06/08/2006 ILE" COPY
�1Ty,
GRAND TERR CE L < 'June 8, 2006 -
22795'Barton R65d
Grand Terrace. "
California 92313-5295 "
Civic Center
(909)824-6621 - '
Fax(909)783-7629
Fax,(909)783-2600
b'Iary'ctta Ferre :CITY. OF GRAND•.TERRA 7,V ,
Mayor
Bea Cortes :. , `7
Mayor Pro Tem
%CITY
m CR. 'COUNCIL
Her an Hilkey'+ '
LecAnilGarcia' , 'REGULAR-MEETINGS
m M Jiiller-
Council Members
7 holnas J.Sell,vab 2ND AN'D.14, Thur,sd ay
;Council Chambers =
- Grand Terrace Civic Center-
_ ;, 2279.5 Barton Road ..
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
CITY COUNCU- CHAMBERS JUNE 8, 2006
GRAND TERRACE-CIVIC CENTER 6:00 PM
22795 Barton Road
THE CITY OFGRAND TERRACE COMPLIES,WITH.THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIE S ACT OF1990,,IFYOU
REQUIRE-SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO-:PARTICIPATEIN-TIIHS_MEETTNG,PLEASE CALL THE CITY CLERK'S.
OFFICEAY(909):824=6621 AT LEAST`48.HOURS PRIOR TO:THE`MEETING., Y
"' -' ;`•
IF YOU`DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE'CITY COUNCIL DURING"THE MEETING :PLEASE COMPLETE=A REQUEST'
: x._ 14
TO SPEAK FORM AVAILABLE AT THE ENTRANCE.AND PRESENT TT TOsTHE CITY CLERK <SPEAKERS WH.L`
BE CALLED UPON.BY THE:MA-Y AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME::
* Call to Order-
* Invocation-Calvary,The Brook Church
* Pledge of Allegiance-
* Roll Call-
STAFF COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEMS RECOMMENDATION ACTION
CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1. Approval of 05-25-2006 Minutes Approve
ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
1. Items to Delete
2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS-None t
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 June 8,2006 Approve ,
B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda ,
C. Approval of 05-25-2006 Minutes Approve
D. Reject Liability Claim GTLC-05-08(Hornsby) Approve
i
i
COUNCIL AGENDA
06-08-2006 PAGE 2 OF 3
AGENDA ITEMS STAFF j COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATIONS ACTION
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.
i
5. REPORTS
A. Committee Reports
1. Crime Prevention Committee
a. Minutes of April 10,2006 Accept
B. Council Reports
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Zone Change Case No. 06-01 (ZC-06-01), Tentative Tract Approve
Map No. 06-01 (TTM-06-01/County No. 18071) and
Environmental Review Case No.06-03(E-06-03)to Change
the Existing R1-20 Zoning to R1-10 Zoning on a 8.26 Acre
Parcel and to Subdivide the Property into 20 Single Family
Lots.
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand
Terrace Approving Zone Change No. 06-01 (Z-06-01) to
Change the Existing R1-20 Zoning to R1-10 and Delete the j
AG Overlay Zone for an 8.26 Acre Parcel Located on the
Northerly Side of Pico Street Starting Approximately 150 i
Feet Easterly of the Intersection ofPico Street and Kingfisher
Road and Environmental Case No. 06-03 (E-06-03)Mitigated Negative Declaration as Provided by the California
Environmental Quality Act
Resolution by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace,
State of California,Approving Tentative Tract Map No.06-
01 (County No. TTM 18071) for a 20 Lot Single Family
Residential Development on a 8.26 Acre Parcel Located on
the North Side of Pico Street 150 East Kingfisher Road in the
City of Grand Terrace,California j
I
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS-None
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District No. 89-1 Approve
B. Personnel Negotiations-Meet and Confer
I
i
COUNCIL AGENDA
06-08-2006 PAGE 3 OF 3
AGENDA ITEMS STAFF COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATIONS ACTION
9. CLOSED SESSION
A. Personnel Negotiations (GC54957.6) Conference with
Labor Negotiator-Tom Schwab, Steve Berry and Larry
Ronnow Representing Unrepresented Employees
ADJOURN
THE NEXT CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE HELD
ON THURSDAY,JUNE 22,2006 AT 6:00 P.M.
..............
AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS FOR THE 06-22-2006 MEETING
MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S
OFFICE BY NOON 06-15-2006.
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING-MAY 25, 2006
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 May 25;2006 at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Maryetta Ferre, Chairman
Bea Cortes, Vice-Chairman
Herman Hilkey, Agency Member
Lee Ann Garcia, Agency Member'
Jim Miller, Agency Member
Tom Schwab, City Manager
Steve Berry, Assistant City Manager
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Larry Ronnow, Finance Director
Richard Shields, Building&Safety Director
Lt. Hector Guerra, Sheriff's Department
ABSENT: Gary Koontz, Community Development Director
John Harper, City Attorney
CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
APPROVAL OF 05-11-2006 MINUTES
CRA-2006-14 MOTION BY VICE-CHAIRMAN CORTES, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER
HILKEY,CARRIED 5-0,to approve the May 11,2006 Community Redevelopment
Agency Minutes.
ADOPT THE FY 2006-2007 CRA BUDGET RESOLUTION
CRA-2006-15 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY VICE-CHAIRMAN
CORTES, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt a Resolution for the 2006-2007 Fiscal Year
Budget of the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace,
approving total appropriations of$11,321,005, to be funded by estimated revenues
of$8,534,920 and available fund balance of$2,786,085.
Total Revenues for the City and the Community Redevelopment Agency combined is
$17,978,455, total.appropriations for both are $18,321,651: There were also off getting
transfers in and out between various funds, the Agency and the City in the amount of
$1,216,595 and those zero out.
CRA AGENDA ITEM NO.
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
May 25,2006
Page 2
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, June 8,12006, at 6:00 p.m.
i
SECRETARY of the Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Grand Terrace
CHAIRMAN of the Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Grand Terrace
i
t '
I
i
Check Register Dated June 8, 2006
r
vchlist- Voucher List Page: 1
05/31/2006 2:03:56PM CITY OF GRANDTERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57590 5/17/2006 003420 INLAND COUNTIES INSURANCE SVCS May Dental &Vi: May Dental &Vision Ins.
10-022-63-00 1,298.51
Total : 1,298.51
57591- 5/18/2006 005452 PACIFICARE OF CALIFORNIA May PACIFICAF PACIFICARE HEALTH INS
10-120-142-000-000 870.49
10-125-142-000-000 487.80
10-140-142-000-000 1,078.84
10-172-142-000-000 152.33
10-175-142-000-000 121.87
10-180-142-000-000 885.67
10-370-142-000-000 834.38
10-380-142-000-000 290.51
10-440-142-000-000 795.57
10-450-142-000-000 - 243.90
21-572-142-000-000, 327.98
32-370-142-000-000 238.40
34-400-142-0.00-000 1,012.05
10-022-63-00 7,373.40
34-800-142-000-000 243.90
Total : 14,957.09
57592 5/18/2006 006772 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY May Life &STD LIFE AND DISABILITY INSURANCE
Page: 1 ,
COUNCEL A02EHM5A o �.� No(% 3�
vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - -- -
05/31/2006 2:03:56PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57592 5/18/2006 006772 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY (Continued)
10-120-142-000-000 20.85
10-125-142-000-000 13.90
10-140-142-000-000 20.85
10-172-142-000-000 3.48
10-175-142-000-000 2.78
10-370-142-000-000 8.85
10-380-142-000-000 6.95
10-440-142-000-000 75.20
10-450-142-000-000 6.95
21-572-142-000-000 6.33
32-370-142-000-000 2.53
34-400-142-000-000 22.81' _
34-800442-000-000- 20.85
10-022-63-00 1,155.38
10-180-142-000-000 20.22
Total : 1,387.93
57594 5/19/2006 006880 IDENTIX IDENTIFICATION SRVS 051706 Fingerprint svcs.-Child Care Dept.
10-440-228-000-000 97.00
Total : 97.00
57595 5/19/2006 001907 COSTCO#478 478130062 C. CARE SUPPLIES
10-440-228-000-000 38.07
10-440-220-000-000 105.08
Total.: 143.15
575-96 5L1.9/2066=0-0-56-6.0 P-OSTMAS-T-ER 051.9.06 P_ostage_for_mailers-for_GT Days -
23-200-12-00 751.34
Total : 751.34
57597 5/19/2006 010638 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY 051006 48" pipeline crossing-Mile Post 541.7
32-600-205-000-000 800.00
32-600-208-000-000 800.00
Total : 1,600.00
57598 5/23/2006 001206 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 050906 Visa Usage for Apr-May 2006
Page: 2
vchlist Voucher List Page: 3
05/31/2006 2:03:56PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57598 5/23/2006 001206 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION (Continued)
10-440-228-000-000 135.81
10-110=220-000-000 95.00
10-110-270-000-000 172.98
10-120-230-000-000 25:00
10-120-270-000-000 40.88
16-900-254-000-000 108.57
23-200-12-00 922.12
23-200-14-00 225.18
23-200-61-00 - 50.00
10-180-245-000-000 5.92'
10-180-272-000-000. 154.05
10-190-220-000-000 440.89
10-440-221-000-000 34.27
10-440-223-000-000 143.05
32-200-210-000-000 17.95 -
10-440-270-000-000 50.48
34-400-210-000-000 120.66
Total : 2,742:81
57599 5/24/2006 010340 BLUE CROSS OF CALIFORNIA_ , PERS-CH CB092A June'Med. Inc.-B. Cortes
10-110-142-000-000 408.59
Total : 408.59
57600 5/24/2006 010367 LOMA LINDA UNIV. HEALTH CARE -050206 NEW HIRE,PHYSICALS & EMP INSS
10-190-224-000-000 281.00
- Total : 281.00
57601- 5/24/2006 010290 KAISER PERMANENTE 1057050005 HEALTH INS-LEE ANN GARCIA
10-110-142-000-000 308.54
Total : 308.54
57602 5/24/2006 010640 COLE, RYAN 051906 Character Entertainment-GT Days
23-200.-12-00 300.00
Total : 300.00
57603 5/24/2006 005702 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT PR end 5/19/06 Contribution for PR end 5/19/06'
10-022-62-00 11,991.91
Page: 3
vchlist _ _ Voucher List -_- Page: _- _ 4_,_
05/31-12006 2:03:56PM -CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa-
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57603 5/24/2006 005702 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT (Continued) Total : 11,991.91 '
57604 5/25/2006 010041 NOLTE ASSOCIATES INC. 6090134 H2O PIPE RELOCATION
32-600-205-000-000 250.00
32-600-208-000-000 250.00
Total : 500.00
57605 5/25/2006 010405 CORPORATION FOR BETTER HOUSING 2nd Pmt 5/24/06 2nd Pmt-Sr. Housing Project
34-500-726-000-000 513,847.63
Total : 513,847.63
57606 5/31/2006 010642 ASSET PROTECTION SERVICES 050106 Rain gutter installation-Bldg/Sfty Dept.
