062-8193 Aug. Engineering Plan Review
10-1-72-250-000-000 807.50
Total : 14,275.76
56368 10/13/2005 007925 WILSON, DOUG Sept. 2005 Sept. Planning Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
56369 10/13/2005 007984 YOSEMITE WATERS Aug. 2005 BOTTLED WATER SERVICES
Page: 16
vchlist bV6,cher List
Page: 17
10/05/2005 5:42:07PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
56369 10/13/2005 007984 YOSEMITE WATERS (Continued) -
10-190-238-000-000 193.49
10-440-238-000-000 63.08
10-805-238-000-000 29.75
Total : 286.32
9/15/2005 007400 U. S. BANK TRUST N.A. Sept. 2005 LEASE PAYMENTS
33-300-206-000-000 23,201.25
Total : 23,201.25
94 Vouchers for bank code : bofa Bank total : 192,928.71
94 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 192,928.71
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the afore-listed checks for payment of City and Community Redevelopment
Agency liabilities have been audited by me and are necessary and appropriate expenditures for the operation of the
City and Agency.
Larry RonncW, Finance Director
Page: 17
G;
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING- SEPTEMBER 22, 2005
A regular meeting of the City Council ofthe City of Grand Terrace was called to order in the Council
Chambers, Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on
September 22, 2005, at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Maryetta Ferr6,Mayor
Herman Hilkey, Councilmember
Lee Ann Garcia, Councilmember
Jim Miller, Councilmember
Tom Schwab, City Manager
Brenda Stanfill, City Clerk
Steve Berry, Assistant City Manager
Larry Ronnow, Finance Director
Jerry Glander,Building& Safety Director
John Harper, City Attorney
ABSENT: Bea Cortes,Mayor Pro Tem
Gary Koontz, Community Development Director
Lt. Hector Guerra, Sheriff's Department
The City Council meeting was opened with Invocation by Pastor Roberto Garcia, Terrace Crest
Baptist Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilwoman Lee Ann Garcia.
ITEMS TO DELETE
8B. Consideration of a Lease Agreement Between the City of Grand Terrace and T-
Mobile Wireless on a Cell Tower Site at the City's Corporate Yard
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
2A. Grand Terrace Little League Girls Junior Softball All-Stars
Mayor Ferr6 introduced each girl from the Grand.Terrace Little League Girls Junior
Softball All-Stars and their coaches and presented them with a certificate of
recognition and a City Pin.
2B. County Fire Department Reorganization -Peter Hills, Fire Chief
Peter Hills, Fire Chief gave a presentation on the County Fire Department
reorganization.
1
i
i
jCouncil Minutes
September 22,2005
Page 2
i
Sylvia Robles, 23008 Orangewood Court, suggested that the City look into
contracting with the County like we do the Sheriff's Department so that we have
local control.
CONSENT CALENDAR
!
CC-2005-96 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
MILLER, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES WAS ABSENT), to
approve the following Consent Calendar Items:
3A. Approve Check Register Dated September 22, 2005
3B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda
3C. Approval of 09-08-2005 Minutes
i
PUBLIC COMMENT
Jeffrey McConnell,21758 Walnut Avenue, questioned the status of the Barton Road bridge
and why there have been so many delays. Questioned the status of the Notice of
Determination with regards to the Manhole Builders project. He also referred to the fact that
there wasn't a 10 day waiting period for an appeal of the Senior Housing Project. He
suggested that staff provide the public notices on the City website in addition to the regular
required noticing.
Barney Karger, 11668 Bernardo Way, stated that he cares about Grand Terrace. He
expressed his concern with undesirables that reside in town and where redevelopment funds
are being spent.
i
Sylvia Robles, 23008 Orangewood Court, expressed her concern with the amount of
information that is available on the website and would like to see more information available.
She feels that the Redevelopment Agency should be abolished.
City Manager Schwab, stated that the Barton Road Bridge retrofit project is a Caltrans
project that is being shared between Grand Terrace and Colton. We are still working with
Caltrans and will get a status of the project. The notice of Determination for the Planning
Commission for Manhole Builders,when that item went before the Planning Commission
they approved it. It is the obligation of the staff to file a notice of determination in the
newspaper stating that the item was approved by the Planning Commission. That notice was
filed properly. Subsequently,there was an appeal and that project will be heard again by the
Planning Commission. The Planning Commission heard the Senior Housing Project and
prior to the end of any 10 day period it went to the Council,however, the reason the 10 day
appeal period is there is that if there is an item that goes to the Planning Commission that
does not go to the City Council,you have 10 ten days to appeal since the senior project had
Council Minutes
September 22,2005
Page 3
to go to the Council there is no purpose for anyone to appeal the Planning Commission
decision because it was automatically going to the Council.
ORAL REPORTS
5A. Committee Reports
1. Emergency Operations Committee
a. Minutes of 08-02-2005
CC-2005-97 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY,SECOND BY COUNCILMEM 3ER
GARCIA, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES WAS ABSENT), to
accept the August 2, 2005-Minutes of the Emergency Operations Committee.
b. Appoint New Committee Member(Hurst)
CC-2005-98 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
MILLER, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES WAS ABSENT), to
appoint Debra Hurst as a regular member to the Emergency Operations Committee
with a term continuing to June 30, 2008.
2. Crime Prevention Committee
a. Minutes of 08-08-2005
CC-2005-99 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
GARCIA, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES WAS ABSENT), to
accept the August 8, 2005 Minutes of the Crime Prevention Committee.
b. California Sexual Predator Punishment and Control Act
CC-2005-100 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
MILLER, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES WAS ABSENT), to
adopt and support the California Sexual Predator Punishment and Control Act and
prepare a letter of support for this act on behalf of the City of Grand Terrace and
forward them to State Senator Robert Dutton, 3 1"District and Assembly Member
Bill Emmerson 63`d District.
3. Historical and Cultural Activities Committee
a. Minutes of 07-11-2005
CC-2005-101 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
HILKEY, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PTO TEM CORTES WAS ABSENT), to
i
Council Minutes
September 22,2005
Page 4
i
i
accept the July 11,2005 Minutes ofthe Historical and Cultural Activities Committee.
COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Hilkey, would like to see the crime statistics made more available to the,
residents. He would like to see the minutes available on the website.
Councilmember Garcia, expressed ,her concern with the erosion of what the Crime
Prevention Officer does in terms of Crime Prevention. She requested a report on what the
specific duties of Beth Powell is for Grand Terrace. She feels that it is important to keep our
residents informed with regards to Crime. She feels that the website would be a good place
to look for things that are going on in the community. She encouraged residents to call into
City Hall if they ever have a question on what is going on. She questioned what is
preventing the information from being provided on the webpage. She suggested that Jeffrey
McConnell put some of the questions that he has been hearing throughout the Community
in the Blue Mountain Outlook and have someone knowledgeable answer the questions and
place them on the webpage as well. She enjoyed the concert in the park and felt that
everyone in attendance enjoyed the evening. She questioned how many people were in
attendance.
Assistant Ci1y Manager Berry,responded that there were approximately 200 to 250 people.
It was a great evening and the band played fantastic songs. They are looking at possibly
adding a farmers market to it next year.
Councilmember Miller,noticed that there is going to be a graffiti clean-up on the gage canal.
He feels that the graffiti needs to be cleaned up as quick as possible. He wants the residents
to know that the City is working to keep the graffiti cleaned up and would like the
information to be posted on the Webpage and newsletter. He stated that there are a lot of
campaign signs up and feels that we need to address the issue of campaign signs before they
become a problem.
John Harper, City Attorney, stated that the Courts have said that the City's do not have the
ability to control when signs go up only when they come down. Political signs can go up
anytime. It is the hope that candidates will abide by the rules, however, there is no
constitutional way to enforce it, except in the public right of way.
Mayor Ferre, stated that letters were sent to candidates who are running for the Colton Joint
Unified School District Board.
City Manager Schwab, stated that letters were sent out to candidates and we removed signs
that were in the public right of way which will be returned to the candidates.
Council Minutes
September 22,2005
Page 5
Manor Ferre, questioned if staff could elaborate at all on what was going on with the
helicopter today.
City Manager Schwab, stated that at approximately 7:30 a.m. they came in contact with an
individual. That individual gave the deputy a false name and while the deputy was checking
out the name, the individual got into his vehicle and drove off. The deputy followed the
individual. He hit a block wall and ran. For about two hours there was a perimeter that was
set up while they searched for this individual. They found out that he was a parolee at large
out of the City of Colton. They could not find the individual.
Mayor Ferre, questioned what is available on the website.
Assistant City Manager Berry, stated that news and events, key statistics, anyone can be
contacted through the website. He feels that there could be more information provided,
however,staff is limited to what they can do. There are companies out there that can provide
this service for us.
PUBLIC HEARING
6A. Street Cut Policy and an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace,
California Establishing Fines for Failure to Obtain a Street Cut Permit and Failure
to Perform Street Cut Construction in Accordance to the Specifications as Described
in the Specifications for Construction Within the Public Right of Way
CC-2005-102 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
MILLER, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES WAS ABSENT), to
continue the Street Cut Policy and an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Grand Terrace, California Establishing Fines for Failure to Obtain a Street Cut
Permit and Failure to Perform Street Cut Construction in Accordance to .the
Specifications as Described in the Specifications for Construction Within the Public
Right of Way to October 27, 2005.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
7A. Second Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace
Approving SP-05-01 (Blue Mountain Senior Villas Specific Plan)and Environmental
Assessment E-05-16
Second Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace,
State of California,Approving General Plan Amendment Case No GP-05-01 for an
Amendment to the City General Plan- Community Development Element to Add a
New Land Use Designation of Medium High Density Residential
i
I
j Council Minutes
September 22,2005
Page 6
CC-2005-103 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
MILLER, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES WAS ABSENT), to
approve the Second Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of
Grand Terrace Approving SP-05-01 (Blue Mountain Senior Villas Specific Plan)and
Environmental Assessment E-05-16 and the Second Reading of an Ordinance of the
City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, State of California, Approving General
Plan Amendment Case No GP-05-01 for an Amendment to the City General Plan -
Community Development Element to Add a New Land Use Designation of Medium
High Density Residential
I
7B. Approve August 25, 2005 Council Minutes and Re-vote on Voucher#56055 in the
Amount of$890,674.00
CC-2005-104 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA, SECOND BY MAYOR FERRE,
CARRIED 3-1-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY VOTED NO AND MAYOR
PRO TEM CORTES WAS ABSENT),to approve the August 25,2005 City Council
Minutes.
CC-2005-105 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA, SECOND BY MAYOR FERRE,
CARRIED 2-1-1-1 (COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY VOTED NO, MAYOR PRO
TEM CORTES WAS ABSENT, AND COUNCILMEMBER MILLER
ABSTAINED), to approve Voucher#56055 in the amount of$890,674.00.
I
NEW BUSINESS
I
8A. Discussion on Fireworks Regulations
i
CijyManager Schwab,stated that the City Council adopted an ordinance in 1998 establishing
the sale and regulation of safe and sane fireworks in the City of Grand Terrace. During the
seven years that the City has allowed legal fireworks, and especially in recent years, the
I number and quality of illegal fireworks has proliferated considerably. In staff s research,it
appears that the illegal fireworks are now more readily available within the United States,
and particularly in the State of Nevada,for purchase by California residents to be utilized in
our local neighborhoods. Whether it is increased availability of illegal fireworks or the use
of legal fireworks in Grand Terrace that has caused the proliferation of the illegal variety is
open to debate. He stated that in the limited research of local law enforcement agencies both
the City of Loma Linda and the City of Highland both prohibit the use of fireworks of any
variety legal or otherwise and it is our conclusion that those communities had a high level
of illegal fireworks use even though they allow no legal fireworks. Staff is looking for
direction from the City Council as to whether there is any desire to amend our current
fireworks regulations. He suggested creating some sort of task force to come up with a
solution.
I
I
Council Minutes
September 22,2005
Page 7
John Kelly, TNT Fireworks, indicated that he would like to be a"resource for a task force
should one be formed. He stated that there are stores in Nevada that sell the illegal
fireworks. He encouraged the formation of a task force, continue local efforts, continue
education,punish offenders.
Mickey Bubier,22659 La Paix, stated that if the City no longer allows the sale of fireworks
in Grand Terrace the local youth leagues will suffer tremendously and struggle to fund their
organizations. He questioned how many responses the fire department participated in on the
4"of July.
Nicole Page,22734 De Soto Street,stated that it is difficult for the organizations to come up
with the funds to support the leagues. She feels that the fireworks booth sale is a strong way
for the leagues to raise money.
Brian Phelps,22857 Wren Street,stated that losing the fireworks fundraising would hurt the
leagues and asked that the Council consider this when discussing the issue of fireworks.
Councilmember Miller,stated that he supports having the sale of fireworks as fundraisers for
our local organizations.
Councilmember Garcia, stated that she is in support of forming a task force and she would
like the fire department,police.department and crime prevention to be involved. She'would
like to see updates monthly or every other month. She would like to see the Fontana Fines
idea and a major education campaign.
Councilmember Hilkev, he questioned if there were fires on the 41h of July.
City Manager Schwab, stated that there were two fires,however,there was no direct link to
fireworks.
Councilmember Hilkev, he would like to attach a fine to the residence not the actual
individual. He would be supportive of a committee that would look at this at long range.
Mayor Ferre, feels that a committee would be extremely important in this decision. She
questioned what the chances would be to have a fireworks show in Grand Terrace. -
City Manager Schwab, stated that it would be up to the Council to direct staff to do that and
staff would have to come up with a way to fund it.
Mayor Ferre, would like the committee to consider a fireworks show in Grand Terrace.
City Manager Schwab, stated that the formation of a task force will have to come back to
S
I
I
Council Minutes
September 22,2005
Page 8
Council for approval and recommendation of members.
8C. Blue Mountain Villas - Ground Lease
Sylvia Robles, 23008 Orangewood Court, requested that priority be given to residents'
extended family.
i
City Manager Schwab, stated that this issue has been discussed and they will be addressing
that issue.
i
CC-2005-106 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
GARCIA, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES WAS ABSENT), to
authorize the execution of the Ground Lease By and Between the City of Grand
Terrace/Lessor and Corporation for Better Housing/Lessee.
I ,
CLOSED SESSION -None
Mayor Ferr6 adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m. until the next CRA/City Council Meeting which is
scheduled to be held on Thursday, October 13, 2005 at 6:00 p.m.
I -
CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace
MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace
� r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I '
STAFF REPORT
CRA ITEM() COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE: October 13, 2005
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION FOR STAFF TO ATTEND THE LEAGUE OF
CALIFORNIA CITIES NEW LAW AND ELECTION SEMINAR IN
MONTEREY, DECEMBER 7-9, 2005
The League of California Cities is holding a City Clerks Department New Law and Election Seminar
in Monterey on December 7-9, 2005.
Staff is requesting authorization to attend. Funds have been budgeted for this purpose.
Staff Recommends Council:
AUTHORIZE THE CITY CLERK TO ATTEND THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES NEW
LAW AND ELECTION SEMINAR IN MONTEREY,DECEMBER 7-9, 2005
LEAGUE
OF CALIFORNIA
£* CITIES
2005 CITE CLERKSr NEW LAW
& ELECTION SEMINAR
Leadersh'
1P
Through - Wednesday, December 7 - Friday, December 9, 2005
Monterey Marriott Hotel, Monterey, California
LllewrninL7
You Will Want To Attend If You Are A...
> City Clerk
> Deputy City Clerk
> Assistant City Clerk
You Will Benefit From This Program By...
> Learning about the changing face of elections
> An update from the Fair Political Practices Commission
> Hearing an address by the Secretary of State
> New Law&Election Updates
> Hearing about experiences with the Federal Voting Rights Act and the Department of
Justice
> Getting updates on new ethics laws
> Fearlessly facing recalls, initiative and referendum
> Sharing the 10 habits of highly effective city clerks
Watch the program grow at wymcacities.orglevents
Three ways to register before Tuesday, November 15:
-Register online at www.cacities.orglevents
-Fax the Registration Form
-Mail the Registration Form
RE E�,VED
Historical & Cultural Activities Committee (A_jT 0 It 2005
Minutes for September 12, 2005
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Pauline Grant. Those present were
Pauline,Shelly Rosenkild,Masako Gifford,G1oriaYbarra,TraceyMartinez,Frances Carter and Ann
Petta.
Secretary's Report:The Minutes for July 11`'were read and approved on a motion by Ann,seconded
by Shelly. Motion carried.
Treasurer's Report: There is no Treasurer's Report as Colleen is on vacation.
Historical Report:Ann contributed two items for our historical collection. The first item was a red
heart-shaped fan with the inscription"I Love Grand Terrace"on it. She noted that the fan came from
the Grand Terrace Day Parade held in June. The second item is a 1976 Grand Terrace, Route 19,
Omnitrans bus schedule. Maryetta Ferre also contributed to our historical collection. Her
contribution is a newspaper clipping dated 7/14/05 on Jimmy Webb. It was stated that Mr. Webb
wrote"Ode to Grand Terrace."
Country Fair:Pauline advised that selection of judges for the food contest,will be done in October.
Frances said she will bring food contest rules for the fair to our next meeting.
The billboard workshop was rescheduled for Monday, September 26, 2005 at 1:00 p.m. Shelly
stated she will bring some materials for the billboards. If different materials are needed, our
committee will decide at our next meeting.
Tracey stated she will have the fair posters ready for our next meeting to give to Colleen to pass out
to different businesses.
Ann noted that six applications have been received for the fair. October 1, 2005 is the scheduled
deadline.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. The next meeting will be October 3, 2005.
Resp a'tfully Submitted,
i
loria Ybrr
Secretary
1
I
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE V E D
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS COMMITTEE OCT 0 6 2005
Regular Meeting
MINUTES CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
September 6, 2005 CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT
The Grand Terrace Emergency Operations Committee met at the regular time at the Emergency
Operations Center at 22795 Barton Road, Building 3. The meeting was called to order by
Chairperson, Vic Pfennighausen at 6:04 p.m. Agendas were distributed.
MEMBERS PRESENT—JoAnn Johnson, Vic Pfennighausen, Dottie Raborn and Glenn Nichols.
MEMBERS ABSENT—Rich Haubert.
CITY STAFF—Assistant City Manager, Steve Berry.
GUESTS PRESENT/INTRODUCTIONS—Debra Hurst, Mike Cruz (maintenance), Sue Taylor
and Hanni and Don Bennett. Introductions were made and guests were welcomed. Steve explained
how the EOC works, who is involved, where the shelters are, etc. He explained about supplies and
how, in most emergencies, the Fire Department would probably take over.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA with motion by Dottie Raborn and second by Glenn Nichols.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 2, 2005 as written. Motion by Glenn Nichols and
second by JoAnn Johnson.
LIAISON REPORT by Steve Berry
a. Water supply to EOC was out several days. It is now restored.
b. Concert in the Park will include a fund raiser for Foundation of Grand Terrace for Katrina
victims.
c. There will be food, shaved ice and a book sale at the Concert. Concert will be free.
d. Would like a tour of radio room and explanation for guests after the regular meeting.
e. Steve just returned from week long training on earthquakes.
f. Blue Mountain Outlook is a good venue for inforniation dispersal.
g. It will be necessary to do a radio modulation test to make sure there is no interference
between the proposed cell tower and our antennas.
h. Our maintenance personnel would probably be the first responders in an emergency.
i. Steve has been talking to Red Cross and the Water Company re emergency preparedness.
j. Volunteer picnic is set for October I" at the Senior Center. Invitations have been sent.
k. Save On has begun to work on ground.
1. Outdoor Adventure Center is on agenda for Council on 8"' as is the Senior Project.
EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES REPORT by Vic Pfennighausen
a. Trailer roof is in very bad shape and needs to be repaired.or replaced.
b. Vic recomn-iends remove pole and hoist, replace and reinforce roof and replace pole and
hoist with four or six individually mounted lights around roof.
c. Steve and Mike will consult about the trailer roof./light pole problem after meeting.
d. Vic reports that both the big main generator a:nd the trailer generator have been run this
week. 1 1
CsOC-IN I�1L P,Q17-MD'A 0 EP1 Jfl PH Fin ��
e. Yard work behind the EOC should be finished within 3 months.
f. Southwest division Convention will be held in Riverside at Rain Cross Center this year
September 9, 10 and 11. A rare opportunity for people in this area.
g. Will mount antenna for scanner on trailer when roof and vent have been repaired.
h. Will make another effort to make the radio work at Fire Station and to set up a regular
Monday night NET for them to participate.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS'- Nothing new.
NEW BUSINESS —Nothing new.
