The URL can be used to link to this page

08/13/1992 .wn.w.,re FILE COPY ( 'T Ilk 0 Vagigolg August 13, 1992 ~♦'em�sw ae0 22795 Barton Road y{ Grand Terrace CITY OF GRAND TERRACE 4, California 92324-5295 � Civic Center s (714) 824-6621 Regular Meetings 2nd and 4th Thursday - 6 30 P M Byron R Matteson Mayor Hugh J Grant Mayor Pro Tempore Gene Carlstrom Ronald M Christianson Herman Hilkey Council Members Thomas J Schwab City Manager Council Chambers Grand Terrace Civic Center 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324-5295 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS August 13, 1992 GRAND TERRACE CIVIC CENTER 6:30 P.M. 22795 Barton Road * Call to Order - Invocation - Pastor Rich Dubose, Azure Hills Seventh-Day Adventist Church * Pledge of Allegiance - * Roll Call - STAFF COUNCIL CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RECOMMENDATIONS ACTION 1. Approval of 7/29/92 Minutes Approve 2. Approval of Check Register No. Approve CRA081392 ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONVENE CITY COUNCIL r Items to Delete 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS A. Five-year Service Award - Maria Muett B. Recycling Family of the Month - July 1992 C. Local Emergency Communication Update 3. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine & non- controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time with- out discussion. Any Councilmember, Staff Member, or Citizen may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion. A. Approve Check Register No. 081392 Approve B. Ratify 08/13/92 CRA Action COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF COUNCIL 08/13/92 - Page 2 of 2 RECOMMENDATI•NS ACTION C. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda D. Approve 7/14/92, 7/23/92 and Approve 7/29/92 Minutes E. Award Infrastructure Maintenance Award Contract _ I F. Release Cash Deposit (Lee) Approve 4. PUBLIC COMMENT 5. ORAL REPORTS A. Committee Reports (1) Crime Prevention Committee (a) Conference/Training Request B. Council Reports 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS - 6:30 P.M. A. FY 1992-93 Annual Assessment, Landscaping District 89-1 B. Negative Declaration for Source Approve Reduction Recycling/Household Hazardous Waste Element 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None 8. NEW BUSINESS A. Measure "I" Capital Improvement Adopt Program Resolution B. Vehicle Theft Fee Resolution Adopt 9. CLOSED SESSION A. Real Estate Negotiations (Pico Park) ADJOURN THE NEXT REGULAR CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE HELD ON AUGUST 27, 1992 AT 6:30 P.M. AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS FOR THE 8/27/92 MEETING MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BY NOON 8/20/92. PENDING C R A APPROVAL. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - JULY 29, 1992 An adjourned 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 July 29, 1992 at 6:30 p.m. PRESENT: Byron Matteson, Chairman Ronald Christianson, Agency Member Herman Hilkey, Agency Member Thomas J. Schwab, Executive Director Randall Anstine, Assistant City Manager Phil Bush, Finance Director Brenda Stanfill, Secretary Joe Kicak, City Engineer ABSENT: Hugh J. Grant, Vice-Chairman Gene Caristrom, Agency Member Patrizia Materassi, Planning Director John Harper, City Attorney ti APPROVAL OF JULY 9, 1992 CRA MINUTES ( CRA-92-31 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY CHAIRMAN MATTESON, CARRIED 2-0-2-1 (VICE-CHAIRMAN GRANT AND AGENCY MEMBER CARLSTROM WERE ABSENT; AGENCY MEMBER CHRISTIANSON ABSTAINED) , to approve the July 9, 1992 CRA Minutes. APPROVAL OF CHECK REGISTER NUMBER CRA072392 CRA-92-32 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 3-0-2-0 (VICE-CHAIRMAN GRANT AND AGENCY MEMBER CARLSTROM WERE ABSENT) , to approve Check Register No. CRA072392. Chairman Matteson adjourned the CRA meeting at 6:40 p.m. , until the next regular City Council/CRA meeting, which is scheduled to be held on Thursday, August 13 , 1992 at 6:30 p.m. SECRETARY of the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace CHAIRMAN of the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Grand Terrace C R A AGENDA ITEM NO. Z. ti COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF GR TERRACE DATE AUGUST 13, 1992 CHECK REGISTER NO CRA081392 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF NUMBER VENDOR AUGUST 13, 1992 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 25507 BANK OF AMERICA PAYMENT ON CIVIC CENTER 25536 KICAK AND ASSOCIATES $153,318 36 ENGINEERING SERVICES, HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM 80 00 TOTAL $153,398 36 I CERTIFY THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE AFORELISTED CHECKS FOR PAYMENT OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIABILITIES HAVE BEEN AUDITED BY ME AND ARE NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE OPERATION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY n �� 17 SP PHIL BUSH XIN 310 FINANCE DIRECTOR Z 0Z 2 n a 1 4 o 0 CITY OF GRA( J TERRACE DATE AUGUST 13, 1992 CHECK REGISTER NO 081392 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF AUGUST 13, 1992 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT P7869 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/16/92 $ 201 52 P7870 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/16/92 113 51 P7871 CATALINA VARELA REIMBURSEMENT FOR CHILD CARE SUPPLIES 129 21 P7872 BEST COMPUTERS COMPUTERS, THREE 4,089 11 P7873 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/17/92 625 43 P7874 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/17/92 226 80 P7875 LARRY MAINEZ PLANNING INTERN, 7/6-7/17/92 560 00 P7876 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/20/92 334 56 P7877 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/20/92 153 06 P7878 MARIA RAMIREZ PAYROLL ENDING 7/17/92, OMITTED ON PAYROLL SYSTEM 286 96 P7879 INLAND EMPIRE,L G C MEETING, COUNCIL 42 00 P7880 LOUISE SMITH REIMBURSEMENT FOR OFFICE SUPPLIES 143 73 P7881 O SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/21/92 256 68 P7882 C SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/21/92 58 79 P7883 CZ) SIX FLAGS MAGIC MOUNTAIN TEEN CLUB EXCURSION 210 00 P7884 a PRO PAVING REPAIR DEBERRY STREET (SEWER) 1,285 50 p P7885 C;) SHARON KORGAN REIMBURSEMENT FOR CRIME PREVENTION SUPPLIES 42 31 Z m P7886 m PERS RETIREMENT FOR PAYROLL ENDING 7/17/92 620 98 r p P7887 a ELIZABETH R DUARTE PAYROLL ADVANCE, 7/31/92 806 62 2E P7888 ili SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/22/92 80 69 gi C) P7889 I SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/22/92 28 20 O a P7890 CATHY TOTH INSTRUCTOR, AEROBICS 109 60 r Lp P7891 PETTY CASH REIEMBURSE PETTY CASH, GENERAL 402 10 P7892 VISA MEETING, CITY MANAGER, SACRAMENTO AND FONT FOR COMPUTER 229 93 1 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DATE AUGUST 13, 1992 CHECK REGISTER NO 081392 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF AUGUST 13, 1992 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT P7893 LOUISE SMITH REIMBURSEMENT FOR OFFICE SUPPLIES $ 109 25 P7894 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/27/92 P7895 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/27/92 18 1815 828 88 P7897 LEAGUE OF CA CITIES REGISTRATION FOR PLANNING SEMINAR 170 00 P7898 AMY PODANY REFUND FOR PLANNING PERMIT P7899 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/28/92 100 00 62 01 P7900 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/28/92 18 12 P7901 KAREN GERBER PAYROLL ADVANCE FOR 7/31/92, LOCAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT, AND MONITOR FOR CIVIC CENTER 1,449 13 P7902 CA PARKS/RECREATION SOCIETY MEMBERSHIP FOR 1992/1993 1 P7903 SOUTHERN CA EDISQN COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/30/92 160 00 60 79 P7904 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/30/92 54 33 P7905 LARRY MAINEZ REIMBURSEMENT FOR PLANNING SEMINAR REGISTRATION P7906 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/31/92 45 00 226 34 P7907 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 7/31/92 28 02 P7908 DOROTHY ELLIOT REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCUSION 160 00 P7909 ROSE WAHLSTROM REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 160 00 —P_7al0 -HEL-EN—PA-T-T-ERSON--- -- REFUND—FOR—RE-CREATION EXCURSION 160 00 P7911 AIDE WEALAND REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 160 00 P7912 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 8/3/92 51 74 —P7913- SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 8/3/92 176 30 P7914 LARRY MAINEZ PLANNING INTERN, 7/20-7/31/92, AND REIMBURSEMENT FOR LOCAL MILEAGE 654 75 P7915 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE LIFE INSURANCE, 8/92, REPLACE CHECK, PAYROLL SYSTEM ERROR 568 65 P7916 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE LIFE INSURAN''c 8/92, REPLACE CHECK, PAYROLL ( -TEM ERROR 105 00 2 CITY OF GRAB TERRACE DATE AUGUST 13, 1992 CHECK REGISTER NO 081392 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF AUGUST 13, 1992 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT P7917 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 8/4/92 $ 218 16 P7918 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 8/4/92 34 26 P7919 MARIA MUETT ADVANCE FOR TRAVEL, LEAGUE OF CA CITIES SEMINAR 50 00 P7920 PERS RETIREMENT FOR PAYROLL ENDING 7/31/92 754 71 P7921 PRO PAVING STREET REPAIRS ON GRAND TERRACE ROAD 3,405 00 P7922 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 8/6/92 25 62 P7923 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 8/6/92 45 78 25470 DALE WIER SOFTEWARE CONFIGURATION 90 00 25471 BAKERS FOOD MACHINERY REPAIR DISHWASHER, CHILD CARE CENTER 169 50 25472 SUZETTE DAVIS REFUND, RECREATION PROGRAM 25 00 25473 JEANNETTE SOLIS , REFUND, RECREATION PROGRAM 18 00 25474 AMY ZIMMERMAN REFUND, RECREATION PROGRAM 15 00 25475 LORI BROWNING , REFUND, RECREATION PROGRAM 25 00 25476 COLTON, 2ND WARD REFUND, POOL RENTAL, RECREATION 70 00 25477 BARBARA WILLIAMS REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 320 00 25478 EVA ALVAREZ REFUND, RECREATION PROGRAM 50 00 25479 ESTHER/WILLIAM BAILEY REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 320 00 25480 CLARA SCHOELKOPF REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 320 00 25481 DORIS LINDSEY REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 160 00 25482 CARMAN NEVAREZ REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 160 00 25483 FRANK/CELIA SANCHEZ REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 320 00 25484 ANNE LINDEMAN REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 160 00 25485 ANNA VAN MEETEREN REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 160 00 25486 HELEN MCCAIN REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 160 00 3 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DATE AUGUST 13, 1992 CHECK REGISTER NO 081392 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF AUGUST 13, 1992 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 25487 LOUISE KENWORTHY REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION $ 160 00 25488 RUBY HAMILTON REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 320 00 25489 DORIS/JACK LONDON REFUND FOR RECREATION EXCURSION 320 00 25490 BUILD PERMIT LAW BULLETIN SUBSCRIPTION FOR PLANNING 59 78 25491 CAROL COMER REFUND, RECREATION PROGRAM 100 00 25492 SUSAN VAN CAMPEN REFUND, RECREATION PROGRAM 25 00 25493 VICKI BAILS REFUND FOR WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SERVICES, NOT CONNECTED 272 00 25494 SUPERIOR PHONE SERVICE INSTALL PHONE JACK, CIVIC CENTER 55 00 25495 ASSOC /ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONS MEMBERSHIP FOR 1992/1993 60 00 25496 WORDPERFECT CORP DRAWPERFECT, RECREATION 1 16 70 25497 STATE OF CALIFORNIA SEQA PUBLICATION, PLANNING 36 00 25498 C C P 0 A MEMBERSHIP, 1992/93, (CA CRIME PREVENTION OFFICERS ASSOC) 50 00 25499 ALI YASIN REFUND FOR SIGN PERMIT, PLANNING 100 00 25500 CITY OF VICTORVILLE CITIES PORTION, LITIGATION ON FINES/FORFEITURES 243 30 25501 DANIEL DEVOR REFUND, WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SERVICES 8 50 25502 ADVANCE COPY SYSTEM MAINTENANCE/REPAIRS ON COPIER, CHILD CARE 484 15 25503 ALTA-DENA DAIRY DAIRY PRODUCTS FOR CHILD CARE 300 30 -25504 -RANDALL-ANST-INE AUTO-ALLOWANCE-FOR AUGUST, 1992 200 00 25505 AWARD COMPANY OF AMERICA DO-IT-YOURSELF PLAQUES, CITY CLERK 148 60 25506 BFI WASTE SYSTEMS TRASH PICK-UP, SENIOR CENTER, AUG 1992 _ 74 14 -2-5508- BANK OF AMERICA ADMINISTRATION FEES,G T PUBLIC FINANCE AUTHORITY 3,551 50 25509 BAYLESS STATIONERS OFFICE SUPPLIES/COPIER PAPER 131 08 25510 BEST COMPUTER MGB CARD FOR MONITOR 26 94 25511 DANIEL BUCHANAN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 7/16/92 50 00 4 CITY OF GRAI TERRACE DATE AUGUST 13, 1992 CHECK REGISTER NO 081392 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF AUGUST 13, 1992 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 25512 C E I AIRLESS JACKHAMMER, MAINTENANCE $ 189 51 25513 CA CRIME PREVENTION REGISTRATION FOR SEMINAR 190 00 25514 CA PARKS/RECREATION SOCIETY MEMBERSHIP FOR 1992/1993, BALANCE 30 00 25515 STATE OF CALIFORNIA FINGERPRINT CHECK, CHILD CARE 104 00 25516 STATE OF CALIFORNIA MAINTENANCE/ENERGY FOR LIGHTS AT BART/215, JUNE,1992 281 36 25517 CHEM-LITE INDUSTRIES STREET MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 279 61 25518 CHINO VALLEY PRODUCE PRODUCE FOR CHILD CARE 171 70 25519 CITY OF COLTON WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SERVICES FOR AUG ,1992 33,149 36 25520 DUNN-EDWARDS CORPORATION PAINT SUPPLIES, MAINTENANCE 35 88 25521 EASTMAN KIDAK CORPORATION MAINTENANCE ON KODAK COPIER, JUNE, 1992 AND EXTRA COPIES FOR MAY, 1992 390 33 25522 EASTMAN KODAK CREDIT CO LEASE ON KODAK COPIER FOR 7/11-8/10/92 223 27 25523 EWING IRRIGATION SUPPLIES IRRIGATION SUPPLIES FOR PARKS 198 06 25524 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP EXPRESS MAIL FOR FINANCE AND RECREATION 31 00 25525 FLOWERS BY YVONNE FLOWERS FOR MR WEEKS 48 99 25526 FRITZ LAWNMOWER SERVICE PARTS FOR WEED EATER, MAINTENANCE 44 06 25527 GREENWOOD'S UNIFORMS BALANCE DUE ON UNIFORM FOR CITIZENS PATROL 63 31 25528 STANLEY HARGRAVE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 7/16/92 50 00 25529 HARPER & BURNS LEAGAL SERVICES FOR JUNE AND JULY, 1992 5,702 60 25530 HART PRODUCTS JANITORIAL SUPPLIES, CIVIC CENTER 181 02 25531 HONEYWELL, INC MAINTENANCE ON HVAC UNIT, CIVIC CENTER, AUG 1992 1,094 08 25532 HYDRO-SCAPE PRODUCTS, INC IRRIGATION SUPPLIES FOR PARKS 26 70 25533 INMARK NAME PLATE/CITY BADGES 31 79 25534 INTERSTATE BRANDS CORP BAKERY GOODS FOR CHILD CARE 97 61 25535 JANI KING JANITORIAL SERVICES, AUG 1992, CHILD CARE CENTER 759 00 5 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DATE AUGUST 13, 1992 CHECK REGISTER NO 081392 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF AUGUST 13, 1992 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 25536 KICAK & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING SERVICES, 7/1-8/2/92 $ 12,570 50 25537 SHARON KORGAN TRAVEL ADVANCE FOR CRIME PREVENTION SEMINAR 602 00 25538 LELAND NURSERY NURSERY SUPPLIES/MATERIAL FOR PARKS AND CIVIC CENTER 778 58 25539 LITTLE RED SCHOOL HOUSE SUPPLIES FOR CHILD CARE 99 96 25540 GEORGE LOPEZ BABYSITTER, AEROBICS CLASS, 6/18-8/4/2 105 00 25541 ALECIA LUCAS MONITOR, CIVIC CENTER 7/15-8/2/92 119 25 25542 MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS PHONE FOR JULY, 1992 35 74 25543 MIG COMMUNICATIONS ADA ACESSIBILITY CHECKLIST, COMMUNITY SERVICES 58 32 25544 PATRIZIA MATERASSI AUTO ALLOWANCE FOR AUG 1992 200 00 25545 MIGHTY MOVER TRAILERS, INC D U I CHECKPOINT TRAILER 10,995 89 25546 RAY MUNSON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 7/16/92 50 00 25547 ONE STOP LANDSCAPE SUPPLY DUMPING CHARGES FOR JULY, 1992 120 23 25548 OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY MAINTENANCE ON ELEVATOR FOR AUG 1992 220 73 25549 PACIFIC EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT SAFETY EDUCATION MATERIAL 53 88 25550 PACIFIC BELL PHONE FOR CHILD CARE,SENIOR CENTER, EMERGENCY OPERTIONS CENTER, AND CIVIC CENTER 671 34 25551 PAGENET-ONTARIO MAINTENANCE/AIR TIME FOR PAGERS, AUG 1992 33 00 25552 THE PETRA COMPANIES PRIftT_ING/_STAMP FOR-F-INANCE 14720 25553 PETTY CASH RIEMBURSEMENT FOR PETTY CASH, CHILD CARE 320 99 25554 S E RYKOFF & COMPANY FOOD FOR CHILD CARE 1,429 94 25555 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SBCC SUPPLIMENTS,-C-ITY CLERK - - - 51 00 25556 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ANIMAL CONTROL FOR 1991/1992 10,711 75 25557 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO DUMPING CHARGES FOR 6/16-7/14/92 813 75 25558 SCHOOL SERVICES OF CA SCHOOL FEASIBILITY STUDY, PROGRESS PAYMENT 879 39 25559 THOMAS SCHWAB AUTO ALLOWANCE FOR AUG 1992 200 00 6 CITY OF GR' [ TERRACE t DATE AUGUST 13, 1992 CHECK REGISTER NO 081392 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF AUGUST 13, 1992 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 25560 JIM SIMS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 7/16/92 $ 50 00 25561 LOUISE SMITH COMPUTER LOAN 25562 SMART & FINAL IRIS COMPANY PAPER SUPPLIES FOR CHILD CARE 182 4 25563 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY ELECTRIC FOR CHILD CARE CENTER, SENIOR CENTER, BALL PARK 182 40 LIGHTS AND A SIGNAL 3,059 81 25564 SPEEDEE OIL CHANGE/TUNE-UP SERVICE ON 1990 FORD TRUCK 25565 SPORTMART 42 54 T-SHIRTS FOR RECREATION SUMMER STAFF $1 00 25566 STAPLES OFFICE SUPPLIES/FILE CABINET FOR,SUMMER YOUTH PROGRAM 190 34 25567 THE SUN NOTICE OF ELECTION/LEGAL AD FOR CITY CLERK 25568 TEXACO REFINING/MARKETING FUEL FOR CITY TRUCKS, EQUIPMENT AND CHILD CARE ,VAN 262 24 262 24 25569 TOYS R US SUPPLIES FOR CHILD CARE 397 04 25570 TRI-COUNTY OFFICIALS UMPIRES FOR SLO-PITCH SOFTBALL, 7/1-7/15/92 54 00 25571 FRAN VAN GELDER PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 7/16/92 25572 WAXIE 50 00 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES FOR CHILD CARE 232 36 25573 WEARGUARD WORK CLOTHES SHIRTS AND BOOTS, MAINTENANCE 7 25574 WESTERN GIFT DISTRIBUTORS BINGO BOARD, SENIOR CITIZENS 3340 25575 WESTEC SECURITY, INC 1,377 05 SECURITY MONITORING FOR CHILD CARE CENTER, JULY-NOV 1992 645 00 25576 DOUG WILSON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 7/16/92 25577 WINDSHIELDS OF AMERICA 50 00 WINDSHIELD FOR F-350 TRUCK 164 60 25578 YOSIMITE WATERS BOTTLED WATER FOR CHILD CARE, SENIOR CENTER, AND CIVIC CENTER 276 02 PAYROLL FOR JULY, 1992 189,956 22 TOTAL $313,791 81 I CERTIFY THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE AFORELISTED CHECKS FOR PAYMENT OF CITY LIABILITIES HAVE BEEN AUDITED BY ME AND ARE NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE OPERATION OF THE CITY PHIL BUSH, FINANCE DIRECTOR 7 PENDING CITY CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL APPROVAL CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING - JULY 14, 1992 An adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was scheduled to be held in the Council Chambers, Colton City Hall, Colton, California, on July 14, 1992 at 5: 00 p.m. PRESENT: Byron Matteson, Mayor Gene Carlstrom, Councilmember Thomas Schwab, City Manager ABSENT: Hugh Grant, Mayor Pro Tem Ronald Christianson, Councilmember Herman Hilkey, Councilmember The meeting was adjourned due to the lack of a quorum until the next regular meeting which is scheduled for Thursday, July 23, 1992 at 6:30 p.m. CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace ' COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM#3Q F ,IV COL. i-QROVAL CITY OF GRAND TERRACE PENDING CITY CITY COUNCIL MINUTES COUNCIL APPROVAL REGULAR MEETING - JULY 23, 1992 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was scheduled to be held in the Council Chambers, Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on July 23, 1992 at 6:30 p.m. (�) PRESENT: Byron Matteson, Mayor Gene Carlstrom, Councilmember Thomas J. Schwab, City Manager Randall Anstine, Assistant City Manager Brenda Stanfill, City Clerk Phil Bush, Finance Director Patrizia Materassi, Planning Director Joe Kicak, City Engineer ABSENT: Hugh Grant, Mayor Pro Tem Ronald Christianson, Councilmember Herman Hilkey, Councilmember John Harper, City Attorney The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. to July 29, 1992 at 6:30 p.m. for lack of a quorum. CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM#3 r PENDING CITY CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL APPROVAL CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ADJOURNED REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING - JULY 29, 1992 An adjourned 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 July 29, 1992 at 6:30 P.M. PRESENT: Byron Matteson, Mayor Hugh J. Grant, Mayor Pro Tem Ronald Christianson, Councilmember Herman Hilkey, Councilmember Thomas J. Schwab, City Manager Randall Anstine, Assistant City Manager Phil Bush, Finance Director Patrizia Materassi, Planning Director Brenda Stanfill, City Clerk Joe Kicak, City Engineer ABSENT: Gene Carlstrom, Councilmember Patrizia Materassi, Planning Director John Harper, City Attorney The meeting was opened with invocation by Pastor Salim Elias, Azure Hills Seventh-Day Adventist Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilmember Christianson. Mayor Matteson convened City Council meeting at 6: 30 P.M. Mayor Matteson reconvened City Council meeting at 6:40 P.M. CONSENT CALENDAR CC-92-133 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, CARRIED 3-0-2-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT AND COUNCILMEMBER CARLSTROM WERE ABSENT) , to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar with the removal of Items 3D and 3E. A. APPROVE CHECK REGISTER NO. 072392 B. RATIFY 07/29/92 CRA ACTION C. WAIVE FULL READING OF ORDINANCES ON AGENDA F. APPOINT PLANNING COMMISSIONER COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM# 3 iJ Council Minutes - 07/29/92 Page 2 G. APPROVE STAFF ATTENDANCE TO THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION/MAIN STREET PROGRAM CONFERENCE IN SAN JOSE - AUGUST 6-7, 1992 ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR 3D. APPROVE 7/9/92 & 7/10/92 MINUTES , ) CC-92-134 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, CARRIED 2-0-2-1 (MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT AND COUNCILMEMBER CARLSTROM WERE ABSENT; COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON ABSTAINED) , to approve the July 9, 1992 and July 10, 1992 City Council Minutes. 