10-180-245-000-000 480.00
---Total-: - 480.00
57607 6/8/2006 001024 ACCENT PRINT& DESIGN 251285 RECEIPT BOOKS
10-180-210-000-000 472.00
10-180-210-000-000 36.58
Total : 508.58
57608 6/8/2006 001040 ADDINGTON, MATTHEW 050106 Planning Commission Stipend-5/18/06
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
57609 6/8/2006 010594 AEI-CASC ENGINEERING INC. 508279 ENGINEERING SRVS-48"WATER PIPELINE
32-600-205-000-000 572.25
32-600-208-000-000 572.24
Total : 1,144.49
57610 6/8/2006 010158 AMSTERDAM PRINTING 9568499 Attendance calendar logs-Staff -
10-440-210-000-000 40.32
Total : 40.32
57611 6/8/2006 010376 ARCADIS G & M INC. 0144148 CONSULTING SERVICES ,
32-600-208-000-000 84.67
Total : 84.67
57612 6/8/2006 001213 AT&T 051406 Child care dsl service-June -
Page: 4
vchlist Vtiu�t'vher List \ Page: 5
05/31/2006 2:03:56PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57612 6/8/2006 001213 AT&T (Continued)
10-440-235-000-000 89.76
Total : 89.76
57613 6/8/2006 010084 BIDNEY, ROBERT 050106 Planning Commission Stipends-5/18/06
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
57614 6/8/2006 010641 BUSTAMANTE, CHRISTINA 052206GT Planning Commission Mtq. Minutes 05/18
10-190-210-000-000' 264.50
Total : 264.50
57615 6/8/2006 010102 CALIF. ASSOC. OF CODE ENFORCE. 051806 CACE 2006 Membership Dues-2006
34-800-265-000-000 75.00
Total : 75.00
57616 6/8/2006 001742 CHAGOLLA CONSTRUCTION, RO_ BERT 112 REHAB SFR
10A 90=719-000-000 23,065.00
113 REHAB SFR
10-190-719-000-000 1,114.09
Total : 24,179.09
57617 6/8/2006 001745 CHAMPLAIN PLANNING PRESS 20930 Planning Comm. welcome guide
10-370-274-000-000 33.75
Total : 33.75
57618 6/8/2006 001907 COSTCO#478 1433 C. CARE SUPPLIES
10-440-228-000-000 29.78
_ _ 10-440-220-000-000 45.69
Total : 75.47
57619 6/8/2006 002720 FRANKLIN QUEST COMPANY 53350414 BINDER#27598
10-172-210-000-000 64.09
10-172-210-000-000 4.97
Total : 69.06
57620 6/8/2006 002727 FREEMAN COMPANY, J R 3281570 Misc. Ofc supplies-City Clerk's Dept.
10-125-210-000-000 93.71
Page: 5
vchlist Voucher List Page:__
0513112006 2:03:56PM _ CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57620 6/8/2006 002727 FREEMAN COMPANY, J R (Continued) Total : 93.71
57621 6/8/2006 002901 G.T. AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 3616LUNCH May Chamber Lunch S. Berry/M. Ferre
10-110-270-000-000 8.00
10-180-270-000-000 8.00
Total : 16.00
57622 6/8/2006 010559 GST 500161 Load HR Software for J. Verhelle
10-120-210-000-000 95.00
Total : 95.00
57623 6/8/2006 010632 HIGH TECH SECURITY SYSTEMS 68396 SECURITY CAMERAS
10-440-704-000-000 4,327.00
- Total : 4,327.00
57624 6/8/2006 003171 HINDERLITER de LLAMAS &ASSOC. 0011740IN 2nd Qtr. Contact Svcs.
10-140-250-000-000 150.00
32-370-250-000-000 150.00
Total : 300.00
57625 6/8/2006 010639 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL 0149921IN Bldg.-Sfty. Reference Materials
10-175-210-000-000 68.96
Total : 68.96
57626 6/8/2006 010210 LILBURN CORPORATION 060508 OAC-EIR LITIGATION ANALYST
10-160-250-000-000 1,859.00
Total : 1,859.00
57627 6/8/2006T.01061-1 MCNABOE—DARCY 050106 Planning-Commission Stipend=05/18106
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
57628 6/8/2006 001456 OFFICE MAX-A BOISE COMPANY 231004 Ofc. Supplies-City Manager's Dept.
10-120-210-000-000 112.77
Total : 112.77
57629 6/8/2006 010616 OVERLAND, PACIFIC &CUTLER INC 0604262 April Relocation Svcs.
23-301-95-00 1,697.50
Page: 6
r ,
vchlist VuuiOer List Page: 7
05/31/2006 2:03:56PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57629 6/8/2006 010616 OVERLAND, PACIFIC&CUTLER INC (Continued) Total : 1,697.60
57630 6/8/2006 005586 PETTY CASH 053006 Child Care petty cash replenishment
10-440-223-000-000 37.44
10-440-228-000-000 5.00
Total : 42.44
57631 6/8/2006 005673 RENTAL SERVICE CORPORATION 28193757001 RENTAL OF EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES
10-180-218-000-000 186.42
Total : 186.42
57632 6/8/2006 006285 RIVERSIDE HIGHLAND WATER CO 052406 Water/Sewer chgs: 21974 De Berry Street
10-190-210-000-000 66.67
Total : 66.67
57633 6/8/2006 006310 ROADRUNNER STORAGE 3298 May Storage charges
10-140-241-000-000 89.00
Total : 89.00
57634 6/8/2006 006505 S.B. COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 2006-04 Fuel chgs-City sweeper& mowers
16-900-254-000-000 101.48
10-440-272-000-000 63.43
Total : 164.91
57635 6/8/2006 006531 S.B. COUNTY SHERIFF 8644 S.B CO SHERIFF
10-410-256-000-000 6,826.17
10-410-250-000-000 559.07
Total : 7,386.24
57636 6/8/2006 007005 SO CAL LOCKSMITH 109730 REPLACE SNACK BAR LOCK-PICO PARK
10-450-245-000-000 635.28
11164 Re-key Bldg./Safety Office
34-400-246-000-000 74.70
Total : 709.98
57637 6/8/2006 006778 STAPLES CREDIT PLAN 5625561000682 Mis. Ofc. Supplies-Community Svcs.
10-180-210-000-000 45.00
Page: 7
vchlist Voucher List Page:_
05/31/2006 2:03:56PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57637 6/8/2006 006778 STAPLES CREDIT PLAN (Continued)
9162545472 Mis. Office Supplies-Planning Dept.
10-370-210-000-000 27.29
9162627010 Misc. Office Supplies-Finance
10-190-210-000-000 75.25
10-140-210-000-000 111.51
Total : 259.05
57638 6/8/2006 010586 THE JAMIESON GROUP 200672 PROVIDE PROF. SRVS FY 05/06
10-370-255-000-000 5,800.00
Total : 5,800:00
57639 6/8/2006 010584 WALLIN, KRESS, REISMAN, ET AL. 051106 Legal Svcs: March/April 2006
23-301-95-00 2,460.50
Total : 2,460.50
57640 6/8/2006 007843 WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 40985 CITYWIDE TREE-TRIM REMOVAL
16-900-260-000-000 4,100.00
Total : 4,100.00
57641 6/8/2006 007920 WILLDAN 0628588 April Plan check/inspection svcs.
10-172-250-000-000 190.00
34-400-251-000-000 1,365.00
0628589 April Engineering svcs-Bldg/Safety Dept
10-172-250-000-000 2 J85.00
Total : 3,740.00
57642 6/8/2006 010519 XEROX CAPJT_AL_SERV_ICES,_LLC 01-7.657279 XEROX-MACHINE
10-190-700-000-000 351.69
Total : 351.69
57643 6/8/2006 007987 XEROX CORPORATION 017657278 COPIER USAGE
10-190-700-000-000 318.22
Total : 318.22
53 Vouchers for bank code: bofa Bank total :, 612,054.25
Page: 8
{
vchlist VO_,,E-i;ier List Page: 9
05/31/2006 2:03:56PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
53 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 612,054.25
I(-certify that to the best of my knowledge, the afore-listed checks for payment of City and C6mmunity Reddvelopment
Agency liabilities have been audited by me and are necessary and appropriate for the operation of the City and Agency.
'0'M1 -N
awgdy'
Larry R nn w, F nonce Director
Page: 9
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING-MAY 25, 2006
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order in the Council
Chambers,Grand Terrace Civic Center,22795 Barton Road,Grand Terrace,California,on May 25,
2006, at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Maryetta Ferre, Mayor
Bea Cortes, Mayor Pro Tem
Herman Hilkey, Councilmember
Lee Ann Garcia, Councilmember
Jim Miller, Councilmember
Tom Schwab, City Manager
Steve Berry,Assistant City Manager
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Larry Ronnow, Finance Director
Richard Shields,Building& Safety Director
Lt. Hector Guerra, Sheriff's Department
ABSENT: Gary Koontz, Community Development Director
John Harper, City Attorney
The City Council meeting was opened with Invocation by Pastor Salim Elias,Azure Hills Seventh-
Day Adventist Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Pro Tern Bea Cortes._
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ITEMS TO DELETE -None
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Water Awareness Poster Contest Winners- Grand Terrace Elementary School
Don Hough, Riverside Highland Water Company announced that this is the fourth
year that they have adopted Grand Terrace Elementary School. He introduced Mr.
Hyder, Principal Grand Terrace Elementary School who announced the winners of
the contest to the Council and had them show the Council their posters.
CONSENT CALENDAR
CC-2006-57 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
GARCIA,CARRIED 5-0,to approve the following Consent Calendar Items with the
C+UNPOQL AQrMIDA ITEM NOa] 3(�'
J
i
Council Minutes
May 25,2006
Page 2
i
removal of Items 3B. And 3F.:
i
3A. Approve Check Register Dated May 25, 2006
3C. Approval of 05-11-2006 Minutes as amended
3D. Redlining 80 Feet of Berm Curbing in Front of 22;182 and 22172 Barton
Road
3E. Adopt FY 2006-2007 City of Grand Terrace Budget Resolution
(Total Revenues for the City and the Community Redevelopment Agency
combined is $17,978,455, total appropriations for;both are $18,321,651.
There were also off setting transfers in and out between various funds, the
Agency and the City in the amount of$1,216,595 and those zero out.)
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
3B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda
3F. First Amendment to the Employment Agreement Between the City of Grand
Terrace and the City Manager
Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan,feels that items 3B and 3F have a number ofproblems. She
feels that the Ordinances on the Agenda should be read in detail. She is very concerned with
the amendment to the Employment Agreement for the City Manager given all of the public
statements, it is absolutely unacceptable. Not only that they are continuing with this City
Manager but raising his salary. She feels that the Council should not approve the amendment
and that he should be terminated. She feels that the resolution on changing how the meetings
are conducted is very involved and feels that people need more time to read and understand
what is being changed and feels that it should not be passed. She feels that item 3F and item
8A. should be read in their entirety.
CC-2006-58 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
HILKEY,CARRIED 5-0,to approve the following items that were removed from the
Consent Calendar:
3B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda
3F. First Amendment to the Employment Agreement Between the City of Grand
Terrace and the City Manager
f
PUBLIC COMMENT
Bill Hays,22114 De Berry,indicated that he has been asked to come into the podium tonight
by a substantial amount of my fellow citizens. I am not here representing a few. I am tasked
Council Minutes
May 25,2006
Page 3
with a chore I take no pleasure in. Some on the Council have forgotten we have a
representative form of government. You were elected to represent us. The taxpayers and
voters of Grand Terrace, sadly, it turns out, the only people some of you have chosen to
represent are the developers. From the on set of the OAC to ESSCO at the last Council
meeting, you have ignored hundreds of petition signatures and scores of citizens that have
come into this podium seeking redress from their government and at the last council meeting
L- as I mentioned allowed Councilwoman Cortes to force a vote that without a doubt will bring
again another lawsuit onto the voters of Grand Terrace. We feel that personal relationships
between Council members and City management have clouded the judgement of some of
you,to the detriment of the citizens. It therefore has become necessary, as is the right of the
voters,to seek the removal from office of Mayor Maryetta Ferre and Councilwoman Garcia;
Councilwoman Cortes would also have been included except election law would not allow
it because she is up for re-election should she decide to run. I will add that there are
candidates that we feel will defeat her in November and will support them. It is unfortunate
that I stand here alone in place of many that fear retaliation by you and the City. I suspect
I will no longer be welcomed on the traffic ad-hoc committee or will never see my curbs
redlined. A small price to bring the voice of the citizen back to Grand Terrace. At this with
your permission, Mrs. Ferr6 I would like to approach the dais and serve you and
Councilwoman Garcia with the signed Notice of Intent Petitions to Recall you both in
November 2006.