TRAINING/SPEAKERS
a. Explanation of Emergency Operations lay out at Community Room in the event of
disaster.
b. Understanding that this lay out is quite widely used and follows the SEMS recommended
plan. All cities are supposed to'use basically the same plan.
c. Explanation of Fire Department and Sheriffs radios and how it is possible for them to
communicate with each other.
d. After adjournment, radio room and other facilities will be explained to guests.
e. After adjournment, trailer situation will be assessed.
ADJOURNMENT at 7:12 p.m.
JoAnn Johnson, Secretary
NEXT MEETING WILL BE TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2005 AT 6 P.M.
I,
i
COMMITTEE REQUEST FOR-
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE OCTOBER 13, 2005 DATE OCT. 5, 2005
PROBLEM:
-= The Emergency Operations Committee has vacancy's that need to be filled.
ALTERNATIVES:
- - SOLUTION(S):
�f Accept the application of Susan Taylor to be a regular member.
r'
PROPOSED ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY COUNCIL AND/OR STAFF:
Accept the application of Susan Taylor.
i
� i
c1Tr .
I CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
o
6RAIdD TERR APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN SERVICE
I -
Complete and submit to the City Clerk's Department
l
Applying as a member of �-
Name S u_z
Address d� � s
10
Home Phone G 'o Business Phone U�1 7-
Occupation 016
Education (List highest year completed and all degrees) 0
Are there any workday evenings you could not meet? ( ) Yes 66-No If so, please list
i
I
Why are you interested in this appointmen 4r—) b-o-- �
i
I
What do you consider to be your major qualifications? '�-
r v
LtJ
A
References
i
vt -
CU_)J d,"� 0
i
Please attach a written statement containing any additional information you feel would be useful to the-city
Council.
I '
Community and Economic Development Department
CALIFORNIA
Y"
CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X ) MEETING DATE: 4 October 13, 2005
FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED X
SUBJECT: Specific Plan No.04-02(SP-04-02),Tentative Tract Map No.
04-01 -(TTM-04-01/County No. 16624) and Environmental
Review Case No. 04-01 (E-04-01) to build.15 single family
residences
APPLICANT: Massaro and Welsh, Civil Engineers for Jason Karger,
Developer
LOCATION: Approximately2 acre site consisting of two vacant parcels
located on the northerly side of De Berry Street between
the Gage Canal on the west and Mt.Vernon Avenue on the
east
RECOMMENDATION: Open the Public Hearing on the proposed Specific Plan
and Tentative Tract Map; Receive any testimony; Close the
Hearing and Approve the Ordinance for Specific Plan No.
04-02 for First Reading and Approve the Resolution for
Approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 04-01
Background:
The proposed project consists of fifteen (15) detached, single family homes on fifteen
residential lots with an average lot size of 5,468 square feet. The homes will all be one
story in height. All but two will have garages'o.n the back with vehicular access provided
by a 20-foot wide public alley in the back. A sixteenth lot proposed on the corner of De
Berry Street and Mt. Vernon Avenue will be offered to the City as a proposed park site.
The subject site consists of two parcels totaling about 2 acres located on the northerly side
of De Berry Street between the Gage Canal on the west and Mt.*Vernon Avenue on the
east. The property is very long, about 800 feet, but only 100 feet deep. It is a difficult
piece of property to develop which was left over when the area was subdivided many years
ago. It also lies directly across the street from a large apartment development,"The Crest".
22795 Barton Road 9 Grand Terrace, Califorpia.,pFA1 -P� •
J
f It should be noted that the only requests that are before the City Council are the proposed
Specific Plan No. 04-02 and the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 04-01 to subdivide the
subject site. Four companion Site and Architectural Review applications, SA-04-02, SA-
04-03, SA-04-04 and SA-04-05, have alreadybeen approved by the Planning Commission-
contingent upon the approval of the Specific Plan and _Tentative Tract Map by the City
Council. The Site and Architectural Review applications were for the design and
appearance of the individual homes proposed for this development.
This project was originally filed on February 5,2004, almost two years ago, and was heard
on five different occasions by the Planning Commission. The last hearing was held on
September 15, 2005 at which time the Commission recommended this project to the City
Council. During this long period of time,the project underwent several revisions including
the deletion of a 4-unit apartment building on the corner of De Berry and Mt. Vernon; a
widening,of the proposed-side yards; the varying,of the front yard setbacks; and revised
architectural designs for the homes.
In early June of this year, Staff was informed that the son of the original developer had
taken over the project and that he intended to modify the project to make it more
acceptable to the Planning Commission based on their comments at earlier public hearings
on this project. The applicant, Massaro and Welsh, who represented the original
developer, remained involved but now represents the son of the developer, i.e. the "new"
! developer.
In July of this year, after reviewing a new map and proposal by the new developer, the
' Planning Commission expressed an opinion that the new developer was going in the right
direction and that "the proposal looked a lot better than what was originally presented"to
them.
Specific Plan:
The City's Zoning Code does not,contain an existing zoning classification that would
accommodate the proposed project. Therefore, the applicant on behalf of the developer
filed Specific Plan No. 04-02 to permit the proposed project to go forward with lot sizes and
setbacks not conforming to existing zoning standards. The City does not have a residential
zone that would permit lots as small as the 4,460 square feet as proposed by this project
I or the typical lot size of 5,450 square feet. In addition,the front yard setbacks were varied
from the standard 25 feet for residential lots.
The proposed Specific Plan was modified several times to meet the requirements of the
Government Code and to reflect changes in the proposed project itself. As such the
Specific Plan,as recommended by the Planning Commission on September 15' of this
year will serve as the "zoning" for this project.
A copy of the proposed Specific Plan No. 04-02, as recommended for approval by the
City's Planning Commission, is attached here as Exhibit A.
Tentative Tract Map:
The Tentative Tract Map, TTM-04-01, shows 16 individual lots. Fourteen of the lots will
front on De Berry and the two next to the Gage.Canal will front on Mirado Street. ,Fifteen
of the lots will be developed with single family homes. The sixteenth end lot next to Mt.
Vernon will be offered to the City for future park purposes. A blue-line copy of the
proposed Tentative Tract Map has been provided to the Council as Exhibit 1.
Access to the garages of the lots fronting on De Berry will be provided by means of a 20
foot alley running along the northerly property line of the site. These garages will be
located in back of the residences. The two houses fronting on Mirado, however,will have
their garages'on the front of the house. The average lot size will be 5,465 square feet with
a typical depth of 100 feet and width of 54.5 feet. Two of the lots will be smaller than this
`-� average with three larger.
The tentative tract map also shows, the foot prints of the proposed residential structures
and what floor plans will be located on what lots. The front yard of each unit will vary from
15 to 20 feet; the average front yard will be 17 feet. The interior lots fronting on De Berry
will each have side yards of 9.5 feet on the garage side and 5 feet for the other side with
the exception of the corner lots, the 45 foot wide lot on Mirado and the residential lot(Lot
15) next to the,proposed park which will have a 19.5 foot side yard. The garage for this
latter lot will not front directly onto the alley but will have a separate driveway coming off
the alley at an angle. The County Fire Department indicated that there would be no
problem with the proposed access to Lot 15.
For the Council's information and review, the Staff report to the Planning Commission for
this project.for the meeting of September 15, 2005 has,been attached,along with all of the
L Attachments for that report. (Please see Attachment 1.) Also included are the draft
minutes for the September 15, 2005 Planning Commission meeting on this project where
the Commission recommended this project for approval to the Council. (Please see
Attachment 2.)
Environmental Review:
After completing the Initial Study, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been proposed for
this project. The requirements of lawforthe Mitigated Negative Declaration have been met
including the mandatory public review period. This project qualifies for a Mitigated
Negative Declaration on the grounds that it will not have a significant adverse impact on
,the environment with the proposed mitigation conditions. The Mitigated Negative
Declaration proposed under E-04-01 for this project is attached here as Exhibit B.
Recommendation:
As noted above, this is a very difficult piece of property to develop. Not only does it have
an unusual shape, long and narrow, but it lies directly across the street from a large
apartment project. Because of these circumstances, both Staff and the Commission felt
that some sort of modification of the typical R1 standards would be appropriate as
proposed under the Specific Plan. Both the Staff and Commission have spent a very long
time working with the applicant and the prior developer and also the new developer to
come up with a good recommendation to the Council for this property. With the changes
made by the new developer, the Planning Commission felt it could make that
recommendation for this project.
i
i
I i
i
The Planning Commission and Staff recommend for approval the Ordinance for the
Adoption of the Specific Plan No. 04-02 (Attachment 3)and the Resolution of Approval for
Tentative Tract Map No. 04-01 ,(Attachment 4).
f
Respectfully submitted, Approved by:
J n Lampe Gary L. oontz
Alssdciat6 Planner Community Development Director
JL:jI
Exhibits: 'Exhibit 1 - Tentative Tract Map No. 04-01 (County No. 16624)
Exhibit A - Specific Plan No. 04-02 (Document)
Exhibit B - Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study
,I
Attachments: Attachment 1 - Planning Commission Staff Report 9/15/05
Attachment 2 - Draft Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting of 9/15/05
Attachment 3 - Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 04-01
Attachment 4 - Ordinance Approving and Adopting SP-04-02
i
I
c:\MyFiles\JOHNXKadarXcouncilreportSP-04-02
f
I ,
I
I
I
I -
I SPECIFIC PLAN
' No. 04-01
Tract No. 16624
Mt. Vemon-De Berry
' City of Grand Terrace
I ,
I
I
I
I
I EXHIBIT
I
i
I
I
I
Specific Plan
I No. 04-02
City of Grand Terrace
IAugust 2005
Ii
I
I
I -
f
I
i
I
Prepared for:
Mr. Barney Karger
11668 Bernardo Way
Grand Terrace, CA 92313
i
Prepared by:
Massaro and Welsh, Civil Engineers-Planners-Land Surveyors
1572 N. Waterman Ave., Suite 5
San Bernardino, CA 92404
(909) 883-9355
i
Speck Plan Mt. Vernon—De Berry City of Grand Terrace
ISpecific Plan Outline
ISection 1 —Introduction
A. Purpose and Intent
B. Project Location
C. Project Setting
D. Existing Conditions
IE. General Notes
tom,
ISection 2—Master Plan
A. Conceptual Landscape
B. Infrastructure
I.
Section 3 —Implementation
I \A. Development Standards
IEXHIBITS
LocationMap............................................................................................. 1-1
Existing Land Use Map.............................................................................. 1-2
Assessors Parcel Ma
General Plan Ma ... 1-4
ZoningMap...'......................................................................... ............. 1-5
Reduction of.Tentative Tract Map.............................................................. 1-6
Conceptual Grading Plan............................................................................. 1-7
Preliminary Landscape Plan....................................................................... 1-8
UtilityServices .................................................................. ........ 1-9
Fencing& Walls........................................................................................ 1-10
Fencing&Walls........................................................................................ 1-10A
Page 3 of 26
Specific Plan Mt. Vernon—De Berry City of Grand Terrace
ISection 1 —Introduction
IA. Purpose and Intent.
I •
The implementation of this Specific Plan will provide for the development of the project
Isite with the goals and objectives of the City of.Grand Terrace General Plan. The
regulations contained herein are intended to allow for development standards created
specifically for the project area while ensuring substantial compliance with the spirit,
Iintent, and provisions of the various ordinances of the City of Grand Terrace.
i B. Project Location
The project encompasses 2.0 acres and is located along the North side of De Berry
Avenue between Mt. Vernon Avenue to the east and Gage Cnal to the west. The
Assessor's Parcel Numbers are 1167-321-03, 04. Township 2 South, Range 4 West,
Northeast '/4 of Section 5.
C. Project Setting
This project is an infill type of project. To the north of the site are single-family homes
and apartments, minimum lot size is 7,260 S.F. built approximately 40 years ago. To the
south of the site and across De Berry Street is an apartment complex called "The Crest",
consisting of 228 units, built around 1978.
J
To the west of the site is the Gage Canal, and west of the Gage Canal is vacant land. _
To the southwest of the site are single-family homes, minimum lot size 7,200 S.F. built
40 years ago. _
To the northeast of the site on the east side of Mt. Vernon Avenue are single-family
j homes, minimum lot size 7,200 S.F. built 40 years ago.
To the southeast of the site on the east side of Mt. Vernon Avenue is a school site.
i
D. Existing Conditions
The site consists of two parcels of vacant land 1.80 acres and 0.20 acres totaling 2.0
f acres. The dimensions of the site are as follows: The 1.80 acre site is 781.25 feet by
100.00 feet, and the 0.20 acre site is 98.00 feet by 100.00 feet. The site falls in east to
west direction from an elevation of 1055 to an elevation of 1028. The property slopes
-downward toward the west at rates between 2 and 7 percent. A dedicated 20 foot wide
alley runs along the north of the site. This alley is shown on Tract Map No. 6551, M.B.
88/26-27.
I
i
i
Page 4 of 26
i
i
i
BARTON RD. Z
z �
Q� DE 50TO 5T
vNc
DE BERRY 5T.
C'T NO 16 24
VAN BUREN 5T.
LOCATIONALAP
NOT TO SCALE
L.00ATION 1IAP EMIT
1-1
PAGE 5 OF 26
I
i
�I
rnsYAl s Fall rxtvu9vost Ptn. East Riverside Land Company, M.B. 6/44 City of Grand Terrace 1167 - 3 2
OF A MOND TAIA71a+Ol1T. Tax Rafe Area
16001
qs+ �
I o tlss
31 P�q.
93
nfi 89 90 91 92 93 94
a
I i I O !9 81 60 61 61 6! 11 15 +e
Y!/lII4i-IIt 1f a3 !8 30 ,4 Pin. 1
\ C. Arn
Anrssfe re r
y Fq,)I ^.7.w 29 28 27 0. 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17-16 15 1/ 13 ffi 11 10 9 8 7 6 S 4 S 2
C !] !e !!
I Pin.15 I iosa ,.. wso us+ ws.n
ai aO f w. s us n s esso n + I
(9.71 AC.)
15 If !! 1fi' _ rt7 o IB s 19r 20s
r _ 21 22 - 23 _ I4
1.77 AC.
Irr ui.0 1-- --0ESffB—T-1�/77 —
i {w I �13 t7 I „+rnsl use u.sr uss u.1. usr usoy nss w.ae - u u n.a ,
) Is n ❑ r1 u m n ae +7 as as
' Pin.
_ I
I f.7+Ael; fit 12 10 9 8 7 6 5 1 4 w 3 2
u 1 I
07 er.r9 wsf usr ss us. n.w use u.w !
u ss m
ue Au. I �
Pin. 15 —
sru (9.54 AC.)
1.81 AC. SS I
1 I
^ I 33
fz
Assessor's Map 9E
Pin. Traci na 11175, M. 155/18-aI Pin. N.E.1/4, Sec. 5. Book 1167 Page irony o2e
JUnE 1998 trawl No. 6551, M.S. 85/P6—t7 T.YS., R,4W. San Bernardino County
NOT TO SCALE
I
I
ASSESSORS PARCEL AdAP EXITM17'
1-3
PAGE 6 OF 26
I City o Grand Terrace
Speck Plan . Mt. Vernon—De Berry ty .f
IE. General Notes'
I1.. General Plan and Zoning
The General Plan for the site is in the category of Medium Density Residential(MDR).
I Under the General Plan,(MDR)will allow up to 12 units per acre for development. The
site is zoned medium density residential (R3). Under the Zoning R3 the minimum lot
size is 12,000 S.F.,•interior lot widths are 60 feet, corner lot widths are 70 feet, lot depths
are 100 feet, front yard setbacks are 25 feet, side yards are 5 and 10 feet, and rear yards
are 20 feet.
IThe project does not fit the requirements of the Medium Density Residential (R3)Zone
or any city zone. Therefore, a Specific Plan is required which provides the zoning
requirements and standards specific to this site and the proposed project.
I
Lot 1 (a corner lot)has a width of 60 feet and a depth of 100 feet, with a 15 foot street
side yard setback, and 5 foot side yard setback. Lots 2 through 12 have a width of 54.5
feet and'a depth of 100 feet, with a 9.5 and 5 foot side yard setback. Lots 1 through 12
and 15 have a front yard variable setback'between 15 feet and 20 feet and a rear yard,
i variable setback between 6 feet and 11 feet.
Lot 13 and 14 have.a front yard setback of 20 feet and a rear setback of 19_and 18 feet,
respectively, and a 5 foot side yard setback and a 15 foot side street yard setback for Lot
_ 14.
Lot 15 has an average width of 64.5 feet and a depth of 100 feet, with a 19.5 and 5.0 foot
side yard setback.
Lot"A" which is immediately to the east of Lot 15 has an average width of 58 feet and a
depth of 100 feet and will be offered to be dedicated to the City of Grand Terrace for a
park.
Under the existing R3 zoning site development standards, the project meets the minimum
depth of 100 feet, and side yard setback of 5 feet, and corner lot setback of 15 feet.
Any details or issues not specifically addressed by the Specific Plan regulations shall be
subject to the regulations of the governing agency. Definitions of terms shall also be as
defined in the codes of the City of Grand Terrace.
2. City Circulation Element
Access to the project is provided by De Berry Street which is classified as a 66-foot wide,
two-lane local collector on the General Plan's Circulation Element. There are curbs and
gutters along De Berry Street but no sidewalks. Mirado Avenue is a 60 foot wide local
street with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. A dedicated 20 foot wide alley will provide
access into the garages located on the rear of the lot. The 20 foot wide alley was shown
Page 7 of 26
`
i
-
� :�sZ.r�# t' € i`i't3*^�i��S"� t.u,+x�-,-. j 4yf.,s t, i� •� � � � � �� s� y�7}/ i � � �i•hn+" �-`r•,_- ,�T Fes' .r �7
°t,�a 5�z�� :� 1� a� �i}yt•:. '.�Y tr r�30_•�'-e+r i...; �,� r �
'' �`SvaY,.�n.f�v�,,, - rr,�- ' � "'"'�'v�`4 ;sue � �'}•��
f"
i�, ���F Jf �S t � �;^��OC11 E�8�(���'•li}17�f
�,j' +4' 1 r 4. +.s` .ra4.c.! •� 5 .fir.
k[ull
F+�i.#,�r � x.a h'I�`�`���� re�pF� f��il°�fl l� s.: •�.
Y:`a�.p".4�^�} iZn�f �i-5i26�a1yi��ly t4 ��fiSS
1
zb�?,
t
I •f
Zonin,aMap .
BAKT01 Cloy Of
�+
�
Grand Terrace
_ �"`;?y� Ucx•:upmcn�33:p:a�ncm
1
_ --
_i rut s•1•
X--� ILoniltg I'gn Land Ujeo
RI-7?-Single Family Residential'
x s UE Sl1'1'p S't —!� DE SOul SI• 1� R1-10-Low Density Single Family
RI-20-V.Low Density Single Family
-_• _ ! RH� Ilillside Residential ,
J" i DE BERRY ST R2-Low Medium Density Residential-
j BI'�'->`"" R;-Medium Density R r
_ - t e:idential
.. ! `'=
- = ` -;.M. <� � BRSP-General Commercial
BRSP-Village Commercial
BRSP-Office Protassional
Tr -s=N •. n�Y w '"' -�{ AP-Administrative Professional
_.► (�L.? t y f "» t:"X == '`R``' C'- -General Commercial
� Cal-Commercial yfanufacturing
' .--,- y;•-•-•� I --} � AIR Restricted Manufacturing
�S
Al_-Industrial
tC'\Rltl\W. �� i CAKIIL\:XL S'1' --
• �-- �.� � - � isj" ?"",;17
PUB-Public Facilities
FP-Flood Plain Overlay District
AG-agricultural Overlay District
J '
I
rl
Z®1N1 TG MAP
1-S
i
PAGE 10 OF 26
I Mt. Vernon—De Berry, City of Grand Terrace
Speck Plan
on Tract Map No. 6551,.recorded as M.B. 88/26-27. Improvements to De Berry Street
and Mirado Avenue and the alley per the Grand Terrace Municipal Code Chapter 15.28
IArticle I.
1. Sawcut wings on curbs to maintain 10% maximum side slope for.handicap ramps at
I both comers on Mirado Avenue.
2. Remove and replace all curb depressions on De Berry Street, all damaged curb and
gutter on all streets, cut asphalt paving back 12" from removed gutters, and install
Imatch up paving.
A 6 foot wide non-recorded Southern California Edison easement runs immediately
I south of the alley. The garages served by the alley will be setback a variable distance
between 6 feet to 11 feet from the edge of the alley to provide a variable backup
distance between 26 feet to 31 feet for the garage parking of each unit.
IThe two lots facing Mirado Street will have the garages in front of the house. The
rear yards will back up to Gage Canal.