3E. AWARD STREET SWEEPING CONTRACT CC-92-135 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CARLSTROM WAS ABSENT) , to award the annual street sweeping contract to Dickson Company in the amount of $51.50 per hour. ORAL REPORTS 5A. Committee Reports 1. Crime Prevention Committee (a) Minutes of 5/18/92 CC-92-136 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON, SECONi BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CARLSTROM WAS ABSENT) , to accept the Crime Prevention Committee Minutes of May 18, 1992. 2. Historical & Cultural Committee (a) Minutes of 7/6/92 CC-92-137 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CHRISTIANSON, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CARLSTROM WAS ABSENT) , to accept the Historical & Cultural Committee Minutes of July 6, 1992 . 5B. Council Reports Mayor Matteson, announced that the League of California Cities will hold its Annual Conference October 10-13, 1992 and indicated that delegates were to be selected to attend the meeting. Council Minutes - 07/29/92 Page 3 It was the consensus of Council to appoint Mayor Matteson as the Voting Delegate and Mayor Pro Tem Grant as the Voting Alternate. Mayor Matteson, commented further that the Inland Empire Division of the League of California Cities is conducting its search for the 1992 Innovative City of the Year. Expressing his belief that the Child Care Center was instrumental in the City's first place win in the previous year, he requested input that might assist the City in winning the award again. City Manager Schwab, remarked that the City's remodeling of the entire Town & Country Center actually precipitated the City's capture of the 1991 Innovative City award. He indicated that the City has developed the Senior Center and is in the process of developing Pico Park but expressed his opinion that those projects will not be sufficient to qualify the City for the award. He solicited ideas from the public and requested that Staff be allowed the opportunity to aggressively formulate ideas for presentation to the League. He announced that the City will submit its 1991 winning proposal for review at the League's October 1992 state-wide competition. Councilmember Christianson, indicated that he met with Assemblyman Woodruff and Senator Leonard in Sacramento on Wednesday, July 22, 1992 to discuss the State budget. He reported that Assemblyman Woodruff assured him that he would not vote for a budget package that would include reductions of funds allocated to cities. He revealed, however, that he was uncertain of Senator Leonard's allegiance and added that neither legislator knew when the budgetary dilemma would be resolved. Mayor Matteson, questioned whether there were representatives from other cities who were lobbying the State budget. Councilmember Christianson, responded that Assemblyman Woodruff affirmed that he had received many calls from other cities regarding the issue and reiterated Assemblyman Woodruff's support for the cities. Council Minutes - 07/29/92 Page 4 Councilmember Hilkey, inquired as to the status of the City's efforts to acquire new equipment from Comcast. City Manager Schwab, remarked that he had an appointment to examine Comcast's Ontario character generator but stated that he missed the appointment due to the birth of his child. He commented that the appointment was rescheduled for 10: 00 a.m. on Thursday, July 30, 1992 and added that he has an appointment with a vendor to investigate and select a character generator for the City. He reported further that Comcast is in the process of ordering the equipment to upgrade the mobile van but revealed that the improvements of the studio facilities will not occur for another six to eight months. Mayor Matteson, requested that Councilmember Hilkey attend a Caltrans meeting in Rancho Cucamonga on Thursday, July 30, 1992 on behalf of Councilmember Carlstrom. Mayor Pro Tem Grant, indicating that he has been a member of Council since the City's incorporation fourteen years ago and expressing his pride in the City, stated that recent changes in his employment responsibilities have been preventing him from properly performing his public duties. He announced that, unless his vocational situation changes prior to the incumbent nomination period deadline on August 7, 1992, he will not run for re- election to City Council. City Manager Schwab, expressed for the record his regret at hearing Mayor Pro Tem Grant's announcement. He commented further for the record that Mayor Pro Tem Grant has had a perfect attendance record, with the exception of one absence which was excused, during the fourteen years that Mayor Pro Tem Grant has served on Council. He remarked that he will miss Mayor Pro Tem Grant. Mayor Matteson, describing Mayor Pro Tem Grant as the "champion of the people" who has always considered the desires of the residents of the City, expressed his feeling that the City needs Mayor Pro Tem Grant and indicated his sense of loss regarding the news. Council Minutes - 07/29/92 Page 5 NEW BUSINESS 8A. Accept Dedication in Exchange for Improvements - 12887 Mt. Vernon (Lopez) CC-92-138 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CARLSTROM WAS ABSENT) , to�� authorize Staff to solicit bids for roadway and storm drain improvements at 12287 Mt. Vernon Avenue and to appropriate $8,950 from the Storm Drain Construction Fund to offset the cost for the engineering and construction of the storm drain improvements. 8B. FY1992-93 Annual Assessment, City of Grand Terrace Landscaping and Lighting District 89-1 CC-92-139 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CARLSTROM WAS ABSENT) , to adopt the Resolution ordering the preparation of Plans, Specifications, Cost Estimates, and the "Engineer's Report"; to adopt the Resolution approving the "Engineer's Report"; and to adopt the Resolution of Intention to provide for the annual levy and collection of assessments. ORDER OF ADJOURNMENT Mayor Matteson adjourned the City Council Meeting at 7: 10 p.m. , until the next regular CRA/City Council Meeting, which is scheduled to be held on Thursday, August 13 , 1992 . CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace DATE:8/3/92 STAFF REPORT CRA ITEM () COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE- 8/13/92 SUBJECT- A WARD OF ANNUAL INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE CONTRACT PROPOSED ACTION- Approve awarding the Annual Infrastructure Maintenance Contract to Pro Paving Company. BACKGROUND: During the month of July 1992, staff solicited proposals from street maintenance general contractors A total of five proposals were distributed,with three contractors responding. Those responding with bids were: O Pro Paving, Grand Terrace O Hood Communications, Grand Terrace O Ayala Paving, San Bernardino ANALYSIS Staff reviewed all proposals submitted for completeness It appeared that all contractors thoroughly reviewed the plans and specifications, and responded to all points. All appeared to have reviewed the needs of the City infrastructure All contractors have demonstrated experience in projects similar to and larger than that of the City. City staff performed a detailed analysis of all quotes submitted by the three contractors (Copy of the Analysis is attached to this report). The Comparison Analysis revealed that overall, Hood Communications submitted the lower bid for all concrete work required Pro Paving (formerly All Pro Construction), submitted the lowest bid for all asphalt work required It was staff's intent to recommend awarding the concrete work phase to Hood Communications, and the asphalt work to Pro Paving. Staff discussed this possible arrangement with Hood Communications Hood Communications declined this arrangement. They would prefer to be awarded the entire contract, rather than one phase of work Pro Paving was determined to have the lowest asphalt pavement average, and the second lowest concrete average, as well as the lowest equipment rental average. COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM#3 E. FORM MOTION: BASED UPON BIDS SUBMITTED, APPROVE AWARDING THE ANNUAL INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE CONTRACT TO PRO PAVING. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ROADWORK BID COMPARISON FORECASTED MIX FOR FY 1992/93* TYPE OF WORK PRO PAVING AYALA HOOD ASPHALTIC CONCRETE REPAIRS 179,293 189,539 194,661 SEAL/SLURRY COAT 21,548 16,161 53,871 SAW CUTTING IN ASPHALTIC CONCRETE CEMENT CONCRETE REPAIRS 5,446 6,090 5, 25 SAW CUTTING IN CEMENT CONCRETE 159 137 168 MISC CONCRETE WORK 2,867 2,925 1,638 TOTAL WORK & MATERIAL 209,313 214,851 255, 63 TYPE OF EQUIPMENT PRO PAVING AYALA HOOD ROLLER 8-10 TON 4,081 7,322 7,392 ROLLER 3-5 TON MOTOR GRINDER 532 403 420 PAVING MACHINE BLONOX N/A N/A N/A BARBER BARBER GREEN N/A N/A N/A BERM MACHINE WATER TRUCK BACK HOE 1,274 1,187 1,117 CREW TRUCK 840 504 1,915 SKIPLOADER 10,087 10,529 10187 DUMP TRUCK 11,970 14,395 15,082 TOTAL EQUIPMENT 28,784 34,339 36,0114 TOTAL FORECASTED CHARGES $238,097 $249,191 $291,977 * REFLECTS APPROVED FY 1992/93 SPENDING LEVEL WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 70% OF ACTUAL FY 1991/92 SPENDING N/A - UNABLE TO COMPARE BIDS BECAUSE TWO CONTRACTORS DID NOT QUOTE BOTH TYPES OF EQUIPMENT CITY OF GRAND TERRACE SUMMARY OF ROADWORK ACTIVITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 TYPE OF WORK IN SQUARE FEET ASPHALTIC CONCRETE REPAIRS 146,362 SEAL/SLURRY COAT 256,528 SAW CUTTING IN ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 0 CEMENT CONCRETE REPAIRS 1,502 SAW CUTTING IN CEMENT CONCRETE(LINEAL FT) 212 MISC CONCRETE WORK 195 AGGREGATE BASE MATERIAL 0 # OF MANHOLE COVERS 38 TYPE OF EQUIPMENT ----# OF HOURS CHARGED---- ROLLER 8-10 TON 88 ROLLER 3-5 TON 0 MOTOR GRINDER 4 PAVING MACHINE BLONOX 37 BARBER GREEN 0 BERM MACHINE 0 WATER TRUCK 0 BACK HOE 14 CREW TRUCK 24 SKIPLOADER 131 DUMP TRUCK 171 INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM ALL PRO CONSTRUCTION INVOICES FOR THE PERIOD 7/1/91 TO 6/30/92 (STORM DAMAGE REPAIR WAS EXCLUDED) CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ROADWORK BID COMPARISON FOR FY 1992/93 ----AVERAGE $ PER SQUARE FOOT TYPE OF WORK PRO PAVING AYALA HOOD ASPHALTIC CONCRETE REPAIRS 2 91 2.96 3.34 SEAL/SLURRY COAT 0 40 0.32 0.55 SAW CUTTING IN ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 0 95 0.72 1 13 CEMENT CONCRETE REPAIRS 5 18 5 79 5.35 SAW CUTTING IN CEMENT CONCRETE 1 07 0.92 1 13 MISC CONCRETE WORK 21 00 21.43 1200 AGGREGATE BASE MATERIAL 1 29 1.17 1157 I TOTAL AVERAGE $4 69 $4.76 $3158 ASPHALT WORK AVERAGE $1 39 $1.29 $1.65 CONCRETE WORK AVERAGE $9 08 $9.38 $6.16 i TYPE OF EQUIPMENT PRO PAVING AYALA HOD ROLLER 8-10 TON 132 50 237 72 240100 ROLLER 3-5 TON 102.50 212.72 240.00 MOTOR GRINDER 380 00 287 72 300.00 PAVING MACHINE: BLONOX 440 00 380.00 BARBER GREEN 880 00 778.28 BERM MACHINE 250 00 236 08 75.00 WATER TRUCK 180 00 228.00 228 00 BACK HOE 260 00 242 16 228100 CREW TRUCK 100 00 60.00 228 00 SKIPLOADER 220.00 229 64 220�00 , DUMP TRUCK 200 00 240.52 252 00 I TOTAL(EXCL PAVING MACH) $1,825 00 $1,974 56 $2,011J00 A 4 'tG.w..w4,Q (1Ty 12-9 1108 5 • STAFF REPORT ry'VRM�e/ ,•1 Date July 23, 1992 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace Meeting Date August 13, 1992 Cr ';Drnia 92324-5295 - ' Subject $500 00 Cash Deposit - Dr Robert Lee Civic Center (714) 824-6621 On July 26, 1990, Dr Robert Lee installed a 2" water service for his office at 22575 Barton Road The work required cutting of the street and therefore $500.00 deposit was required The street repair as performed by his contractor has been satisfactory Dr Lee, pursuant to the provisions 12 08 080(c) is requesting that the $500 00 deposit be refunded STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT Byron R Matteson Mayor City Council authorize the release of $500 00 cash deposit to Dr Lee Hugh J Grant Mayor Pro Tempore JK/ct Gene Carlstrom or......M Christianson Herman Hilkey Counul Members Thomas J Schwab City Manager COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM# 3 F COMMITTEE REPORTS COUNCIL MEETING DATE: COMMISSION/COMMITTEE: Crime Prevention DATE: 8/5/92 SUBJECT: Conference /Training Request PROBLEM: Committee has approved for Howard Panek and Mary Schmidtgal citizen patrol volunteers to attend the annual CCPOA Conference and training in Modesto with Sharon Korgan, CSO Conference is September 15-18 in Modesto All will drive together The program is attached Committee has money set aside for crime prevention training/ „J REQUESTED ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY COUNCIL AND/OR STAFF: Approval of conference attendance COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM# S Pt 1(a) f i , _ ;. The 1992 C C PO A Conference 6 0cPO4 '' is coming t ;51 'e0 This year's theme " C° e CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH b °°�. CULTURAL AWARENESS September 15, 16, 17, & 18 Red Lion Hotel - Modesto 1150 9th Street Modesto, CA 95354 F' 38 Dear CCPOA Members, "U` ��"�`'V Did you know MODESTO, CALIFORNIA is "almost exactly" in the center of the state9 We are proud to announce that the 18th Annual Training Conference will be held at the fabulous Red Lion Hotel and Convention Center in Modesto, CA from SEPTEMBER 15 through 18, 1992 "CRIME PREVENTION Listed inside is your 1992 conference schedule Yogi will THROUGH CULTURAL notice a change in the format this year-- the banqu�t is AWARENESS" is a very timely being held on Thursday night The conference will end on theme for this year's conference! Fnday morning with a motivational Training will feature Deena Levine general session addressed by of Diversity Consultants speaking the HONORABLE B T COLLINS on MULTI CULTURAL AND GORDON GRAHAM— Bata DIVERSITY ISSUES, Joe Canton PLAN ON ATTENDING THIS on CULTURAL SENSITIVITY, YEAR'S CONFERENCE! If you CALIFORNIA Gail Sadalla addressing have questions on ANYTHING Ctico CULTURAL CONFLICT, (travel arrangements, registration, Anastasia Stemburg on HATE hotel accommodations, college CRIMES, and Paula Watson on credits, etc) please feel free to Santa Rosa *Sacramento CULTS These are Just a few of the contact I - 805) 326-3053, San .Berkeley Stoditnn outstanding trainers who will be at George Chilimidos, conference F,anne<o °Mend • this years conference chanman(510) 671-4630, .5an.... Modest o or Patti Taylor,registration California has such a diverse (805) 326-3052! Montoroy Fresno Seim population, with communities facing many of the same Sincerely, - . challenges, however each community is unique It is the goal of CCPOA to provide state-of-the- Karen Shaffstall B°'"'"°" art training to its members We PRESIDENT hope that by offenng such a wide CALIFORNIA CRIME Oxnard vanety of training topics each PREVENTION OFFICERS Lo. ea ad o member will be able to choose those which apply to the unique crime prevention needs of their 1 community San D1eQo a.is wca g<tli•=%•_„"?;,-_,.. SCHEDULE Tuesday, September 15 - 12 00 p m Exhibit set-up, Tuolumne River Room 1 00 p m -4 00 p m State Boat d Meeting 600pm - 700pin Exhibit Viewing 7 00 p m -8 00 p m Reception/hospitality Wednesday, September 16 - 7 00 a in - 11 00 a m Registt ation/coffee/exhibits 800am -630pm Exhibits 9 00 a in -9 30 a in FlagslGi eetings/Overview 9 30 a in - 10 30 a ni General Session-Gangs -Sgt Martinelli 10 45 a in 12 00 p in General Session -Community Oriented Policing- Chief Joseph Brann 12 00 p m -12 30 p ni General Session -Caialyn Ortiz,D 0 J Video Pt emiere,Ray Johnson, 0 C J P 12 30 p m - 1 30 p ni Lunch 1 30pm -3 15pm Break-outs(2) - Cultural Sensitivity,Dr Joseph Canton, Cultural Conflict, Gail Sadalla 3 30 p m -5 00 p m Bi eal,-outs(2) - Multi Cultural Diversity Issues,Deena Levine Cults Paula Watson 5 00 p m -6 30 p ni HospitalitylHoi s d oeuvres/Exhibitors Thursday, September 17 - 800am -9 00 a in Coffee in Exhibit at ea 9 00 a m -12 00 p in Exhibits open until 3 00 p in 900am - 1030am Break-outs(2) - �1 Supervising A Crime Prevention Unit Lt Scott Parsons Environmental Design Redeveloping Program Implementing Strategies fo, Change,Brut e Ramm 10 45 a m -12 00 pin Bi eak-outs(2) - Pt oducing Crime Pt evention Videos,Sgt Pat Kolsiad, & Sgt Tet t y Bi anum Hate Ci lines Anastazia Steinbui g 12 00 p in - 2 00 p m Stop Crime Coalition Lunch 2 00 p ni -3 30 p m General Session -Maxine McIntyre 3 45 p m -4 00 p iit General Session -Model Security Ot dinance,Bi uce Ramni 4 00 p ni -5 00 p ni General Session -Fraud Steven Taylor 6 30 p in - 7 30 p ni No Host Cocktails 730pni - 1030pm Banquet Friday, September 18 - 800am -900am Coffee 9 00 a m -10 30 a m General Session -Crime Prevention Liability, Got don Graham 11 00 a m -12 00 a in General Session -Honorable B T Collins, Thanks and Closing Remarks 1 00 p m -4 00 p in State Board Meeting (Opportunity drawings will be held in the vendors area during the break) This year's conference has been planned to conform with your work schedule by ending Friday at noon Activities and opportunities for networking have been planned for the whole week As you can see from the list of speakers, we have some very informed and dynamic speakers lined up to share their knowledge and expertise with you Watch your nail for further information and the registration form t One credit will be offered to those who complete and return the Modest()ColleQ'e fnrm thnt will he ►neluded with vnur revtctrnttnn nar/ret Registration fees are as follows CCP 0 A Members $ 95 00 CCP 0 A Members Late Registration (Late if after 9/1/92) :005 00 Non-Members Registration$105 00 Non-Members Late Registration (Late after 9/1/92) $135 00 ( MODESTO TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION' 111=1111111110 MODESTO MILEAGE PLANNER FROM MILES APPROX DRIVE Fresno 94 miles 2 hours Reno 210 miles 4 hours Sacramento 75 miles 15 hours San Francisco 90 miles 2 hours San Jose 95 miles 2 5 hours Los Angeles 317 miles 6 - 6 5 hours San Diego 400 miles 7 - 7 5 hours Redding 210 