ORAL REPORTS
5A. Committee Reports -None
COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Hilkev, questioned if Council was still going to get a report from the
Sheriff's Department.
City Manager Schwab,responded in the affirmative. It will include the crime rate and
possibly make a recommendation on the service level. Staff is hoping to have that the
second meeting in June or the first meeting in July.
Councilmember Hilkev, questioned if that presentation will allow for dialog on,what
services we are getting and the services that they would like to see.
City Manager Schwab, responded that it will allow Council to have dialog on everything
that we pay for in the contract.
Councilmember Hilkev, stated that he believes that everyone got a letter from a resident
that lives next to the trucking company on Michigan. He is very frustrated trying to find
Council Minutes
May 25,2006
Page 4
out what happened and how it got this way. It has been talked about at several meetings
and they still seem to be waiting for a response. He feels that whatwas approved is not
happening. Requested staff to put together something to see what has been approved so
that we can deal with this issue.
Ci . Manager Schwab, responded that he received the same letter and that he has
assigned it to the Planning Department to give him an exact accounting of what approvals
they have and also on the conditional use permit if there was any time limitations. They
will look at what permits they have and what things they are permitted to do under their
current license and staff will report back to Council and at that poirit the Council can
direct staff to take action.
Councilmember Hilkev, questioned if there are time limitations.
City Manager Schwab, responded that it is being researched now to, see what does it
specifically say in their pen-nit and whether there are any restriction's on time.
Councilmember Hilkev, stated that it was a residence zoned for commercial and now the
residence is being used as an office but there was a fire and when the repair was done
there were some permits issued. He questioned if people can live on that property.
City Manager Schwab, responded that the house that burned is their office. When they
came back to make the repairs it can to be done to commercial codes. He stated that they
will investigate whether there are any residences on that property.
Councilmember Hilkev, questioned if his employees can live there.i
Councilmember Garcia, complimented the Chamber of Commerce and the City on the
Taste of the Terrace, it was very nice. She thanked Bobbie Forbes for doing a wonderful
job as the Chamber President. She welcomed Sid Baily the incoming Chamber President.
She questioned if there is an update on the Valero Gas Station.
Cily Manager Schwab, responded that they have received the Planning approval to build a
Valero but that approval is approximately 2 to 3 months old. He n6ticed today that they
are tearing the building down.
Councilmember Garcia,reminded everyone about Grand Terrace Days and encouraged
everyone to attend and asked staff to give an update.
Assistant City Manager Berry, stated that they are gearing up for Grand Terrace Days that
will be held on June 3, 2006. The parade will begin at 9:30 a.m. on Barton and Canal. It
is going to be a fun parade with lots of bands, floats and cars. It is going to be a lot of fun
Council Minutes
May 25,2006
Page 5
for many things for the entire family to enjoy.
Councilmember Miller,requested an update on the graffiti issue here in Grand Terrace.
Assistant City Manager Berry, responded that staff has been working with the Terrace
Retirement Home to have them maintain the wall. He has sent two work orders to have
the wall repainted. There was car keying on Reed. He feels that the rest of the
community is under control. With school ending in a few weeks we will probably see a
rise in graffiti. The 24 hour video cameras will be installed in both of the parks, which
will be helpful.
Mayor Pro Tem Cortes,reminded the citizens that it is very important to lock your
windows. She thanked the Sheriff's Department for the quick response to a home
burglary.
Lt. Hector Guerra San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, indicated that there
were several residential burglaries last week that were concentrated in the same area. As
a result they were able to develop some leads on the suspects. Yesterday, one of the
deputies patrolling that specific area located an individual in the process of committing a
burglary. They are currently in the process of investing those and working on the leads.
He reminded residents to secure their windows and doors.
Mayor Ferre, stated that Rollins Park is in full bloom and looks beautiful as well as the
landscaping on the corner of Mt. Vernon and Grand Terrace. I'd like to respond to the
petition. The Grand Terrace that I know may look at this petition and say this is a
distraction and simply outrageous. The people who sign this petition are the same people
who come to the Council Meeting to attack every project that's brought even for
consideration. They attack the City Staff, and they make false accusations and attack the
Council and every allegation on this petition is false and I'll address each in the form of a
statement if the petition goes that far. Rest assured though, I would be no part of
allowing a small group of people to make all of the decisions for the 12,000 people who
live here.
PUBLIC HEARING-None
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
7A. Second Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace,
California,Amending Chapter 8.112 of the Municipal Code and Regulating the Sale
and Discharge of Fireworks.
CC-2006-59 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM
i
Council Minutes
May 25,2006
Page 6
I
CORTES, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the Second Reading of an Ordinance of the
City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, California,Amending Chapter 8.112 of
the Municipal Code and Regulating the Sale and Discharge of Fireworks
NEW BUSINESS
A. Resolution Adopting City Council Procedures
The following is a list of items that the Council requested the-City Attorney review and
comment and for staff to amend the Council Procedures and Policy with Council and the City
Attorney's recommendations and bring back to Council for consideration:
— Page 3 Section 1.6 - Would like it to be consistent with State Code
— Page 4 Section 2.1 Public Comment-Would like it to be consistent with State Code
— Page 4 Section 2.2-Would like the deadline to remain 12:00 noon on the Wednesday
of the week preceding the meeting.
— Page 6 - Section 2.7 d - Would like other than to answer questions or to rebut new
evidence introduced to remain
— Page 7 Section 2.9 - clarify whether it should be unanimous'consent of the Council
— Page 7 Section 2.11 - clarify the changes and additions
— Page 8 Section 3.3 - clarify
— Page 8 Section 3.4 -take the gender out or use he/she
— Page 9 Section 4.2 e- should include Mayor and Councilmembers
— Page 10 Section 4.5 - last sentence should be corrected to read before debate on
issues.
— Page 11 Section.5.2 - clarification on how further time will!be granted if requested
— Page 11 Section 5.3 - clarify whether this is permissible if we follow the Roberts
r
Rule of Order
— Page 12 & 13 Section 6.3 - clarify, particularly Debatable or Amendable
— Clarify that if a motion is made and it's not on the agenda can the Council act on it
during that meeting or does it need to be deemed an emergency item.
i
It was the consensus of the Council to consider changing the meeting days from the 2"a and
4`h Thursday to the 2"a and 4`'Tuesday of each month.
i
CLOSED SESSION -None
Mayor Ferr6 adjourned the meeting at 7:05 p.m., until the next CRA/City'Council Meeting which
is scheduled to be held on Thursday, June 8, 2006 at 6:00 p.m.
i
i
Council Minutes
May 25,2006
Page 7
CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace
MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace
STAFF REPORT
CRA ITEM () COUNCIL ITEM(X) MEETING DATE: June 8, 2006
SUBJECT: REJECT LIABILITY CLAIM GTLC-05-08 (Hornsby)
The City of Grand Terrace has received a claim for damage to the claimant's patio that was allegedly
caused during a clearing of City property.
Our Claims Adjuster has reviewed the claim and is requesting that the City reject the Claim and send
a standard rejection letter to the claimant. A copy of the claim is attached for your review.
Staff Recommends Council:
REJECT LIABILITY CLAIM GTLC-05-08(Hornsby)AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY CLERK TO
NOTIFY THE CLAIMANT OF THE ACTION TAKEN
t
OUNNUL 11Q,E A ITEM NP0
FILE WITH: CLAIM FOR DAMAGES I RESERVE FOR FILING STAMP
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE TO PERSON OR PROPERTY
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE I CLAIM NO.&rL r r D S�-D
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92313
INSTRUCTIONS
1. Claims for death,injury'to person or to personal property must be filed 'VInot later than six EC E I V E
months after the occurrence., (Government Code Section 911.2) j PT
�� 2UU�
2. Claims for damages to real property must be filed not later than one year after the
occurrence. (Government Code Section 911.2)
3. Read entire Claim Form before filing. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
4. This claim form must be signed on page 2 at the bottom.
::1T`!CLERK'S DEPARTMENT"
S. See Page 2 for space provided to include a diagram of accident location:
6. Attach separate sheets,'if necessary; to give full details. SIGN EACH SHEET.
TO: City of Grand Terrace I Date of Birth of Claimar
Name of Claimant
Occupation of Claimant
Home Address of Claimant City and State Home Telephone Number
��� s �e,�-�w.:o s-f. Cad 7 erne c%1. � �7m- � •�
Business Address of Claimant
City and State business Telephone Number
Give address and telephone number to which you desire notices or communications to•be sent Claimant's Social Security No
regarding this claim �,J� iC�nc- �oc�
When did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Name of any city employees involved in INJURY or DAMAGE
Date Time, r
wiF-s d•e i x,�If claim claim is for Equitable Indemnity, give date
claimant served with the complaint:
Date
Where did DAMAGE or INJURY occur? Describe fully, and provide a diagram in the section provided on page 2. Where
appropriate, give street names and'addresses and measurements from landmarks:
���lr
?Descnbe in detail how the DAMAGE or INJURY occurrea.
e�Z r f Q3 S 7'-Q i2 ✓J/l�;rl Q ti1��J
724-e
i
Descri e m Detail each INJURY or DAMAG
k r 'y
i
Why do you claim the City is responsible?
�Al i- c 2 Ar( P O
I -
c The amount claimed, as of the date-of presentation of this claim, is computed as follows:
Damages incurred to date(exact): Estimated prospective damages as far as known:
Damage to property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Future expensesI for medical and hospital care $
Expenses for medical and hospital care . . . $ Future loss of earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Loss of earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Other prospective special damages.. . . . . . . $
Special damages for. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Prospective general damages . . . . . . . . . . $
General damages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ Total estimate prospective damages . . . . . . $
Total damages incurred to date . . $
Total amount claimed as of date of presentation of this claim: $
See Page 2(over) THIS CLAIM MUST BE SIGNED ON REVERSE SIDE
II
Was damages and/or injury investigated by police? If so,what city?
Were paramedics or ambulance called? /<1 C:�:) If so, name city or ambulance
If injured, state date, time, name and address of doctor of your first visit
WITNESSES to DAMAGE or INJURY:List.all persons and addresses of persons known to have information:
Name Address Phone
Name Address Phone
r Name Address Phone
DOCTORS and HOSPITALS:
Hospital Address Date Hospitalized
Doctor Address Date of Treatment
Doctor Address Date of Treatment
READ CAREFULLY
For all accident claims provide in the following area a of City Vehicle when you first saw it,and by`B"location
diagram of the names of streets, including North, East, of yourself or your vehicle when you fast saw City vehicle;
South,and West;indicate place of accident by"X"and by location of City vehicle at time of accident by"A-1" and
showing house numbers or distances to street corners. If location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of accident
City Vehicle was involved,designate by letter "A"location by`B-1"and the point of impact by"X."
<3-
Signature of Claimant (or person filing on his/her behalf Typed or Printed Name
giving relationship to Claimant)
Date:
NOTE: CLAIMS MUST BE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK(Government Code Section 915a). Presentation of a false claim
is a felony(Penal Code Section 72.)
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE .
CRIME PREVENTION COMMITTEE MAY 1 7006
Regular Meeting
MINUTES CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
April 10,2006 CITY CLERKS DEPARTMENT
The Grand Terrace Crime Prevention Committee met for the regular meeting at the.Senior Center.
Meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m.by Chairperson, Philomene Spisak.
MEMBERS PRESENT were Chairperson, Philomene Spisak, JoAnn Johnson, Dottie Raborn, Don
Bennett, Lew Neeb, Debra Hurst and Pat Smith.
MEMBERS ABSENT— Richard Rollins.
CITY STAFF/SHERIFF'S DEPT.— Amber Emon, SSS
GUESTS PRESENT—None.
INTRODUCTIONS - Were not necessary.
AGENDA was approved with motion by Debra Hurst and second by Pat Smith.
MINUTES for the meeting of March 13, 2006 were approved with motion by Pat Smith and second
by Debra Hurst.
PUBLIC COMMENT—None.
CORRESPONDENCE—None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Swindles (to be changed to Criminal Activities)
a. Reported that elderly man was knocking on doors with a plea for money because
his grandson had been in an accident.
b. Slightly different "facts"were related at each house and donations were received.
c. He was finally apprehended and his car was impounded with expired license plate.
d. Be on the alert should he come back to town.
B. Grand Terrace Days
a. Meeting will be this Wednesday(12") at 2 pm.
b. Citizen Patrol will probably be directing traffic.
c. Will work on getting a booth. Possibly a booth combining Crime Prevention and
Citizen Patrol. Amber will get application.
D. Action Item: Jessica's Law Recommendation
a. Nothing new regarding Jessica's Law. It will probably be on the November ballot.
CU,NrC0L AC d' EEM4 N0 (A
J'
i
NEW BUSINESS
A. Crime Prevention Planning
a. We really need a Neighborhood Watch program. 1
b. Some areas are covered-,by Crime Free Multi-Housing. I
i
REPORTS
A. Summary of Law Enforcement Activity
a. Extensive report on crimes in Grand Terrace in the past week. Some specifics
follow.
b. Grand Theft Auto on Van Buren. Was recovered.
c. Recovery of auto stolen by using shaved key. Pregnant thief taken to hospital.
d. Strong arm at Grand Terrace Care Center probably for drugs. -
e. Grand theft of several large rolls of copper wire.
f. Assault on Pico and Michigan and Vandalism on Tanager
g. Many run away juveniles recently.
h. Stolen vehicle at Highlands and several burglaries elsewhere.
i. Attempt to pass counterfeit$100 bill.
j. A 12 year old vandal was caught.
k. Two deaths from natural;causes.
B. Citizen Patrol Report—Bob Stewart—No report since Bob was not present.
C. Other Community Programs—Nothing reported.
4
D. Member Reports
a. Debra Hurst reported that Mary Ann Stewart, Mickey Bubier and herself will
complete the Citizen Patrol Academy tomorrow with the driving portion.
b. Graduation and presentation to Council will'probably occur soon.
i
ADJOURNMENT-There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 6:50
p.m. f
I
Secretary o nn Johnson
k
1
f
Community and Economic Development Department
CALIFORNIA
--,STAFF jjz
CRA ITEM O COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE: June 8, 2006
FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED X
SUBJECT: Zone Change Case No.06-01 (ZC-06-01-),Tentative Tract Map No.
06-01 (TTM-06-01/County No.18071)and Environmental Review
Case No.06-03(E-06-03)to change the existing R1-20 zoning to
R1-10 zoning on a 8.26 acre parcel and to subdivide the
property into 20 single family lots.
APPLICANT: Karger Homes
LOCATION: Vacant 8.26 acre parcel located on the northerly side of Pico
Street starting approximately 150 feet easterly of the
intersection of Pico Street and Kingfisher Road.
RECOMMENDATION: Open the Public Hearing on the proposed Zone Change and
Tentative Tract Map; Receive any testimony; Close the Hearing
and Approve the Ordinance for Zone-Change Case No. 06-01
for First Reading and Approve the Resolution for Approval of
Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01
Background:
The applicant is proposing to change the existing zoning on the subject site from R1-20(Very Low
Density Single Family-minimum required area 20,000 sq.ft.)Zoning to R1-10(Low Density Single
Family-minimum required area 10,000 sq. ft.)Zoning. Also proposed is Tentative Tract Map No.
06-01 (County No. 18071) to subdivide the site into 20 single family lots in conformance with the
new zoning designation.
The subject site consists of an 8.26 acre parcel located on the northerly side of Pico Street and
easterly of Kingfisher Road. The site is more-or-less rectangularly shaped,but with an irregular
eastern boundary. The site is presently vacant and was rough graded at some point in the past,
at least on its easterly half. Also, the site is bounded by wood fences on the west and north. On
the east there is a slump stone block wall around a three million gallon water reservoir which lies
to the immediate east of the site. The reservoir is owned and operated by the Riverside Highland
Water Company.
There are two wide easements crossing the site. These include the 100 foot wide easement for
the California Aqueduct which runs down the middle of the site from the northeast corner to the
22795 Barton Road 9 Grand Terrace, Ca. -12 tip 3�ff& -261 A�0911
uu� M, - 3 ITE ffil 0 1 1 A
southwest corner; and a 60 foot wide Edison easement along the northerly property line.
The surrounding area is developed to single family homes to the west, north and south. To the
immediate west are 15 two-story, single family homes on Kingfisher Road. These homes lie on
individual single family lots ranging in size from 10, 692.9 sq. ft. to 21, 294.1 sq. ft. ;however, the
more typical lot size is about 10,900 sq. ft. These homes lie within the;R1-7.2 (Single Family
Residential - minimum required area 7,200 sq. ft.)
To the north along Lark Street, the lots abutting the subject site average about 8,000 sq.ft.; these
lots are also located in the R1-7.2 Zone and are occupied by two-story homes. To the south are
acre and one acre lots along Blue Mountain Court.
On May 18, 2006 the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council the approval and
adoption of the Ordinance changing the existing R1-20 Zoning to R1-10 Zoning and also the
approval of the Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01 (TTM 18071). A copy
of the Planning Commission's report for May 181h is attached hereto for reference (Exhibit 2)
together with the draft minutes of that hearing and first hearing on this project on April 20, 2006.
Zone Chancge.
Because the property is impacted by a number of constraints,such as the aqueduct easement,the
Edison easement and the adjacent three million gallon water reservoir, the applicant feels that a
higher density is required to make it possible to develop this site. It should be pointed out that
while a couple of the lots will be slightly over 10,000 square feet in size, the average lot size for the
proposed map will be about 14,800 sq. ft. The new zoning designation will provide a transition
between the larger half-acre and acre sites below Pico Street and the smaller lots to the west and
north of the site. Lastly, the new zone is consistent with the existing General Plan designation
which is "LDR" (Low Density Residential).
The subject site also lies in the AG (Agricultural Overlay District) Overlay Zone which permits the
keeping of large farm animals among other agricultural uses. Given the density of the new
subdivision and the proximity of the smaller urban lots abutting the site, the Commission included
in its recommendation that the AG Overlay Zone be deleted for this site.
Tentative Tract Map:
The proposed subdivision is shown on the tentative tract map labeled "Exhibit 1." It will consists
of 20 single family lots ranging in size from 10,200 square feet to 22,230 square feet. Each of the
20 lots will meet the development standards for the proposed R1-10 zone including lot area
(minimum 10,000 square feet), lot width (interior lot 60 feet, corner lot 70 feet), lot depth (100) and
street frontage (minimum 40 feet).
Interior access to the future development will be provided by two private culr'de-sac streets, Jaden
Court and Bryce Court. These streets will be maintained by a required homeowner's association
for this tract.
The applicant has decided to come back at a later date for the Site and Architectural Review
approvals for the actual homes he plans to build on the 20 lots; however, the applicant was
required,however,to provide"footprints"of future, possible construction on several of the proposed
lots demonstrating that a future home could comply with all of the setback requirements of the
proposed R1-10 Zone. These "footprint" studies have been included as exhibits of the attached
May 18'h Commission report.
As noted above, running through the middle of the site is the 100 foot wide easement for the
California Aqueduct which runs along the easterly side of Grand Terrace. The applicant and his
engineer have had several discussions with the State Department of Water Resources regarding
an "encroachment permit;" however, they were told by the State that they needed to submit a
complete set of improvement plans.before an application could be considered. The applicant feels
that he can not do this until the tentative map has been approved by the Council. The Planning
Commission in making its recommendation imposed a condition that the final map can not be
approved until the required "encroachment permit" has been obtained from the State.
Staff did receive a letter from the State (by Fax) outlining the above process which has been
included here as Exhibit 7.
The preliminary grading plan is also shown on the tentative tract map, Exhibit 1. The grading plan
shows the proposed finished elevations for each pad and two tiers of retaining walls with a water
quality grassy swale in the southwest corner of the site. Also, located in the southwest corner will
be a 10 foot wide access road for maintenance purposes.
The applicant's engineer prepared several exhibits in response to issues raised at the Planning
Commission hearing. These include: a copy of the old tentative map,TTM 14078,approved in the
early 90's by the City which shows a dedicated street along the westerly property line. (Please see
Exhibit 10 of the Commission report.); a lot study showing,the layout under the existing R1-20
zoning which shows that the number of lots along the westerly property line is similar to the
proposed subdivision and that the pad elevations for those lots would also be similar because of
the locations of the aqueduct(Please see Exhibit 11 of the Commission report.); and, a profile for
the future private street, Bryce Court showing a 6%grade at a 1:1 scale which is not that steep and
is actually slightly less than the existing grade on Pico Street (Please see Exhibit 12 of the
Commission report.).
-- Environmental Review:
This project to change the excising R1-20 Zoning To R1-10 zoning and to subdivide the site into
20 single family lot qualifies for a Mitigated Negative Declaration under the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act in that the project will not have an adverse impact on the
environment. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration together with the Initial Study with the
mandatory finding of no impact for this project are attached hereto a Exhibit B (E-06-03).
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission and Staff recommend that the City Council adopt the Ordinance
changing the existing R1-20 Zoning to R1-10 Zoning based on the findings in the Ordinance and
recommend the approval of the Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01 (County
No. 18071) based on the findings in the Resolution and subject to the recommended conditions of
approval.
Respectfully submitted, Approved by:
%r 471A &..— �S
---
Johrtampe Gary L. oontz
Ass ciate Planner Community Deve opment Director
JL:jI
Exhibits: Exhibit A- Legal description of site of proposed change of zone
Exhibit B - Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study,,E-06-03
Exhibit 1 -Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01 (County No. 18071
Exhibit 2 - Planning Commission Staff Report for 5/18/06 ;
Exhibit 3 - Draft Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of 4/20/06
Exhibit 4 - Draft Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of 5/18/06
Exhibit 5 - Proposed Ordinance changing the zoning to R1-:10
Exhibit 6 - Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract No. 06-01
Exhibit 7 - Letter received from State Department of Water"Resources by fax
I
c:\MyFiles\JOHN\Kargerpico\AZC-06-01 coundIrpt
i
I
{
I
I
I
i
i
�I
t
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF THE N.W. 1/4 OF THE S.E. 1/4 AND OF THE
S.E. 1/4 OF THE N.E. 1/4 OF THE S.W. 1/4, ALL SECTION 4, T.2S.,RAW., S.B.M.