I
3. Site Plan
The site plan shows the location of a total of 15 single-family homes and Lot"A"
dedicated to the City of Grand Terrace for a park. There are 13 proposed homes located
on De Berry Street between Mt. Vernon Avenue and Mirado Avenue and 2 proposed
homes at the northwest comer of De Berry Street and Mirado Avenue. The 13 proposed
homes facing De Berry Street have a variable front yard setback between 15 feet to 20
feet. There are three different floor plans with elevations showing which floor plan will
be constructed on each lot. The proposed 20 foot wide easement for ingress and egress
will be granted by separate instrument and recorded in the San Bernardino County
Recorder's Office.
4. Floor Plans
The site will have four(4) different plans for the proposed single family houses.
Plan 1 will contain 1,606 square feet of living area consisting of a living room, family
room, dining area, kitchen, 3 bedrooms, and 2 baths. Plan 1 is located on Lots 13 and 14
on the west side of Mirado.Avenue.
Plan 2 will contain 1,704 square feet of living area. There will be a great room, country
kitchen,three bedrooms, a den or fourth bedroom, and two baths. The garage is attached
to the rear of the house with access provided by the 20 foot wide alley along the northerly
property line. Plan 2 is located on Lots 3, 5, 9, and 12.
Plan 3 will contain 1,818 square feet of living area with a layout almost the same as"Plan
2", but with no den or fourth-bedroom option. The garage.is also attached to the back of
the house. Plan 3 will be located on Lots 1, 4, 7, 8, and 15.
Page 11 of 26
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 16624
Jan
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE is
ll! i�r i i .✓+' h , � �r �1 ' 1 ' I"'% -`-.%�1/' 1 1 I I
m
N
O ROM*
/rn�� I�t 6 � I �rir uo loo O.I � ' CdJJpSitP�
wcxztam—
t I t
_
® N`,.;u1�' a '�' tl��, I I ,��y ``�~� m��� `t �w at w a �i,""• ,:.: ' iu;`` ly "°r'�I ��',- 9_`I` Y � _
EL—
reran WMH
wsm(,
L u
fad
I
Specific Plan Mt. Vernon—De Berry City of Grand Terrace
' Plan 4 will contain 1,733 square feet of living area. It will have a great room, kitchen,
three bedrooms, and two baths. The garage will also be located on the back of the house.
' Plan 4 will be located on Lots 2, 6, and 10.
5. Elevations
IPlan 1-The house will have a contemporary design with a strong Spanish influence
including the use of arches over the windows and file roofs. Plan 1 has the garage on the
Ifront.
Plan 2 and Plan 3 have a very similar appearance in terms of the window treatment,
Iarches, columns, tile roofs, and roofline. These-plans have the garage on the back facing
the alley; therefore,'there is no garage door on the front elevations.
IPlan 4 also has a strong Spanish influence, but the front has-a different roof line and
different window treatment from the first three plans. The use of cross-gabled roof and
extensive use of window panes gives this plan a unique appearance.
I '
Since the proposed concrete sidewalks'are next to the.concrete curb and gutter,this will
give a variable distance from the back of the sidewalk to face of the houses between 21
and 26 feet for a front yard. The back yards vary with an average 30 feet by 40 feet
rectanglar.yard. The design of the homes with the garage attached to the rear gives a
spacious feel to the front and back yards.
6. Conceptual Grading Plan
The site has a gentle slope falling toward the Gage Canal on the west side of the site.
Small concrete block retaining walls will be used between the property lines. A 5-foot
wooden fence will be attached to the concrete block retaining wall. The reason for the
small walls between the property lines is that we have to meet the proposed property line
elevations along De Berry Street and the existing elevations for the 20 foot wide alley.
Also, city policies state that we can not have cross lot drainage. Therefore, to meet these
conditions a small wall will have to be placed between the lots.
r
Grading Standards: At the time of development within the Specific Plan area a complete
soils engineering report indicating evidence of a safe and stable development for the
improvements anticipated shall be submitted with the grading plans. The
recommendations by the geologists and soils engineer shall be incorporated into the
grading,plan design prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
An N.P.D.E.S. Compliance Study and a Hydrology Study has been submitted to the City
planning staff.
Page 13 of 26
�1
allfq
PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE e3
p� asa w
—
2,7:�1
/ 1 — te� :—
-
_-I
1�('�y'oJQ �' iiiNNN\��_� � _ ____ � ____ _ _ � I�` ( wa. / r I �� 1��• I ' J {e� �
7 ..1' I 7.. '7 ii 1 7 1� 1 i L' 1 �. '.ems A . 'r.1 1 ����-' r mmmuur�
zi
A,y,_y' pf wad `*W;a wa ilti Wrc �A A Jura J r 1 p C S
IV �4i e� 4\� 1 :�': `� t,,i , I L\e`�� ,m o�� \ ,s.::?I ...s - ;' - w�: - ""+'-' \ �p� �"''Y•' ��w�y� g\� ova
1 I 1 i 1 1 —0t8r'
' 1• mu.r. +��vyr,vo ,L`pFyi��j � d it i�T• \ Yf1LfY'L
°f°l•"•m..S\ oa.e.►r —U
•�r�. e.ro r a.m•m.n w, ��
1
RARE'
—SAR0 A
-- ,I�WELSH
W
`I
V
I errace
Speck Plan Mt. Vernon—De Berry City of Grand T
ISection 2—Master Plan
IA. Conceptual Landscape Plan
LANDSCAPE SPECIFIC PLAN FOR TRACT 416624, GRAND TERRACE, CA.
ISTREET TREES:
I • One street tree per lot or one tree per 60 lineal feet for the entire block. Twenty-
five street trees will be required.
• All street trees shall be clean, require little maintenance,be structurally strong,
insect and disease resistant, and require little pruning. Tree selection shall be
i from.the approved tree list. They shall be a minimum 24" box size.
• Trees shall not be planted less than 25 feet from the beginning of the curb return
at intersections; 10 feet from streetlights; 10 feet from fire hydrants, and 10 feet
from driveways.
• Trees with a limited root structure are recommended near sidewalks in order to
minimize sidewalk and curb breakage.
o All trees to be guaranteed by contractor for'sixty days after occupancy.
LIST OF APPROVED STREET TREES FOR GRAND TERRACE:
• ArecaWwm romanzoffianum Cocos Palm
• Cupaniopsis anacardioides Carrotwood
• Eucalyptus sideroxylon rosea Red Iron Bark
• Fraximis uhdei "Tomlinson" Tomlinson's Ash
• Ginkgo biloba(fastigiated male) Maidenhair Tree
• Koelreuteria bipinnata Goldenrain Tree
• Lagerstroemia indica Crape Myrtle
• Liquidamber styracifZua American Sweetgum
• Magnolia grandiora cv. Southem Magnolia
• Pinus canariensis Canary Island Pine
• Pinus pinea (with pot) Italian Stone Pine
• Pistacia chinensis Chinese Pistachio
• Plantanus acerifolia London Plane Tree
• Quercus ilex Holly Oak
• Quercus virginia Louisiana Live Oak
® Trachycarpus fortunei (excelsa) Windmill Palm
• Washington filifera California Fan Palm J
• Washington robusta Mexican Fan Palm
Page 15 of 26
Specific Plan Mt. Vernon—De Berry City of Grand Terrace
MAINTENANCE:
I • All landscape is to be maintained by the individual homeowner per individual lot.
• Landscape areas should be maintained in an attractive condition at all times.
I �
• Trees are to be pruned per attached details; under no circumstances are trees to be
topped.
LANDSCAPE SPECIFIC PLAN FOR TRACT#16624, GRAND 'TERRACE, CA.
i
SAFETY:
• Landscaping shall provide adequate sight distance for motorists and pedestrians
entering and exiting a site and shall not interfere with circulation effectiveness.
• Water overspray on hardscape areas.should be avoided and kept to a minimum.
Sprinkler heads on fixed risers are permitted adjacent to a structure.
PLANT MATERIALS:
® Front yard landscape designs soften arch elements, provide privacy between lots,
accent front entries and provide seasonal color and interest.
® Underplanting shall be low-profile shrubs, groundcover and,grasses.
® Shrubs and groundcovers should be selected based on their eventual size to avoid
an `overgrown' or `butchered' appearance.,
I
b Trees should be planted a minimum of 5 feet from adjoining property fences and
walls.
i
® Deciduous trees from the approved tree list shall be used in south facing outdoor
areas around buildings to provide solar access during winter months, while
providing shade in summer months.
PLANTING REQUIREMENTS:
® All front and side yards to be landscaped by developer and maintained by
homeowners. Backyards are to be left for homeowner's to landscape according to
their individual taste.
I
i
i
Page 16 of 26
i
Speck Plan Mt. vernon7-De Berg City of Grand Terrace
I • v 0 t r Minimum one tree per every 1, 0 0 sq. ft. of total al landscape area, exclusive of
required street trees. These trees shall provide a background to street tree
Iplantings.
• Minimum one shrub (5 gal.) per every 25 sq. ft. of landscape area, exclusive of
turf areas.
I '
WATER CONSERVATION:
• Turf areas should be limited to 50%of the total landscape area, planting the
remaining,area with shrubs;groundcover and/or hardscape.
• Select trees,,shrubs and groundcovers that are drought tolerant.
• Shrub and groundcover areas-shall be covered with mulch to improve water
holding capacity of the soil.
• All irrigation systems to be automatic and programmed to the time of least
evaporation.
Page 17 of 26
i
,I
� r
,
,
' 9ly1
I � -
2 4
THE TREE IS TRIMMED T❑ ACHIEVE
A SYMMETRICAL BALANCE THAT
MAINTAINS THE TREE'S MAXIMUM
HEALTH AND AESTHETIC VALUE,
9 8 THE TRIMMING INCLUDES;
3 5 1, TRIMMING "DOUBLE LEADERS" WITH
7 A WEAK CIS❑TCH, SELECT ❑NE
6 LEADER AND REMOVE THE ❑THER.
2, PRUNING "SL❑W GROWING HANGERS"
❑R "DROPPERS" BACK TO A PRIMARY
❑R SEC❑NDARY BRANCH,
3, PRUNING THE "BRANCH STUBS" ❑N
THE TRUNK BACK T❑ THE BRANCH
COLLAR.
4. PRUNING "WATER SPOUTS" FLUSH T❑
THE BRANCH.
5, PRUNING ALL "BASE SUCKERS" FLUSH
TO THE BASE FOR THE TREE,
6, PRUNING ALL "GIRDLING ROOTS" TO
PREVENT FURTHER DAMAGE.
7, REMOVING ALL "RO❑T SUCKERS" BY
PRUNING,
8, PRUNING TREE SKIRT TO LEGAL
HEIGHT.
9, REMOVING RUBBING, WEAK, DEAD OR
CR❑SSING BRANCHES,
ALSO REM❑VE ALL IVY, DEBRIS, MISTLETOE, AND
UNDESIRABLE SUCKER GROWTH, THIS COMPLETE
TRIMMING IS PERF❑RMED FROM THE GR❑UND OR
FROM AN AERIAL DEVICE, IT INVOLVES MAKING
POWER OR HAND SAW CUTS AND ALL NECESSARY
POLE SAW ❑R PRUNING W❑RK. UNDER NO
CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL THE TREE BE POLLARDED
❑R 'TOPPED'. ALL PRUNING SHALL BE SUPERVISED
BY A CERTIFIED ARB❑RIST, PRUNING SHALL CONFORM
T❑ NATIONAL ARBORIST ASSOCIATION STANDARDS.
TREE PRUNING
,
I! PAGE 18 OF 26
E ,
I entatme Tlracl # I �624
PE
N W. CORNER m-r. VERNON AVE. AND DE BEhRY STREET ..........
GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA ih—v wvw
1196110'a
Quad ImM.C.92313
Sr
—Ti
.'ir
0 i- -�)r
4 (`.'� � �'tW.,,.1��r„ `.,. ["`t '� ��Y I` 4r y� f ,` I I,,,�,„��• ., G I Y'.17
CY) BE BERny SMEET
51
[ (:[rr:...«,.�:wf..�n.r.r„ynn.ir.[ro.y:n�.n- 1�[.�ran:alnrYrl...n.�r,..�,6.i.�, ` t - DoDt
�2 1 W..I
21
.....................
11,W 1.-.1. V P. S,*5-ml,Ile
556,
9fis,
00
Specific Plan Mt. Vernon—De Berry City of Grand Terrace
I
B. Infrastructure
1. Water System- The Riverside Highland Water Company will provide water service to
the development. A proposed 6"water main will be located in the alley and will serve
Lots 1 through Lot 15. An existing 6"water main in Mirado Avenue will serve Lots 13
F and 14. Locations of proposed water meters are shown on the tentative tract map.
2. Sewer System- The wastewater is collected by the City of Grand Terrace collection
system, but treated at the City of Colton plant.
1
3. Electrical power will be provided by the Southern California Edison Company based
upon a user fee, a 6 foot non-recorded easement is located south of the 20 foot alley, four
(4) power poles are located in this 6 foot easement.
i
i
4. Solid waste disposal will be provided by USA Waste Disposal.
5. Natural gas service will be provided by the Southern California Gas Company with
monthly user fees applied.
6. Storm drain system- An existing 48" R.C.P. storm drain system is located in De Berry
I
Street and collects the onsite runoff for the site.
I
II
i
i
I
I
i
I
I
I
Page 20 of 26
I .
i
i
i
e
20' ALLEY 6'
S.G.E.
ON-REGORDE
EASEMENT
4' I1' 5'
EX15T. A.G. FAVE,lENT--\ 3' EX15T 'GONG. 3NA1 E,
FROF05EO 6" WATER MAIN-
FROF05ED 8" SEMER MAIN-0
J
t
U'M=SERVICES
1-9
PAGE 21 OF 26
I ' Specific Plan Mt. Vernon—De Berry City of Grand Terrace
1
I .
Section 3—Implementation
A. Development Standards
I
a. Lot Area—Each of the following Lots 1 through 15 will have the said amount of
square footage for each lot and the corresponding house plan type and the house
plan square footage.-
Lot Square Footage of House Plan Type House Plan Square Footage
Each Lot.
1 5,914 Plan 3-R 1,818
2. 5,450 Plan 4-R 1,733
3 5,450 Plan 2-R 1,704
4 5,000 Plan 3-R 1,818
5 5,000 Plan 2-R 1,704
6 5,000 Plan 4-R 1,733
7 5,000" Plan 3 1,818
8 52000 Plan 3 1,818
91 52000 Plan 2 1,704
10 5,000 Plan 4-R 1,733
{ 11 5,000 Plan 3 R 1,818
! 112 5,450 Plan 2-R 1,704
13 4,460 Plan 1-R 1,606
14 5,293 Plan 1 1,606
15 6,407 Plan 3 1,818
Lot"A" 5,600 Dedicated to the City NIA
for use as a park
Average lot size=5,468 S.F.
i
I
Page 22 of 26
I Specific Vernon
c Plan Mt. Ve —De Berry City of Grand Terrace
.f�
Ib. Lot Dimensions—Each of the following Lots 1 through 15 and Lot"A'will have
the said amount of width and depth:
ILot Width Depth
1 60' 100'
I2 54.5' 100'
3 54.5' 100'
4 54.5' 100'
5 54.5' 100'
6 54.5' 100'
I 7 54.5' 100'
8 54.5' 100'
9 54.5' 100'
10 54.5' 100'
11 54.5' 100'
12 54.5' 100'
13 45' 99'
14 55' 97'
15 64.5' 100'
Lot"A" 58 100'
c. Building Height—No building or structure shall exceed two and one-half(2 '/2)
stories or thirty-five (3 5)feet in height.
Building Setbacks
LOT FRONT B.S.L. REAR B.S.L. SIDE YARD B.S.L.
1 20 6 151.5
2 15 11 9.515
3 17 9 9.5 /5
4 19 7 9.5 / 5
5 17 9 9.515
6 15 11 9.5 /5
7 17 9 9.5 /5
8 19 7 9.5 /5
9 17 9 9.5 /5
10 15 11 9.5 /5
11 19 7 9.5 /5
12 17 9 9.5 /5
13 20 19 515
14 20 18 15 /5
15 16 10 19.5 /5
Page 23 of 26
r
I City o Grand Terrace
Specific Plan Mt. Vernon—De Berry ty f
I
I
d. Driveways
1 Concrete driveway approaches for Lots 1 through 12 will be served from the
twenty(20)foot wide alley.
I `
2) Concrete driveway approach for Lot 15 will be served from the twenty(20)-
foot wide alley.
1
3) Concrete driveways approaches for Lots 13 and 14 will be served from
N4irado Avenue.
I
e. Fences and Walls
IFences and walls shall not exceed six(6) feet in height shall be permitted along
the front,rear and side property lines. Six(6)feet in height wrought iron gates
shall be placed along the frontyard setback along De Berry Street. The property
line at the north along the alley and the sideyard setback will be served by a five
(5)foot high wooden fence.
I
i
I '
i
I -
I
Page 24 of 26
i
i
i
i
5' HIGH WOODEN
I FENCE (TYPICAL)
x
5' 5'
x
2-8"x&"xl&" CONCRETE
BLOCKS (TYPICAL)
SIDE YARD WALL FENCE DETAIL BETWEEN LOTS I THROUGH LOT 15
5' 5'
c
&' H16H WROUGHT IRON
FENCE (TYPICAL)
'-H16H WROU6HT IRON FENCE FACIN6
DE BERRY STREET AND MIRADO AVENUE
FENC`ETG & WALLS EX IlBiT
1-10
PAGE 25 OF 26
I
I I
I
I
I I
I
I �
I 1 I 1
i
I �
I
I
I I
I
I
I
5'-HI6,H WOODEN FENCE (TYPICAL)
i
1
I
I
I
i
i
NCING,& WALLS EX
��'
i
IPAGE 26 OF 26
PROPOSED
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
_} Document Type: Negative Declaration (Mitigated)
Date: June 30, 2005
Project Title: SP-04-02, TTM-04-01, SA-04-02, SA--04-03, SA-04-04, SA-04-05, SA-04-06
and E-04-01
Project Location: 2 acres located on the north side of De Berry Street between the,Gage Canal
on the west and Mt. Vernon on the east. Property measures approximately
950 feet in length with a depth of 100 feet.
■ Description of Project: The proposed consists of a total of 16 lots, 15 will be developed with
single family detached type units on individual lots ranging in size from about 4,500 square feet to
about 6,400 square feet. The 16`h lot will be left undeveloped as open space or a mini-park. The
Specific Plan has been submited along with the Tentative Tract Map detailing lot dimensions,
setbacks, house plan types, floor area, square footages, proposed landscaping, fences, block
walls,walls and infrastructure. The Site and Architectural Review application have been filed for
= each housing product, i.e., each single family floor plan.
Project Proponent: Massaro &Welsh, Civil Engineers
Lead Agency: Community Development Department, City of Grand Terrace
Contact Person: Gary L. Koontz, Community Development Director
(909)430-2247
Public Review Period: Began:Thursday, June 30,2005 Ended: September 15, 2005
Public Hearings/Meetings: Planning Commission—Thursday, Sept. 15, 2005 at 7:00 P.M.
City Council -Thursday, October 13, 2005 at 6:00 P.M.
Environmental Finding:
Based on an Initial Study, attached hereto, prepared to evaluate the potential
environmental impacts of approving SP-04-02, TTM-04-01, SA-04-02, SA-04-03, SA-
04-04, SA-04-05 and E-04-01, the said project qualifies for a Mitigated Negative
Declaration on the grounds that it will not have a significant adverse impact on the
environment with the recommended mitigation conditions.
Signature: f
Gary L. Koontz, Community Development Director
EXHIBIT B
c:\MyFiles\JOHN\Karger\Karger2-5-05\negativedeclarationSP-04=021
i
f
I
f
City of Grand Terrace
Community Development Department
Environmental Checklist Form
i
1. Project Title: Specific Plan No. 04-02, Site and Architectural Review Case
No.'s 04-02,04-03,04-04,04-05,04-06,Tentative Tract No.04-
O1 and Environmental Review Case No.04-01
i 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Grand Terrace
Community Development Department
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace,CA 92313
i
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Gary L. Koontz, Community Development Director or John
Lampe,Associate Planner (909)430-2247
4. Project Location: Approximately 2 acre vacant area located generally on the north
side of De Berry Street between the Gage Canal right-of-way on
the west and Mt.Vernon Avenue on the east. The property in
question is a long linear area with an average depth of 100 feet
and an overall length of about 950 feet.
5. Project Sponsor's Name Massaro&Welsh,Civil Engineers
6. General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential
I
j 7. Zoning: "R3"(Medium Density Residential)
8. 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. Attach additional
sheets if necessary.)