miles 4 5 hours Modesto Airport Modesto Airport is currently served by two commuter airlines American Eagle and United Express Each airline has appi oximately 6 daily flights both ai riving and depai nng fi om Modesto an poi t A American Eagle is a feeder au line for Amei scan Au lines, and they fly ■ between Modesto and San Jose San Jose is now Anier lean Airlines hub"` `� ��a� Airport in California Amei ican and Amei ican Eagle both handle arrangements for groups of 10 persons or more For assistance, call American Airlines,toll fi ee 1- 00-AASALES, or you may call the American Eagle sales r epr esentative foi the Modesto area,John Pivirotto(805)541-1010 United Express acts as a feeder au lines foi United An lines,and currently provides setvwe between Modesto and San Francisco For assistance in at anging foi group discounts for groups as small as five passengers call the Central Valley sales rep,Robin Anderson 1-800-444-9247 The Red Lion Hotel and Ramada Inn pi ovide on-call van transportation to and from the Modesto Airport,and there are two cab companies in Modesto There are two car rental agencies that will deliver a vehicle at time of arm al for those making advanced reservations Stockton Metropolitan Airport The airport is located only 30 minutes north of Modesto, and has jet service provided by U S Air s San Francisco International Airport. United Shuttle Service also provides van service three times a day between Modesto (stops at Holiday Inn)and San Francisco International Airport San Francisco is approximately a 13/4 hour drive from Modesto (During commute times, this can become a 21/2 hour drive) Oakland International Airport Oakland airport is a 1 1/2 hour drive from Modesto and is often more convenient/easier to use than San Francisco (Again,the drive time may increase during commute hours) Sacramento Metropolitan Airport. Sacramento airport is a 1 1/2 hour drive from Modesto The air service,however,is limited in comparison to San Francisco or Oakland airports +"'"" TRAIN SERVICE W 11III I d p 1,„ - AMTRAK -� ■ in`9';;liPiL, Passenger Station ` - cr rySI, i j • 3243 Talbot Avenue _: 41' Riverbank,CA 95367 BUS SERVICE 4111111.11. Greyhound/Trailways Lines Group Tours '1 I^ ,•ttir 't, 701 10th Street Storer Coachways l_:.U Modesto, CA 95353 3519 McDonald Avenue e�e. � tL (209)526-4314 Modesto, CA 95351 ISM` (209)521-8250 , AUTO RENTING &LEASING 14 \ Avis Rent-A-Car Standard Rent-A-Car �� 617 An poi t Way 2005 Evergreen#200 'iN;�` � Modesto,CA 95354 Modesto,CA 95350 G (209) 527-7223 h41 Poq� �:AA OP o' `, Nb • Patricia Taylor Bakersfield Police Department Box 59 Bakersfield, CA 93302 Sharon Korgan San Bernardino-Co SD 22795 Barton Rd Grand Terrace CA 92324 - (IT), GRAND TERR C *1.4.10.0 12.463 VFM.Ew^ 22795 Barton Road B. T. & E. . $ E. R T. Grand Terrace Cr- '7rnia 92324-5295 �- Civic Center (714)824-6621 Date: August 7, 1992 Meeting Date: August 13, 1992 Subject: Annual Levy of Assessment Landscaping and Byron R Matteson Lighting District Mayor Hugh) Grant At your adjourned meeting of July 29, 1992, the City Council Mayor Pro Tempore adopted the Resolution of Intention, approved the Engineer's Report and set a public hearing on the proposed Assessment Jene Carlstrom for Landscaping and Lighting District for the date. onaiuqvi. Christianson STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT: Herman Hilkey Council Members City Council conduct a Public Hearing and adopt the attached Thomas J Schwab Resolution levying the Annual Assessments for Landscaping City Manager and Lighting District 89-1. JK:dlk p.s. Please bring your Reports provided for July 29th meeting. COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM# C� A RESOLUTION NO. I RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE C OF , GRAND TERRACE CONFIRMING A DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT AND PROVIDING THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENT LEVY AFTER FORMATION OF A DISTRICT { WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated proceedings for the annual levy of the assessments for a street lighting district pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", being Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, in a district known and designated as CITY OF GRAND TERRACE LANDSCAPING AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 89-1 WHEREAS, the City Council has ordered the preparation of a report and the City Engineer has prepared and filed with this City Council a report purs ant to law for its conside ration and subsequently thereto this City Council did adopt its Resolution of Intention to i levy and collect assessments for the next ensuing fiscal year relating to t i e above-referenced District, and further did proceed to give notice of the time and place for Public Hearing on all matters relating to said annual levy of the proposed assessment, and, WHEREAS, at this time, this City Council has heard all testimony and evidence and is desirous of proceeding with said annual levy of assessments NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace does hereby resolve, determine and order as follows SECTION 1. That the above-recitals are all true and correct , SECTION 2 That upon the conclusion of the Pubhc Heanng, wntten protests filed, and not withdrawn, did not represent property owners owning more than fifty percent (50%) of the area of assessable lands within the District, and all protests are overruled and denied SECTION 3 That this City Council hereby confirms the diagram and assessment as submitted and order the annual levy of the assessment for the fiscal year and in the amounts as set forth in the Engineer's Report and as referred to in the Resolution of Intention as previously adopted relating to said annual assessment levy SECTION 4 That the diagram and assessment as set forth and contained in said Report are hereby confirmed and adopted by this City Council SECTION 5 That the adoption of this Resolution constitutes the levy of the assessment for the fiscal year SECTION 6 That the estimates of costs, the assessment diagram, the assessments and all other matters, as set forth in Engineer's "Report", pursuant to said "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", as submitted, are hereby approved, adopted by this City Council and hereby confirmed SECTION 7 That the maintenance works of improvements contemplated by the Resolution of Intention shall be performed pursuant to law and the County Auditor shall enter on the County Assessment Roll the amount of the Assessment and said assessment shall then be collected at the same time and in the same manner as the County taxes are collected After collection by said County, the net amount of the assessment shall be paid to the City Treasurer of said City 2 SECTION 8 That the City Treasurer has previously established a special fund known as the CITY OF GRAND TERRACE LANDSCAPING AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT 70. 89-1 into which the City Treasurer shall place all monies collected by the Tax Collector pursuant to the provisions of this Resolution and law and said transfer shall be made and accomplished as soon as said monies have been made available to said City Treasurer SECTION 9 That the City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to file a certified copy of the diagram and assessment roll with the County Auditor, together with a certified copy of this Resolution upon its adoption 3 2 SECTION 10 That a certified copy of the assessment and diagram shall be filed m the office of the City Engmeer, with a duplicate copy on file m the Office of the City Clerk and open for public inspection PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 1992, by the following vote AYES NOES L ABSENT ABSTENTIONS BYRON MATTESON, MAYOR CITY OF GRAND TERRACE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ATTEST ' BRENDA STANFILL, CITY CLERK CITY OF GRAND TERRACE APPROVED AS TO FORM , JOHN HARPER, CITY ATTORNEY 4 1 DATE:8/4/92 STAFF REPORT CRA ITEM () COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE 8/13/92 SUBJECT APPROVAL OF NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS FOR THE SOURCE REDUCTION RECYCLING/HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE ELEMENT BACKGROUND: Assembly Bill 939 requires all municipalities to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) and a Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE) that outlines the planning strategies of each city to reduce the amount of solid waste being placed into the landfills. All cities are mandated by AB 939 to reduce solid waste by 25% by 1995 and a 50% reduction by 2000 The aforementioned documents are intended to outline the strategies for meeting these requirements. The SRRE and HHWE will include several components that describe Grand Terrace's waste, detail the recycling programs and efforts planned, educational and informational programs, and other related material The law additionally requires that California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents to be prepared, which describe any environmental affects that the SRRE and HHWE may have on the surrounding community. If any are listed, specific measures are included to mitigate those affects. Prior to the adoption of the SRRE, the City must conduct an environmental review. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Planning Department has completed the standard environmental reviews of the proposed projects, SRRE and HHWE, and has determined that they do not have significant adverse impacts on the environment. The Negative Declarations and Environmental Assessments for SRRE and HHWE were distributed to the State of California Office of Planning and Research No negative comments were received from OPR nor any significant comments from reviewing agencies. Therefore, the Negative Declarations are recommended for approval Additionally,staff has attached copies of the Planning Commission Meeting minutes from June 4, 1992 and July 2, 1992, meetings for your review RECOMMENDATION: STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS FOR THE SRRE AND HHWE RLA COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM# (p 6 ATc ' CALIFORNIA PO E WILSON, Goveinur rOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 100 TENTH STREET ' ^`h` \CRAMENTO CA 95814 `r 'rams. Nay 15 , 1992 PATRIZIA MATERASSI CITY OF GRAND TERRACL 22795 BARTON ROAD GRAND TERRACE, CA 92324 Sioject. SRRE SCH # 92042055 Dear_ PATRIZIA MATERASSI The State Clearinghouse has submitted the above named proposed c�h �jative Declaration to selected state agencies for review The review period is now closed and the comments from the responding agency(ies ) is (are) enclosed On the enclosed Notice of Completion form you will note that the Clearinghouse has checked the agencies that have commented Please review the Notice of Completion to ensure that your comment package is complete If the comment package is not in order, please notify the State Clearinghouse immediately Remember to 1refer to the project' s eight-digit State Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly Please note that Section 21104 of the California PublIc Resource) C ,de required that: "a responsible agency or other public agency shall only make substantive comments regarding those activities Lnvvolved in a project which are within an area of expertise of the agency or which are required to be carried out or approved by the agency ' Commenting agencies are also required by this section to support ri,._tr comments with specific documentation Should you need more information or clarification, we recommend that you contact the cummenting agency at your earliest convenience This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Ci,.aringhouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Please contact Russell Colliau at ( 916 ) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process Sincerely, i / ' -,• / It L_4 Christine Kinne Acting Deputy Director, Permit Assistance Cr t 1 osures cc Resources Agency (vlA1' I91 i I E OF CALIFORNIA PE fE WILSON Governor GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH S 1400 TENTH STREET '« SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 May 15 , 1992 PATRIZIA MATERASSI CITY OF GRAND TERRACE 22795 BARTON ROAD GRAND TERRACE, CA 92324 Subject: HHWE SCH # 92042054 Dear PATRIZIA MATERASSI The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental document to selected state agencies for review The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have comments This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Please call Russell Colliau at ( 916 ) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process When contacting the Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eight-digit State Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly Sincerely, Christine Kinne Acting Deputy Director, Pcimit Assistan� t ✓ Z�� CEQA Initial Study Addressing the City of Grand Terrace Source Reduction and Recycling Element April 1992 1 Prepared by EMCON Southwest 1430 East Cooley Drive Suite 130 Colton, California 92324 I Project E69-01-03 • Fmcon s,7dkale574---J x nlcd on rec;cietl pope: 1 CONTENTS 1 Introduction 1-1 Purpose 1-1 Project Location 1-1 Project Description - 1-2 2 Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form 2-1 Background 2-1 Environmental Impacts 2-1 Certification 2-6 Determination 2-7 3 Discussion of Environmental Evaluation 3-1 Revised April 2 i'MV°n Recycled Paper 1 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE This Initial study has been prepared in conformance with Section 15063 of the State, and Ordinance 3041 of the San Bernardino County Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The Initial Study has been prepared to determine the potential impacts associated with the adoption of the City of Grand Terrace Source Reduction and Recycling -Element (SRRE) The SRRE prepared by the City of Grand Terrace is consistent with Public Resources Code Section 40000 et, seq and California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 9, developed by the California Integrated Waste Management Board entitled "Plan ing Guidelines and Procedures for Preparing and Revising Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plans, dated May 30, 1991 The SRRE should be considered a policy and planning document as m ny of the programs discussed therein are preliminary in nature and subject to revision based, upon uncontrollable circumstances Upon subsequent development of individual SRRE Rlrograms, it may be determined that these programs are considered projects under the requirements of CEQA and therefore require further environmental documentation Although no facilities are .--, proposed for development within the City of Grand Terrace, the City's SRRE may depend upon development of recycling and composting facilities in adjacent cities or in the region for achievement of its stated goals and objectives These facilities, if constructed, will be subject to environmental review by the appropriate lead agency prior to their app oval PROJECT LOCATION The City of Grand Terrace is located in San Bernardino County, ap roximately 15 miles south of San Bernardino and 60 miles east of Los Angeles Neighboring jurisdictions include the City of Colton and the County of Riverside The City covers approximately 3 7 square miles at an elevation of approximately 1,065 feet above mean sea level The City is a residential bedroom community According to the California Department of Finance, the total number of housing units is 4,263, of which 3,205 are single-family units and 799 are multifamily units, mobile homes contribute another 259 units As of January 1990, the Department of Finance reported the City's population as 11,418 The Chamber of Commerce reports that the Grand Terrace business community is made up of small commercial enterprises i EMCONE6901-03GTCEOA1Doe Revised fApnl2 1992 1 - 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Grand Terrace Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) was developed in response to Assembly Bill 939, the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) AB 939 requires every City and County in the State of California to prepare an SRRE that identifies how each jurisdiction will meet the mandatory waste diversion goals set by the State of 25% by 1995 and 50% by 2000 This section presents a summary of each of the components included in the SRRE Solid Waste Generation Study Component A solid waste generation study was conducted to quantify and characterize the solid waste generated, diverted, and disposed by the City of Grand Terrace Currently, 12,809 tons of solid waste are generated in the City annually Through a number of existing diversion programs, 2,850 tons annually are diverted from disposal This existing level of solid waste diversion is 22 2% of the current solid waste generation Source Reduction Component Source reduction is a method of solid waste management that focuses on reducing the quantities of waste that enter the waste stream Simply put, it means reducing waste at the source—whether at home, office, or factory—before it is ever generated Examples of source reduction methods include replacing disposable items with reusable or repairable \-=' items, reusing and otherwise increasing the efficiency of materials such as scrap paper or yard waste, and reducing the amount of materials used in manufacturing or packaging Four broad categories of source reduction activities are examined and evaluated These categories are 1) education/technical assistance, 2) rate structure modifications, 3) economic incentives, and 4) regulatory measures Alternatives from the following categories were selected for implementation • Educational/Technical Assistance • Rate Structure Modifications • Regulatory Programs These selected alternatives do not require any new or expanded facilities The effectiveness of these programs is tied directly to the education and public information activities undertaken by the City EMCON E6901.03 GTCE0A1 Doc Revised April 2 1992 1 - 2 i 4 Recycling Component Almost all of recycling opportunities currently available to Grand Terrace residents and businesses are owned and operated by the private sector The current recycling efforts divert 2,850 tons per year of material from disposal To further increase recycling in Grand Terrace, a number of ne programs will be implemented and existing programs expanded These programs are su manzed as follows • Continue the commingled residential curbside program • Establish drop-off centers • Encourage private industry to establish additional buy-b ck centers in Grand Terrace • Encourage the development of recycling opportunities for multifamily developments such as apartments, condominiums, and mobile-home parks • Institute quantity-based user fees for refuse collection se ices • Provide technical assistance to businesses, school , and government agencies • Develop revisions to new development specifications o require adequate space for recycling in new multifamily developments • Enhance City procurement policies to encourage the purchase of recycled r_• products Composting Component Composting can play a key role in the City integrated waste management system Yard waste and readily decomposable material make up a significant portion of the total waste stream There are no existing composting programs in Grand Terrace The City will work with its residential waste hauler to establish a residential yard waste collection program The City will work with other jurisdictions to develop I composting facility in the region The composting program will be implemented in the short-term planning period Special Waste Component Special wastes are solid wastes that require special handling or disposal osal because they present potential hazards to human health or the environment Spicial wastes include certain types of hazardous wastes that are regulated by the California Department of Health Services (Sections 66310, 66740, and 66744 of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations) They also include other solid wastes which, because of their source of