RECORDS OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
r
i
I
i
I
PROPOSED
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Document Type: Negative Declaration (Mitigated)
Date: March 30,2006
Project Title: Z-06-01,TTM-06-01 and E-06-03
Project Location: An approximately 8.26 acre parcel located on the north side of Pico Street
starting approximately 150 feet easterly of the intersection of Pico Street and
Kingfisher Road
■ Description of Project:The proposed project will consist of the changing of the existing R1-20
(Very Low Density Single Family)zoning to R1-10(Low Density Single Family)Zoning and
subdividing the subject site into 20 single family lots with a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet.
Project Proponent: Karger Homes
Lead Agency: Community Development Department,City of Grand ITerrace
Contact Person: Gary L.Koontz, Community Development Director
(909)430-2247 I
Public Review Period: Began:Thursday,March 30,2006 Ended:Thursday,June 8,
2066
Public Hearings/Meetings: Planning Commission—Thursday,April 20,2006 and May 18,2006
City Council-Thursday,June 8 ,2006
Environmental Finding:
Based on an Initial Study,attached hereto, prepared to evaluate the potential
environmental impacts of approving Z-06-01,TTM-06-01 and E-06-03,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:
Gary L. Koontz,Community Development Director
c:\MyFiles\JOHN\Kargerpico\negativedeclarationZ-06-01
EX IBIT B
City of Grand Terrace
Community Development Department
Environmental Checklist Form
I. ProjectTitle: Zone Change No.06-01,Tentative Tract Map No.06-01 (County
No. 18071)and Environmental Review Case No.06-03
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Grand Terrace
Community Development Department
22795 Barton Road
�i Grand Terrace,CA 92313
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Gary L. Koontz, Community Development Director or John
Lampe,Associate Planner (909)430-2247
4. Project Location: An approximately 8.26 acre, vacant parcel located on the
northerly side of Pico Street starting approximately 150 feet
easterly of the intersection of Pico Street and Kingfisher Road
5. Project Sponsor's Name Karger.Homes
6. General Plan Designation: "LDR"(Low Density Residential)
7. Zoning:. Existing zoning R1-20(Very Low Density Single Family)to be
changed to R1-10(Low Density Single Family)
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 project will consist of the changing of the existing R1-20(Very Low Density Single Family)Zoning to Rl-
10(Low Density Single Family)Zoning under Z-06-01 and subdividing the subject site into 20 single family
residential lots under TTM-06-01 (County No. 18071)in conformance with the proposed R1-10 Zone with a
minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. A proposed grading plan is also shown on the submitted tentative tract
map.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Settings: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
North: Single Family Residential,water reservoir and avocado orchard,Zoned R1-7.2 and R1-20
East: Riverside Highland Water Company water tank reservoir,avocado orchard and open hillside,
Zoned R1-20 and RH(Hillside Residential)
South: Single Family Residential,Zoned R1-20
West: Single Family Residential,Zoned R1-7.2
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, flnancing approval, or participation
agreement)
City of Grand Terrace Department of Building and Safety—building and grading permits;County of San
Bernardino Fire Department—plan check requirements; and City of Grand Terrace Public Works for
sewer connection and street improvements. The State of California Department of Water Resources for
an encroachment permit over the California Aqueduct.
Community Development Department 1 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
i
f
f
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 D Transportation/Circulation ❑ Public Services
❑ Population and Housing D Biological Resources ❑ Utilities and(Services Systems
®Geological Problems ❑Energy and Mineral Resources '❑Aesthetics
®Water ❑Hazards 'D Cultural Resources
®Air Quality ®Noise ❑Recreation
❑Mandatory Findings of Significance f
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 r
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.
�3 A fp
gnature Date
i
tq-1
Gary L. Koontz Community Development Director
Printed Name Title
I
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.
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.
Community Development Department 3 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
i
i
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact i Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
I. Land Use and Planning. Would the proposal: i
I
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source: General Plan Categories Map; and Zoning
District Map—The proposed use and new zone are '
consistent with the Land Use Category of the City's I
General Plan. 1
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)This project will be a transition between the Rl- I
20 properties to the east and south and the higher j
density single family development to the west zoned ❑ ❑ ❑
R1-7.2.
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 this part of Grand Terrace)
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community(including a low-income or
minority community)? (The site is relative small in
size at 8.26 acres. It lies at the edge of the urban
development in the City and will not disrupt or divide
any existing part of the City. ) f
A brief explanation to answer 1:
The proposed project at 2.4 dwelling units/acre is consistent with the existing General Plan of the City which allows up to 5
units per acre for the"LDR"category. The project will meet all of the standards of the City including all subdivision and
grading standards. The developer will also have to obtain an encroachment permit from the State Department of Water
Resources for that part of the proposed subdivision within the 100 foot wide California Aqueduct easement which runs through
the middle of the subject site. In addition,there are no agricultural resources on the site as it has been vacant for a number of
years. Lastly,the proposal at the edge of existing development will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of any
established part of the City.
Community Development Department 4 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
II. Population and Housing. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections?(This project is relatively ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
small is size with only 20 units. It is consistent with
the City's General Plan and population projections for
future development under the General Plan.)
-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
will not induce any substantial growth as it is at the
edge of the urbanized portion of the City and is
presently served or can be served with all necessary ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
infrastructure.)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? (The property is vacant and will not displace
any existing housing.)
—' brief explanation to answer II:
The proposed project is a relatively small project which is consistent with the City's General Plan. It will not have any
significant effect on regional or local population projections. In addition,the site is presently or can be easily served by all
necessary infrastructure. No major expansion of infrastructure will be required;and no growth inducement will result. Lastly,
the site is a vacant parcel which was graded a number of years ago for an old subdivision which was never recorded. No
displacement of existing housing stock will result from this proposal.
Community Development Department 5 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
i
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact I Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
III Geologic Problems. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? (General Plan MEA/EIR-ES4) ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Seismic ground shaking?(GP MEA/EIR41-1) ❑ ® ❑
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?(GP ❑ ❑ �j
MEA/EIR-II-1)
d) Seiches, tsunami,or volcanic hazard? (GP N EVEIR ❑ ❑ ❑
II-1) j
e) Landslides or mudflows? (GP MEA/EIR II-1) ❑ ❑ ❑
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading,or fill? (GP ❑ { ❑ ❑ f
MEA/EIR II-20)
g) Subsidence of the land? (GP MEA/EIR II-1,Append ❑ ❑ ❑
B)
h) Expansive soil? (GP MEA/EIR II-1,Append B4) ❑ ❑ ❑
I) Unique geologic or physical features? (GP MEVEIR ❑ ❑ ❑
II-1)
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 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
zone change to R1-10 and subdivision of 20 single family lots. This required soils report will identify any liquefaction
potential.
Finding:Potential impact reduced to a level of insignificance with mitigateon measure:This project must meet the
requirements that all structures be designed and constructed to meet the seismic standards of the Uniform
Building Code.
I
i
i
I
Community Development Department 6 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
i
i
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
IV. Water. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff? (GP N1EA/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 N EA/EIR II-1)
d) Changes in.the amount of surface water in any water ❑ ❑ ❑
body? (GP MEA/EIR II-1)
e) Changes in currents,or the course or direction of water ❑ ❑ ❑ J
movements? ()
f) Changes in the quality of ground waters, either through ❑ ❑ ❑ �^J
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 M[EA/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)
A brief explanation to answer IV:
The proposed project is to change the R1-20 Zoning to R1-10 and to subdivide the site into 20 single family lots.. There will
be an increase in impermeable surface area with future residential development;however,a hydrology study will be required to
analyze how this increase in runoff will be adequately handled. The hydrology study will be required before any grading
permits for this project can be issued. In addition,before the grading permits are issued for this project,all NPDES
requirements will have to be met which will ensure that many of the impact to water resources will be eliminated. These
requirements will be set out in a required"Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan." Also,a"Water Quality Management
Plan"will be required before building permits are issued to ensure the quality of the water runoff from this site.
Finding:Potential impact reduced to a level of insignificance with mitigation measure:This project must meet the
requirements that 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 Boards
NPDES Permit for San Bernardino County,as required by the Clean Water Act and submission of a hydrology study.
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
I
i
V. Air Quality. Would the proposal:
I _
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
existing or projected air quality violation? (GP
MEA/EIR H-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) i
f
A brief explanation to answer V:
The proposed project is relatively small size at only 8.26 acres. With only 20 units,it,the project,does not have the capacil,j
significantly impact the air quality of the region. There will be a very small increase in air pollution primarily from the vehi'
of the new residents;however,this will not be significant. However,there may be the potential for generation of dust when the
site is graded for the 20 proposed single family lots.
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 8 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
i
I
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
VI. Transportation/Circulotion. Would the proposal result ;
a) Increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Trans. Engineering and Planning Consultant)
b) 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? U ❑ ❑
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or ❑ ❑ ❑
bicyclists? (TCM Ordinance 147)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting ❑ ❑
alternative transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)? (TCM Ordinance 147)
g) Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts?() ❑ ❑ ❑
Brief explanation to answer VI:
Based on the size and nature of the proposed project,it will not have a significant traffic impact on arterial or
intersection level of service.
VH. 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 H-20,Append C)
b) Locally designated species(e.g.,heritage
trees)? (GP MEA/EIR II-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)? (GP MEA/EIR II-20) ❑ ❑ ❑ M
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
(GP MEA/EIR U-20) ❑ ❑ ❑ in
Community Development Department 9 Initial°Study and Environmental
Analysis
• I
I
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Brief explanation to answer VH:
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 to result from the
development of this project.
i
VIII. Energy and Mineral Resources. Would the
Proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy ❑ ❑ ❑
conservation plans? (GP N[EA/EIR
II-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 II=19, and Append B)
Brief explanation to answer VIII:
No mineral resources have been identified in the City. Therefore the development of this project will not adversely impact
any mineral resources. In addition,the project(the 20 individual homes)will have to be constructed in compliance with
the energy standards of the building code.
i
I
Community Development Department 10 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
IX. Hazards. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
release of hazardous substance
(including,but not limited to: oil,
h pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)?
(GP MEVEIR II-7)
b) Possible interference with ❑ ❑ ❑
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?(GT
Emergency Plan, and GP MEVEIR
II-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 II-1)
e) Increase fire hazard in areas with ❑ ❑ ❑
flammable brush, grass,or trees?
(GP MEVEIR U-6)
Brief explanation to answer IX:
The site lies immediately east of an avocado orchard and not immediately to a hazardous brush area. No hazardous materials are expected except for
those household hazardous materials which are expected in all residential development. The Riverside Highland Water Company reservoir
to the immediate east lies partly below grade and there are existing drains for emergency conditions.
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) ❑ ❑ ❑
Community Development'Department 11 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 X.
There will be some increase in ambient noise level simply from having 20 new homes in the area;however,such
residential noise will not be significant. In addition,all construction and grading activity on the site will have to comply
with the City's Noise Ordinance.
Finding:Potential impact reduced to a level of insignificance with mitigation measures. The construction activi,_
for this development will have to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance which will mitigate any potential noise impacts
to less than significant levels.
i
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:
a) Fire protection? ( )
b) Police protection? ( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
c) Schools? ( ) ❑ ❑
d) Maintenance of public facilities, ❑ ❑ ❑
including roads?( ) ❑ ❑ ❑
e) Other governmental services? ( )
❑ I ❑ ❑ ■
Brief explanation of answer M.
This proposed project for 20 single family horses is relatively small in size. As for any residential projects,there will be
some effect on public services but because of the relatively small 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 district impact fees for this project before building permits
are issued.