The proposed consists of a total of 16 lots, 15 will be developed with single family detached type units on
individual lots ranging in size from about 4,500 square feet to about 6,400 square feet. The 16`h lot will be left
undeveloped as open space or mini-park. The Specific Plan(SP-04-02)has been submitted along with the
Tentative Tract Map (TTM-04-01) detailing lot dimensions, setbacks, house plan types, floor area, square
footages, proposed landscaping, fences, block walls, walls and infrastructure. The Site and Architectural
i
Review applications have been filed for each housing product,i.e.,each single family floor plan.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings:(Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
t
North: Mixture of single family homes, duplexes and four-plexes. Also a townhouse condominium
project(Cape Terrace). Zoned R3
East: Single family homes and the Terrace Middle School. Zoned R1-7.2 and PUB
South: The Crest Apartments.Zoned R3
West: The Gage Canal and farther to the west a recently approved 55 unit townhouse condominium
project on 4.8 acres and single family residential. Zoned R3 and R1-7.2
'10. Other agencies whose a proval`is required (e.g., Permits, financing approval, or participation
agreement)
I
Community Development Department 1 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
1�
d
City of Grand Terrace Department of Building and Safety—building and grading permits;County of San
Bernardino Fire Department—plan check requirements;Riverside Highland Water Company for water
connection and service; and City of Grand Terrace Public Works for sewer connection.
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.
■Land Use and Planning ❑ Transportation/Circulation ❑ Public Services
❑ Population and Housing ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Utilities and Services Systems
■Geological Problems ❑Energy and Mineral Resources ❑Aesthetics
❑Water ❑Hazards ❑Cultural Resources
■Air Quality ■Noise ❑Recreation
❑Mandatory Findings of Significance
Determination:
On-the basis of this initial evaluation(To be completed by the Lead Agency):
❑ 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 measures described on an attached sheet have been added
to the project. A MITIGATED 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 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,there WILL NOT
be significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects(a)have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and(b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
EIR.,including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon,the proposed project'
v
Signature Date
Gary L. Koontz Community_ Development Director
Printed Name Title
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
Community Development Department 2 Initial Study and Environmental,
Analysis
i
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 the parentheses
following each question. 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 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) "Potential Significant Impact"is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is
significant. If there are one or more "Potential Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, and,EIR is required.
I ,
4) "Potential Significant Unless Mitigated Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potential 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 Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses,"may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier Analyses may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section XVII at the end of the
checklist.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential'impacts'(e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). References to a
previously prepared or outside document should,where appropriate, include a reference to
the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached,and
other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
i
Community Development Department 3 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially ' Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
I. Land Use and Planning. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
�- (Source: General Plan Categories Map; and Zoning
District Map—This will mitigated by the filing of a
Specific Plan which will act as the Zoning for this site.) ❑ ❑ ■
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project? (There are no known agencies where the
proposed project would cause a conflict. )
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
(Zoning District Map,Zoning Regulations, City Zoning
Code)
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses)? (There are no significant
agricultural resources in Grand Terrace)
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
established community(including a low-income or
minority community)? (The site is relatively small and
is vacant. It will not divide any portion of the
community. )
A brief explanation to answer I:
The proposed is inconsistent with the existing R3 zoning of the site;therefore,a Specific Plan has been filed which will act as
the new zoning for the site with new development standards. The Specific Plan will have to be written to conform to the
requirements of State Law. The project with its modified setbacks and lot sizes could be incompatible with nearby single
family development but the potential impact will be less than significant because of the proposed landscaping and architectural
design. In addition,there are no agricultural resources in Grand Terrace and no part of the community will be disrupted by this
project.
Finding:Potential impact reduced to a level of insignificance with mitigation measure. If approved,
the Specific Plan will eliminate the conflicts with the existing•R3 Zoning of the site.
Community Development Department 4 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
1 1
i
I
I
i
r
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
H. Population and Housing. Would the proposal:
I Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? (This project is consistent ❑ ❑ ❑
with the City's General Plan and the number of units
proposed is less than that allowed by the existing R3
Zone.)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or ❑ ❑ ❑
indirectly(e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? (This project is
an"infill"type project; the number of unit proposed
j will not necessitate any expansion of services.)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable ❑ ❑ ❑
housing? (The property is presently vacant.)
brief explanation to answer II:
EThe proposed project is relatively small in size. The zoning of this site has been R3 for a number of years. The proposed
project is only about 60%of the maximum allowed by the existing R3 zoning. The project is consistent with the City's General
Plan and will not exceed population projections for the City. It will also not induce growth because of its small size. In
addition,the property is vacant and will not displace any existing housing,affordable or otherwise.
Geologic Problems. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? (General Plan MEA/EIR-ES-4) ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Seismic ground shaking?(GP MEA/EIR-II-1) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (GP ❑ ❑ ❑
MEA/EIR-II-1)
d) Seiches, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (GP MEA/EIR ❑ ❑ ❑
e) Landslides or mudflows? (GP MEA/EIR II-1) ❑ ❑ ❑
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (GP ❑ ❑ ❑
MEA/EIR II-20)
g). Subsidence of the land? (GP MEA/EIR II-1,Append ❑ ❑ ❑
B)
) Expansive soil? (GP MEA/EIR II-1,Append.B-4) ❑ ❑ ❑
Unique geologic or physical features? (GP MEA/EIR ❑ ❑ ❑
II-1)
Community Development Department 5 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
Issues(and Support.In formation Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
A brief explanation to answer III:
No active or potentially active fault traces cross the site. The only known potential geologic hazard to the site is from seismic
ground shaking which is not unusual for any site in Southern California. This and any other.geologic hazard will be mitigated
by the requirements that all residential structures shall be designed and constructed to meet the seismic standards of the
Uniform Building Code. Also,a soils report will be required before the issuance of a grading permit or building permits for
this project for the construction of 15 residences.
Finding:Potential impact reduced to a level of insignificance with mitigation measure:This project must meet the
requirements that all residential structures be designed and constructed to meet the seismic standards of the Uniform
Building Code.
M Water. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff? (GP MEA/EIR II-1 ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Append.B)
b) Expose to people or property to water related hazards ❑ ❑ ❑
such as flooding? (GP MEA/EIR II-1)
c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of ❑ ❑ ❑
surface water quality(e.g.,temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? (GP MEA/EIR II-1)
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water ❑ ❑ ❑ it
body? (GP MEA/EIR II-1)
e) `Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water ❑ ❑ ❑ _'
movements? ()
f) Changes in the quality of ground waters, either through ❑ ❑ ❑ �'
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through
substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability?
(GP MEA/EIR II-1)
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? (GP ❑ ❑ ❑
MEA/EIR II-1)
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? (GP MEA/EIR II-1, ❑ ❑ ❑
and 97 Regional WCA Report)
I) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater ❑ ❑ ❑ _
otherwise available for public water supplies? (GP
MEA/EIR II-1)
Community Development Department 6 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
I
I
I
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
I
Incorporated
A brief explanation to answer IV:
The proposed project is to construct 15 single family homes. There will be some increase in impermeable surface area;
however,there is a 42"r.c.p.along De Berry which will handle the slight increase from this project.The submitted hydrology
(Preliminary Hydrology Report for Tract No.16624 by Paul Welsh,May 20,2005)has indicated the amount of run-off fror-
this project. In addition,before grading permits are issued for this project all NPDES requirements will have to be met wh
should ensure that many of the impact to water resources will be eliminated. These requirements have been set out in the
submitted"Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan"prepared by Massaro&Welsh,January 6,2005). Also,all-water for the
use of this project will be provide by the local water provider,the Riverside Highland Water Company.
I
V! Air Quality. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
existing or projected air quality violation? (GP
MEA/EIR II-14, and AQMP)
b; Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (The Element ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
contains an implementing action to reduce such
exposure)
c) Alter air movement,moisture, or temperature, or cause ❑ ' ❑ ❑ ■
any change in climate? (Any such implementing
actions are designed to have a positive effect on the
region's air quality)
d) Create objectionable odors? (No specific,odor causing ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
proposals are included in the Element)
brief explanation to answer V:
The proposed project is relatively small size. With only 15 units it does not have the capacity to significantly impact the air
quality of the region. There will be a very small increase in air pollution primarily from the vehicles of the new residents;
however,this will not be significant.
Finding:Potential impact reduced to a level of insignificance with mitigation measure. For the grading of the site where
dust will be generated,appropriate dust control measures will be integrated into grading plans and activities as required
by the City as part of the conditions of the grading permit.
I
Community Development Department 7 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
VI. Transportation/Circulation.Would the proposal result :
a) Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
(Trans. Engineering and Planning Consultant)
d) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses? ( )
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
nearby uses? ( )
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or ❑ ❑ ❑
bicyclists? (TCM Ordinance 147)
0 Conflicts with adopted policies supporting ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
alternative transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? (TCM Ordinance 147)
g) Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts? () ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
explanation to answer VI:
The proposed project is to has been reviewed by the City's Traffic Engineer. He concluded that because of its
relatively small size that a traffic study would not be required even though there will be some slight increase n traffic
which will not be significant. In addition,he stated: "The project will have no significant traffic impacts on the
adjacent streets and intersections."
Community Development Department 8 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
{
Issues and,Su ort Information Sources):
)• Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
I VII. Biological Resources. Would the proposal result
in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or
their habitats(including but not limited to ❑ ❑ ❑
plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? (GP
MEA/EIR 11-20,Append C)
b) Locally designated species(e.g.,heritage
trees)? (GP MEVEIR H-20) ❑ ❑. ❑
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g.,
oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (GP ❑ . ❑ ❑
MEA/EIR II-20)
d) Wetland habitat(e.g:, marsh,riparian, and
vernal pool)? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
(GP MEA/EIR H-20) ❑ ❑ ❑
Brief explanation to answer VII:
No rare or endangered species-are known to live in the urban areas of Grand Terrace. In addition,there are no desirable
large trees on the site or wetland habitats. No adverse impacts to biological resources are expected from the development
of this project.
f VIII. Energy and Mineral Resources. Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy ❑ ❑ ❑
conservation plans? (GP MEA/EIR'
11-19, and Append D)
b) Use non-renewable resources in a ❑ ❑ ❑
wasteful and inefficient manner?
c) Result in the loss of availability of a ❑ ❑ ❑
known mineral resource that would
be of future value to the region and
the residents of the State? (GP
MEA/EIR 11-19, and Append B)
Community Development Department 9 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
i
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Brief explanation to answer VIM
No mineral resources have been identified in the City. Therefore the development of the proposed 15 residential units will
not adversely impact any mineral resources. In addition,the project will have to be constructed in compliance with the
energy standards of the building code.
IX. Hazards. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or ❑ ❑ ❑
release of hazardous substance
(including,but not limited to: oil,
pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)?
(GP MEA/EIR II-7)
b) Possible interference with ❑ ❑ ❑
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan? (GT
Emergency Plan, and GP MEA/EIR
H-13)
c) The creation of any health hazard or ❑ ❑ ❑
potential health hazard? (GP
MEA/EIR II-1)
d) Exposure of people to existing ❑ ❑ ❑
sources of potential health hazards?
(GP MEA/EIR H-1)
e) Increase fire hazard in areas with ❑ ❑ ❑
flammable brush, grass, or trees?
(GP MEA/EIR II-6)
Brief explanation to answer IX:
There are no known hazards on the site or the immediate surrounding area including areas of flammable brush. In
addition,this is a residential project with no storage of hazardous materials other than what would normally be found in a
residential setting;however,such storage will not be significant.
Community Development Department 10 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
,I
i
1
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
X. Noise. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increase in existing noise levels?
(City Noise Element) ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
b) Exposure of people to severe noise
levels? (City Noise Element) ❑, ■ ❑ ❑
Brief explanation to answer X.
1 There will be some increase in ambient noise level simply from having 15 new homes on the site which is presently vacant;
however,this increase will not be significant. In addition,the site is located just west of Mt.Vernon Avenue which has
been identified in the City's Noise Element as an existing and future noise generator. However,this will be mitigate by the
recommendations of the noise study required for this project which include conforming to the requirement of the Building
Code for interior noise insulation.
Vinding:Potential impact reduced to a level of insignificance with mitigation measures. The recommendations of the
' submitted noise study("Acoustical Evaluation for Tract No. 16624,Wieland Associates,Inc.,May 2005)will be
conditioned for this project along with conforming to the requirements of the Building Code for interior noise insulation if
required.
XI. Public.Services. Would the proposal have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
f
a) Fire protection? ( )
b) Police protection? ( ) ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ .
c) Schools? ( ) ❑ ❑ ■
d) Maintenance of public facilities, ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
including roads? ( ) ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
e) Other governmental services? ( )
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Brief explanation of answer XI.
This proposed project for 15 single family homes is small in size. As for any residential project there will be some effect
on public services but because of the size of the project all of these effects will be less than significant. In addition,there
will be an increase in the City's property tax base because of the development of existing vacant land and the developer
will also have to pay the school impact fee for this project before building permits are issued.
i I
I
Community Development Department 11 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
MI. Utilities and Services Systems. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or
supplies, or substantial alternations to the following
r' utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? (GP
MEA/EIR H-32,H-33) ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
b) Communications systems? (GP
MEABIR II-33) ❑ ■ ❑
c) Local or regional water treatment or
distribution facilities? (GP ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
UMA/EIR H-30)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? (GP
MEA/EIR II-30) ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
e) Storm water drainage? (GP
MEA/EIR II-33) ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
0 Solid waste disposal? (GP
{ MEA/EIR H-32) U ❑ ■ ❑
g) Local or regional water supplies?
(GP, MEA/EIR H-30) ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Brief explanation of answer XII.
This proposed project for 15 single family homes is small in size. As for any residential project there will be some effect
on utility services but because of the size of the project all of these effects will be less than significant.In addition,no
utility has.identified any problems in being unable to service this project. \
r
XIII. Aesthetics. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
highway? (GP MEA/EIR II-22)
b) Have a demonstrable negative ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
aesthetic effect? (Proposed site plan
and project elevations ) ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
c) Create light or glare?
Brief explanation to answer XIII.
The proposed project does not lie near scenic highway or will block scenic vistas. In addition,any potential aesthetic
impacts will be mitigated by the conditions of the project such as the requirement for a landscaping plan.
Community Development Department 12 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
I
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
X1:V. Cultural Resources., Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources?
(GP MEA/EIR II-20) ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
b) Disturb archaeological resources?
(GP MEA/EIR II-20) ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
i c) Affect historical resources? (GP
MEA/EIR H-22) ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
d) Have the potential to cause a
physical change which would affect ❑ ❑ ■
unique ethnic cultural'values? (GP
MEA/EIR II-22)
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred
uses within the potential impact ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
area? ( )
Brief explanation to answer)(IV.
No known palentological,archaelogical or historical resources exist on the site. No cultural values or sacred uses will bi "
impacted by this project. The site was probably rough graded a number of years ago when the surrounding area was
developed.
XV. Recreation. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for
neighborhood or regional parks or ❑ ❑ ❑
other recreational facilities? (GP
MEA/EIR II-21)
b) . Affect existing recreational
opportunities? (GP MEA/EIR II-21) ❑ ❑ ❑
Brief explanation to answer XV.
As the project is residential,there will be some increase in the demand for and affect on recreational resources;however,
as only 15 units are involved such effects will be less than significant. In addition,the developer is offering the lot next to
the Mt.Vernon right-of-way as a vest-pocket park to the City.
I
Community Development Department 13 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
XV1. Mandatory findings of significance.
a) Does,the project have the potential
to 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 rare or
endangered plant or animal,
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history
or prehistory?
b) Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
c) Does the project have impacts that
are individually limited,but ❑ ❑ ❑
cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable"means
that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the
effects of other probable future
projects.)
d) Does,the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial ❑ ❑ ❑
adverse effect on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Community Development Department 14 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
I i .
I
I
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
I
Mitigation
Incorporated
Brief explanation to answers XVI.
No Impact.The proposed project is relatively small with only 15 units. Any effects on the environment resulting from this
project will either be less than significant or will be fully mitigated by the regulations of the submitted Specific Plan or the
required permits such as the building and-grading permits.
I �
XVII. Earlier Analysis.
Earlier analysis may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program p gr EIR, or other CEQA process, one or
more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR, or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for
review.
■ Used the Grand Terrace General Plan Master Environmental Assessment and
EIR for most of the base impact information. Both documents are available at
the Grand Terrace Community and Economic Development Department.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist wei
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
measured based on the.earlier analysis.
■ Not Applicable
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are"Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated,"describe the mitigation measured which were incorporated or refined
j from the earlier document and the extent they address site specific conditions for the
project.
■ Not,Applicable
JL jl
Grand Terrace Community Development Dept
I
Authority:Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 21087.
References:Public Resources Code Sections 21080(c),21080.1,21080.3,21082.1,21083,21083.3,21093,21094,21151;Sunstrom v.
County of Mendocino,202 Cal.App.3d 296(1988);Leonoff v.Monterey Board of Supervisors,22 Ca1.App.3d 1337(1990)
II •
c:\MyFiles\JOHN\Karger\Karger2-5-05\E-04-01
Community Development Department 15 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
I
I , I II
Community and Economic Development
(AtIfORNIA Department
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace
California 92313-5295
(909) 824-6621
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: Thursday, September 15, 2005
SUBJECT: CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING FOR SP-04-02, SA-04-02, SA-
04-03, SA-04-04, SA-04-05, TTM-04-01 AND E-04-01
APPLICANT: Massaro and Welsh, Civil Engineers
LOCATION: Approximately 2 acre vacant area consisting of two parcels located
on the north side of De Berry Street between the Gage Canal on the
west and Mt. Vernon on the east.
RECOMMENDATION: Re-open the public hearing and receive the staff report and any
testimony, close the hearing and approve the Resolution calling for
the Approval of SA-04-02, SA-04-03, SA-04-04 and SA-04-05 and
Recommend to the City Council the Resolution for Approval of
TTM-04-01 (Tentative Tract No. 16624) and the Adoption'of the
Ordinance for SP-04-02
BACKGROUND:
This is the continued public hearing for SP-04-02,SA-04-02,SA-04-03,SA-04-04,SA-04-05,TTM-
04-01 an E-04-01 to construct a single family residential proj ect on a two(2)acre site located on the
north side of De Berry Street between the Gage Canal on the west and Mt. Vernon on the east.
(Please see Attachment 1, the aerial photo of the subject site.)
This project was filed on February 5, 2004 and has been heard on four prior occasions before the
Planning Commission. It was first heard on August 19,2004,secondly on January 20`h of this year,
thirdly on May 181h of this year and fourth (and last) on July 21st. During this period the project
underwent several revisions including the deletion of an 4-unit apartment building on the corner of
ATTACHMENT 1
i
Mt. Vernon and De Berry, a widening of the side yards and varying of the front yard setbacks.
In early June, Staff was informed that the son of the developer had taken over the project and that
he intended to modify the tentative map to add an additional single family lot and reduce the size of
a proposed open space lot next to Mt. Vernon.
On June 22nd Staffreceived a second revised tentative tract map showing 15 single family residential
lots and with a 5,600 square foot open space area to be dedicated as a park on the corner of De Berry
and Mt. Vernon. A revised Specific Plan showing these latest changes was received by Staff on
August 15, 2005.
At the last meeting on this project on July 21", members of the Commission expressed an opinion
that the son of the developer was going in the right direction and that "the proposal looked a lot
better than what was originally presented." The Commission members also expressed a wish to see
the front yard setbacks varied more along with the street elevations of the proposed homes. (Please
see Attachment 2, the minutes of the July 21s`meeting on this project.)
On August 15"', Staff received a revised tentative tract incorporating those changes reviewed by the
Planning Commission at the July 21 st meeting along with modified front yard setbacks ranging from
15 feet to 20 feet along De Berry. On August 15`h we also received revised front elevations and
revised floor plans for Plans 1, 2 ,3 and 4.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Tentative Tract Map and Site Plan:
i
The latest revised tentative tract map shows 15 single family lots ranging in size from 4,460 square
feet for the smallest to 6,407 square feet for the largest as shown on Exhibit 1. The end lot next to
Mt.Vernon will be dedicated to the City as a vest-pocket park as noted above. Two of the lots will
front on Mirado Avenue; the rest will front on De Berry. Access to garages for the residences
fronting on De Berry will be provided by a 20 foot wide alley running along the northerly property
line of the site. The garages will lie to the rear of the house. The two house fronting on Mirado,
however,will have their garages on the front of the house. Most of the residential lots will be 54.5
feet in width; however, Lot 13 fronting on Mirado will be 45 feet wide and the two lots next to the
proposed park site will each be 59.5 feet in width. The average lot depth will be 100 feet. (A 8 V?
x 11" reduction of this latest revised tract map is included as Attachment 3'.)