generation, physical, chemical, or biological characteristics, or unique disposal practices, are specifically conditioned in a solid waste facilities permit for handling and/olr disposal ( EMCON E69-01433GTCEOA1 Doc Revised April 2 1992 1 - 3 Based on the findings of the solid waste generation study, medical waste was identified as a type of special waste The City will work with the County to encourage the proper management of medical waste The cost for this program is considered under the Education and Public Information Component Education and Public Information Component Education and public information comprise the single most important element of any waste _-' diversion program Education and public information efforts targeting source reduction, recycling, composting, and special waste are discussed in this component A number of new programs are selected for implementation that target residential, commercial, and industrial generators The selected programs are • Multifamily Residence Program • Block Leader Program • Containers for Recycling • Preprinted Materials • Public Service Announcements • Recycling Videos • Exhibits 'J • Technical Assistance • Waste Audits • Awards • Speakers Bureau • Employee Training • Waste Reduction Curricula • Special Assemblies and Field Trips • School Drop-Off Centers All programs will be implemented within the short-term planning period and continue through the medium term Disposal Facility Capacity Component Integrated waste management includes the environmentally safe disposal of solid waste that cannot easily be diverted from landfilling There are no permitted solid waste disposal facilities in the City of Grand Terrace All waste disposed by the jurisdiction is exported to facilities outside the City EA/CON E6901-03GTCEOA1 Doc Revised April 2 1992 1 - 4 I Funding Component The purpose of the funding component is to demonstrate that the City has the ability to generate funds and allocate resources to plan, develop, and implement the various programs identified in this document Solid waste activities will be funded primarily by a portion of the user fees for refuse collection Integration Component This section provides a summary of the solid waste management pract ces proposed in this Source Reduction and Recycling element It includes explanations of how the programs work together to maximize the feasibility of source reduction, recycling, and composting options and jointly achieve the diversion mandates Consistent with the State's integrated waste management hierarchy, the City will promote source reduction activities targeted at decreasing the amount of solid waste being generated For those wastls that continue to be generated, recycling and composting programs will divert waste from disposal If a waste cannot be diverted, the City will ensure that it is landfilled in an environmentally safe manner The combination of component programs will divert an additional 17% In the short term and 34 6% in the medium term These figures, combined with the existing �22 2%, equal 39 2% by 1995 and 56 8% by 2000, exceeding the State-mandated goals EMCON E69-01-03GTCEOAI Doe Revised April 2 1992 1 - 5 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY FORM BACKGROUND 1 Name of Proponent City of Grand Terrace 2 Address and Phone Number of Proponent 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324-5295 (714) 824-6621 3 Date Study Completed for Posting April 3, 1992 4 Agency Requiring Initial Study City of Grand Terrace 5 Name of Proposal City of Grand Terrace Source Reduction and Recycling Element 6 Location of Proposal City-wide II ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all answers are provided in Section 3) Yes Maybe No 1 Earth Will the proposal result in a Unstable Earth Conditions or in changes in geologic substructure9 X b Disruptions, displacement, compaction or overcovenng of soil9 X c Substantial changes in topography, or ground surface relief features9 X d The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features9 X e Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site9 X f Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake9 X g Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards 9 X 2 Air Will the proposal result in a Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality X b The creation of objectionable odors9 X EMCON E69-01-03GTCEOA2 DOC Revised April 2 1992 2 - 1 Yes Maybe No c Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X 3 Water Will the proposal result in a Substantial changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters9 X b Substantial changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? X c Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X d Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X f Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground water? X g Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X h Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X 4 Plant Life Will the proposal result in a Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, mlcroflora and aquatic plants)? X b Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X c Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X d Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X EMC0N E6401-03 GTCE0A2 DOC Revised Alpnl 2 1992 2 - 2 Yes Maybe No 5 Animal Life Will the proposal result in a Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? X b Reduction in the number of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals' X c Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat'? X L' 6 Noise Will the proposal result in a Increase in existing noise levels'? X b Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 7 Light and Glare Will the proposal produce new light or glare? X 8 Land Use Will the proposal result in substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X 9 Natural Resources Will the proposal result in a Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X — b Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource'? X 10 Risk of Upset Will the proposal involve a A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions'? X b Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X 11 Population Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the area's human population'? X — 12 Housing Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing'? X — 13 Transportation\Circulation Will the proposal result in a Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X b Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? X BACON E6301-03GTCEOA2DOC Revised Apnl 2 1992 2 - 3 1 Yes Maybe No c Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? X I d Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X e Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X f Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians? X 14 Public Services Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental - services in any of the following a Fire protection? X b Police protection'? X c Schools'? T 1 x ___ _ d Parks or other recreation facilities'? X e Maintenance of public facilities, including roads'? T X f Other governmental services'? X 15 Energy Will the proposal result in a Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy'? X b Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy'? X 16 Utilities Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities a Power or natural gas'? X b Communications Systems'? T X c Water? X d Sewer or Septic Tank? I X e Storm Water Drainage'? X f Solid Waste and Disposal'? r X 17 Human Health Will the proposal result in a Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard'? X b Exposure of people to potential health hazards'? X EMCON E69o1-03GTCEOA2 DOC Revised'April 2 1992 2-4 I 1 1 I Yes Maybe No 18 Aesthetics Will the proposal result in obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view'? X 19 Recreation Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities'? X 20 Cultural Resources _ a Will the proposal result in the alteration or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? X b Will the proposal result in adverse physical ar aesthetic effects to a prehistoric building, structure or object'? X c Dose the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values'? X d Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area'? X 21 Mandatory Findings of Significance --- a Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California History or prehistory'? X b Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals'? X c Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable'? X d Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X EMCON E6401-03GTCEOA2 DOC Revised April 2 1992 2 - 5 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the statement furnished above and in any attached exhibits presents the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statement, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief Date April 3, 1992 �A f (Signature) Senior Protect Planner, EMCON Southwest (Title) EMCON E69-01-03 GTCEOA2 DOC Revised April 2 1992 2- 6 Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation 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 upon the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because of mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project by the applicant A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required Patnzia Materassi Planning Director Date Z Cp V ,Oc.�-� 2ct S5-i Si'nature City of Grand Terrace BACON E6901-03 GTCEOA2 DOC Revised Apnl 2,1992 2- 7 , 3 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The following analysis is a description of the findings contained in the COI/ of Grand Terrace Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form (Section 2) addressing the prop sed adoption of the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element A detailed discussion oflall potential impacts checked "Yes" or "Maybe" is provided, along with appropriate discussion and/or 'mitigation measures All items check "No"are similarly described 1 Earth Will the proposal result in a Unstable Earth Conditions or In changes in geologic substructures'? No Adoption of the SRRE will not result in or create unstable earth conditions or result in changes to geologic substructures as no direct physical improvements are proposed b Disruptions, displacement, compaction or overcovenng of sod? No Adoption of the SRRE will not result in displacement, compaction or overcovenng of soil as no physical improvements are proposed c Any Substantial changes in topography, or ground surface rel of features'? Because the SRRE does not identify specific sites for physical improv ments no changes occurring to the topography or ground surface relief features are anticipated d The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical } features'? No No site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, dest luction, covering, or modification of unique geologic or physical features are not anticipated to occur e Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? No No direct site development is involved in the proposed project which would alter soils through' wind or water f Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in ;siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a rivb r or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? No No changes will occur which would result in the deposition or erosion f beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any, inlet or lake as no direct physical improvements ' re proposed g Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards suc as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards'? No BACON P69-01-03GTCEOA3 Doe Revised April 2 1992 3 - 1 No site development is involved in the proposed project Thus, impacts which could result in exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards are not anticipated Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required , 2 Air Will the proposal result in a Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? L No Adoption and implementation of the SRRE could result in the addition of two (2) recycling collection vehicles being added to existing refuse collection routes This additional vehicular movement will not result in substantially increased air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality beyond projections by the South Coast Air Quality Management District b The creation of objectionable odors'? Maybe Although adoption of the SRRE will not result in the creation of objectionable odors, it is possible that future implementation of composting programs throughout the region may increase the potential for odors to be generated through the biological decomposition of organic waste Such odor generation would be minimal and would be controlled through state mandated on-site management Thus, any impacts would be considered non-significant •,--' c Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally9 No Air movements will not be altered, further, changes in moisture, temperature and climate (either locally or regionally) will not occur if the SRRE is adopted as no direct physical improvements proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 3 Water Will the proposal result in a Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters'? No Changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements will not occur if the proposed SRRE is adopted as no direct physical improvements have been proposed which alter such features b Substantial changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff'? No EMCON P69-01-03GTCEOA3 Doe Revised April 2 1992 3 - 2 I No site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, changes to the absorption rate drainage pattern, or rate in the amount of surface runoff are not anticipated as a result of the SRRE c Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? No No changes to the course or flow of flood waters will occur as the result f the adoption of the SRRE as no direct physical improvements are proposed I ' d Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? No No changes will occur in the amount of surface water in any water body as no physical Improvements are proposed e Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, Including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity'? No No direct impacts to surface waters or surface water quality are anticipated as a result of SRRE adoption as no physical improvements are proposed f Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground water? No The direction or rate of flow of ground waters will not be affected If the project is adopted as no direct physical improvement are proposed g Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or ekcavatlons? No No site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, project adoption will not result in changes to the quantity or quality of ground waters h Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? No No substantial reductions in the amount of water otherwise available for public waster supplies will result from the adoption of the SRRE as no direct physical improvements are proposed Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves'? No Adoption of the SRRE will not result in the exposure of people or property to water-related hazards (e g , flooding or tidal waves) beyond those already in existence as no direct physical Improvements are proposed � I EMCON P69-01.03 GTCEOA3 Doc Revised Apnl 2 1992 3 - 3 Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 4 Plant Life Will the proposal result in a Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species, of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? No No site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, project adoption will not result in changes to the diversity of species nor deterioration of vegetation b Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rate or endangered species of plants'? No Reduction of the numbers of any unique, or rare or endangered species of plants will not occur if the project is approved as no direct physical improvements are proposed c Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species'? No No new species of plant, or barriers to replenishment of existing plant species will result with the adoption of the SRRE as no direct physical improvements are proposed 1 d Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop'? No A reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop will not result from the adoption of the SRRE as no direct physical improvements are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 5 Animal Life Will the proposal result in a Change in the diversity of species or number of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? No Neither changes in the diversity of species nor number of any species of animals will occur with the adoption of the SRRE as no direct physical improvements are proposed b Reduction in the number of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals'? No Reduction of the numbers of any unique or rare or endangered species of animals will not occur with the adoption of the SRRE as no direct physical improvements are proposed EMCON P69-01-03 GTCEO A3 Doe Revised April 2 1992 3 -4 c Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? No No deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat will result from the adoption of the SRRE as no direct physical improvements are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 6 Noise Will the proposal result in " a Increase in existing noise levels? No Adoption of the SRRE will not result in an increase in the existing noise levels as no'significant new noise sources are proposed b Exposure of people to severe noise levels? No Adoption of the SRRE will not result in the exposure of people to noise levels which exceed City standards as no new significant sources of noise are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 7 Light and Glare Will the proposal produce substantial new light or !are' No Adoption of the SRRE will not result in the exposure of people to new ligh or glare as no new sources of light are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 8 Land Use Will the proposal result in substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area9 No Adoption of the SRRE by the City of Grand Terrace will not result in substantial alterations of the present or planned land use in the area as no direct physical improvements are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 9 Natural Resources Will the proposal result in a Substantial increase in the rate of use of any natural resources9 EMCON P69-01-03GTCE0A3 Ooc Revised Apnl2 1992 3 - 5 I No The SRRE was developed to reduce the rate of use of natural resources through recycling, composting and source reduction efforts No substantial increases in the rate of use of any natural resources will result from adoption of the SRRE b Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? No r� ; Substantial depletion of non-renewable natural resources will not result from adoption of the SRRE The SRRE will result in the preservation of many non-renewable natural resources through recycling and waste reduction efforts 10 Risk of Upset Will the proposal involve a A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? No Adoption of the SRRE will not result in any risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset condition as substances which could result a risk of upset are not included in the SRRE targeted materials b Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? --' No No impacts to emergency response or emergency evacuation plans will result from adoption of the SRRE as the SRRE has no effect upon these plans Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 11 Population Will the project alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the area's human population? No The SRRE will have no effect upon housing, population, or employment Therefore, adoption of the SRRE will have no impact on the location, distribution, density, and growth rate of the human population Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 