I
Ii
4
i
Community Development Department 12 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
XII. Utilities and Services Systems. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or
supplies, or substantial alternations to the following
utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? (GP
MEA/ELR U-32, II 33) ❑ ❑ ❑ JE.
b) Communications systems? (GP
MEA/ELR II-33) ❑ ❑ ❑
c) Local or regional water treatment or -
distribution facilities?(GP ❑ ❑ ❑
M[EA/ELR II-30)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? (GP
MEA/EIR H-30) ❑ ❑ ❑
e) Storm water drainage? (GP
M[EA/EIR II-33) ❑ ❑ ❑
f) Solid waste disposal? (GP
MEA/ELR lI 32) ❑ ❑ ❑
g) Local or regional water supplies?
(GP MEA/ELR H-30) ❑ ❑ ❑ j
Brief explanation of answer XII.
This proposed project is relatively small in size. All of the needed services exist for this site including electricity,phone,
and natural gas. There will be no impacts resulting from this project on utilities and service systems.
XIII. Aesthetics. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ j
highway? (GP MEA/ELR H-22) -
b) Have a demonstrable negative ❑ ❑ M ❑
aesthetic effect?(Proposed site plan
and project elevations ) ❑ ❑ ❑
c) Create light or glare?
Brief explanation to answer XlH.
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 requirement for a site and architectural review of all 20 houses by the City's Planning
Commission before building permits are issued. This review will be made at a public hearing in which are property owners
within 300 feet will receive notice.
Community Development Department 13 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
i
i
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
In iorporated
XIV. Cultural Resources. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources?
(GP MEA/EIR II-20) ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Disturb archaeological resources?
(GP MEA/EIR H-20) ❑ ❑ ❑
c) Affect historical resources? (GP
MIEA/EIR U-22) ❑ ❑
d) Have the potential to cause a
physical change which would affect ❑ j ❑ ❑
unique ethnic cultural values? (GP f
MEABIR II-22)
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred
uses within the potential impact ❑ ❑ ❑
area? (No religious or sacred uses
are located on or adjacent to the site)
Brief explanation to answer XIV.
No Down palentological,archaelogical or historical resources exist on the site. No cultural values or sacred uses will t�--
impacted by this project.
XV. Recreation. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for j
neighborhood or regional parks or ❑ ❑ ❑
other recreational facilities? (GP
MEA/E1R 11-21)
b) Affect existing recreational
opportunities? (GP MEA/EIR 11-21) ❑ ❑ ❑
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 20 units are involved,such effects will be less than significant.
f
j
Community Development Department 14 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
XVI. 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-tern,
environmental goals?
c) Does the project have impacts that
are individually limited,but ❑ U ❑
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 15 Initial Study and Environmental
Analysis
i
1
Issues(and Support Information Sources): Potentially Potentially Less than No
Significant Significant Significant impact
Impact I Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Brief explanation to answers XVl.
No Impact.The proposed project is relatively small with only 20 single family units. Any effects on the environment
resultingfrom this project will either be less than significant
p ) or will be fully mitigated by the regulations and requirements
of the future planning and building department reviews.
XVII. Earlier Analysis.
Earlier analysis may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program 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 Ten-ace Community and Economic Development Department.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist WC-r--,
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 1
f
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are"Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated,"describe the mitigation measured which were incorporated or refined
from the earlier document and the extent they address si�e specific conditions for the
project.
® Not Applicable
JL.jl
Grand Terrace Community Development Dept
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 Cal.App.3d 1337(1990)
I
c:1MyFilesUOHNIKargerpico\E-06-03checklist
Community Development Department 16 Initial Study ands Environmental
Analysis
b
Community and Economic Development Department
CALIFORNIA
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: Thursday, May 18, 2006 (Continued from the meeting of April 20,
2006.)
SUBJECT: Zone Change No. 06-01, Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01 (TTM
18071) and Environmental Review Case No. 06-03 to change the
existing R1-20 zoning to R1-10 on a 8.26 acre parcel to subdivide the
property into 20 lots
APPLICANT: Karger Homes
LOCATION: Vacant 8.26 acre parcel located on the northerly side of Pico Street
starting approximately 150 feet easterly of the intersection of Pico
Street and Kingfisher Road.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive the Staff Report, open the public hearing and receive any
testimony, close the public hearing and recommend to the City
Council the adoption of the Ordinance changing the existing R1-20
Zone to R1-10 and the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01
(County No. 18071)
BACKGROUND:
This project was continued from the meeting of April 20,2006 in order for the applicant to respond
to and address some of the issues raised at the April meeting regarding the zone change, lot sizes,
street grade, outlet structure on Lot 18, etc. The applicant's engineer has provided some additional
exhibits related to these issues which have been labeled as follows:
XHIBIT 2
22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92313-529,
Exhibit 10-A copy of the Tentative Tract Map No. 14078 approved in the early 90's (This
map waw approved with a dedicated street along the westerly property line..)
Exhibit 11 - Lot study showing the layout under the existing R1 - 20 zoning (This study
shows that the number of lot along the westerly property line is similar to the
proposed tract and that the pad elevations for those lofts would also be similar
because of the aqueduct..
Exhibit 12-Profile of Bryce Court showing a 6%grade at 1:1 scale(The profile is drawn at
a 1:1 scale to show that 6% is not that steep.)
Exhibit 13 - Plan view of outlet structure between Lots 17 and 18 per Commissioner's
request.
Exhibit 14-Profile of outlet structure between Lots 17 and 18 per Commissioner's request.
Given the technical nature of some of these exhibits, Staff feels it would be�best to let the applicant
and/or his engineer expand on the explanation of these exhibits to the Planning Commission. If
members of the Commission have any questions before the continued public hearing,please contact
Staff and we would be happy to relay those questions to the applicant.
REOUEST:
The applicant is proposing to change the existing zoning on the subject site from RI-20(Very Low
Density Single Family-minimum required area 20,000 sq.ft.)Zoning to R1-10(Low Density Single
Family-minimum required area 10,000 sq. ft.)Zoning. Also proposed is Tentative Tract Map No.
06-01 (County No. 18071)to subdivide the site into 20 single family lots in conformance with the _
new zoning designation. The applicant's engineer has submitted a"Letter of Intent"describing this
proposal,please see Attachment 1.
STI'E AND SURROUNDING AREA:
The subject site consists of 8.26 acres located on the northerly side of Pico Street beginning about
150 feet easterly of the intersection of Pico Street and Kingfisher Road. The site is more-or-less
rectangularly shaped but with an irregular eastern boundary. It has a frontages on Pico Street of about
670 feet and a maximum north-south dimension of about 620 feet. The property is presently vacant
and appears to have been rough graded at some point in the past, on at least!its easterly half. Also
the site is bounded by wood fences on the west and north. In addition,there;is a slump stone block
wall around a two million gallon water reservoir and along the easterly boundary of the site. Please
see Attachment 2 for an aerial photograph of the subject site and the surrounding area.
Vehicle access to the site is provided by Pico Street which is a 66 foot widte local collector street
which along the subject site is without curbs, gutters or walks. Also additional pave-out will be
required.
The surrounding area is developed to single family homes to the west,north and south.Also,to the
southwest are located a convent and a seminary. To the east,as pointed out above,is the two million
gallon water reservoir of the Riverside Highland Water Company and �an avocado orchard.
Properties farther to the east lie on the western slope of Blue Mountain.
I
Tentative Tract No. 88-02R 1(County Number 14078)was approved by the City Council in 1994 for
15 lots with a variance for area modification;however, this tentative map for the 15 residential lots
was never recorded.
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING:
The subject site lies within the "LDR" (Low Density Residential, 1 -5 units/acre) category of the
City's General Plan and is presently zoned R1-20 (Very Low Density Single Family - minimum
required area 20,000 square feet). The proposed change of zone to R1-10 (Low Density Single
Family-minimum required area 10,000)and the proposed subdivision are consistent with the City's
General Plan. The overall gross density will be 2.4 units/acre and all lots will be greater than the
proposed 10,000 square foot required minimum area.
The surrounding area also lies in the"LDR"category;however,those parcels to the immediate west
are zoned RI-7.2(Single Family Residential-minimum required area 7,200 square feet while those
parcels to the immediate east and south are zoned R1-20 (Very Low Density Single Family -
minimum required area 20,000).
The subject site and the properties to the east and south lie also within the"Agricultural Overlay"
Zone).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Zone Change:
\� The applicant is requesting that the existing zoning of R1-20 be changed to R1-10. Because the
property is impacted by a number of constraints such as the aqueduct easement,the Edison easement
and the adjacent 2 million gallon water reservoir,the applicant feels that a higher density is required
to make it possible to develop this site. It should be pointed out that while a couple of the lots will
be slightly over 10,000 sq. ft.in size,the average lot size for the proposed map will be about 14,800
sq. ft. The new zoning designation will provide a transition between the larger half-acre and acre
sites below Pico Street and the smaller lots on Kingfisher to the west. Lastly, the new zone is
consistent with the existing General Plan designation which is "LDR"(Low Density Residential).
The subject site is also in the AG (Agricultural Overlay District) Zone which permits the keeping
of large farm animals. Given the density of the new subdivision and the proximity of smaller urban
lots abutting the site, Staff feels that it would be appropriate to delete the subject site from the AG
Overlay. Therefore,the recommendation does include the deletion of the site from the AG overlay.
Tentative Tract Man:
The proposed subdivision is shown on the tentative tract map(Exhibit 1). It will consist of 20 single
family lots ranging in size from 10,200 square feet to 22,230 square feet. The average size of the
20 lots will be about 14,800 square feet. Each of the 20 lots will meet the development standards
for the proposed R1-10 zone including lot area(minimum 10,000 square feet),lot width(interior lot
60 feet, corner lot 70 feet), lot depth(100 feet)and street frontage(minimum 40 feet). (Please see
Attachment 3 for an 8 %2 x 11 reduction of the proposed tentative map.)
The applicant has decided to come back at a later date for the Site and Architectural Review
approvals for the actual homes he plans to build on the 20 individual lots. Staff, however, did ask
the applicant's engineer to provide "footprints" of future, possible construction on three of the
smaller lots to make sure any future home could comply with the setback requirements for the
proposed RI-10 Zone. Exhibits 2, 3 and 4 show these possible "footprints" and demonstrate that
a future home could comply with all of the setback requirements of the R1;-10 Zone which include
25 feet for the front yard, 1015 feet for the side yards and 35 feet for the rear yard. It should be
pointed out that in the R1-10 Zone 10 feet of the required 35 foot rear yard can be taken up by slope
areas. These exhibits demonstrate that all pad areas will be large enough4o accommodate future
residential development in the new RI-10 zone.
Access to the proposed subdivision will be provided by means of Pico Street and two cul-de-sac
streets, Jaden Court and Bryce Court. As pointed out above, Pico Streef is a 66 foot wide local
collector which requires full improvements along the subject site including curbs,gutters,sidewalks
and pave-out. Jaden and Bryce Courts will be new 60 foot wide local streets ending in cul-de-sacs.
They will be fully improved with curbs, gutters and walks. +
Also shown on the tentative tract map are several easements. Through the middle of the site is a 100
foot wide easement for the California Aqueduct which runs along the easterly side of Grand Terrace.
The actual aqueduct consists of a 108"pipe shown on the tentative map along the"left"side of the
100 foot easement. The applicant and his engineer have had discussions with the State Department
of Water Resources for an"encroachment permit,"however,theywere told that the applicant needed
to submit complete improvement plans before the application could be considered. The applicant
feels that he can not do this until the tentative map has been approved. The applicant agrees to have
a condition imposed that prior to the approval of the final map,the encroachment permit be must be
granted by the State's Department of Water Resources.