The tentative map also shows the foot prints of the proposed residential structures and what floor
plans will be located on what lot. The front yard of each unit will vary from 20 feet to 15 feet; the
average front yard will be 17 feet., The interior lots fronting on De Berry will each have side yards
of 9.5 feet on the garage side and 5 feet for the other side of the lot with the exception of the corner
lots,the 45 foot wide lot on Mirado and the end lot(Lot 15)next to the future park which will have
a side yard of 19.5 feet. The garage of this latter lot will not front directly onto the alley but will
have a separate driveway coming off the driveway. The County Fire Department indicated that there
would be no problem with the proposed access to Lot 15 and the Fire Department recommended
several items which have been incorporated into the conditions of approval for the tentative map.
We also asked for input from the firm of"Waste Management" about trash truck access. "Waste
Management"indicated that there would be no problem providing trash service for the new homes.
In addition,a breakdown of the individual lot sizes,on what plans will be located on which lots and
of the house plan square footages is shown in the upper right corner of the tract map/site plan.
This latest proposed map does follow the recommendations of the City Manager in his letter dated
September 5,2003 where he outlined a potential"compromise"position on this project. In his letter,
the City Manager indicated that Staff would like to see the side yards of the non-garage site of the
single family lots increased from 5 feet to 10 feet to provide more usable open space;the elimination
of the two-story 4-plex on the corner because of access issues; and to provide a"green belt area for
a small park where the 4-plex had been proposed." (Please see Attachment 4 for a copy of the City
Manager's letter.)
Elevations and Floor Plans:
On August 15`h, the Son of the Developer also submitted new elevations and floor plans for four
"Plans"for the proposal. "Plan 1"will have the garages on the front and will be utilized for the two
lots west of Mirado. The other plans, "Plan 2," "Plan 3" and "Plan 4" will be built on those lots
fronting on De Berry. The plans will be mainly 3 bedroom with 2 baths, country kitchens, great
rooms and attached garages. One of the plans, "Plan 3"will have optional fourth bedroom or den.
The drawings showing the elevations and floor plans are labeled Exhibits 2, 3, 4 and 5.
The elevations will reflect a strong"Spanish"influence with stucco exterior,tile roofs,architectural
embellishments around windows and doors and earth tone colors. Each floor plan will have 2 to 3
front elevations to add variety to the appearance of the homes from the street. (8 %"x 11"reduction
of the floor plans and elevations are included as Attachment 5, Attachment 6, Attachment 7 and
Attachment 8.)
A large"Color and Materials"board has been submitted and will be exhibited at the public hearing
for the Commission's review and information.
Preliminary Landscaping
A preliminary landscaping plan has been submitted for the proposed project showing landscaping
for the front yard and the parkway as shown on Exhibit 6. Most of the proposed trees are on the
City's approved list of street trees. Even though the latest preliminary landscaping plan does not
show the variable front yard setback,the final installed landscaping will have to be substantially the
same as shown on the preliminary landscaping plan. (A 8'/2"x 11"reduction of the landscaping plan
is included as Attachment 9.)
Conceptual Grading:
The conceptual grading plan has been included as Exhibit 7. The site has a gently slope with a"fall"
towards the Gage Canal. A detailed grading plan and soils report will be required to be submitted
i
!
during"plan check"before a grading permit is issued for this project. The latest revised grading plan
shows additional information requested by earlier reviews. (Please see Attachment 10 for a 8 Y?x
j 11" reduction of the grading plan.)
�I
Specific Plan Document:
A revised Specific Plan document was submitted for this project on August 15`h and labeled Exhibit
A. Since the City's Zoning Code does not have a zoning classification that would accommodate the
proposed development, it was necessary to file for a specific plan. A specific plan may be used as
one of the methods of implementing the City's General Plan for a specific area. Typically,it is used
to provide land use regulation where the jurisdictions zoning code does not have the standards to
permit the development of a particular project. Also, a specific plan is applied to a "specific"
geographic area within the local jurisdiction. Specific plans are often employed, in addition, to
provide for both flexibility for innovative project and for a more detailed review and mechanism to
control the development.
i
As stated above, the City's Zoning Code does not contain an existing zoning classification that
would accommodate the applicant's project. Therefore,the applicant has filed SP-04-02 to permit
the proposed project to go forward with lot sizes and setbacks not conforming to current zoning
standards. The City does not have a residential zone that would permit lots as small as 4,460 square
jfeet as proposed by this project or a typical lot size of 5,000 square feet.
i
This latest revision of the proposed Specific Plan No. 04-02 does meet the requirements of Section
65450 through 65457 of the Government Code. As such the revised and updated Specific Plan will
serve as the "zoning" for this project. An Ordinance to adopt the Specific Plan has been prepared
for the Commission's consideration for its recommendation to the City Council. The Ordinance is
included in this Staff report as one of the attachments.
REVIEWING AGENCY COMMENTS:
The following comments were made by various agencies in reviewing this project:
The Riverside Highland Water Company
Please refer to the letter to staff from the Riverside Highland Water Company dated February 20,
2004. (Attachment 11)
Fire Department, Hazardous Materials Division:
Please refer to the letter to staff from the County Fire Department, Hazardous Materials Division,
dated February 24, 2004. (Attachment 12)
i
The Gage Canal Company
Please refer to the letter from the Gage Canal Company dated March 2, 2004. (Attachment 13)
i
Y �
The City Traffic Engineer:
Pleaser refer to the comments made by the City Traffic Engineer in his three memorandums on this
project dated March 3, 2004, July 7, 2005 and August 11, 2005. (Attachment 14, 15 and 16),
Building and Safety/Public Works:
Please refer to the comments made by the Director of Building and Safety/Public Works in his
memorandum dated August 8, 2005. (Attachment 17)
Department of Public Health:
Please see the letter for the Department ofPublic Health-Environmental Health Services dated June
24, 2005 regarding this project. (Attachment 18)
County of San Bernardino Fire Department, Communi Safety Division:
Please see the comments made by the County Fire Department in its letter dated March 15, 2004
(Attachment 19) and it had written notes dated July 15, 2005 (Attachment 20).
The Gas Company
Please refer to the letter from the Gas Company on this project dated June 28,2005(Attachment 21).
TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE:
The project proponent will be required to pay traffic signal improvements and circulation
improvement fees as set forth by Ordinance No. 190. Said fees for medium density development are
$80/unit for the signal improvement fee and$650/unit(District B)for the circulation improvement
fee. These fees are to be paid prior to the issuance of building permits.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
With the information submitted by the applicant including a hydrology study and a"SWPPP"plan,
Staff was able to complete the Initial Study and a proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for this
project. These latter two documents were made available for a 21 day public review starting on
Thursday,June 30"',2005. Staff does not believe that the minor changes in the design of this project
would warrant revising this original environmental assessment for this project. (Please see Exhibit
B —the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study for this project.)
FINDINGS:
Section 18.63.060 of the Zoning Code requires that specific findings be made by the Planning
i
i
Commission in approving a site and architectural review application. These findings are:
1. The proposed project is consistent with the intent of the Grand Terrace Municipal
Code and the General Plan.
2. The locations and configuration of all structures associated with this project are
visually harmonious with this site and surrounding sites and structures,that they do
not interfere with the neighbors'privacy,that they do not unnecessarily block scenic
views from other structures and/or public areas, and are in scale with the townscape
and natural landscape of the area.
3. The architectural design of structures, their materials, and colors are visually
harmonious with surrounding development and natural landforms; are functional for
the proposed project; and are consistent with the Grand Terrace Municipal Code.
4. The plan for landscaping and open spaces provides a functional and visually pleasing
setting for the structures on this site and is harmonious s with the natural landscape
of the area and hereby developments.
5. There is no indiscriminate clearing of property, destruction of trees or natural
vegetation or the excessive and unsightly grading of hillsides,thus the natural beauty
of the city, its setting and natural landforms are preserved.
i
6. The design and locations of all signs associated with this project are consistent with
the scale and character of the building to which they are attached or otherwise
associated with and are'consistent with the Grand Terrace Municipal Code.
7. Conditions of approval for this project necessary to secure the purposes of the Grand
Terrace Municipal Code and General Plan are made a part of this approval.
In addition, the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that specific findings be made prior to the
approval of the tentative map. These findings are:
a) The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvements is consistent with the General Plan; and
b) The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development; and
c) The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially or avoidable injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat; and
d) The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
public health problems; and
e) The proposed subdivision, its design, density and type of development and
improvements conform to the regulations of the City's Development Code and the
regulations of any public agency having jurisdiction by law.
Findings, for the Specific Plan are based on Section 18.90.040 of the Zoning Code for zoning
amendments. These findings have-been incorporated into the proposed Ordinance for the Specific
Plan,Attachment 24.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Upon approval by the Planning Commission,the proposed project will be subject to the Conditions
of Approval for the four Site and Architectural Reviews (Attachment 22) and the Tentative Tract
Map(Attachment 23).
RECOMMENDATION•
Staffrecommends that the Planning Commission approve the Resolution of Approval for SA-04-02,
SA-04-03, SA-04-04 and SA-04-05 (Attachment 22) and recommend for approval to the City
Council the Resolution of Approval for TTM-04-01 (Tentative Tract Map No. 16624)(Attachment
23) and the Ordinance Adopting the Specific Plan, SP-04-02 (Attachment 24).
Respectfully submitted,
Lampe,Associate Planner Gary L. eoontz, Cqa,6unity Development Director
GLK:JL jl
Exhibits: Exhibit 1 Tentative Tract Map No. 16624 and'Site Plan
Exhibit 2 Plan 1 Elevations and floor plan
Exhibit 3 Plan 2 Elevations and floor plan
Exhibit 4 Plan 3 Elevations and floor plan
Exhibit 5 Plan 4 Elevations and floor plan
Exhibit 6 Preliminary Landscaping Plan
Exhibit 7 Conceptual Grading Plan
Exhibit A Specific Plan No. 04-02 Document
Exhibit B Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study
Attachments%m#Attachment 1 Aerial photograph of site and surrounding area
Attachment 2 Minutes of the July 21', last,meeting of Planning Commission
Attachment 3 8 %2" x 11"reduction of tentative tract map and site plan
Attachment 4 Letter from the City Manager dated Sept. 5t', 2003
attachment 5 8 %2"x 11"reduction of Plan 1 elevations and floor plan
1 64ftachment 6 8 %2"x 11"reduction of Plan 2 elevations and floor plan
wittachment 7 8 %2"x 11"reduction of Plan 3 elevations and floor plan
✓Attachment 8 8 %2"x 11" reduction of Plan 4 elevations and floor plan
7
I
i
Attachment 9 8 % "x 11"reduction of preliminary landscaping plan
Attachment 10 8 % "x 11" reduction of preliminary grading plan
Attachment 11 Letter from the Riverside Highland Water Company 2/20/04
Attachment 12 Letter from County Fire -Haz Met dated 2/24/04
Attachment 13 Letter from the Gage Canal Company dated 3/2/04
Attachment 14 Memorandum from the City Traffic Engineer 3/3/04
Attachment 15 Memorandum from the City Traffic Engineer 7/7/05
Attachment 16 Memorandum from the City Traffic Engineer 8/11/05
Attachment 17 Memorandum from Director of Building and Safety 8/08/05
Attachment 18 Letter from Environmental Health Services 6/24/05
Attachment 19 Letter from the County Fire - Community Services 3/15/04
Attachment 20 Notes from County Fire - Community Serices dated 7/15/05
Attachment 21 Letter from the Gas Company dated 6/28/05
Attachment 22 Resolution ofApproval for SA-04-02,SA-04-03,SA-04-04&SA-04-
05
Attachment 23 Resolution for Approval for TTM-04-01 (TTM 16624)
Attachment 24 Ordinance Adopting Specific Plan No. 04-02
ICI
c:\MyFilesUOHN\Kargerlkarger2-5-04\SP-04-02comm.rpt5
I
I,
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
low
21 ✓Jfj 4
IA
'R1.
W U
Iff
31
Qt
Hill
U-7
0-7;
i W�r'
un
MTJ
NA
gim 17171 JJ7
4q?
r
r- `-''�;}� ,.;dt"''�71t '"' t �s: t.:;: ^5. r Wj�4
11T.
qu
.117:t{r "a �[': "'�.` t-o- _;_j2�s_:c :.;-.iSl..f�.xa[�a�i,+=.=•�....:....�7m�s1� �p' ��t,
r2r
,
E,
L d Ud HL m
. 2. SP-04-02 SA-04-02 �j
SA-04-03 SA-04-06 F/ I n 7/
TTM4M41 E-04-01: Continuation of the project that will consist of an approximately
2 acre vacant area consisting of two parcels located on the
north side of De Berry Street between the Gage Canal on e
j west-and Mt. Vernon Avenue on the east.
I
APPLICANT: Massaro and Welsh, Civil Engineers
j LOCATION: Northerly section of De Berry Street between the Gage Canal
i
on the west and Mt. Vernon Avenue on the east.
RECOMMENDATION: Re-open the public hearing and receive the staff'report. Review
a new and revised tentative tract map and provide comme
and guidance to the Son of the developer. Continue the punnc
hearing to the meeting of Thursday, August 18, 2005.
Planning Director Koontz wanted to inform the Commission that Staff was unaware of the
overhead projector lamp being burned out. There will not be any projection slides at this
meeting, and will be sure to have a new bulb by the next Planning Commission.
Associate Planner Lampe greeted the Commission and presented his staff report. This is a
continuation of this project to construct a single-family residential project consisting of two
acres on the north side of De Berry Street.
The project has been heard three prior times by the Planning Commission. Just before the
last meeting, in which this project was discussed, the Applicant and the Developer showed
up with a revised tract that the staff did not have an opportunity to put into the package
the Planning Commission. The revised map showed 14 single family lots and on i
easterly end next to Mt. Vernon Avenue, a 12,000 square foot open spaced lot will be set
I aside and would not be developed.
As the Staff needed additional time to analyze the latest revised design, the Commission
continued the Item to this meeting with instructions to the Applicant and the Developer to
come back with the various requests that the Commission had with regard to this project.
Following the Meeting of May 18, 2005, the Staff did receive a revised Specific plan with
the latest revised map. The map was distributed to the various County Agencies and City
Departments for review and comment in early June. Some time afterwards, the Staff was
informed that the Son of the Developer was going to take over the project and it was his
intentions to modify the map by adding an additional single family lot. This lot would be
located next to the undeveloped open space lot facing Mt. Vernon.
A second map was presented to Staff which it showed 15 single family lots with a 5,600
square foot open space lot at the east end next to Mt. Vernon. A revised specific plan was
also received and was distributed to various agencies and City departments for review and
comment.
Two lots located at Mirado Street will face onto Mirado Street with garages in the front The
rest of the lots will face De Berry Street. The garages will front an existing alleyway in the-,
I back. Most of the lots are 54 112 feet wide. One side yard has been widened out to 9 1i*�_
i
•
3 ATTACHMENT J*
feet to reflect the Commission's input with regard to the side yards being widened out to 10
feet.
The County Fire Department was contacted with regard to fire access from the existing
alleyway. The Applicant met with Mr. Doug Crawford of the San Bernardino County Fire
Department, in which he had four comments that he would like proposed on the map. A
fire flow with 1,250 gallons per minute, along with a new hydrant on De Berry, and the
alleyway posted as one way rather than two ways.
The Staff contacted Waste Management with regard to trash pick up for the area. Waste
Management had no problems with the proposed residences and indicated it will be able to
service the area without problems.
_ The initial study was completed and a Negative Declaration for the project was proposed.
Under CEQA, the City is required to provide public notice that the document is available for
public review. No documentation or comments from the general public were received.
It is Staffs recommendation that this item be continued to August 18th under the
assumption that no changes will be made to the proposed tract map. U there are any
changes, the staff is recommending a 60 day continuance to review any changes.
Associate Planner Lampe concluded his staff report.
Chair Wilson opened the Public Hearing and asked if the Planning Commissioner's had any
questions or comments.
Vice Chair Addington remarked that the proposal looked a lot better than what was
originally presented. Is the open space area going to be irrigated with a lawn?
Planning Director Koontz replied that it is the City Manager's interest in acquiring the piece
to construct and maintain a small pocket park.
Commissioner Comstock wanted to know who will maintain the alleyway.
Associate Planner Lampe replied that the Department of Public Works would need to come
up with an agreement along with the Developer, to make sure that the alleyway is properly
maintained.
Vice Chair Addington-asked if the alleyway was considered public or private.
Associate Planner Lampe reported that the former Public Works Director, Virgil Barham
had informed Mr. Lampe that the alley was publicly dedicated but that the City had never
accepted the maintenance for the alleyway.
Chair Wilson also agreed with the revised plan and is looking forward to moving forward
with the project. Chair Wilson invited the Applicant to come forward.
Jason Kanter
19236 Dandelion Court
Mr. Karger thanked the Commission for their comments and is looking forward to moving
forward with the project.
4
i
' Mr. Karger asked if the Commission had wished to have several elevations insofar as the
setbacks are concerned, or to vary the setbacks between two and three feet
Chair Wilson replied that the staff will work with Mr. Karger with regard to what vAll be
feasible, and will bring it before the Commission in the future.
Vice Chair Addington felt that a variance of the front elevations would be feasible ai id
would look presentable. Also to reduce the front setback to less than 20 feet Also, to
increase the setback in the rear yard next to the driveways.
j Chair Wilson closed the public hearing.
MOTION PC-29-2005: Motion was made by Vice Chair Addington to continue the item_
i
to the September 15, 2005 meeting.
Commissioner Whitley seconded the motion.
MOTION VOTE
PC-29-2005: Approved 540-0-0
3. SA4W21, CUP4)4-10
E-04-12: Construct a completely new auto service station with
,I
convenience market, car wash, delicatessen and freeway sign
APPLICANT: RAMCAM Corp., on behalf of business owner, Mr. Fahim
Tanios
LOCATION: 22045 Barton Road (Approximately .66 acre parcel located
the south side of Barton Road just east of the 1-215 Freeway o_
ramp. This site was operated as a Texaco and Shell fueling
1 station in the past.)
RECOMMENDATION: Open the continued Public Hearing, receive the staff report and
public testimony, if any, provided guidance to staff and applicant
on the proposed redesign and continue to the next meeting of
August 18, 2005.
Associate Planner Lampe presented his staff report. The project was continued from the
meeting of May 19, 2005. Specifically, the project was continued to allow' for a redesign of the
proposed gas station/mini-market building to reflect the California Craftsman style of the Outdoor
Adventures Center Specific Plan. The original design did not comply with the style of
architecture for the area.
There were two other issues related to the project with regard to the color scheme of the canopy
and also the freeway signage.
The Applicant met with the staff and presented a revised architectural style. Staff felt that the
design did not have enough of the California Craftsman design features. The Applicant was
then asked to submit another proposal. On July 13, 2005, a second design proposal was
received from the applicant that has been presented at this meeting.
I
5
i•i�•.yir��ii% i
ON,
IN�. -
��' i� Nr. ��. � � ..n •, �1.� '..�� ^ter—��.=. � _—_ ..�<.�ti n � - - —_ .�. .:5� � y'7�•
...._..., .�....,•_= ter _ __•��r arr���l �. !�
=;�• �_�.►1�►T.� �_ ��- �C�J►_� _fir=
z � 1.
1 I
I
- « September 5, 2003
0000
1 I 11
(llIf01NII
22795 Barton Road Barney Karger
Grand Terrace Karger Construction
'C lifornia 92313-5295 11668 Bernardo Way
Grand Terrace, CA 92313
Civic Center
Dear Barney: -
(909) 824-6621
Fax (909) 783-7629 1 apologize for the delay in responding to you regarding our meeting of
Fax (909] 783-2600 August 25`h regarding your plans for a subdivision at the comer of Mt.
Vernon and De Berry. In reviewing the plans and discussing with the
Planning DepartrnenSwe have come to an agreement on a compromise r.
that we-could potentially support in moving this project forward to the
Lee Ann Garcia Planning Commission and the City Council.
Mayor
As you are aware Staff has no approval authority on any projects
Maryette Ferre however,we do make recommendations to the Planning Commission and
Mayor Pro Tempore the City Council.
Herman Hilkey Your current plans include 15 single-family units and one four-plex at the
Don Larkin corner of Mt. Vernon and De Beny. As we had indicated previously we
Bea Cortes have some difficulty accepting the 5 ft. side yard concept that you have
Council Members proposed. ,We are proposing an alternative of increasing that from 5 ft. to :-
10 ft. on the hon-garage side of each lot. This would provide the
Thomas J. Schwab homeowner with a slightly larger yard and a little more usable space on
City Manager the non-garage side. Doing so along the 13 units that will utilize the alley
for garage access,the creation of a 10 ft. side yard will result in the loss
of 1 unit from the current plan.Increasing those side yards would then
move lot#12 to the property line of the four-plexes that sit to the north of
this property.
In regards to the four-plex at the corner of Mt. Vernon and De Berry we
cannot support a 2-story four-plex on this corner. The access issues are
difficult and moving over and eliminating lot 13 actually eliminates the
possibility for access on that particular lot.