12 Housing Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing'? No EMCON P69-01-03GTCE0a3 Doc Revised April 2 1992 3 - 6 The adoption of the SRRE will have no impact upon the existing housing and will not result in creating a demand for additional housing as significant increase employment is not anticipated Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 13 Transportation\Circulation Will the proposal result in a Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement2 No - Adoption and implementation of the SRRE could result in the addition of two (2) recycling collection vehicles being added to existing refuse collection routes This additional vehicular movement is not considered substantial, thus no impacts are anticipated b Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? No Existing parking facilities will not be affected if the SRRE is adopted Further, it will not necessitate or create a demand for new/additional parking as no significant increases in employment or population shifts are anticipatedI c Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? No Adoption and implementation of the SRRE could result in the addition of two (2) recycling collection vehicles being added to existing refuse collection routes This additional vehicular _ movement is not considered substantial, thus no impacts upon existing tr nsportation systems are anticipated d Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? No Neither present patterns of circulation nor the movement of people and/or goods will be affected if the SRRE is adopted as substantial increases in vehicular movement will not occur e Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? No No waterborne, rail, or air traffic will be affected by adoption of the SRRE as these means of transportation will not likely be utilized for the SRRE implementation f Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians9 No Increased hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians may occur from implementation of the curbside collection program identified in the Recycling Component of SRRE however, this increased hazard is considered insignificant as only two additional vehicles are anticipated as a result of this program EMCON P69d1-03GTCE0ti3 Doc Revised Apni 2 1992 3 - 7 Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 14 Public Services Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following a Fire protection'? No Adoption of the SRRE will have no effect upon or result in the need for new or altered fire protection services as no direct physical improvements are proposed b Police protection'? No Because shifts in population or increased employment are not anticipated, adoption of the SRRE is not anticipated have an effect upon or result in the need for new or altered police protection services c Schools'? No No new school facilities will be required if the SRRE is adopted as population increases or shifts in population will not result from adoption or implementation of the SRRE d Parks or other recreation facilities'? No No new parks and recreation facilities will be required if the SRRE is adopted as no population increases or shifts in population will result from the proposed project e Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? No Adoption and implementation of the SRRE could result in the addition of two (2) recycling collection vehicles being added to existing refuse collection routes This additional vehicular movement and resultant impacts upon roads is not considered substantial Thus, no substantial impacts are anticipated upon the maintenance of public facilities or roads as a result of the adoption of the SRRE f Other governmental services'? No Some impacts to the City support staff may occur as a result of increased regulation and documentation requirements contained within the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 However, these impacts are considered insignificant as adequate staff resources are identified within the SRRE to address the requirements No impacts to other governmental services are anticipated as the result of the adoption of the SRRE Mitigation Measure EMCON P69-0t-03 GTCEOA3 the Revised April 2 1992 3 - 8 No mitigation measures are required 15 Energy Will the proposal result in a Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy9 No Adoption of the SRRE will not result in the use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy as no direct physical improvements are proposed and insignificant additional vehicular movement is anticipated b Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy'? No No substantial increases in demand upon existing sources of energy or requirements for the development of new sources of energy are anticipated as a result of the doption (f'the SRRE as no direct physical improvements are proposed and insignificant additional vehicular movement is anticipated Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 16 Utilities Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or sub tantial alterations to the following utilities a Power or natural gas? No The adoption of the SRRE will not create the demand for additional pow r (i e , electricity) or natural gas as no direct physical improvements are proposed b Communications Systems'? No The adoption of the SRRE will not create the demand for additional communications systems as no physical improvements are proposed c Water'? No No new demands for domestic water will be created if the SRRE is a opted as no direct physical improvements are proposed d Sewer or Septic Tank No No new demands for sewer facilities or septic tanks will be created if the SR E is adopted as no direct physical improvements are proposed e Storm Water Drainage'? EMCON P6901-03GTCEOA3 Doc Revised April 2 1992 3 - 9 No Adoption of the SRRE will not necessitate new storm water drainage improvements as no direct physical improvements are proposed f Solid Waste and Disposal9 No The SRRE has been prepared in response to the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 r , The SRRE is comprised of several components (refer to the Project Description) which are _--- intended to achieve significant reductions in the amount of solid waste/refuse generated within City of Grand Terrace Specifically, the City has identified goals and objectives which are aimed at reducing the amount of solid waste by 25 percent by 1995 and by 50 percent by 2000 Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 17 Human Health Will the proposal result in a Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? No The creation of potential health hazards will not result from the adoption of the SRRE as hazardous substances are not a part of the proposed project b Exposure of people to potential health hazards9 No Adoption of the SRRE will not result in the exposure of people to potential health hazards as hazardous substances are not a part of the proposed project Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 18 Aesthetics Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view9 No No site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, potential impacts resulting in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public or the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view will not result from the proposed project Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 19 Recreation Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities9 No BACON P69O1-03GTCE0A3 Doc Revised April 2 1992 3 - 10 The SRRE will not create any impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities as shifts or increases in population are not anticipated Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 20 Cultural Resources a Will the proposal result in the_ alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site' No No site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, the alteration of a significant archaeological or historical site, structure, object or building will not occur b Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure or object'? No No adverse physical or aesthetic effects to any buildings, structures or objects, either historic or prehistoric, are anticipated as no direct physical improvements are proposed c Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values'? No Cultural values will not be affected by adoption of the SRRE as no direct physical improvements are proposed d Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area'? No No impacts to existing religious or sacred uses are anticipated within the impact area as a result of the adoption of the SRRE as no direct physical improvements are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 21 Mandatory Findings of Significance a Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California History or prehistory'? 1 No EMCON P69-01-03 GTCEOA3 Doc Revised April 2 1992 3 - 11 ' The SRRE is specifically intended to improve the quality of the environment through the implementation of programs designed to reduce, reuse, or recycle solid waste and thereby improve the quality of life b Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals9 No Adoption of the SRRE and implementation of the individual components of that policy guide will achieve short-term as well as long-term goals without significantly impacting the environment c Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable9 No Cumulative impacts associated with the SRRE are not significant As presented in the environmental analysis, the goals and objectives identified in that document are specifically intended to significantly reduce existing quantities of solid waste currently being generated in the City The reduction in refuse generation will have a positive effect on the environment and further reduce cumulative impacts associated with the SRRE, which are not significant d Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly'? No The SRRE is specifically intended to improve the quality of the environment through the implementation of programs designed to reduce, reuse, or recycle solid waste and thereby improve the quality of life The proposed project does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly Discussion of Environmental Evaluation This environmental evaluation does not address potential impacts associated with the siting, construction, and operation of a Material Recovery Facility and/or Composting Facility within the jurisdictional control of the City of Grand Terrace acting as Lead Agency Future facilities which implement specific components of the SRRE (e g, Recycling and Composting) may be located on sites which result in potential impacts to the environment However, the nature and extent of potential environmental impacts and resultant mitigation measures for these non-site-specific future facilities identified in the SRRE will be subject to subsequent environmental review and analysis by the appropriate lead agency In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15145, Analysis of unknown impacts associated with the siting, construction, and operation of a Material Recovery Facility or Composting Facility within the City of Grand Terrace would be considered speculative in nature, at this time Therefore, these potential impacts cannot be addressed until specific locations,plans of operation, and extent of improvements can be identified The identification of such sites will necessitate subsequent environmental documentation to fully analyze the potential impacts and identify appropriate mitigation measures prior to implementation of the - program and/or approval of the site(s) EMCON P69-01-03GTCEOA3 Doc Revised April 2 1992 3 - 12 CEQA Initial Study Addressing the City of Grand Terrace Household Hazardous Waste Element April 1992 Prepared by EMCON Southwest 1430 East Cooley Drive Suite 130 Colton, California 92324 Project E69-01-03 1 Emcon sty pr n4 d on recycled pope CONTENTS 1 Introduction 1-1 Purpose 1-1 Project Location 1-1 Project Description - 1-2 2 Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form 2-1 Background 2-1 Environmental Impacts 2-1 Certification 2-7 Determination 2-8 3 Discussion of Environmental Evaluation 3-1 Revised April 2 PfgMon Recycled Paper 1 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE This Initial study has been prepared in conformance with Section 150 3 of the State, and Ordinance 3041 of the San Bernardino County Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The Initial Study has been prepared to determine he potential impacts associated with the adoption of the City of Grand Terrace Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE) The HHWE prepared by the City of Grand Terrace is consistent with Public Resources Code Section 40000 et, seq and California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapte 9, developed by the California Integrated Waste Management Board entitled "Planning Guidelines and Procedures for Preparing and Revising Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plans, dated May 30, 1991 The HHWE should be considered a policy and planning document as many of the programs discussed therein are preliminary in nature and subject to revision based upon uncontrollable circumstances Upon subsequent development of individual HHWE programs, it may be determined that these programs are considered projects under the requirements of CEQA and therefore require further environmental documentation Although no facilities are proposed for development within the City of Grand Terrace, the City's HHWE may depend upon development of household hazardous waste collection facilities in adjacent cities o!r in the region for achievement of its stated goals and objectives These facilities, if constructed, will be subject to environmental review by the appropriate lead agency prior to their approval PROJECT LOCATION The City of Grand Terrace is located in San Bernardino County, approximately 15 miles south of San Bernardino and 60 miles east of Los Angeles Neighboring jurisdictions include the City of Colton and the County of Riverside The City covers approximately 3 7 square miles at an elevation of approximately 1,065 feet above mean sea level The City is a residential bedroom community According to the California Department of Finance, the total number of housing units is 4,263, of which 3,205 are single-family units and 799 are multifamily units, mobile homes contribute another 259 units As of January 1990, the Department of Finance reported the City's population as 11,418 The Chamber of Commerce reports that the Grand Terrace business community is made up of small commercial enterprises BACON E3601d3GTHHCE0A1 Doc Revised April 2,1992 1 - 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Grand Terrace is proposing a Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE) in accordance with the requirements established by the enactment of Assembly Bill (AB) 2707 That bill, signed into law in December, 1991, mandated stringent requirements for establishing household hazardous waste diversion programs to be implemented throughout the State of California in order to reduce the amount.of hazardous waste entering landfills The City of Grand Terrace Household Hazardous Waste Element is a comprehensive document which describes the existing household hazardous waste generation and diversion quantities, as well as the programs that will be undertaken to divert these wastes from being landfilled Specifically, the programs to be addressed by the City in the proposed HHWE include • Statement of Goals and Objectives • Existing Conditions • Evaluation Criteria • Evaluation of Alternatives • Program Selection • Program Implementation • Monitoring and Evaluation • Education and Public Information Statement of Goals and Obtectives The Statement of Goals and Objectives outlines the progress the City is attempting to achieve within the short-term (1991-1995) and medium-term (1996-2000) planning periods Additionally, the Statement of Goals and Objectives defines the City's overall goals to be used as a guidance tool for development of the HHWE Existing Conditions The existing programs and facilities discusses existing household hazardous waste diversion programs and facilities throughout the County and the City which assist in the diversion of household hazardous waste The existing conditions examined include • Periodic household hazardous waste collection events • Permanent household hazardous waste collection facilities • Landfill Load Checking Programs • Residential Curbside Collection of Waste Oil Evaluation of Alternatives The evaluation of alternatives examines several alternative programs that may be available to the City to achieve the goals and objectives developed to assist the city in diverting household hazardous waste from entering landfills these alternatives include the following • Periodic household hazardous waste collection events • Permanent household hazardous waste collection facilities EMCON E36-OI 3GTHHCEOAI Doc Revised April 2 1992 1 - 2 • Mobile household hazardous waste collection programs • Residential curbside collection programs • Landfill and Transfer Stations load checking • Household hazardous waste recycling • Public education and information programs Program Selection The program selection section discusses the most favorable program for he City based upon City specific conditions, opportunities and-constraints The programs elected also define whether the specific programs will be implemented in the short-term or medium-term planning periods Programs selected for implementation by the City of Grand Terrace include • Continuation of periodic collection events • Utilization of permanent collection facilities • Continuing residential curbside collection of waste oil • Continuing load-checking program at County landfills • Continuation of public education and information programs • Continuing the recycling of household hazardous waste Monitoring and Evaluation The monitoring and evaluation section discusses how the City will monitpr and evaluate the selected programs effectiveness in achieving the overall and specific goals nd objectives d Education and Public Information The Education and Public Information section of the HHWE identifies specific goals and objectives for the short-term and medium-term planning periods In ad ition, the following information is included in this section 1 • Plans for expanding and modifying existing public educate n and information programs • Public and private program implementation costs, revenues, and revenue sources r i i I I 1 EMCCN E3601-03GTHHCE0AI Doe Revised Apnl 2 1992 1 -3 I 1 2 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1 BACKGROUND 1 Name of Proponent City of Grand Terrace 2 Address and Phone Number of Proponent 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324-5295 (714) 824-6621 '�' 3 Date Study Completed for Posting April 3, 1992 4 Agency Requiring Initial Study City of Grand Terrace 5 Name of Proposal City of Grand Terrace Source Reduction and Recycling Element 6 Location of Proposal City-wide IL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all answers are provided in Section 3) Yes Maybe No 1 Earth Will the proposal result in a Unstable Earth Conditions or in changes in geologic substructures 9 X b Disruptions, displacement, compaction or overcovenng of soil9 X c Substantial Change in topography, or ground surface relief features9 X d The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features9 X e Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the sites X f Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake9 X g Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards 9 X 2 Air Will the proposal result in a Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality X b The creation of objectionable odors9 X EMCON E69-01-03GTHHCEOZDOC Revised April 2 1992 2 - 1 Yes Maybe No c Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X 3 Water Will the proposal result in a Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X b Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? X c Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X d Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X f Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground water? X g Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X h Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? X 4 Plant Life Will the proposal result in a Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? X b Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? X c Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X d Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X EMCON E69-01-03 GTHNCEOaDOC Revised April 2 1992 2 - 2 Yes Maybe No 5 Animal Life Will the proposal result in a Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? X b Reduction in the number.of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? X L c Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat'? X d Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X 6 Noise Will the proposal result in a Increase in existing noise levels'? X b Exposure of people to severe noise levels'? X 7 Light and Glare Will the proposal produce new light or glare'? X 8 Land Use Will the proposal result in substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area'? X 9 Natural Resources Will the proposal result in a Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources'? X b Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? X 10 Risk of Upset Will the proposal involve a A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions'? X b Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan'? X 11 Population Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of the area? / X 12 Housing Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? X EMCON E69O1-03GTHHCEOZDOC Revised Apnl 2 1992 2 -3 Yes Maybe No 13 Transportation\Circulation Will the proposal result in a Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement'? X b Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking'? X c Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems'? X d Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods'? X e Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic'? X f Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians' X 14 Public Services Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following a Fire protection'? X b Police protection'? X c Schools' X d Parks or other recreation facilities'? X e Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ! X f Other governmental services'? X 15 Energy Will the proposal result in a Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy'? X b Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy'? X 16 Utilities Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities a Power or natural gas'? X b Communications Systems'? X c Water' X d Sewer or Septic Tank'? X e Storm Water Drainage'? X f Solid Waste and Disposal'? j X i EMCON E69-01Q1 GTHHCEOZDOC Revised April 2 1992 2 - 4 Yes Maybe No 17 Human Health Will the proposal result in a Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard'? X b Exposure of people to potential health hazards'? X 18 Aesthetics Will the proposal result in obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X 19 Recreation Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities'? X 20 Cultural Resources a Will the proposal result in the alteration or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site'? X b Will the proposal result in adverse physical ar aesthetic effects to a prehistoric building, structure or object'? X Dose the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values'? X d Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area'? X 21 Mandatory Findings of Significance a Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California History or prehistory'? X b Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals'? X c Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable'? X BACON E63O1433GTHHCEOZDOC Revised April 2 1992 2 - 5 Yes Maybe No d Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly9 X 1 1 I I EMCONE6901-03GTHHCEOZDOC Revised April 2 1992 2 - 6 CERTIFICATION I hereby certrfy that the statement furnished above and in any attached exhibits presents the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statement, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief �Date April 3, 1992 //' _ �� _-- -- � ignature) Senior Protect Planner, EMCON Southwest � (Title) EMCON E690143GTHHCE0200C Revised April 2 1992 2 - 7 Environmental Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared XI find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect' upon the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because of mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added t ' the project by the applicant A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PR PARED I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the nvironment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS REQUIRED Patnzla Materassi Planning Director Date / " k - 32 LA-4 tiviTTCQ s Si Signature City of Grand Terrace f EMCONE6901-03GTHHCE02 DOC Revised April 2 1992 2 - 8 p 3 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The following analysis is a description of the findings contained in the City of Grand Terrace Initial Study Environmental Checklist Form (Section 2) addressing the adoption of the City's proposed Household Hazardous Waste Element A detailed discussion of all potential impacts checked "Yes" or "Maybe" is provided, along with appropriate mitigation measures All items check"No" are similarly described 1 Earth. Will the proposal result in _ ._1 a Unstable Earth Conditions or in changes in geologic substructures '? No Adoption of the HHWE will not result in or create unstable earth conditions or result in changes to geologic substructures as no direct physical improvements are proposed b Disruptions, displacement, compaction or overcovering of soil9 No Adoption of the HHWE will not result in displacement, compaction or overcovering of soil as no physical improvements are proposed c Changes in topography, or ground surface relief features9 No `-9 Because the HHWE does not identify specific sites for physical improvements no changes occurring to the topography or ground surface relief features are anticipated d The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features9 No No site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, destruction, covering, or modification of unique geologic or physical features are not anticipated to occur e Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site9 No No site development is involved in the proposed project which would alter soils through wind or water f Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake No No changes will occur which would result in the deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any, inlet or lake as no direct physical improvements are proposed EMCON P6901-03GTHHCE03 Doe Revised Apnl 2 1992 3 - 1 g Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards'? No No site development is involved in the proposed project Thus, impacts which could result in exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure or similar hazards are not anticipated Discussion of Potential Impact and/or Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 2 Air Will the proposal result in a Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? No Adoption of the HHWE will not result in substantial increased vehicular movement or physical development which could impact air emissions or cause deterioration of ambient air quality beyond projections by the South Coast Air Quality Management District b The creation of objectionable odors? No No aspects of the project will result in the creation of objectionable odors as physical improvements are not proposed c Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? No Air movements will not be altered, further, changes in moisture, temperature and climate (either locally or regionally) will not occur if the HHWE is adopted as proposed 's no direct physical improvements are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 3 Water Will the proposal result in a Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? No Changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements will not occur if the proposed HHWE is adopted as no direct physical improvements have been identified which alter such features b Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff'? EMCON P69-01-03GTHHCEO3 Doe Revised April 2 1992 3 - 2 No No changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff are anticipated from the adoption of the HHWE as no direct physical Improvements are proposed c Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters9 No No changes to the course or flow of flood waters will occur as the result of the adoption of the HHWE as no direct physical improvements are proposed d Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body'? No No direct site development is involved in the proposed project thus, no changes will occur in the amount of surface water in any water body e Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, Including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity' No No direct impacts to surface waters or surface water quality are anticipated as a result of HHWE adoption as no direct physical improvements are proposed f Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground water'? No The direction or rate of flow of ground waters will not be affected if the project is adopted as no direct physical improvements are proposed g Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations ' No No direct site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, adoption of the HHWE will not result in changes to the quantity or quality of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations h Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies ' No No substantial reductions in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies will result from the adoption of the HHWE as no direct physical improvements are proposed I Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves'? No BACON P69-01.03 GTHHCEO3 Doc Revised Apnl 2 1992 3 -3 I Adoption of the HHWE will not result in the exposure of people or property to water-related hazards (e g , flooding or tidal waves) as no direct physical improvements are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures required 4 Plant Life Will the proposal result in a Change in the diversity of species, or number of any native species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops or aquatic plants)'? No Neither changes inrthe diversity of species nor deterioration of vegetation will occur as a result of the adoption of the HHWE as no direct physical improvements are proposed b Reduction in the numbers of any unique, rate or endangered pecies of plants'? No No direct site development is involved in the proposed project Therefo`e, reduction of the numbers of any unique, or rare or endangered species of plants will not occur if the project is approved c Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species r No No new species of plant, or barriers to replenishment of existing plant species will result with the adoption of the HHWE as no direct physical improvements are proposed d Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop'? No A reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop will not result from the adoption of the HHWE as no direct physical improvements are proposed as no direct physical improvements are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 5 Animals Will the proposal result in a Change in the diversity of species or number of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic org nisms or insects) No Neither changes in the diversity of species nor number of any species of animals will occur as a result of the adoption of the HHWE as no direct physical improvements are proposed b Reduction in the number of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals'? No EMCON P69-01-03GTHHCE03 Doc Revised April 2 1992 3 -4 f 1 No direct site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, a reduction of the numbers of any unique or rare or endangered species of animals will not occur as a result of the adoption of the HHWE c Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat'? No No deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat is anticipated as a result of the adoption of the HHWE as no new facilities are proposed �l d Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop9 No No direct site development is involved in the proposed project Thus no reductions in agricultural acreage or crop are anticipated as a result from the adoption of the HHWE Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 6 Noise Will the proposal result in a Increase in existing noise levels'? No Adoption of the HHWE will not result in an increase in the existing noise levels as no significant new noise sources are proposed b Exposure of people to severe noise levels No Adoption of the HHWE will not result in the exposure of people to noise levels which exceed City standards as no new significant sources of noise are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 7 Light and Glare Will the proposal produce new light or glare9 No Adoption of the HHWE will not result in the exposure of people to new light or glare as no new sources of light are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 8 Land Use Will the proposal result in substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area9 No EMCON P6901-03GTHHCE03 Doe Revised Apnl 2 1992 3 - 5 Adoption of the HHWE by the City of Grand Terrace will not result in substantial alterations of the present or planned land use in the area as no direct physical improvements are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 9 Natural Resources Will the proposal result in a Substantial Increase in the rate of use of any natural resource'? No No increases the rate of use of any natural resources are anticipated as a result of adoption of the HHWE as no direct physical improvements are proposed b Substantial depletion of any nob-renewable natural resource'7 No No direct site development is involved in the proposed project Thus, a substantial depletion of non-renewable natural resources will not occur from adoption of the HHWE 10 Risk of Upset Will the proposal involve a A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not lirpited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions9 Maybe Adoption of the HHWE could result in a risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset condition at a mobile household hazardous waste collection event or at a permanent household hazardous waste collection facility b Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan'? No No impacts to emergency response or emergency evacuation plahs will result from adoption of the HHWE as the HHWE has no effect upon these issues Mitigation Measure 10 a Provide written instructions to both employees and participants in the collection programs which clearly explain the proper and safe handling pf these wastes 10 a Require all mobile collection events held within the City to be staffed by properly trained personnel, with adequate equipment, and clearly defined safe handling procedures 10 a The City of Grand Terrace shall continue to require the saf transportation and disposal of household hazardous waste in accordance with the California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances, (Cal EPA\DOTS) EMCONP6401-03OTHHCE03Doc Revised iApnl 2 1992 3 - 6 11 Population Will the project alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the area's human population? , No Adoption of the HHWE will have no impact on the location,distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required _-' 12 Housing Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing9 No The adoption of the HHWE will have no impact upon the existing housing and will not result in creating a demand for additional housing as significant increase employment is not anticipated Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 13 Transportation/Circulation Will the proposal result in a Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? B No Substantial additional vehicular traffic will not be generated b Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? No Existing parking facilities will not be affected if the HHWE is adopted Further, it will not necessitate or create a demand for new/additional parking as significant increases in employment or population shifts are not anticipated - c Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? No Substantial impacts to the existing transportation facilities are not anticipated as little or no additional vehicular movement is anticipated as a result of the adoption of the HHWE d Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? No Neither present patterns of circulation nor the movement of people and/or goods will be affected if the HHWE is adopted as little or no additional vehicular movement is anticipated e Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic'? No EMCON P69-01-03 GTHHCEO3 Doc Revised April 2 1992 3 - 7 No waterborne, rail, or air traffic will be affected by adoption of the HHWE as these, means of transportation will not likely be utilized for the HHWE implementation f Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or p destrians? No Hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians will not occur as little or no additional vehicular movement is anticipated as a result of the adoption of the HHWE Mitigation Measure - No mitigation measures are required 14 Public Services Will the proposal have substantial effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following a Fire protection? Maybe Because the Fire Department may be the first response team to a potential household hazardous waste spill at a collection event held within the City, some impacts to Fire protection services could result from adoption of the HHWE b Police protection'? No Adoption of the HHWE will have no effect upon or result in the need for new or altered police protection services c Schools? No No new school facilities will be required if the HHWE is adopted as population increases or shifts in population will not result from adoption or implementation of the HHWE d Parks or other recreation facilities'? No No new parks and recreation facilities will be required if the HHWE is adopted as no population increases or shifts in population will result from the proposed project e Maintenance of public facilities, including roads'? No Adoption and implementation of the HHWE is not anticipated to result in increased vehicular traffic which would impact maintenance of roads or the maintenance of public facilities Thus, no substantial impacts are anticipated upon the maintenance of public facilities for roads as a result of the adoption of the HHWE f Other governmental services? EMCON P6901-03GTHHCE03 Doc Revised Apnl 2 1992 3 -8 I 1 1 No No impacts to other governmental services are anticipated as the result of the adoption of the HHWE Mitigation Measure 14 a Require all mobile household hazardous waste collection events held within the City to be approved by the Fire Department as part of the planning and approval process r" ' 15 Energy Will the proposal result in - a Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy'? No Adoption of the HHWE will not result in the use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy as little or no additional vehicular movement and no site development is involved in the proposed project b Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy'? No No substantial increases in demand upon existing sources of energy or requirements for the development of new sources of energy are anticipated as a result of the adoption of the HHWE as no direct physical improvements are proposed `,,_,,, Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 16 Utilities Will the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities a Power or natural gas'? No No direct site development is involved in the proposed project Thus, the adoption of the HHWE