The Staff did send a copy of the tentative map to the Department of Water Resources,Engineering
Division-Encroachments and Relocations. We also called that office and talked to the personnel,
who will be involved in the review of this project,on at least two separate occasions. We were told
that full improvement plans would be required before the encroachment permit could be considered
but that there was nothing in the proposed tentative map which would preclude a possible
encroachment permit. Staff may have a written response from the State on;this matter by the time
of the public hearing on April 20`h. This written response will not be an encroachment approval but
will acknowledge the receipt of the tentative map and outline the encroachment permit process.
Along the northerly boundary of the site is a 60 foot wide easement to Southern California Edison.
There are also existing and proposed drainage and sewer easements located on the site. New sewer
lines will run along the easterly side of the aqueduct easement and within Br ce Court to and along j
the westerly property line of the site. There are also easements for the Riverside Highland Water
Company for a 24" line westerly of the water reservoir east of the site and a 10 foot wide access
easement along the easterly property line of the site. Lastly,there will be tiered retaining walls and
drainage easements along the southerly side of Lot 1 and the westerly sides of Lots 1 and 2.
Conceptual Grading:
The preliminary grading plan has also been included and is shown on the tentative tract map,Exhibit
1. Pad elevations are indicated on each lot. Generally,lots will be decreasing in elevation from east
to west and from north to south. The overall property has about a 50 foot fall as measured along the
Pico Street frontage. The new cul-de-sac's will have an average grade of 5 to 6 percent.
As dirt was imported to the site in the past, the applicant's engineer believes that the grading will
be balanced.onsite.
The applicant's engineer has also provided a letter to Staff discussing the NPDES compliance for
this project. The letter discusses the construction BMP's,post construction BMP's, and the fact
that a"Water Quality Management Plan"will be prepared and submitted to the City with the final
ma for this project. The applicant's engineer will be resent at the public hearing to discuss an P P j PP � 1� P P g Y
questions members of the Commission may have about the NPDES compliance. Please see
Attachment 4 for a copy of the letter from the applicant's engineer on this matter.
REVIEWING AGENCY COMMENTS:
The following comments were made by various-local agencies in reviewing this project:
County of San Bernardino, Fire Department Community Safety Division:
Please refer to the comments made by the County Fire Department in its letter dated March 14,2006
Attachment 5.
Riverside Highland Water Company.
�J
Please refer to the comments made by the Riverside Highland Water Company in its letter dated
March 28, 2006 ,Attachment 6.
City Traffic Engineer:
Please refer to the memorandum dated April 3,2006 from Craig Neustaedter,City Traffic Engineer,
for comments regarding traffic for this project,Attachment 7.
Building and Safety:
Please refer to the comments made by the Director of Building and Safety/Public Works in his
memorandum of April 11, 2006,Attachment 8.
Staff has also attached below three ,e-mails received regarding this project, two from a property
owner on Kingfisher and one from the applicant. Please see Attachments 11, 12 and 13.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
This project to change the existing R1-20 Zoning to R1-10 Zoning and to subdivide the site into 20
single family lots qualifies for a Mitigated Negative Declaration under the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act in that the project will not have an adverse impact on the
environment. Copies of the Mitigate Negative Declaration and the Initial Study/Environmental
Checklist with the mandatory finding of no impact for this project are attached hereto as Exhibit B
and were made available for a 20 day public review as mandated by law.
FINDINGS: j
Section 18.90.040 of the Zoning Code requires that specific findings be made by the Planning
Commission in recommending a Zone Change to the City Council. These required findings for an
acceptable project are as follows:
1. The proposed amendment(Zone Change)will not be:
a. Detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the
persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed
amendment or within the City; or
b. Injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City.
2. The proposed amendment(Zone Change)will be consistent'with the latest adopted
General Plan.
In addition ,the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires that specific findings be made prior to the
approval of the tentative map. These findings are:
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvements is consistent with the General Plan; and
2. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development; 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 orwildlife
or their habitat; and
I
4. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
public health problems; and
5. 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.
These findings have been incorporated into the recommended Ordinance to change the existing R1-
20 Zoning to R1-10 Zoning (Attachment 9) and in the recommended Resolution of Approval
(Attachment 10) for Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01.
CONDTI'IONS OF APPROVAL:
Upon approval by the Planning Commission, the tentative map will be subject to the attached
conditions of approval as shown in the Resolution of Approval (Attachment 10) for City Council
action.
I
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council the adoption
of the Ordinance changing the existing R1-20 Zoning to R1-10 Zoning(Attachment 9)based on the
findings in the Ordinance(Attachment 9) and recommend to the City Council the approval of the
Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01 (TTM 18071)based on the findings and
subject to the recommended conditions of approval(Attachment 10).
Respectfully submitted,
r '1
*oLam. e,Associate Planner Gary L.Koontz, mmunity Development Director
JL jl
Exhibits: IgNbibit-A * al dew-fiptionaf site Q age of 00fi0-
19NMbit B R sas,caa�a ��:•: .�+tea-�T�.�_: , + a T � 1 Isa a
r b s "'i�..',m
Exhibit 1 - Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01 (TTM 18071)
Exhibit 2 -Proposed footprint on Lot 6
Exhibit 3 -Proposed footprint on Lot 10
Exhibit 4-Proposed footprint on Lot 15
Exhibit 5 -Proposed footprint on Lot 1
Exhibit 6 -Proposed footprint on Lot 7
i' Exhibit 7 -Proposed footprint on Lot 8
Exhibit 8 -Proposed footprint on Lot 14
Exhibit 9 -Proposed footprint on Lot 16
Exhibit 10-A copy of the Tentative Tract Map No. 14078 approved in the early 90's
Exhibit 11 -Lot study showing the layout under the existing R1 -20 zoning
Exhibit 12 -Profile of Bryce Court showing a 6% grade at 1:1 scale
Exhibit 13 -Plan view of outlet structure between Lots 17 and 18
Exhibit 14 -Profile of outlet structure between Lots 17 and 18
Attachments: Attachment 1 -Letter of intent from applicant's engineer
Attachment 2 -Aerial photograph of site and surrounding area
Attachment 3 - 8 %Z x 11 reduction of the tentative tract map
Attachment 4 - Letter from applicant's engineer on NPDES compliance
Attachment 5 -Letter from County Fire-Community Safety Division, 3/14/06
Attachment 6 - Letter from Riverside Highland Water Company dated 3/28/06
Attachment 7 -Memorandum from City Traffic Engineer dated 4/3/06
Attachment 8- Memorandum from the Director of Building and Safety/Public
Works, dated 4/11/06
Ar}—lf__ A O _ Aropocv__d_owin 3301A 1.11Q 8i; 0 4h@ g n tQ RI 1/1
Attachment 1(1_T?A�A�k1 3b1�3-4A-ppr-@V2iiAr-Tenta4ive Tr_.,,..Ne. 06 n�
( )
Attachment 11-E-mail from Mark.and Anna Roberts dated 4/5/06
Attachment 12-E-mail from Mark and Anna Roberts dated 4/10/06
Attachment 13-E-mail from the applicant to Mr. and Mrs. Roberts dated 4/10/06
c:V...POHN1Kargerpico\TTM-06-01 Z-06-01 comm.rpt
i
a-ss
30.s - T
I o' -- CpUR
gycE
I
_ p I 5
PE 80.6
I 6
4 5" PE 7 .87 o
O I o
I H=6.0 e.E' 4
f/fl I T.W.=73.0 k PE 73.8
I I
26
r�
OP5,2
I
� I 3
99 I PE 73.8
I
O pFESS/p f
0 -z'
d 3 No. 22502
Exp. 12-31-07 * Scale: 1" = 40'
civic, EXHIBIT A- 2 40
�O- , �
W.J. McKEEVER, INC.
TENTAnVE MACT NO. 18071 i C� �G�G
EXHIBIT SHOWING
e47 NORTs lAa1N sBt, svrrE 2s
PROPOSED HOUSE ON LOT 6 RAID$ R01
COUNPIY OF SAN BE INTO
22502 DATE
I
123.15' /A /
///
s
RET. WALL
/ MAXIMUM H=5.0
10 25'
PE 91.0
159.74'
PE 91.0
��QQROFESS/p�!
No. 22502 EXHIBIT
* Exp. 12-31-07
Scale: 1" = 40'
0 40 80
9�pF CALF
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18071 ui W.J. ' McKEEVER, INC.
EK-IIBIT SHOWING CIVII, ENGINEERING
647 NORTH MAIN STREET, SUITE 2A
PROPOSED HOUSE ON LOT 10 RIVERSIDE, CAUFORNIA 92501
PH.: (961) 341-8700
061 641-3740
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO �`.06
. 22502 DATE
i
I
r
14
PE 81.6
15
PE 76.3
0
76.5' in ,.
b 188.12'
16 17
PE 68.6 PE 74.1
,.
FESS/pal
N0. 22502 EXHIBIT A- 4
* Exp. 12-31-07
Scale: 1" = 40'
40 so
�OF CAAL-\ mom
i
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18071 W.J. McKEEVER, INC.
CIVIL ENGINEERING
EXHIBIT SHOWING NORTH MAW MMM. SUM PA HOUSE ON LOT 15 � �R 01
(�i) aca-ssoo
L) S41-�+o
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO �V-AMQ-6
22502 DATE
PE 69.5
c 71V 161.37. RET. WALL r r
o /
PE 65.2
30'
54'
a I / o
w
PoGu10 D� CRIB"& 49/70aDD
��QROFESS/NO
0�!
3 No. 22502
* Exp. 12-31-07
Scale: 1" = 40'
C/Vl\,
or c,�oR��P EXHIBIT 5 � wiw" 40 80
---I
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18071 ��
W.J. McKEEVER, INC.
EXHIBIT SHOWING 647 CIVIL ENGINEERING
GSUITE zA
PROPOSED HOUSE ON LOT 1 RIVE PH.:
(9 1) 341-37A 92601
00
FAX: (981) 541-6740
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
16II.LIAIi J. MeKE:EVER. R.C.E. 22502 DATR
I
I
fl� g
I I 130.00'
III
1
� III
I I RET. WALL
MAX H=11 1
ttd � 1 i
I I
o r
7 8
PE 76.8 PE. 84.0
o
I a
I
J
48.57'
1 O I
30.90. JA®EN ;COURT
I
I
��QROFESS/p�`
3 No. 22502
* Exp. 12-31-07 EX H I B I T 6
1 V � ' Scale: 4� = 40'
CAL 80
I
I
I
uj W.J. McKEEVER, INC.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18071 j CIVIL ENGINEERING
EXHIBIT SHOWING 647 NORM MAIN FrREER, SUrrE 2A
PROPOSED HOUSE ON LOT 7 I RIVERBD)E, CALIFORNU e2601
PH.: (961) S41-3700
FAM (MI) 641-3740
COUNT Y OF SAN BERNARDINO
WRMAH J. McM&M. R.C.E. 22502 DATE
FaGp
� �f1
85.89'
RET. WALL
MAX H=10'
85.89
J N
d�
7 15' 8 � 9
PE 76.8 PE 84.0 PE 85.0
M
20.6'
`p0' ;...;.. /
N
49.82' L=28.97'
AI)eN
co
QROFESS/p
No. 22502
* Exp. 12-31-07
C/o-OP ���� 7 Scale: 1" = 40'
�CA1_IF 0 40 80
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18071 Uj W.J. McKEEVER, INC.
EXHIBIT SHOWING CIVIL ENGINEERING
847 NORTH V= STREET, s[ffE 2A
PROPOSED HOUSE ON LOT 8 RIVERSME. CALWORM 92501
PR.: (001) 841-2700
FAX (051) 241-2740
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
1PILLiAI[ J. 16cKEEVER. R.C.E. 22502 HATE:
;
13
PE 91.0
/ o
cci
2.5' HIGH
14 ?s, ;:";: j R WALL
PE 81.6 ;o
i _ 0
#
4w,
15 !