I
In consideration for the fact that this particular development has very
little open space we are proposing that the comer parcel that is currently
slated for the four-plex be created into a green belt area for a small park,
or some type of amenities that would be available to the residents. It also
would provide a more clear view for the amount of traffic that currently
exists at Mt. Vernon and De Berry.
I
i
ATTACHMENT
I .
I
a '
C Page 2
C. Karger Letter
9/5/03
- -An summary, although this project does not meet our current minimum
standards this compromise would allow the development of 14 single
family units which would provide needed housing in the City and I
believe could be a profitable venture for you.
If you,wish to discuss this.further please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
a
Thomas Schwab
City Manager
TS jv
JLNa VHaVZZV
I
I
I
1, ;L
31
J r• ;,
I
�j,Lil ,
L l��fL' a
jr-if 1:
U J11
i
,d.•.
I
i
w
iP2
I I
b w �QN1 I
i
1 � .
I
I
PLAN 1 KARM HOMES,NC.
GRAND TERRACE -
a FASiSM COUNTY,caUF.
............•wou.
MELYMAIIeriwirai`oaeiwoeiai—__...__._...------•--•--.��___...�.__...—......._--^---.�.,�.��...r, wvBcwaWao.�Ecr �
kk
;i
� �Jn
jiiitiiiii ........tt::l::•
Itfu««u«r(• I7«««cur«r I«r(t«f(!t(((t•
IMMIUM.
I(««««««f• If!(((«(«(((r ISI 1((``((r«(((((((
I((«!(«((«It• X',•+ I'«(((r!((!!f!! _ I((«[ftt(!!!!f•
1'«((«UMM. —� I-fammuf((( I(tf!(!(!(((r(• we
1 ffr(«f(ft««. ■L L I'r(t((frtr«f!( I f• r1f�f(!!((ft/(• ■L\I
I««««f«[«• I7!«(uft«(« ter I!«f«fr«r«(•
I(«(«!(««((!• 1(((«!t(f!r«(r• ►t-r� I t(at((((((«((«(•
Iltf(«`(((f(f««t Itttflrrf(`Illttr« _ 1'!(!f!II!(f«(•
1'!t!t(!(f[[
I•(«««f[tt�i lu «rfu!!i 1 4 f«(««u(«taf•if(! Iff««S�rr««t!!« rat
e■ ((((((tu(/t«((•�(((I(t(. �. I f«(«/
Irani«««('
It
tuft /
t((«, ( ■i 1!(�r i(i_ Ira},t ( .. _ •��■
I for
r(rrffJ ��■ rrrrr . eta■ r («• 111111
h«u�ad -�- rat «t ��■ r#f�rrr}rt ..
r;«u
«r«ra«fd jiiiS(if iit E M r it It..
MC
( ((S(�1
•t I,: „t
SM I, .......
3fSf+
�' 1 If fN El
I
I)!!»)11mmuI
Mlyy■aal 1'f),►,ll,J, 1 lal ,J ,l)J►J)f 1I)
+m»»»► il�at ►t»»f»!1 ��1 ,lff�»�n»t►nf►
■aa um)fi !I 1 )n»»)Jn+
r111 /»111»ff,l --�� /'»)I►»I►,.Ij )))Jl)))llJl)f),1
/Inn) ,11► /!»»1►►I»I OPPAHM Jf!!ml»„)f».1
/d)I )»+ I►»»»»»,)1 )I!l/1I,JMID.J
il�►.141M)
fS3f»»33ii1 �»,»mm»� .,mlmm»»t»�
'off f3 + »,11)»/ nl t f
)► )),))J I,,,'1 /»)!!//», !!.I u 1„»)1!J IJI)»)+
- i3f3f3fifi33nf:► '" - i 11'Ifltf►MM). �' Is MI fiMID'I
•»»►»m»1»»)
- IA►lI►!I),►)»l.� r I„►1►)11J►))!„N�+ — )»Il»I!»»»,».,
• ►►1I»)t)1 J1),I �. mI!»»»»I))».
#!»» )f»31»31.� »»�»»»»»1».+ »»))ml»nj
»»►t»f)n»/),I'I i 8 'I!»»►,II»»J»),I� 1 atmt»»)tXIII
►»,»J►/»»»»1 »,»»»,»»,lt., ,. 1►»»»,►»)m
1p
- •»»!„»»)»)J!I•, 1!!,/IJ )1►1))., ial yJ))I)),!.
■■1 !I))1►1)I,►J)!lJ,l'1 f,►I)1l13f)fl))»f, '�;��11!»l1n+
I XM 1 •»)J1►»!fJ 1»»,. I ■■/ -- ,»»»»!I
MIDIJl!»)AM oaf '!!»►»»»)»J».1 -11 /„!»))JJ)!•I
•»I!I»J»)I»»1 �■1 ),J»Al)1»
),11l11,1)11f MI.,
•►»»»►»n,»n►I •»»»IJl»»»m., 1,
FA 01
u
mi =
d • I b
�ALCf o
�u
• - i O
= KMMM HOME%WC. ,#.
GRAND TERRACE
a■
•h►l►11J11111)lJh1 �1J111!))rr.�
■ )J�11/JJn1J1JAl n.Al 1A)Ann1
o- •»Aa1)JI1711»l)l B 1tnn1AlA1I1
_ •)n)AUDI»A))I'I i w I)1 •»)»A)»7.
A11)►V)!))1))1)1 I t�l A).�-inninin
/■/ nin?,P)b))n.1 I /, in 1'»JJA1nJI
/// 1J1IIl.►►HIIII111 >I�1; 1" �V1J111J1?1
1/ J711AJ.►•�)!1 my -�, !)1 �Vll►n1 1
•J/nnn.�»77AL1 111 ►MMY
P)MMI� Hnnn1.►t1n1)11.al, in 1►)nn
u •)l1n))1Il'•!11)).1 u �• JlI ' 1 1�1
'HIM AIj11nn.1 In Jll!)nl
•»»JnnsOMM1 own, In Ir1)l1111
►r i` •1JJ1L/Ht111111).1 ■8! •Ill J.Mnn.l
�• ln)np JnJ11n. n) 1n)1111.
1)A► 11)1JJJn)1.1 •Jll Ji)Jl»)JII)l.
Jl 111A)JIJImin)l1),I ►' My11A»)111A11
)111!)1:1 i;;)MI);;;M1.1
Ann)))n))»).1 1»)))))IMM.1
w, A»AIM)MM.1 AAnnnAAAI.
•»nnnlnlJ)M ■�1 •111I1nini n n
►)7 r 1 »nJ1J)n11I»•1 i■1 1111n11J11A)1111
■mil lnnln11nnn)I ■'1 •1)nn l►lln1J11
111 -milm1)Iln)1JJ.1 )»))MMiln n.I
Iminnnninji,I1J1)Jl11JlJ)l1Jl.J - JJAl11)11)J1/J)1.
•lJJJ)J1)Ill1JA11,1 •)»lI1)A1/1J1J11.1
•)►►111))1)l1J1)I). •)JAA)AD1AJJl.1
•J11/1111►1»lJ)11� •J)))1JJ1)JJJJ1Ll1
u _
rt� _
'O..I ism
wwr man
ENV-ism
J
KARM HOMEA INC. �.
GRAND TERRACE
rRIMSVE COUNTY,
1
i
,LmawHaV LsV
IP PP • MM O�GNr
FRri � z
I
n
I
11rt (iff1 i1
.WAW -
� z �
ir
rrar � +� � tv F CDs
ape Fss : � � ' '• [n �. I,
I
I
14
j
a
N } t i I G
.71
t
PREUMINARY GRADING PLAN
CffY OF CUM TSWAM
wow
rAmk
IL
L
A
c' 09
C.L A�now
mLw
Rau—
ts;7�:_
0`o T '
N i V�> 1450&Washington St. Colton, CA 92324-4696 • (909)825-4128 FAX(909)825-17:
4 I �4\�'�'SEgv►�0 ,
February 20, 2004
i
Mr. John Lampe
City of Grand Terrace
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92313
Re: Tentative Tract No. 16624
Dear Mr. Lampe;
Riverside Highland Water Company has no objection to this project
moving forward, although there are some concerns with the water system.
The east tie-in on Mt. Vernon Avenue to our 24" water main is very deep. '.
We believe it would make more sense to tie in on De Soto Street. We are willing
to work with the developer on this change if necessary.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (909)
825-4128.
Thank you. i
i
Sincerely,
nn ''
Rich Haubert
Distribution Superintendent
RNHIss
ATTACHMENT
wL."Tnl
ti_I ECONOMIC OEVELOPM
AND PUBLIC SERVICES G
OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DIVISION PETER R.HILLS
190 South "E" Street - San Bernardino, CA 92415-0153
,.. Fire Chief
9) 386-8401 - Fax(909)386-8460 County Fire Warden
24 FEBRUARY 2004
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT -�R 7 Mat
22795 BARTON ROAD
GRAND TERRACE, CA 92313-5295
ATTENTION: JOHN LAMPE,ASSOCIATE PLANNER
FILE NO: SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 04-01, SITE AND,A,RCHITECTURAL REVIEW
CASE NO'S O4-02, 04-03, 04-04, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO 04-01, AND
E1'VIRONMENTAL REVIEW CASE NO 04-01
APPLICANT: MASSARO & WELSH, CEVIL ENGINEERS-LAND SURVEYOR
ON BEHALF BARNEY KARGER, OWNER
r Dear Mr. Lampe:
With regards to the above-mentioned file the San Bemardino County Fire Department
(' F'::zardous Vtatei-iais Divisio
n does not have any additional comments for this project.
Should you have any further questions, comments, or concerns,please feel free to contact
me at(909)386-8401.
KlUSTEN RIEGEL,MPH, REHS
Hazardous Materials Field Services Section
ATTACHMENT
PAUL RENC;K wnu'4 vLDJJ AVJJ.Jr,Vr, 1J 11r.1`11`I r.i 11 1v1t1it 111Y
I PRESIDENT 'VICE PRESIDENT GENERAL MANAGER-SEC TREASURER
THE GAGE CANAL COMPANY
7452 DUFFERIN AVENUE
RIVERSIDE,CA 92504
909-780-1333 ,
FAX 909-780-1973
March 2, 2004
Jim Lampe
Associate Planner
City of Grand Terrace
Dear Mr. Lampe
Regarding your plans for Tract #16624, The East side of the Gage Canal
Property and De Berry Street along Gage's property line adjacent to your
project, show that the'elevation on the adjoining lots are higher than the Gage
Canal property. These plans would require a concrete retaining.wall at least 2
feet high to prevent water from flowing on to the Gage Canal property.
As for the existing wooden fences, there is a tendency for children to pull the
boards off. Wooden fence posts rot and boards fall off due to the loose.nails.
j Installing a durable chain link fence would be more effective.
1
I - '
I
l
ATTACHMENT
TEP tm
P.O. Box 18355
Irvine CA 92623 phone:949 552 4357
e-mail:tepirvine@sbcglobai.ner fax;909494 4408
mobile*909 263 0383
Date: March 3, 2004
To: John Lampe, Associate Planner, City of Grand Terrace
From: Craig S. Neustaedter, Registered Traffic Engineer (TR1433)
Subject: Comments on Specific Plan for 16 Residential Lots
Location: North side of DeBerry between Gage Canal and Mt Vernon Av.
File No: SP-04-01
The proposed project consists of 15 single-family dwelling units and a two-story four unit
apartment building. On a daily basis, the project will generate 170 vehicle trips. In the a.m.
peak hour, the project will generate 13 vehicle trips, and in the p.m. peak hour, the project will
generate 18 vehicle trips. The project will have no significant traffic impacts on the adjacent
streets and Intersections.
Access to the dwelling unit driveways will be via a 20 ft. wide alley. Parking In the alley can
significantly impede the through movement of vehicles, including emergency vehicles. It is
recommended that the alley be signed to prohibit parking.
C .
Transportation Engineering and Planning, Inc.
�. ATTACHMENT' .
i I
1 ,
P.O. Box 18355 TEP,,,,
Irvine CA 92623 phone:949 552 4357
fax:909494 4408
e-mail:tepirvine@sbcglobal.net mobile: 909 263 0383
I
Date: July 7, 2005
To: John Lampe, Associate Planner, City of Grand Terrace
From: Craig S. Neustaedter, Registered Traffic Engineer(TR1433)
Subject: Comments on Residential Specific Plan
Location: DeBery Street at Mount Vernon Ave.
File No: TTM04-01 (#16624)
The proposed project will consist of 14 single-family dwelling units. Access to the units'
garages will be taken via a proposed alley with a curb to curb width of 20 feet.
! The project will have no significant impact on circulation or parking.
I
i
i
r
I
Transportation Engineering and Planning, Inc.
ATTACHMENT
P.O. Box 92 TEP
23 phone:949 552 4357
Irvine CA 92623 fax:909494 4408 ,
e-mail:tepirvine@sbcglobal.net mobile:909 263 03831
Date: August 11, 2005
To: John Lampe, Associate Planner, City of Grand Terrace
From: Craig S. Neustaedter, Registered Traffic Engineer (TR1433)
Subject: Comments on Specific Plan for Tract Number 16624
Location: North Side of DeBerr'y between the Gage Canal and Mount
Vernon Ave.
File No: SP-04-01 /TTM-04-01
The project proposal will add one dwelling unit to the previously reviewed tract map. The
proposal will have no significant traffic impacts.
C,y✓
( Transportation Engineering and Planning, Inc.
ATTACHMENT ;,;
i
i
I
��oMMp1yj?�
12-8.5373 Revised
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Lampe, Associate Planner
g H FROM: Jerry Glander, Director of Building and Safety/Public Works
DEPARTMENT OF
BUILDING& SAFETY, DATE: August 8, 2005 (Revision No. 2)
PUBLIC WORKS
AND HOUSING
SUBJECT: Specific Plan No.04-01 (SP-04-01),Site and Architectural Review
22795 Barton Road Case No.'s 04-02, 04-03, 04-04 04-05 & 04-06 (SA-04-02;03 -
Suite B 04 -OS 06) Tentative Tract Map No.04-01 (TI'M-04-O 1 -County
Grand Terrace ' ' '
California 92313-5295 No. 16624)and Environmental Review Case No. 04-01 (E-04-01)
Civic Center Approximately 2 acre, vacant area consisting of two parcels
(909) 825-3825 located on the north side of De Berry Street between the Gage
Fax (909) 825-7506 Canal on the west and Mt. Vernon Avenue on the east. Barney
e
Kar er- 161ot subdivision
The following recommendations should be considered as conditions prior
recordation of Final Map.
i
1- Pay off any remaining sewer assessment balance on the original parcel.
2• Submit to City Council for acceptance; all agreements bond
s for
i Performance, bonds for labor and material for the following:
A.. Grading
B. Sanitary sewer improvements
C. Storm drain improvements
D. Water system improvements
F.
E. Street, curb, gutter& sidewalks
Street lights
G. Final property corner survey monuments
3• Cash deposit in the amount of 10% of total estimated cost.
4. -Submit a preliminary soils reportprepared by a California Registered Civil
Engineer.
5• Show all easements on Tract Map.
6• Do not show building footprints on Final Tract Map.
i
M1.
ATTACHMENT
12-8.5373
_. August 8, 2005
After project review and in compliance with the Grand Terence Municipal Code Chapter 15.28
Article I, the following recommendations should be considered as conditions for the proposed
project.
1. Provide the following:
A. Plot plan.
B. Grading, drainage plan and N.P.D.E.S.plan.
C. Complete construction plans for structures.
D. Property corner points.
2. All utilities shall be run underground.
3. Provide proof of payment of school fees.
4. Pay all plan check,permit and inspection fees.
5. Pay all capital improvement,maintenance, circulation and traffic improvement fees.
6. All improvements shall be designed by persons registered and licensed to perform such work
pursuant to the State of California Business and Professions Code, which shall comply with all
applicable requirements of the 2001 Califomia Building Code,2001 California Electrical Code,2001
California Plumbing Code,2001 California Mechanical Code,American Disabilities Act,(Ca1DAG
2000),Title 24 California Energy Requirements and the Grand Terrace Municipal Code.
7. Install three street lights on DeBerry Street.
C 8. Saw cut wings on curbs to maintain 10%max. side slope for handicap ramps at both comers
on.Mirado Avenue.
9. Remove and replace all curb depressions on De Bevy St.,all damaged curb and gutter on all
streets and cut asphalt paving back 12" from removed gutters, install match up paving.
10. Cut back tree branches hanging over alley.
11. Remove & replace damaged concrete swale in alley and repave each side of swale.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH �—y7an COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
f i
.3t 5 North Arrowhead Avenue-San Bernardino,CA 924154160-(909)8844056
❑ 1647 East Holt Boulevard-Ontario,CA 91761 -(909)458-9673 JAMES A.FELTEN, MPA.
Public Health Director �
❑ 13911 Park Avenue-Victorville,CA 92392-(760)243-3773
❑ San Bernardino County Vector Control Program ERIC K FRYKMAN,MD,MPH,MBA
2355 East 5th Street-San Bernardino,CA 9241"M-(909)388-"w Health Officer
-WO
June 24, 2005
D LI DANIEL J.AVERA, REHS
--Wt NED Chief of Environmental Health
JUN 2 8 2005Adelaft Montclair
Also swvwV��..``
Apple valley N.em..
BwftmMICHELLE F. BOUSTEDT Big a R,Onnt o Cum
John Lampe, Associate Planner Planning/Commun China RedlarWe
I
City of Grand Terrace �"'"eS Department Conan San Bwrwdm
FonteCommunity and Economic Development Department c� u�P1e
Hesperia Viciarv"
22795 Barton Road Highiancl Yucaipa
Grand Terrace,CA. 92313 Lam L"'is YU=veN Y
SUBJECT: TTM-04-01
i
Mr. Lampe:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed project for Tentative Tract(TTM-04-01).
Environmental Health Services has reviewed the submitted Tentative Tract Map for this project. At
this time, EHS has no comments.
If you have any questions,please contact me at(909)3874655.
Sincerely,
aula Harold, REHS
Water&Waste Management
PH:ar
N:,WamURmldd mxh \Lztw oo cm u=a TTM-O"I 0&2"5
ATTACHMENT IN
i
• COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDWO
COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT ECONOMIC SERVIOfflLCES
r�.� AND F•UBLIC SERY{CES GROUF
OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL •�' PE.ER R. HILLS
COMMUMtTV SAFETY DIVISION Fro Chef
620 South -'E"Street • San Bernardino,CA 92415-0179 ^-)unty I-9n Warden
(909)316-BAQO • Fax(909)3884460
MARCH 15,2004
r
BEILNARDO KARGER
11669 8ERNARDO WAY
GRAND TERRACE, CA 92313
FILE:T.M GT04,87-36
LOCATION:DRBERRY AVEIv'YTE—GRAND TERRACE
PROJECT TYPE:APARTMENTS
SQUARE FOOTAGE:5,200
PLANNER: JOFM LAMPE
Dear Applicant:
With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced project,the,San Bernardino
County Fire Department requires the following fire protection measures to be provided in accordance with
applicable local ordinances,codes,and/or recognized lire protection standards.
The following information of this document sets forth the FIRE CONDITIONS and GUII�ELINCS which
are applied to this pmject. ❑ Approved 0 Approved w/conditions ❑Not Approved
FIRE CONDITIONS.,
JurIsdictlon. The above referenced project is under the jurisdiction of the San.Bernardino County
Fire Department herein ("Fire Department'). Prior to any construction occurring on any parcel, the
applicant shall contact the lire Department for verification of current fire protection requirements.
All new construction shall comply with the current Uniform Fire Code requirements_ and all
applicable statutes,codes,ordinances and standards of the Fire Department. (F"1)
Water System, ,Prior to any land disturbance, the water systemis shall be designed to meet the
required fire flow for this devclopmeni and shall be approved by the Fire Department. Ae required
fire flow shall be determined by using Appendix MA,of the Uniform Fire Code.
The Fire Flow for this project shall be:
2000 GPM for a 2 Hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure.
Except for individual Single family residences, the applicant shall submit four. (4) copies of the
water system improvement plans to the Fire Department for review and approval. New water
systems shall have minimum cighi (8) inch mains, six (6) inch :atera:s, six (6) inch riser and an
approved six(6)inch fire hydrant. Standard 9033 fF-5]
-:..�I ,,,;1 ifs. P��s �;f:: ATTACHMENT aebnl,,lr.ir,.,: (,N i I PA-L MAINS' 3r�:,.r,d fifsl'rci
I ClJF1'QHL�U,YQIIAC: .
TR GT04/8736
MARCH 15, 2004
Page 2
Fire Fe . The required fire fees(currently$600.00)shall be paid to the Fire Departinetit.