will not create the demand for additional power(I e , electricity) or natural gas b Communications Systems'? No The adoption of the HHWE will not create the demand for additional communications systems c Water? No No new demands for domestic water will be created if the HHWE is adopted as no direct physical improvements are proposed d Sewer or Septic Tank'? EMCON P69-01-03GTHHCEO3 Doc Revised April 2 1992 3 - 9 r No No new demands for sewer facilities or septic tanks will be created if the HHWE is adopted as no direct physical improvements are proposed e Storm Water Drainage? No No direct site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, adoption of the HHWE will not necessitate new storm water-drainage improvements 7 f Solid Waste and Disposal? No As previously indicated, the HHWE has been prepared in response to AB 939 and 2707 The HHWE was developed to reduce or eliminate the amount of household hazardous waste illegally disposed in landfills Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 17 Human Health Will the proposal result in a Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard'? Maybe The mishandling of household hazardous waste at both mobile collection events and permanent facilities could have the potential to cause human health hazards b Exposure of people to potential health hazards Maybe The mishandling of household hazardous waste at both mobile collection events and permanent facilities could have the potential to cause human health hazards Mitigation Measure 17 a Provide signage and information to both employees and participants at mobile collection events or permanent facilities located within thq City which clearly discusses the proper handling of household hazardous waste 17 b Ensure both permanent and mobile collection events and permanent collection facilities are properly permitted in accordance with Calif rnia Environmental Protection Agency, Toxics Control Agency regulations 18 Aesthetics Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view'? No BACON P69-0143 GTHHCEO3 Doc Revised April 2 1992 3 - 10 No direct site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, no obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view will result from adoption of the HHWE Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures required 19 Recreation Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? r = No - The HHWE will not create any impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities as shifts or increases in population are not anticipated Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required 20 Cultural Resources a Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? No No significant archaeological, prehistoric, or historic destruction will occur as a result of the HHWE adoption as no direct physical improvements are proposed �` b Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? No No effects, physical or aesthetic, are anticipated to occur as a result of adoption of the HHWE as no direct physical improvements are proposed c Does the proposal have potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? No No direct site development is involved in the proposed project Therefore, no unique ethnic cultural values are anticipated to be affected as the result of adoption of the HHWE d Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area No No known existing religious or sacred uses will be impacted as the result of adoption of the HHWE as no direct physical improvements are proposed Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are required EMCOH P6901-03G7HHCE0300e Revised Apnl2 1992 3 - 11 21 Mandatory Findings of Significance a Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California History or prehistory'? No The HHWE is specifically intended to improve the quality of the environment through the implementation of programs designed to reduce, reuse, and recycle household hazardous waste b Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals'? No Adoption of the HHWE and implementation of the individual programs of that policy guide will achieve short-term as well as long-term goals without significantly impacting the environment c Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable'? No Cumulative impacts associated with the HHWE are not significant As presented in the environmental analysis, the goals and objectives identified in that document are specifically intended to reduce existing quantities of household hazardous waste currently being generated in the City The reduction in household hazardous waste generation will have a positive effect on the environment and further reduce cumulative impacts associated with the HHWE, which are not significant Discussion of Environmental Evaluation This environmental evaluation does not address potential impacts associated with the siting, construction, and operation of a household hazardous waste collection facility within the City of Grand Terrace Future facilities which implement portions of the HHWE may be located on sites which result in potential impacts to the environment However, the nature and extent of potential environmental impacts and resultant mitigation measures for these non-site-specific future facilities discussed within the HHWE will be subject to future envir q nmental review and analysis by the appropriate lead agency In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15145, Analysis of unknown impacts associated with the siting, construction, and operation of a household hazardous waste collection facility within the City of Grand Terrace would be considered speculative in nature, at this time Therefore, these potential impacts cannot be addressed until specific locations, plans of operation, and extent of improvements can be identified The identification of such sites will necessitate subsequent environmental documentation to fully analyze the potential impacts and identify appropriate mitigation measures pnor to implementation of the program and/or approval of the site(s) 1 EMCON P69-01-03GTHHCEO3 Doc Revised April 2 1992 3 - 12 GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING JUNE 4, 1992 The regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on June 4, 1992 at 7.10 p m by Chairman Dan Buchanan PRESENT. Dan Buchanan, Chairman - Stanley Hargrave, Vice-Chairman Ray Munson, Commissioner Jim Sims, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner Ron Wright, Commissioner Maria C Muett, Associate Planner Larry Mainez, Planning Intern Maggie Alford, Planning Secretary ABSENT: None PLEDGE: Stanley Hargrave, Vice-Chairman PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 6:30 P.M. The Associate Planner said that a gentleman from EMCON, a consultant firm working with the Assistant City Manager in meeting the regional authonties guidelines for Household Hazardous Waste Element and Source Reduction and Recycling Element is here to answer any questions She said staff is providing this for informational purposes so they know what this plan generally is about She said the responsibility the Planning Department had was looking at the initial study and environmental issue She said the Assistant City Manager is working on the element and the actual technical end of it, and City Council is the authoritative body, and they will be the body reviewing and voting on this She said Mr Perry can answer any questions, and they will be looking at it from the Planning Commission's perspective of a project-by-project, for example, if a compost-type site comes in or a lumber yard, etc, and how this additional regulation would fit onto this project, so naturally, the project would come before them anyway for land use She said this evening, they are giving the commission a very general look at it and will go into more detail for them as the plan gets approved, and they will be given 1 some standards and guidelines so they know what their official capacity will be in looking at this element She said she has before them draft initial studies, and the lead agency is the State,who said it met the requirements, so now they are ready for City Council to adopt it She said it does not become a part of the General Plan, it is just an additional regional control She mtroduced Mike Perry from EMCON, statmg that the consultant was hired by most of the Inland Empire cities MIKE PERRY EMCON _ L Ji Mr Perry said in 1989, the State of California passed the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, which requires each city and each county to develop a plan by which it will effectively reduce or rec3)cle the amount of waste it is currently generating by 25% by the year 1995 and increases this diversion to 50%by the year 2000 He stated that within the legislation itself, it is specified exactly how the plans were to be developed, what the plans were to analyze, what options in many cases were available or at least had to be evaluated, and also provided for some penalties for non-compliance He said, in bnef, if the city or county either does not submit its plan or does not achieve its recycling and diversion goals, it can be subject to up to as much as $10,000 per day fine,,therefore, it became an import t process for each city to look at very seriously He stated that, within the eastern San Bernardmo Valley, 10 cities got together under a loosel -formed memo of understanding by which they hired a single consultant to delvelop plans for all 10 cities He said the concept behind this was that solid waste, although it is forced to be looked at on a city-by-city basis, often is more of a regional issue - each city can not be expected to develop its own mature iecovery facility to divert 25% or 50% of its waste stream as it is just not cost effective, so the MOU and the 10 cities got together, hiring a single consulting firm to assist all of the cities within the MOU to prepare the plan He said the plan started out as a waste characterization study, of which each cities waste stream was analyzed and broken down into 35 categories or types of waste, looking at types of waste from aluminum cans down to the percentag of diapers found in the waste stream He said, based upon this information, a plan was developed by which the city could effectively reduce that amount of waste being generated, and in brief, the impact it has upon the Planning Commission is, much of the responsibility for implementing this plan will loosely fall upon them He said when development occuifs within the City, ideally, they will have to look at it from a standpoint of, "Well, how is this new development going to assist us in achieving our goals9'; particularly with environmental impact report for large development,whethe they be shopping centers or real estate developments, as those types of issues need to be looked at and hopefully incorporated within the conditions of approval of any 2 particular project Commissioner Sims asked if this plan includes construction waste as well as waste generated by residents Mr Perry said at this time, construction demolition waste is targeted as a waste type generated from the City, that the City will be attempting to get a handle on to reduce the amount that's entering landfills Commissioner Sims asked_ if it would include debris generated from (r - construction itself, to which Mr Perry agreed Commissioner Sims asked if the purpose of the program was to try to mimmi7e waste gomg to the landfills themselves, and asked if the program was associated with the recychng program being implemented nght now He asked how the cost issues were being addressed Mr Perry said the SRRE tried to identify those costs that would be associated with implementation of the plan itself He said the plan is a very comprehensive plan, running from educational programs to actually counting wastes and doing waste audits at businesses throughout the City- it's not just recycling, it's education, source reduction, composting- there are many facets to it He said the funding aspect of the plan they identified, as consultant for the City, they tried to identify those costs associated with implementing the plan and then allowed the City Manager's office to evaluate how those funds would be generated and how they would be used once they are generated for the plan itself Commissioner Sims said that what he is maybe suggesting is that a condition of development may be that they have to pay a fee of some sort associated with the management of the waste product that they would be generating out of their specific project Mr Perry said this is certainly one way of generating funds to pay for the program He said other ways being used by other cities are, as they already have a recycling surcharge on their refuse collection, typically that does not touch the commercial and industrial businesses within a City, so a similar type of fee is being established by many cities for their commercial, industrial and multi-family residential units that are using the 3 1/2 cu yd bins, so that they are paying what amounts to an equal share toward implementation of the City wide fund program Commissioner Sims asked how this is enforced 3 The Associate Planner said the Planning Director 11 be getting more information as to standards implemented on these proje, when appropriate She said they will be reviewing this information to the comnussion through workshop sessions, but at this point, they are just starts g out Commissioner Sims said he felt because all of a sudden, they are placed in a position nd of f authole th this land of thing, is will cost somebody some money, someplace, and they n ed to be very aw, and are I of what the impacts are a 1 The Associate Planner said the Assistant City Manager is,working on this with the consultant as to the framework of this plan, implemen ation tool1and some of the enforcement end of it and meeting the State requir ment, and they are working on what their mechanism tools are from the Planning Comnussion responsibility Commissioner Wright said recently in the City of Riverside, apparently they are going to have yard waste pickup on one day and paper waste on another He asked, in that we only have one trash pickup day a w ek, if the plan has some way of separating the grass clippings, for example Mr Perry said the green waste program that is identified within the,SRRE is looking more at a drop-off program than a curbside collection program, working specifically with gardeners regarding agencies or companies and with residents, rather than wanting to take a large load of tre limbs and grass clippings to the landfill themselves, would be able to utilize a drop-off center, which would be picked up on a regular basis and then taken as clean waste to a composting facility within the area t Commssioner Wright asked if there is any particular site where the compost pile is going to end up Mr Perry said at the time of the plan preparation, there were no high prospects for the siting of the composting facility within the City of Grand Terrace, and it was recognized that a regional site would have to be evaluated He said there are several companies that are looking into siting composting facilities within the area and within the region to assist the cities in implementing their SRRE's Commissioner Wright asked if there was any consideration by local ordinance requiring mulching lawnmowers to decrease the amount 4 Mr Perry said the plan itself is much like a General Plan, in that it sets guidelines, and those guidelines can be refined and honed at a later date as necessary and as the programs are implemented He said some cities have decided to work in-house first and have started to buy multi-mowers for their parks and recreation and school programs,and once they have worked out the details of that, then they will be looking at encouraging their residences to do much of the same thing Chairman Buchanan asked for some insight on how the issues dealt with in this plan are going to be impacting the commission's work and their decision making process, and specifically, what kind of authority does something like this add to their ability to condition a project, for example, if someone came in with a child care facility, in the past they would look at safety issues and appropriate fencing and setbacks, etc, would they now have the authority to add conditions such as, "You can not require the parents to use disposable diapers" He said this would be a lot more intrusive in the conducting of somebody's business than they have normally been in the past Mr Perry said he is hesitant to answer this, as these are legal issues and he is not an attorney He said there have been communities that have required child care centers to not use disposable diapers and require the parents to bring in cloth diapers or pay an extra charge for cloth diapers He said these are hotly contested issues, and he doesn't think the full ramification of some of these policies has made it through the courts to be determined He said the Planning Comnussion certainly has the ability to set conditions of approval which are related to solid waste, and being a consultant that is trying to assist cities in reducing their waste streams, he highly encourages them to take a close look at the businesses and see if there are things they can do that can reduce the amount of waste that they are generating Chairman Buchanan said that normally on land use issues, if someone comes in for a Conditional Use Permit or Site and Architectural Review, the scope of their inquiry is limited to how they impact the aesthetics, traffic circulation, etc He said it doesn't make much of a stretch to think about how they impact other infrastructures, such as solid waste management and consider that, although, that is something in their experience that has generally been dealt with when necessary as part of an environmental assessment or impact report, and not on a day-to-day, project-by-project basis, but he can see how there are a lot of projects, such as lumberyards which create a lot of sawdust and other types of businesses that generate a lot of trash, and he wonders if they have the power now to start adding as conditions or even turn down projects because they generate too much waste 5 Mr Perry said that types of projects that may be coming efore them that are a little more controversial might be Stater Bros having ;. avinga "buy-back" center, and if that facility already has the mimmum amount of pTrking required, and in order to put in this "buy-back" center, three parking spaces would be lost, therefore the applicant would have to come to the conun+sion for variance He said once policies and standards are established for refuse bins in multi- family residential units or commercial businesses, they1may have different standards than in the past to allow for storage on-site of those materials that can be recycled He said in a neighborhood shopping center, a condition of approval may be that if there are five businesses in this neighborhood strip, the project proponent must put in a cardboard bailer that is for use by all of the tenants of the strip center I Vice-Chairman Hargrave asked if the issue of educatio as far as Planning staff, Planning Commission and City Council has been a dressed yet The Associate Planner said this workshop is just for basic information, but staff is working to get a procedural implementation tool ging, and one good point Commissioner Sims brought up was the code enf rcement situation She said the Assistant City Manager is doing this portion�of the project, and the Planning Department staff dealt with the environmental issue She said the City is one of the last ones to be approved by the City Council, so they are gearing this for July 25, 1992, and in the meantime, staff is working on education so they know what direction they are coming fro as a commission Vice-Chairman Hargrave asked if they would get plane ng standards that would be the same for all ten cities or will every city have its own little niche Mr Perry said one would hope not, but there is a possibility that if an individual city is well on its way to achieving its overall goals, it may not have the same standards set forth as a city that has a long way to go to achieving its goals - PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:10 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENED AT 7:10 P.M. Chairman Buchanan asked everyone to take a moment of silent reflection for Jerry Hawkinson, stating that he resigned from the Planning Commission a short while back and very shortly thereafter passed away e said that, from his own time on the Planning Commission, he was very a preciative of not only the insight that Jerry has always provided but the exam le that he set for 6 GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING JULY 2. 