PE 76.3 I
i
I
No. 22502
* Exp. 12-31-07 * EXHIBIT 8 I Scale: 1" = 40'
V ti1F P 0 40. 80
CAL
� I
i
I
W.J. McKEEVER, INC.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18071 1 CIVIL ENGINEERING {
EXHIBIT SHOWING 1 647RIVERBIDE MAIN
STREET, �2� U
501
PROPOSED HOUSE ON LOT 14 { PH.. (951) 841_3700
TAM (951) 341-8740
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
RHU" J. McKEEEVVER. R.C.E. 22602 DATE
15
PE 76.3
A /
92.00-
l z N llI l l
/// / /
� / / 17
16 PE 68,6 JSO PE 74.1
RET. WALL
N �.
110.19'
r - - - - /
- f,z�w
I PLaJG�3GL�6 fl _ _
Pol�Ja �1�D� Polulo�o �9/D�DDD
QROFESS/pN
3 No. 22502
* _ Exp. 12-31-07 * Scale: 1" = 40'
C/v►\. ��, EXHIBIT iIT 9 p 40 80
W.J. McKEEVER, INC.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18071 VdiCIVIL ENGINEERING
EXHIBIT SHOWING U7 NORM RAM sr=r, sum U
PROPOSED HOUSE ON LOT 16 m(9 c" 1-370 9 °1
PH.: (P61�. 341-9700
VVC: (951) 341-6740
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
e9tttaAv J. u�x R.P.P. 2ps02 nA7P
,• y+me� r•D.•.[vYD.m[•M„ODDD,DatD.amD,..m•w.r..rtt
d'� e+Ix..ue+tnDrromr.�,r•nne wvw.gtarm"w,y.aror GRADING NOTES:
II .
f ftAc7 Na. L3oso s < ) <M.B.22811-rj [ ! •ro«' =gps / 1 0' IP.GWL-/2 1 �t2122
le- a .Dnr rq,nu,nrcrn.[wrwn
� '• •y-wD 1•n D•vwwmuwre,a.r 14lAf j ( '� y!I ' �•�r•Ir[f w,Ml'PYaq uprCr•�-1Yr.Olw..q !. ,n w j r•cw[A.',M
1 L / u/ /} '� �GyL LOT Iy1E gUe.IG •wwiTW rYt �Wt �[ N•dr.d'w',Mllin n4H��a[nm
��• - _ - �• m 10 r880.owrRe.na•Caf�llm®t! UK
:�Dorr�u+roww:��a.�lo�WOO•.tIMUI1U1�w�taD,�w•-.D)
.� - -- +YT 'PwLO�'al �o.•w.wuru
_�f -)I y I/ r .,Iyr••v.ar!rn••xusyDro•ru '• [suit!'(II T"ulni.r°•'rrn�'Iv'i:•t wi'u li u!i[ww[mnr'1 A ur oc•r•naauowa�lnaw�,uvrvna.rwu. I�rouma. '�+w r�q�w u a ww.olurllu nm D•Dnw
5 6.. •� / - / AT C r' �' rL..m�"n wrurwwworryr !ma i•n 9u::oL"l..i"'..0 a u�"onurorlc[rD04O`orrD
PL. I 1 P,IrJ I 11 u1s • P 7 1kui!JMD.TMls
nm Mq _m I�,Xr n..Dv WYvDr,Yoa nm[
r om•"ro wnuYno nrt'L[."u j io au[n umOMOR r
r Del If t
9 rL2
Ir1 •t n' 1 I & �j mini :.wowr'cii
I ppyy r- , Ir / , ru uwa c maim to
dl I '/G�•[ - - - RT yR �f i.� �_/ `�- It � �nwt..•n
SECTION"A-"A"
r�
8 _ 1t w, vL. wtnr.lo• r"ru•°nen n pnu M
y A I BI E `�` --'A.ire �d' 'rR t.'!r+ " iniw"•`Dcm.n mio"`wruM
\10I 12
nl�! :. 4e, \•\ 1 ' � � _9 \D 1 1 1 � 'L I:n[`w°"OormY°i i cwn[.)o.
Ala t PE 'j '/ / / i F fo"i tmrl'ml t+ c aol "r.°il`a'n.'.."o[, 'rvia•
semom-z, D-
t•nv,ru D4.. � r ,T'i'an°wi nn�'i ei
I� � ��- \. .—=,j*� �...r .'rD.`r[ice.•n'D•
'� --� " _. .t'''L.. •s.-,,,w SECTION
-�• R 8 1 _ .n.. •'!�\e21\ / , rei[ °°•vfaln inp. '�,/� eCYl,f.to ,m m ,M 'Pd7n�l w
E9[RIl w ■ .
�
�y ` r Er 78 /4O M•I P lae'l.. RD•DTD,O rM ® YI rWrOnra.
I y / •� 80R01t.11�� f 178 �� ,. ..nn1 wu•r m
I � I / m��rCw�W.1100 \� \� � r'�n�' '•e�v...r �. ' •�'�i0°'p, .. w / / `"'�' �11 I]8� C , ,y tov.r.wr.us {-"-{7-*-! u' n'D"r°i.:tm i•wwi
441 '! ./ wXw
= — \ _ q �� m •r: �1 I rw°w[tm! n•DmD
1.3
L 1 I \ • �/ S/• 1 /III /.K YID.C! ° [[lWunlO iai !"
}
i R fIV �'/ a 11 / IFr • �i-�y�•L- wur rwrn rlrm.ww[uo rwmm uuan To omrD
I B•.x ucl jwvr awme
•� � SECTION"C"-"C['
�j// j \ Lr 1 4 B 3v e.cD
7�.0� Er �
i•' I I'II I `/ ti \ �� I \ •�, \\ •w.re..ve;x.urns�..vw.r< EARTHWORK QUANTITIES:
- --1-- ,�- -'-�-- -,----'t,---/'- -- - - \ -- - •�-;- LEGEND:
- - - °•°o' -i- - --- - - ---- '-�- --- ---- - --- -v_ -44tt---'-- -- -----.o-unt[.m wou.o conm _
to�n.•iz•[ oera,u w ar nw
SOILS ENGINEER: „r• ,owR, ,a
-t _ T iiL°1coan
(1'we w•"�ri'•_. - _ ~- w+-/'014io.u<-hio OWNER:
D _ ei.M.iD.ucu'nx..m.
BENCHMARK:
�-1III �t �� ��w�1��••T Yl.GOwR 01 Yi Rbw
! t I ~
�I�d)� � ' 1[`� 1 :`1 [ � 1 I � I I:Doi•', � Dian w•'n r.°"'•m.[Dra.."m R.[t�D1Y."in[0[!n
PHASE 2
t •wr I I y nM •[rinq wR
Y_J. MoKEEVE�R.INC. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ltNa4SP �` DI �� Y.D.
__!�v �•1•y RKIDX lemto)tmr ! I
nr...y[ yw�ryur •.-�•: ,�za�'�.c c ewe. - �rrtl°K°yr' GRADING PLAN
AN
SHEET
TRACT. NO. 14076 of I
•t
1
G
5 /
/ 9
9-
io
nrn r
A/N/1Y0//1
2
/ 1112-7- „
i
//G'o- 57"R6dT �
/ TENTAT/V&
?rJ Oao Sr Lo r3
sY.diV
I
` l\
-. .-- I._.. ' _. i ._.^" - ' •ice•.%'1Y�A• - _� _.- - �== -- -
r Z
•; y - I a r
.................. ...........
............I........... .....................
j..._........ ......
..............
........... ....... ......
........ ............................ -..j.*.:..,:',....I... 4..........
.....................................
.. ................. ......... ..........4 ..........
......................... ..... ...... .
..........................
ll�_..._.:�.._._._.
1.::__ :�II...
.. _.�i�fi._.,, !F
............................................. ............
..... ..I._.... -
..._:a�tII......... E!(...... i�' . ;IIII
.................. .. ...... . . ........
. ............
............. ...............
.......... ........... ........... .................................. ........
.4............. 4.............
............................. .....................
.....................- ..............
..............
.:::.............. ............. ....... .... . ...............
..........
........................................
...........
........... ........... ...........
................ --------- .......... ...........
...........
is!
...... ..........•..... ............. ................
............................. ....... ... ., `,. 11 1 * - . -.4 ..
............ .......
....................
...........
...........
....................
........................ ............... ........................... T.......................
...............
.............................................. ......... ....... ....................
.....................
.... .........
.. ....... ..................
............ ..........
...........
.......... ................................
..........
......................._a............. ..
.......... ........
_4.......... ........
.... ........ ......
.............
!.. i .� ........... ............. ...........
........... .. ..........
I .._..
........................
.................. ....f ..............—
.............. .............
....................................
..........
.. .... . .......
................
.. ......... ....... ........
I . "'I ..............
.................. ........
........... ......... ..
...........
.............
...................
................. ........................
.... ....
............ ........
............ .. ............ ............
..........
...........
.............. .................. ...........
.......... ..........
................ ...........
..........
...............
........ ...................... ...................
1 , 1
......... ........................ ....... ..........................
--—----—------------- ........... ............. ............ ..............
..........
................
.............. .......
..............
.......... ... ..............I..
............................................... ...........
......... ......... ........................ ........
............ ..........
.... .... ....... ..........
............... ......................
........... .................
............
..........
..........I. -- ... .., "i. ....... ...
.......... ..................... .........................I i
7...................... ..............
.....................................
...........�.._........
...............
....................................
...............
................ ...............
................. .......i ......... ...........t
f.
...........
._.... ..;. .._ .___. .
............�..._�....... ��_.. I i
- -i -_ - _ , _
.... .........
; _
_�....
............................
..............
............
....... ............. ..........
...................
i
777].......... .................
........... ........
_... ........... .__..
...................
................ ............
.................. ...............
�...........�...__.. ...........-
...........
...................
..................................
.... .............
...................... 7-'
........... ...........
-j...................... ....................
........... ..r..............
.......... ......... .............. ...... ..................ii
ij
.....................
.............. ....... ......
................. ....................
............. .................
....................
-4................. ......
....... ....................
_... _
.............
.....................
............... ....... ...
I I I I_..................
.................................... ....... ....... .........
.. ............. ..........
................... .............
.........................- ......... .............
.......... ............
........... ............ ....................... ......... ......... I..............
.................
............. ........ ..........
.1........... ............---. i i
............. .............................. .......... .......... .......... .... ..... .........
................................................
..................................
..........�...
....... .......... ......................
...........
_ ,.._.. i �. ....}......
............
...........
....... .....E. I ............... j___ ._......;....,.._.�._
.................................
._,.i.__ .......... ..........I.._....... ................... ..............
.................... ......................
...........
......................... .. ...............
................ .........
................
I.
........................�......... ...........
............ ........ ........... . .........
................. ...........
............. a........._.
i
Uy4
JU W. ). McKeever Inc.
Civil Engineering
February 20, 2006
City of Grand Terrace
Planning Department
Attn: Mr. John Lampe
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92313
RE: Tentative Tract No. 18071
Dear Mr. Lampe:
Karger Homes is filing Tentative Tract No. 18071 for review and approval by the City of
Grand Terrace.
f
The Tentative Tract consists of 20 lots on 8.26 acres. The proposed lots are a minimum
of 10,000 SF in size. The developer proposes to develop the lots and build houses for
sale.
k
If you have any questions or need any further information, please call me.
Yours truly,
am eever
ATTACHMENT 1
647 North Main Street-Suite 2A-Riverside, California 92501
Ph. (951)341-3700-Fax(951)341-3740-E-Mail Address office@wjmckeeverinc.com