[F-40a]
Access. The development and each phase thereof shall have a minimum of 2 points of vehicular
access. These are,for fire/emergency equipment access and for evacuation routes. Standard
902.2.1[F41)
Turnaround. An approved turnaround shall be provided at the end of each roadway ore hundred
and fifty"ISO)feet or more in length. Cul-de-sac length snail not exceed six hundred(600) feet,all
roadways shall not exceed a 12 % grade and have a minirnum.of forty(40) foot radius for all turns.
I In the FRl or FR2 Fire Safety Overlay District areas,there are additional.requirements.
Standard 902.2.1 (F-431
i
Combustible Protection. prior to combustibles, being placed or the project Site an approved
j paved road with curb and gutter and 5re hydrants with an acceptable watcx system shall be
installed. The topcoat of asphalt does not have to be installed until final inspection and occupancy.
[F-44j
Water system. A water system approved and inspected by the Fire Department is required. The
system shall be operational, prior to any combustibles being stored on the site. The applicant is '
required to provide a minimtun of one new six(6) inch fire hydrant asesetnbly with two(2).two and
one half(2 112)inch and one(1)four(4)inch outlet- All fire hydrants shall be spaced no more than
three hundred(300) feet apart and no more than one hundred fifty(150) feet from any portion of a
structure. Detached single .family residential developments may increase the spacing between
hydrants to be no more than six hundred(600) feet and no more than three hundred (300) feet any
portion of a detached single family structure. Stand-Rd9 01 A [F-54)
i
Water System Certification. The applicant shall provide the Fire Department with a letter from
the serving water company,certifying that the required.water improvements have been made or that
the existing fire hydrants and water system will meet distance and fire'flow requirements, Fire flow
j water supply shall be in place prior to placing combustible materials.on the job-site [F-57)
Street S9a!n. This project is required to have an approved street sign (temporary or permanent).
The street sign shall be installed on the nearest street comer to the project. Installation of the
temporary sign shall be prior any combustible material being placed on the constriction site. Prior
to final inspection and occupancy of the first structure, the permanent street sign shall be installed.
Standard 901.4.4 (F72)
Hydrant Marking. Blue reflective pavement markers indicating fire hydrant locations shall be
installed as specified by the fire Department. In areas where snow removal occurs or non-paved
{ roads exist, the blue reflective hydrant :parker shall be posted on an approved post along the side of
the road, no more than three ;3) feet from the hydrant and at least six (6) feet high above the
adjacent road. Sta .4.3 [F80)
i
'fir;/70)'d 7%[�� ' S�?i t�•)3�L['"4'};
TR GT04/8736
(� MARCH 15,2004
Page 3
Residentl2l Addressing. The street address shall be installed on the building with numbers that are
a minimum of four (4) inches in height and with a one half(%) inch stroke. The address shall be
visible from the street. During the hours of drAness, the numbers shall be internally and
electrically illuminated with a low voltage power source. Numbers shall contrast with Aeir
background and be legible from the street. Where the building is fifty (50) feet or more from the
roadway, additional contrasting Four (4) inch numbers shall be displayed at the property access
entrances. Standard 901.4.4 [F81]
illuminated Site Diagram. The applicant shall submit for review and approval a site diagram plan
to the lire Department. The applicant shall install at each entrance to a multi:-family complex an
illuminated diagrammatic representation of the complex,which shows the location�f each unit and
each fire hydrant.Standard 901.4.4 [F84]
Snark Arrestor. An approved spark arrestor is required Evcry chimney that is used in
conjunction with any fireplace or any heating appliance in which solid or liquid fuel are used, shall
have an approved spark arrestor visible from the ground that is maintained in conformance with the
Uniform Fire Code. [F87]
yp
l
l) 1~ORD
Planning&Engineering Supervisor
DC js
• L-�Zr �:��ZLi '3'�N
v'riivi wva t%):cl rse 8UVOOb84VU massaro & weish40001
I
i
MASSARO
WELSH
RICHMM O.MASSARO, P.E. PAUL T.WELSH,P.E.,L.S.t
CIVIL ENGINEERS PLANNERS • LAND SURVEYORS
FAX (909) 809 - 9490
r
COVER SEW
orU 9) 7).0 3 7
TE Opr MESSAGE
TO: ...�EJ�JV L14MPC DATE:
i
! Um TELI±COPY CCNTAINS Z— PAQM
INCIMING Tus, COVER SHEET I t
i
I r
MESSAGE: dney&
-mccT LUL l6dvro
vim
Dov L./ZiiE' j FkW if PLA Af
�r� r
I
I �
i
I { ATTACHMENT
1572 North Waterrmn Avenue, Suitie 5 5aiz 13emardino, Call
I
vJ o s pra 3�t �
JLL
S30M rn WVA MWrwwW `
ia3a mi woum*uosin�+,wanu °a p
auuus"w iOk s30a drams SWL a /
- O eNou°3aao��� • - a31u° 'r► - � 1/ •;�, ��>.��Cf�� �� ����!
ns3w3'wbra=vmn -ic
4WSS333N ION
• nssm'O31&SV a31d333V-Z I /�
ca uwens Sv 03id v•� .� ✓ t� j�J ' /T�1 �
ld3p "121A N(103 MavvNws Nve ..
lv
- a
{
_ r ASPH
10001,
__ Y � / i
Southern Calliornla
Gas Company
D 2�211�f//IC Redlan981 W.ds.
a Avenue
4-9720
� 11�� 1 L�7'I jl\VV/I L�7 Redlands,CA 92374-9720
I Gas .
Gas i • Mailing Address:
Company- JUL U 1 1005 Po Box 3003,SCS031
Redlands,CA 92373.0306
A WSempra Energy company MICHELLE F. BOUSTEDT
June 23,2005 Planning/Community
Services Department
r City of Grand Terrace
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92313 f-5295 -
Attention: John Lampe
Re: Tentative Tract Map 04-01 — County No. 16624 — De Berry St. between
Gage and Mt. Vernon Avenue
City of Grand Terrace
Thank you for the opportur ity to respond to the above-referenced project. Please note
that Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the above named
project is proposed. Gas service to the project could be provided without any significant
impact on the environment) The service would be in accordance with the Company's
policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the
time contractual arrangements are made.
You should be aware that this letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual
commitment to serve the proposed project, but only as an informational service. The
availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present
conditions of gas supply,and regulatory policies. As a public utility, The Southern
California Gas Company, is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities
Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatory agencies.
Should these agencies take any action, which affects gas supply,, or the conditions
under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised
conditions.
j Typical demand use or:
a. Residential (System Area Average/Use Per Meter)Yearlv
Single Family, 799 therms/year dwelling unit
Multi-Family 4 or less units 482 therms/year dwelling unit
Multi-Family or more units 483 therms/year dwelling unit
These averages are based on total gas consumption in residential units served by
Southern California Gas Company, and it should not be implied that any particular
home, apartment or tract of t omes will use these amounts of energy.
ATTACHMENT IN
b. Commercial
Due to the fact that construction varies so widely (a glass building vs. a heavily
insulated building) and there is such a wide variation in types of materials and ,
a .typical demand figure is not available for this type of construction.
Calculations would need to be made after the building has been designed.
We have Demand Side Management programs available to commercial/industrial
customers to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy
of our energy conservation programs, please contact our Commercial/Industrial Support
Center at 1-800-GAS-2000.
r
`�_J
4Sinc ,
i
Bry P. Wilkie
Technical Supervisor
DW/ocf -
I ,
i
RESOLUTION NO. 05
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND
TERRACE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL
CASE NO.'s 04-02, 04-03, 04-04 AND 04-05 AND ENVIRONMENTAL:
REVIEW CASE NO. 04-01 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
FIFTEEN (15) SI GLE FAMILY RESIDENCES CONSISTING OF
A "PLAN 1" OF ,606 SQ. FT., OF A "PLAN 2" OF 1,704 SQ. FT.
OF A"'PLAN,3" OF 1,818 SQ. FT. AND OF A "PLAN 4" OF 1,733 SQ. FT. _
WHICH WILL BE ONE STORY IN HEIGHT IN AN AREA COVERED
BY SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 04-02 ON A 2 ACRE PARCEL
NORTHERLY SID� OF DE BERRY STREET BETWEEN THE GAGE
CANAL ON THE'WEST AND MT. VERNON AVENUE ON THE EAST
WHEREAS, the app pp pp�icant has applied for the approval of Site and Architectural
Review Case No.'s 04-02, 04-03, 04-04 and 04-05 and Environmental Review Case No.
04-01 to construct 15 single family residential detached units; and
WHEREAS,the applicant has additionally applied for a tentative tract map,TTM-04-
01(County No. 16624)to subdivide the subject site into 16 individual lots to be considered
by the City Council of the Ciy of Grand Terrace: and
WHEREAS, properly noticed public hearings on this project was held by the
Planning Commission on August 19,2004,January 20,2005, May 18,2005 ,July21,2005
and September 15, 2005; and
WHEREAS, under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines,
Article 6, Section 15070, the proposed project for 15 single family residential detached
units qualifies for a Mitigated`Negative Declaration in that there is no'substantial evidence
that the project will have a significant impact on the environment. The environmental
assessment of this project was completed under Environmental Review Case No. 04-01.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS:
1. The proposed project and uses, consisting of a 15 units single family
residential dev lopment with appurtenant facilities and one open space lot
is consistent with the intent of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code and the
General Plan i that it meets the use and density provisions of the General
Plan and is co sistent with Specific Plan No. 04-02 approved as allowed
i under Chapter 18.20 of the Zoning Code.
2. The locations and configuration of all structures associated with this project
are visually ha monious with this site and surrounding sites and structures,
that they do riot interfere wit the neighbors' privacy, that they do not
unnecessarily block scenic views from other structures and/or public areas,
ATTACHMENT
and are in scale with the townscape and natural landscape of the area. The
design and appearance of the 15 unit project will be consistent with the
existing residential development in this area of the City. In addition, the site
will be appropriately landscaped to blend in with existing development and
the setbacks and landscaping of the project will ensure the compatibility of
the development with the existing surrounding residential area.
3. The architectural design of the development,its materials,and colors utilizing
earthtones arevisually harmonious with surrounding residential development
and natural landforms especially the.residential development to the north of
the subject site. The design is both functional for the proposed project and
is consistent with the Grand Terrace Municipal Code. Said materials will
match existing materials and colors within the adjacent residential areas.
4. The plan for future landscaping and open space provides a functional and
visually pleasing setting for the residential structures on the subject site and
is harmonious with the nearby and adjacent residential developments. The
proposed landscaping of the site will aid in making the new residential project
compatible with the surrounding area.
5. Because the site is vacant and undeveloped with no natural vegetation and
is not part of a hillside,there will be no indiscriminate clearing of the property,
destruction of trees or natural vegetation or the'excessive and unsightly
grading of hillsides. Thus the natural beauty of the City, its setting and
natural landforms will be preserved.
The design and location of any signs associated with this project will be
subject to the approval of a sign program to, insure that the signs will be
consistent with the scale and character of the buildings to which they are
attached or otherwise associated with and are consistent with the Grand
Terrace Municipal Code.
7. ' Conditions of approval for this project necessary to secure the purposes of
the Grand Terrace Municipal Code and General Plan are made a part of this
approval as set forth in the accompanying Resolution of Approval.
BE IT.FURTHER RESOLVED that SA-04-02, SA-04-03, SA-04-04 and SA-
04-05 are hereby approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The proposed 15 unit single family residential project'and one open space
lot shall be maintained in conformance with the Site andArchitectural Review
Applications as approved by the Planning Commission on September 15,
2005. All plans shall be consistent in terms of property lines and other
measurements. Minor changes or clarifications may be made by the
Community Development Director or his designee.
2. The proposed colors and materials to be employed shall be in substantial
conformance with the color and materials board and other exhibits shown at
the public hearing on September 15, 2005.
2
i
i
f
3. All construction activity related to this project shall comply with the City's
noise ordinance as stipulated in Chapter 8.108 of the Municipal Code.
4. All construction debris shall be collected and laced in appropriate
p
containers on I daily basis, and the construction site shall be maintained in
a neat and or�erly manner.
i
5. All mechanicali equipment forthis development shall be screened from public
view, and all r oftop mechanical equipment will be screened from view by
either the arc itectural features of the buildings or by screening to be
approved by the Community Development Director. . _
6. The applicant shall comply with the following requirements of the Director of
Building and Safety:
a. Provide for the following at time of plan check:
1. Plot plan.
2. Grading', drainage plan and N.P.D.E.S. plan.
3. Complete construction plans for structures.
4. Property corner points.
b. All new utilites shall be run underground.
C. Provide proof of payment of school fees.
d. Pay all I Ian check, permit and inspection fees.
e. Pay all `capital improvement, maintenance, circulation and traffic
improvement fees and park fees.
7. All improvements shall be designed by persons registered and licensed to _
perform such I work pursuant to the State of California Business and
Professions Code,which shall comply with all applicable requirements of the
2001 California Building Code, 2001 California Electrical Code, 2001
California Plu bing Code, 2001 California Mechanical Code, American
Disabilities Act, (CALDAG 2000),Title 24 California Energy Requirments and
the Grand Terr ce Municipa Code.
8. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the County Fire
Department,Community Safety Division, including those requirements listed
in its letter Mari h 15, 2004.
f
9. The applicant shall comply with all of the conditions and requirements of the
City of Riverside - Water Division with respect to the common boundary
between the s 1bject site and the Gage Canal.
10. A detailed feric*ng plan showing the type, location and height of proposed
fencing for the 15 residential lots shall be submitted to and approved by the
Community Development Director prior to this issuance of building permits.
11. A precise grading plan with soils report shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval prior to the issuance of any grading permit for this
project.
3
12. This project shall provide at least two covered parking,spaces in a garage.
13. Three copies of landscaping and irrigation plans similar to the preliminary
landscaping plan exhibited at the public hearings shall be submitted to the
Community Development Director for review and approval. Said plans to be
prepared 'by a licensed landscape architect. Said plans to be submitted
prior to the issuance of building permits for the new construction. All
landscaping and irrigation facilities shall be installed prior to the final
occupancy of the any residential building. The submitted landscaping plans
shall delete the"weeping willow"trees shown on the preliminary landscaping
plan.
14. All residential construction on the subject site shall comply with the setbacks
shown on Exhibit 1 including those for the sideyards.and front yards along
De Berry.
15. Any signs proposed for this project including real estate subdivision signs
shall comply with the City's Sign Code.
16.- All parking areas shall be surfaced and maintained with asphalt, concrete or
other permanent, impervious surfacing material as required by Section
18:60.040 B of the Zoning Code.
17. The developer shall pay .the appropriate traffic impact fees as required- by
City Ordinance No. 190 prior to the issuance of building permits.
�J 18. All contractors working on this project shall acquire a valid. City business
licence.
19. This approval for SA-04-02, SA-04-03, SA-04-04 and SA-04-05 shall not be
effective until and unless the accompanying tentative tract map,TTM-04-01
is approved by the City Council and the final map is recorded. No building
permits shall be issued until the final map has been recorded.
20. Priorto the issuance of building permits,the applicant and/or developer shall
make an offer of dedication of Lot "A" to the City of Grand Terrace for the
purpose of a park or other recreational uses.
21. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall comply with the
City of Grand Terrace Stormwater System Ordinance (Ordinance No. 142,.
Subsection 1.010, 1993)and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control
Board's NPDES Permit for San Bernardino County, as required under the
Clean Water Act. ,
22. This approval shall expire one,(1) year from the date of its approval unless
the applicant has filed for a building permit. In case the applicant can not
comply with this deadline, then the applicant shall apply for an extension of
the one-year.prior to the original,expiration date. Said time extension to be
granted by the Community Development Director. In conformance with
4
i
Section 18.63.100 of the Zoning Code, no additional time beyond two (2)
years from the,date of the initial approval shall be granted.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace,
a California, at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of September , 2005.
AYES:
I
NOES:
i
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
I
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
i
i
Brenda Stanfill, Doug Wilson,
City Clerk Chairperson, Planning Commission
I
i
I
i
I
c:\MyFiles\JOHN\Kadar\SA-04-02.03.04.05 esolution
I
I
I
i
5
r
T tower has a top plate with a truss bearing which can be any length. In this,case, it is a
12 of mast. The antenna is mounted two feet bove the bottom of the tower. , If the
propos d drawing is used with the 1 inch whip tha is being requested would total 75 feet.
Vice Chair ddington -asked the applicant if a intended on raising the tower to the
maximum hei t.
Mr. Ehlert replied t t he did intend on raising he tower at certain times.
Commissioner Comsto asked the applican what his normal hours of operation were.
Mr. Ehlert replied that it d ends on whe the bands are open. Mostly during the early
morning hours around 3:00 a to 9:00 am
Vice Chair Addington asked staff ould he Commission choose to continue the item, and
continue with the recently requeste ei t of 75 feet, how-long is the public review period.
Associate Planner Lampe replied that th item would have to be re-advertised.
MOTION PC-39-2005: Vice Chair. ddi ton made a motion to Continue CUP-05-06,
E-05-19 t the ovember 17, 2005 Planning Commission
Meeting.
Chair Wil on seconded emotion
MOTION
VOTE PC-39-2005: 4-1-0-0
Comm! sioner Comstock tins No
f 4. SA-04-02, SA-04-03, c/ T914�A P T M)N
SA-04-04, SA-04-05, 9 5
TTM-04-01, SP-04-02
E-04-01: Continued Public Hearing for an approximately 2 acre vacant
urea consisting of two parcels..
APPLICANT: Massaro &Welsh, Civil Engineers
LOCATION: North side of De Berry Street between the Gage Canal on the
west and Mt. Vernon on the east.
RECOMMENDATION: ,Re-open the Public Hearing an receive the Staff Report and any
testimony, close the Hearing and Approve the.Resolution calling
for the Approval of SA-04-02, SA-04-03, SA-04-04 and SA-04-
05 and Recommend to the City �Council the Resolution for
Approval of TTM-04-01 (Tentative Tract No. 16624) and the
Adoption of the Ordinance for SP-04-02.
Associate Planner Lampe,presented his staff report. The item is a two acre site located on
the north side of DeBerry to the Gage Canal. The project was heard and filed,early in the
year 2004. During the last year, the project has undergone several revisions, including the
deletion of a four unit apartment building on the easterly end of the proposal.
ATTACHMENT 2
13
i
In June of this year, the staff was informed that the Son of the Developer was to take over
the project and intendeid to modify the map,for one additional lot for a total of 15 single
family residences and io reduce the size of the proposed open space at the end of the
i project on the corner of Mt. Vernon and DeBerry Streets.
At the meeting of July �1, 2005, the Planning Commission had expressed the opinion that
the new developer was headed in the right direction and there was a significant
improvement to the proposal. The Commission also expressed-a desire to see variability in
the front yard setbacks and also in the proposed street elevations.
The latest proposal was received from the new developer in August, and shows a variety of
setbacks as requested-by the Planning Commission. The setbacks ranged any where from
15 to 20 feet.
-All reviewing agencies were notified of the revised changes as made by the new developer
in which they had no comments.
The applicant has provilied revised floor plans and elevations. There will be two homes
that will have the garage in the front of.the residence, because there will be no alley to the
_rear of the residences. ,
The architecture of the residences_will be Spanish style with tile roofs and architectural
embellishments around,the windows and doors and the use of earth tone colors.
A preliminary landscape plan was supplied by the applicant with use of various trees and
shrubbery in the front of the residences. The final landscaping plan will have to be in
substantial conformance`with the preliminary landscaping that has been submitted.
i A revised version of the specific plan was also reviewed. The staff feels that the specific
plan meets the minimum 1 standards as the government code and can be used as the basis
for the.proposed ordinance for the specific plan for the project.
The environmental study was completed for the project. Staff is recommending a mitigated
negative declaration be adopted for this project. There was a public review period for the
project beginning in June of 2005. A-resolution has been prepared for the project whereas
the project be recommended to the City Council to approve and adopt the project for the
tentative tract map.and approve the ordinance to adopt the specific plan.
Associate Planner Lampe concluded his staff report. ,
Vice Chair Addington reported'an ex parte communication with Associate Planner Lampe in
which he asked question. Associate Planner Lampe contacted the Engineer, in which the
engineer called.Vice Cha rAddington with regard to BMP of Lot 15 and pedestrian access
to the pocket park.
i Chair Wilson opened up.the Public Hearing.
Jason Karger
19236 Dandelion Court
i Mr. Karger thanked the Commission and is requesting that the Commission approve the
project.
14
I 1 '
Vice Chair Addington, commented to the applicant that the product is easy to review and
thanked him.
Planning Director Koontz stated since Jason Karger has taken over the project, he has
been extremely cooperative and very responsive and a pleasure to work with.
Commissioner Comstock asked Mr.. Karger if he was planning on ,planting willow trees in
the front of the residences.
Mr. Karger replied that he did not intend on planting willow trees in front of the residences
as his father wanted to do.
Paul Welsh-Engineer
Massaro Welsh Architects
1572-N. Waterman Avenue #5 1
San Bernardino
Vice Chair Addington thanked.Mr. Welsh for the tentative map and grading plan that was
provided. Vice Chair Addington asked Mr. Welsh what clean water ,BMP's are being
proposed for the project.
Mr. Welsh replied that another member from the office was going to discuss the water
quality management plan.
Doug Massaro-
1572 N. Waterman Avenue 05
San Bernardino
Mr. Massaro replied that in order to fulfill the requirements of the water quality management
plan, the storm water runoff. from the development must be treated on site prior to
discharge. The velocity of the runoff must be increased,to allow the suspension, to settle
out prior to leaving.the site.
The public works officials were contacted, and what is being proposed is to provide.swales
or depressions several inches to one foot in depth on the south sides of the lots. The
swales are designed to contain the first flush, thereby removing the pollutants prior to
discharge.
Vice Chair Addington asked Mr. Welsh with regard to lot 15 and what it.will look like should
the house be flopped. The reason for this is to try to provide for a four foot wide ADA
compatible pedestrian easement to the pocket park. At this time, the garage would be too
close to the property line making pedestrian access unfeasible.
Chair Wilson closed the Public Hearing.
Vice Chair Addington asked if this project is approved, the landscaping plan as shown does
contain willow trees. Can the proposed willow trees be removed.
Planning Director Koontz replied that a condition can be added to exclude willow trees be
planted in the front of the residences.
15
}
MOTION PC-40-2005: Commissioner Comstock made a motion to add a .condition to
the project that there will be no willow trees planted in the front
of the properties, but to allow appropriate trees to be approved
by the Planning Department.
I
F Vice Chair Addington seconded the motion
MOTION
VOTE PC-40,2005: 5-0-0-0
i
MOTION PC-41-2005: Vice Chair Addington made a motion to Approve SA-04-02, SA-
04-03, SA-04-04, SA-04-05, TTM-04-01, SP-04-02 and E-04-01,
with the amended condition
Chair Wilson seconded the motion
MOTION
VOTE PC-41-2005: 5-0-0-0
ADJOURN SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING 8:66 pm
I f
CONVENE PUBLIC WORKSHOP SESSION
I
• Information to Commissioners
Sav-On is now under construction.
i
City Council has approved the Senior Housing project. _.
r Manhole Builders �rpject has been brought back to the Planning Commission and
will be continued to the month of November during the first meeting of the month
which will be November 3, 2005.
• Information from Commissioners
I ,
i Vice Chair Addingtl n has reported that he will not be attending the October 20 2005
P 9 ,
Planning Commission meeting.
Commissioner Whitley reported that he will not be attending the October 20, 2005
i Planning Commission meeting.
Vice Chair Addington reported that'he read an article in the Press Enterprise with
regard to the Outdoor Adventures Center with regard to new plans for the center to
include housing.
Planning Director Koontz replied that there is a new proposal to take a small portion
of the project to malke it a residential area as part of the lifestyle design. The exact
amount of square,footage will remain for retail, and the hotel has always been
proposed. In orderlfor this to move forward, the developer will have to come back
with a revised specific plan and a supplemental EIR to reflect the changes to the
project. A full marketing analysis has been performed and this is what the developer
has come up with. The proposal was made to the City Council as a preliminary
16
RESOLUTION NO. 05_
RESOLUTION,BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.04-01 (TTM 16624)FOR A 15 UNIT
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH ONE OPEN SPACE LOT
IN THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA
`} WHEREAS, the applicant, Massaro and Welsh, Civil Engineers, has applied for the approval of
Tentative Tract Map No.04-01(TTM i 6624)to create a 15 unit single family residential subdivision with one
open space lot on a 2 acre parcel in the City of Grand Terrace; and,,
WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearings were held by the Planning Commission on August
19,2004,January 20, 2005,May 18,2005,July 21,2005 and September 15,2005; and
WHEREAS,under the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA),Article 6,Section 15070,the
proposed project for 15 single family residential units and one opens space lot qualifies for a Mitigated
Negative Declaration in that there is no substantial evidence that the project, as conditioned, will have a
significant impact on the environment. The environmental assessment of this project was completed under
Environmental Review Case No. 04-01; and
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission recommended approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 04-01
(TTM 16624)to the City Council at its meeting of September 15, 2005; and
WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on October 13, 2005 t
regarding the approval of Tentative Tract Map-04-01 (TTM 16624).
NOW THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
1. The proposed subdivision, together with -the provisions for its design and
improvements is consistent with the General Plan in that the overall density and lot
size conform to the General Plan and that all required improvements will be provided;.
and
2. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development in that
the site is fairly level, is served by adequate public services and utilities and the
project conforms to the provisions of Specific Plan No. 04-02; and
3. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially or avoidable injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat in that this is an urban infill project with no wildlife habitats on the
site;.and
4. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
ATTACHMENT 3
I
I
I
public health problems in that all necessary public utilities and services will be
provided; and
5. The proposed subdivision, its design, density and type of development and
improvements conform to the regulations of City Subdivision Ordinance and the
j regulations of any public agency having jurisdiction by law in that the proposed
development conforms to the Medium Density Residential Category of the General
Plan and Specific Plan No. 04-02 developed for this project and allowed by Chapter
18.20 of the Cityl's Zoning Code.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT Tentative Tract Map No. 04-01 (TMM 16624) is hereby
approved subject to the following conditions:
General Conditions of Approval I
{ 1. Details shown on the tentative tract map are not necessarily approved. Any details which are
inconsistent with requirements of ordinance,general conditions of approval,or City policies
must be specifically approved in the final map or improvement plan approvals
i
2. Comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.
3. Approval for filing of this land division is contingent upon approval of plans and
specifications mentioned below. If the improvements are not installed prior to the filing of
this division, the I developer must submit an Undertaking Agreement and a faithful
performance and labor and materials bond in the amount estimated by the City guaranteeing
the installation of the improvements.
4. The City reserves the right to impose any new plan check and/or permit fees approved by the
City Council subsequent to tentative approval of this map.
Conditions Prior to Final Map Approval:
i
5. Upon approval of these conditions and prior to becoming final and binding, the applicant
must agree to and sign the"Acceptance of Conditions"form. The content of the form to be
prepared by the Community Development Department.
6. Provide a"will sele"letter from the Riverside Highland Water Company.
7. Monumentation of the tract map boundaries and lot boundaries is required.
8. A final tract map prepared by,or under the direction of a registered civil engineer authorized
to practice land surveying, or a licensed land surveyor,must be processed through the City
prior to being filed with the County Recorder.
9. A preliminary subdivision guarantee is required showing all fee interest holders and
encumbrances. An updated title report shall be provided before the final tract map is released
I
for filing with the County Recorder.
10. Pay all required feel for the processing and approval of the final tract map.
I
11. Pay off any remaining sewer assessment balance on the original parcel.
I
12. Submit to the City Council for acceptance;all agreements,bonds for performance,bonds for
labor and material for the following:
A. Grading
B. Sanitary sewer improvements
C. Storm drain improvements
D. Water system improvements
E. Street, curb, gutter&sidewalks
F. Street lights
G. Final property corner survey monuments
13. Provide a cash deposit in the amount of 10%of the total estimated cost of the items required
by Condition No. 9 above.
14. The applicant and/or developer shall do the following:
a. Install three street lights on De Berry Street.
b. Saw cut wings on curbs to maintain 10%maximum side slope for handicap ramps
at both corners on Mirado Avenue.
C. Remove and replace all curb depressions on De Berry Street;remove and replace all
damaged curb and gutter on all streets and cut asphalt paving back 12"frm removed
gutters; and install match up paving.
d. Cut back tree branches hanging over the alley along the northerly property line.
e. Remove and replace damaged concrete swale in alley and repave each side of swale
after utilities installed.
15. The applicant and/or developer shall move the Edison power pole on Lot 2 if Southern
California Edison concludes that the proposed driveway for Lot 2 will conflict with the
existing pole's location.
16. Submit a soils report and hydrology study prepared by a California registered civil engineer.
17. Show all easements on the Final Tract Map.
18. Do not show building footprints on the Final Tract Map.
19. Prior to final map approval,plans for all required street improvements shall be submitted to
and approved by the City.
20. Dedicate vehicular access right directly to De Berry Street for all lots fronting directly onto
that street,Lots 3 through Lot 15.
21 Prior to the final map approval,the developer shall submit sewer plans to the City for review
and approval. All residential units within the proposed subdivision shall_be served by the
public sewer system.
22. Prior to final map approval, grading and drainage plans,which must be approved prior to the
final map,shall be submitted to the City to provide for contributory drainage from adjoining
properties and including dedication of necessary easements.
23. Prior to final map approval,plans and specifications for the water system facilities shall be
submitted for approval to the Riverside Highland Water Company. The subdivider shall
i
i
i
submit an agreement and other evidence, satisfactory to the City, indicating that the
subdivider has entered into a contract a contract with the water purveyor guaranteeing
payment and installation of the water improvements.
i
24. Prior to the final map approval,there shall also be filed with the City Engineer,a statement
from the water purveyor indicating subdivider compliance with the Fire Chief s fire flow
j requirements.
Conditions After the Final Map Approval:
25. Final map shall be filed with the County recorder and one(1)Mylar copy of the filed map
shall be submitted to the City offices prior to the issuance of any building permits.
Conditions Prior to Grading:
26. Comply with all N.P.D.E.S.requirements.
27. Comply with W.Q.M.P.requirements.
PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace,California at a regular
meeting held on the 13'day of Ociober, 2005.
ATTEST:
i
i
i
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
i
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
John Harper
i
i
i
i
c:\MyFilesVOHN\Kadar\\1TM-04-04resolution.council.rev
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 04-02 (SP-04-02) FOR A 16 LOT SUBDIVISION
WITH 15 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED UNITS AND ONE OPEN SPACE LOT
ON A TWO ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF DE BERRY STREET
BETWEEN THE GAGE CANAL ON THE WEST AND MT.VERNON ON THE EAST
AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW CASE NO. 04-01 (E-04-01) -MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AS PROVIDED BY THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY,ACT (CEQA)
WHEREAS, the applicant has filed the necessary applications including four Site and
Architectural Review cases and a tentative tract map to subdivide the subject site into 16 individual
lots and construct 15 single family'detached units; and
WHEREAS, there is no existing zone in the City's Zoning Code to accommodate the size
and dimensions of the 16 proposed lots; and
WHEREAS,Section 18.90.040 of the Zoning Code allows for the adoption of a Specific Plan
for those unique properties where the existing zoning provisions are unique or unusual; and
WHEREAS,the subject site is a long,narrow site which was left over after the surrounding
_ area developed and which is difficult to develop under the Zoning standards of the existing Zoning
Code; and
WHEREAS,the proposed project is providing for compensating design characteristics such
as variable front yard setbacks, garages on the back and varied front elevations to make this project
compatible,with the surrounding residential development; and
I
WHEREAS,the resulting density of this,project at 7.5 units per acre,is not inconsistent with
existing development in the area including a large apartment complex immediately to the south and
a recently approved 55 unit townhouse condominium project to the immediate west; and
1
WHEREAS, Specific Plan No. 04-01,Exhibit A,is consistent with the General Plan of the
City of Grand Terrace; and
WHEREAS,in•accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
an environmental review for Specific Plan No. 04.-01 has been conducted and a Mitigated Negative
Declaration has been prepared under E-04-01 for this project with the Mitigated Negative
Declaration (Exhibit B) having been considered by both the Planning Commission and the City
Council; and
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission held properly noticed public hearing on this project
on August 19,2004, January 20,2005, May 18, 2005, July 21, 2005 and September 15,2005; and
ATTACHMENT 4
i
` WHEREAS, the Planning� rig Commission following the,conclusion of the public hearing on
September 15, 2005 recommended that the City Council approve Specific Plan No. 04-02 and the
associated Mitigated Negative Declaration under Environmental Review No. 04-01, set out in-the
attached Exhibits A and B,by adopting this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planni� Commission in takingthe above action found that the proposed
Ig p P
i Specific Plan No. 04-02 will not be:
1. Detrimental to.the.health, safety,morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons
residing or wor ng within'the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within
the city; or _
" 2. Injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City.
WHEREAS,the City Council held a properly notice public hearing to consider the Planning
Commission's recommendation and other relevant testimony on October 13,2005 for SP-04-02 and
E-04-01.
I •
NOW, THEREFOR, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE,
CALIFORNIA,DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
If
i Section 1. Specific Plan No. 04-02 to allow for the development of 15 single family
residence-and one open space lot, set out in full in Exhibit A, is hereby,
approved and adopted by,the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace.
Section 2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration on file in the offices of the Community
Development Department under E-04-01 is hereby approved as Exhibit B.
Section 3. Effective ate: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m.
on the 31"day of its adoption.
Section.4 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 the City Council.
Section 5 First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand
Terrace held on the 13t'day of October,2005 and finally adopted and ordered
I posted at regular meeting of said City Council on the 27th
{ day of Oc ober, 2005.
i
i i
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the City of Grand Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace
Terrace and of the City Council and of 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 October 13, 2005 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Brenda Stanfill
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John Harper
City Attorney
c:\MyFiles\JOHN\Karger\Karger2-5-04\sp04-02ordinance
i
I
I
I
j
a
I
{
I
I
I
I
I
a
i
i
I
I
I
I
J
I
i
I
I
I
i
i
I
I '
I
RAND TERR C
Community Services Department
Staff Report
MEETING DATE: October 13, 2005
SUBJECT: REQUEST TO APPROVE THE SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT
WITH ADELPHIA CABLEVISION REGARDING THE UNDERPAYMENT OF FRANCHISE
FEES FROM 2001-2002.
NO FUNDING REQUIRED
BACKGROUND:
Adelphia Cablevision is the franchised cable provider to the City of Grand Terrace.
In March 2003 the audit firm of Diehl, Evans & Company, LLP was retained by the
City of Moreno Valley, on behalf of the below Inland Empire Cities, to perform an
agreed-upon procedures review of cable television franchise fees and utility user taxes
paid to the Inland Empire Cities by Adelphia Communications ("Adelphia") for the
Calendar years 2001 and 2002.
The purpose of the audit was to provide the Inland Empire Cities with a summary of
estimated cable television franchise fees and utility user taxes payable by Adelphia to
the Inland Empire Cities for the calendar years ended 2001 and 2002, for filing with the
United States Bankruptcy Court by January 9, 2004. Grand Terrace's share of this
audit expense was $674.
Collective Franchise Fee Audit Cities:
City of Desert Hot Springs City of Murrieta
City of Fontana City of Perris
City of Grand Terrace City of Rancho Cucamonga
City of Hemet City of San Bernardino
City of Montclair City of Temecula
City of Moreno Valley
(Hereinafter Referred to as the "Inland Empire Cities" or "the Cities")
In September 2005, staff was contacted by Adelphia with an offer to settle the dispute.
City claim per the audit report $6,588
Amount undisputed by Adelphia $1,054
CDU SCE
i
I
I
Disputed Amount $5 534
Staff offered to split the difference of the disputed amount and retain 100% of the
undisputed amount.
50% of disputed amount = $2,767
Add undisputed amount $1,054
Settlement Amount $3,821
Less cost of the audit <$674>
Net to the City of Grand Terrace $3,147
Since Adelphia is in bankruptcy, it was recommend by the City Manager and the City
Attorney to settle for the$3,�821 now than risk a further delay and possible future
litigation. The cost of litigation would exceed even the full disputed settlement amount.
CONCLUSION:
I
Staff recommends approval of the attached"Settlement and Release Agreement"with
Adelphia Cablevision for$3 as restitution for underpaid franchise fees from 2001-
2002.
i
I
i
i
SETTLEMENT AND,-RELEASE AGREEMENT
This Settlement and Release is entered into this_day of , 2005,by and between the City
of Grand Terrace ("City"), and Adelphia Cablevision of Inland Empire;L.L'G., (together, with its
affiliated debtors and debtors in possession, the"Debtors").
WHEREAS, City and Debtor executed a franchise agreement.on November 13, 1999 (the "Franchise
Agreement");
WHEREAS, City has alleged that the Debtors underpaid franchise fees for the period from January
i
— 1, 2001 through Decembers 1, 2002 (the "Dispute");
WHEREAS, City,has filed a proof of claim, Claim Number 16813, against the Debtors in the United
States Bankruptcy Court of the Southern District of New York(the "Bankruptcy Court") in the
.amount of Seven Thousand, Two Hundred Sixty Two Dollars and Zero Cents ($7,262.00) in
connection with the Dispute (the"Claim");
WHEREAS, the.Debtors have disputed the Claim;
WHEREAS, City and the Debtors have agreed to resolve this matter andthe Debtors believe.that this
Settlement and Release Agreement(the"Agreement") is fair, equitable and in the best interests of the
Debtors' estates;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the parties mutually agree as follows:
1. The Debtors agree to pay City the.amount of Three Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty-One
Dollars and Zero Cents ($3,821.00) (the".Settlement Amount"),within thirty.(30) days of the
later to occur of (i) approval of the Agreement by the Bankruptcy Court, as further described in
paragraph 7 below or(ii) Debtors receipt of a fully executed original of this Agreement..
2. City acknowledges that the Franchise Agreement, is valid and shall remain in force and effect
through November 12, 2014.
3. In consideration of the above, City waives and releases any and all claims (as such term is defined
in 11 U.S.C. §101(5)) against the Debtors, their successors, affiliates, directors, officers,
employees, attorneys, agents, and representatives from any claims or charges which arose prior to
the execution of this Agreement.
4. Upon payment of the Settlement Amount, the Claim will automatically be deemed disallowed and '
expunged.
i
5. City and the Debtors agree that nothing herein shall be deemed to be an admission.of liability with
respect to this matter..
6. City and the Debtors represent and warrant to each other that each has the legal right,power and
authority to enter-into this Agreement and to perform its obligations hereunder.
i
7. Each of the parties to this AGREEMENT acknowledges and agrees that the releases contained in
this AGREEMENT are special releases and that §1542 of the Civil Code of the State of California is
not applicable. If and to the extent it should be determined that the releases contained in this
AGREEMENT are not special releases, contrary to the parties' acknowledged intention and
agreement, each party specifically waives the benefit of the provisions of§1542 of the Civil Code of
the State of California, which p ovides as follows:
i
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE
CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS FAVOR AT THE TIME OF
EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM MUST HAVE MATERIALLY
AFFECTED HIS SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR.
8. This Agreement is subject to and shall be effective upon approval by the Bankruptcy Court
presiding over the Debtors' pending bankruptcy cases. Such approval may be obtained pursuant
to settlement procedures previously approved by the Bankruptcy Court. The Debtors shall not be
obligated to pay the Settlemyent Amount unless and until the Bankruptcy Court approves this
j Agreement. In the event that the Bankruptcy Court does not approve this Agreement, (a)nothing
contained herein shall be deemed to be a waiver of any claims or an admission of liability by any
party hereto; and(b) this Agreement shall be null and void, and all rights of the parties prior to
this Agreement shall be preserved.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, through their duly authorized representative, have
executed this Agreement.
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
i
By.
[Representative]
[Title]
Date:
ADELPHIA CABLE VISION OF INLAND EMPIRE, L.L.C.,
A Delaware limited liability company,
d/b/a Adelphia Cable Communications,
By: Clear Cablevision,,Inc.
A Delaware corporation,
Its Sole Member
By:
Lee A. Perron
Senior Vice President
Date:
I
t
STAFF REPORT
CRA ITEM() COUNCIL ITEM(X) MEETING DATE: October 13,2005
SUBJECT: Schedule November and December City Council Meetings
• Historically, Council has scheduled one meeting a month for November and December due to the
holidays.
November
The regular meeting dates for November fall on the 1 Wh and 20. November 20 is Thanksgiving
ti Day. Staff is recommending that one meeting be held in November on Thursday the 106'.
December
The regular meeting dates for December fall on the 8`' and 22"d The Historical and Cultural
Activities Committee has scheduled the City Birthday Party for December 81'"at 6:00 p.m. and have
requested that the City Council schedule their meeting to follow this event. Staff is recommending
that one regular meeting be held in December.
Please note that should an issue arise that needs to be addressed by the City Council,the Mayor may
call a special meeting.
Staff Recommends Council:
Schedule one meeting for November to be held on the 10`'', and schedule one regular meeting for
December to be held on the 8`''to begin at 7:30 following the City Birthday Celebration.
1 --
i
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
i
i _
i'