1992 The regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Comnussion was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center,22795 Barton Road,Grand Terrace, California,on July 2, 1992 at 7 00 p m by Chairman Dan Buchanan PRESENT: Dan Buchanan, Chairman -(s_ % Stanley Hargrave, Vice-Chairman Ray Munson, Commissioner Jim Sims, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner Patrizia Materassi, Planning Director Maggie Alford, Planning Secretary ABSENT: Ron Wright, Commissioner PLEDGE: Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner '� PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6:45 P.M. The Planning Director stated that the workshop item regarding the Policy Manual for Boards, Commissions and Committees will be continued to the next meeting as she needs direction from the City Manager She said that Item 4 of the meeting, the detached deck at 12410 Quail Lane, has been withdrawn by the applicant Commissioner Van Gelder asked if the Policy Manual is applicable to the Planning Commission The Planning Director said it is, however, it makes a lot of exceptions for the Planning Commission, as it is a special commission that does not only do advisory recommendations, they also have decision-making power She said the manual is not known to them, so she has to ask direction on implementation and/or alteration to conform to the way they operate Commissioner Van Gelder said it is dated April, 1988, and she had never seen it before 1 The Planning Director said at the last meeting, there w a complaint on the increased amount of trucks going down Barton Road,and staff has transferred this to the Sherds Department She said Colton and all the cities where the trucks drive through are issuing a lot of fines for these trucks, as they are going above the speed limn She said there was a complaint on Village Foods and Wme, and the owner has been contacted and wilt repair the display window that has fallen down She said the owner of Donuno s Pizza has also been called and advised that he can not have the banners in the public nght- of-way, and he will be coming by to see what he can do instead She said the satellite dish antenna has not been checked at this time, but will be this next week She stated that on the Spangler's deferment agreement for the sidewalk, she understands the Commission is concerned about being assured this will be built in two years She said there are two things that can be done one is the deferment agreement, and the normal agreement that, the City Engineer drafts does not require bonding, as this is separa a from it , She said the deferment agreement is a document that is notanzed a d recorded, so the person can not sell the house unless the improvements are built She said if they Just have an agreement, it is not sufficient to ensur that this sidewalk will be built within two years, so in order to be sure it 1 be built m two years, they would need to have a bonding mechamsm, whit was estimated by the City Engineer to be $2,200, however the cost to the applicant would probably not be more than 10% of this cost She said the City Engineer supports all the deferment agreements that are based on ardship She said in cases like this, it is difficult for the City Engineer to support staffs _ recommendation, as he feels there are sidewalks all aro nd and this is the only area that there isn't one, and there is no hardship but an economic hardship She said he still recommended to the City CounFil the approval of the deferment agreement with the bonding, but in reading his report, she finally understood that he would prefer for the Planning Commission to support a deferment agreement only when there is hardship, and he would let staff know if he has those concerns, and if he doesn't say nything, usually it is because he feels there aren't any impractical conditions She said in case they just want somebody to make sure they will build the improvements, they don't need to ask for the bond, unless they want to put a t me frame on it Commissioner Sims said they are talking about a lien against the property The Planning Director agreed, stating that it does not set a date, though Commissioner Sims said a lien usually has a dollar value Chairman Buchanan said it is an encumbrance, not a he{n, and it doesn't prevent them from selling it, it would just be an exception to any title insurance policy I 2 The Planning Director said according to the City Engineer's agreement, they would need to build it or they can not sell it Commissioner Van Gelder said the determination of an economic hardship is very subjective The Planning Director said m this case, the Planning Commission is recommendmg to recognize the applicant's request, but with a bond so it is restricted to two years Vice-Chairman Hargrave asked that the Planning Department make sure the City is the beneficiary of the bond The Planning Director said the Engmeenng Department does this She said when the Planning Commission accepts and applicant's request for a deferment agreement, the bonding issue is separate, when the City Engineer processes the deferment agreement, he does not bond, as it is a completely different process Commissioner Sims said a lot of agencies have standard bond forms which has all the proper beneficiaries attached to it The Planning Director said she is sure the City Engineer has this '� The Planning Director said, with regard to the Waste Element, she is sorry the Comnussioner's questions are not answered She said she did the environmental review on it, and when she first talked to the consultant, his opinion of the role of the Planning Commission to her was minimal She said after reading the minutes, she realized the role of the Planning Commission is much larger than that She said she had a meeting with the City Manager, Assistant City Manager and the consultant, and she is preparing some information to bring to them at the next workshop She stated that the Commission needs to review project-by-project, however, not right now She said once the document is approved, the City will need to implement several programs, and one program that is automatically approved is a program that changes their Code and set criteria for the Commission's review of projects, so by the end of December, she needs to bring to the Commission a program that shows what sections of the Code would need to be changed She said these guidelines are not in place at this time She said she postponed the public hearing for City Council so she has the time to get at least a conceptual approval on what the Commission will be doing PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M. 3 DATE:8/5/92 STAFF REPORT CRA ITEM () COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE 8/13/92 I , SUBJECT ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION MEASURE I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the adoption of the Measure I Capital Improvement Program resolution BACKGROUND: Measure I,the San Bernardino County Transportation sales tax program,requires that each local jurisdiction annually adopt by Resolution, a Five Year Capital Improvement Plan and a Twenty Year Transportation Plan. At the very beginning of the program, the City of Grand Terrace submitted four projects, based on the estimated costs and the estimated revenues. These projects have been included as part of the overall program within the County for the City of Grand Terrace ANALYSIS In reviewing the revised anticipated revenues and the estimated project costs, one of the projects had to be eliminated and, hence, only three (3) projects are proposed within the five (5) year program For the Twenty Year Transportation Plan,which the City Council must approve, it is recommended that our Circulation Element of the General Plan (Master Plan of Streets and Highways)incorporated as the "Twenty Year Transportation Plan", with individual projects to be evaluated annually. Attached for your consideration, a copy of the proposed Five Year Capital Improvement Plan, and the proposed Twenty Year Plan, "Circulation Element to the General Plan". Staff suggests that Council consider including in the Twenty Year Plan projects such as tar Michigan Street Widening - Barton to DeBerry or Barton Road Widening - Honey Hills to N E. City Limits gar Mt Vernon Widening, Grand Terrace Road to Northerly City Limits. FORM MOTION 1. ADOPT THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 2. INCORPORATE THE CITY'S CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE "TWENTY YEAR TRANSPORTATION PLAN" WITH PRIORITIES AS SET FORTH IN THIS REPORT COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM# 8 Pt RESOLUTION NO 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITYY OF GRAND TERRACE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 7ID TWENTY YEAR TRANSPORTATION PLAN WHEREAS, San Bernardino Courity voters approved passage of Measure I in ; November 1989 authorizing San Bernardino Associated Governments, acting as the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority, to impose a one-half of one percent retail transactions and use tax applicable in the incorporated and unincorporated territory of the County of San Bernardino, and WHEREAS, revenue from the tax can only be used for transportation improvements and traffic management programs authorized in the Expenditure Plans set forth in Ordinance No 89-01 of the Authority, and WHEREAS, Expenditure Plans of the Ordinance require each local jurisdiction receiving revenue from the tax to expend those funds pursuant to Five Year Capital Improvement Program and a Twenty Year Transportation Plan adopted by resolution of the local jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, Expenditure Plans of the Ordinance also requi e that each local jurisdiction annually adopt and update the Five and Twenty year p ans, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, State of California, hereby adopts the Measure I Fve Year Capital Improvement Program and Twenty Year Transportation Plan, a copy of which is attached to this resolution ADOPTED this 13th day of August, 1992 ATTEST City Clerk of the City of Mayor of he City of Grand Grand Terrace and of the and of the City Council City Council thereof thereof , I ++� - Measure I Sales Tax Revenue - - Estimates for Local Pass-Through FY 90-91 FY 91-92 FY 92-93/96-97 Jurisdiction Actual Estimate' Fie" VALLEY Chino 461,585 484,664 3,161,627 Chino Hdls 0 114,450 2,239,790 cotton 314,990 330,740 2,157,524 Dntana 695,743 730,530 - 4,765,493 ..rand Terrace 96,017 100,818 657,669 Highland 271,560 285,138 1,860,051 Loma Linda 140,627 147,658 963,225 Montclair 219,290 230,255 1,502,027 Ontario 1,032,314 1,083,930 8,572,863 Rancho Cucamonga 799,252 839,215 5,474,478 Redlands 481,592 505,672 3,298,665 Rialto 577,158 606,016 3,953,244 San Bernardino 1,307,323 1,372,689 8,954,511 Upland 488,021 512,422 3,342,700 Yucaipa 257,882 79,915 1,766,363 County-Valley 1,227,797 1,174,737 6,170,007 MOUNTAIN/DESERT Reg/Arterial Local E&H Transit 'orado River Subarea ieedles 203,151 213,309 1,391,483 904,464 417,445 69,574 County-Col River 47,749 50,136 327,057 212,587 98,117 16,353 Morongo Basin Subarea Twentynme Palms 446,964 469,312 3,061,480 1,989,962 918,444 153,074 Yucca Valley 0 185,497 3,630,183 2,359,619 1,089,055 181,509 County-Morongo Bas 959,019 821,473 2,938,619 1,910,102 881,586 146,931 North Desert Subarea Barstow 1,109,800 1,165,290 7,601,577 4,941,025 2,280,473 380,079 County-No Desert 835,739 877,526 5,724,395 3,720,857 1,717,319 286,220 Mountains Subarea Big Bear Lake 327,401 343,771 2,242,534 1,457,647 672,760 112,127 County-Mountains 913,793 959,483 6,259,026 4,068,367 1,877,708 312,951 Victor Valley Subarea Adelanto 188,299 197,714 1,289,754 838,340 386,926 64,488 Apple Valley 995,390 1,045,160 6,817,925 4,431,651 2,045,378 340,896 ' Hesperia 1,456,509 1,529,334 9,976,360 6,484,634 2,992,908 498,818 Victorville 2,447,136 2,569,493 16,761,661 10,895,080 5,028,498 838,083 County-Victor Vy 852,897 895,542 5,841,919 3,797,247 2,044,672 292,096 • Estimate based on actual mecum to data equalling 5%ineream over FY 90-91 •• Five year atimater to be used for development of the Five Year Capital Improvement Plans Projection-for each f ur.dietion are based on 5%growth and 4%inflation annually £REVIST PIN f FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS MEASURE I PROGRAM OF LOCAL EXPENDITUR-S , CITY OF GRAND TERRACE 1 1 Contact- Randy Anstine Phone: 714) 824-6621 YEAR PROJECT DESCRIPTION COST ESTIMATE 1 Local Streets and Roads , 1994 Barton Rd. & S.P.R.R. , Replace Overcrossing (25% Grand Terrace , 75% Colton) $120,000;00 TOTAL $120,000.00 Arterial/Regional Roads , 1995 Mt. Vernon & DeBerry Traffic Signal $100,000.00 1996 Barton Road @ Interstate 215 Widen Overpass $450,000.00 TOTAL $550,000.00 ° CIRCULATION Issue Assessment (MEA Reference: I I-F-1) Major Significance Community-Wide The present vehicular circulation system in the City of Grand Terrace is shown in Figure VII-1, Land Use Policy Map. Quantifiable data, e.g. street capacities, volumes, etc. , are found in the MEA. The principal highway through Grand Terrace is Inter- state 215, a six-lane freeway with interchanges at Wash- U ington Street (north of the City), Barton Road, and Iowa Avenue (southwest of the City). Current freeway peak hour volumes result in Level of Service "C", defined as "stable flow with speeds and maneuverability closely controlled by volumes". This level of service is usually for urban design standards, and the freeway is, therefore, currently operating adequately. A complete description of the levels of service is included in the Appendix. The main north-south arterial through the City is Mt. Vernon Avenue, which extends from Highgrove to the south, through Grand Terrace to 1-215, and north into Colton. Most of existing Mt. Vernon Avenue between Brentwood Street and 1-215 interchange is within the City of Colton consisting of two lanes built into the side of a hill. Widening to secondary highway standards recommended by this plan is not feasible using normal cut/fill construction methods. The use and projected traffic volumes indicate additional capacity may be needed, however, construction costs may be prohibitive. Future construction should be based on a detailed cost/benefit analysis. The main east-west arterial is Barton Road. It is the most heavily traveled surface street in Grand Terrace and operates during peak hours at levels of Service "A" and "B". The remaining streets in the circulation system are currently two-lane roadways with relatively low AADT and peak hour volumes All these roadways operate at Level of Ser lice "A" ° MASTER PLAN Traffic circulation patterns at buildout of the City will, STREETS AND in general, follow current patterns. The major traffic HIGHWAYS volume attractions will continue to be the freeway and the industrial and commercial employment areas. VI 1-4 .1...".01017-rvir -.11: I m . :0:40�.p. � �..,. t in I 1 41„-- „, L .......„..._,. RNRTAlip- C mnui��i�� }-� \� 0 ��- � ice/� -.- .. +� w �� i'��y�� (/ 7 kt/ "7" .u__4042.11-0.0.......„taallie In i iNt4.•: .N ,a +7_,it .s., . e - ffilnp AllmIlir,.‘.74.....,..14.11r.... Ar‘--... „,, ........... \tp t_j_.4.- 0 .Vt 101 • ing ��. xr:s:s�1F • ii riI �f ' . liiiiiilli �iI � — I �o =N1e-.I -ire:Pam nuu, a�..� m Ana®simu.nt1/41nv�ir Ammai • CITY Ira • I —' Ra 1w• .n.�■o. '11-Bimini. :�1, . I DFIEfRI•' - 1 ::a-EETIrQWWL■ `'��ta.n.w a ,� 5 �w��a�.=uu� J,IR mRmiml� I m, umTs� ry j� p ------- - u 1I 1 } -� 1111,%n■_ . . . ,� 5ti 1 t'' milk • Freeway 1 �,/ I1 r VA BUR 1111111, ira - I�=_ 1 -� iii■■r-.�ion*.Q�r�J � ///// Major Divided Highway a C '� -raJ: ' ! I -- -- ■!•1E■ Modified Major Highway - �: - a�=..�...... aataaal Major Highway ir- )1,1 / ' :r l�„sai �Fi �►�. "•�•� Secondary Highway /! I El ter= ' =imr�� vd l l_J Ll I 'gnillinej ' mix / Collector ice:--- UH_ rs �� Gulmm�Y I�::ci� , // I m l I y,`,, _ �llw~� mum 3 Figure VII - 4 m�`\ ' r��.ta1..t..W .�>•■ ��, r mWW1 N .lf.tW' f�� ' tOi11O1II -.. ='-- : ' .m Master Plan of Streets O , I 'F- ` .. u■■-■m■nmw 4 , ; •:.. •�. .■.a...o...L and_Highways .UIL' �� '1 t i- { . . s.„se,..a ;%MU . - a i �.1. "l�L4mmm�umo rB— _ City of Grand Terrace 1 I 0 1000 3000 FT r III Streets are divided into six categories based on the urban design standard for projected traffic volumes at 9 buildout. Those categories are: 1) Freeway; 2) Major Divided Highway; 3) Modified Major Highway, 4) Major Highway; 5) Secondary Highway; and 6) Collector. 11 Transportation needs for the area will be handled by this proposed highway system and public transit. If the proposed improvements are not made, the level of service I will be greatly reduced and there will be major congestion at the Barton Road/Interstate Route 215 interchange area. Projected Barton Road traffic volumes 1 in the interchange area used for analysis in the last general plan study were nearly equal to traffic volumes determined by the current study. The Barton Road Corridor, Michigan Street from Com- merce Way to Barton Road and the Barton Road/ Interstate Route 215 interchange require major improvements to accommodate projected traffic volumes. Table VI 1-1 indicates the traffic lane configurations necessary to provide a high level of service. Prohibit- ing parking is necessary to provide required traffic lanes within minimum right-of-way widths. I Barton Road, south of Palm Avenue, is proposed to be improved to modified major highway standards. Barton Road will continue to be the key facility in the Grand Terrace traffic system, - by providing access to the commercial-industrial areas, as well as direct access to the 1-215 Freeway. La Cadena Drive has been designated as a major divided highway with six lanes of 1 traffic and a raised landscaped median. Mt. Vernon Avenue and Commerce Way are the only north-south roads that are proposed to be improved to secondary highway standards along their entire lengths. Mt. Vernon Avenue will primarily serve the growing residential areas and the commercial areas around Barton Road. _ In the previous General Plan, Michigan Avenue was also proposed as a secondary highway along its entire length. The new land uses require that Michigan Ave- nue be impro✓ed to secondary highway standards only between Barton Road and DeBerry Street. i mem VII-6 i I 1 Main Street, west of Michigan, is the my east-west street that continues to be recommended s a secondary I highway. This will be necessary in order to accommo- I date the increased -traffic projected asp a result of development of industrial areas in the southwest portion I of the City. In this report, Main Street is a proposed I collector east of Michigan Avenue since the traffic volumes are projected to be lower through the residential areas. 1 Additional collector streets are shown on the General r Plan Circulation Map. Collectors, as the name implies, j collect traffic from local streets and take it to major or secondary highways. 1 The proposed typical cross section of each roadway classification is shown in Figures VII-2 and VII-3. The following street standards are pr000sed for the various categories• Street Type Right-of-Way Pavement Divided Major Highway 120' 94' Modified Major Highway 100' 76' Major Highway 100' 72' Secondary Highway 88' 64' Collector 66' 44' _ Local 60' 36' Two future streets were proposed in the previous Gener- al Plan. The extension of Commerce Way is continued to I be proposed while the extension of Observation Drive is no longer deemed necessary The extension of Com- merce Way will begin south of Barton Road and will terminate at Main Street. The alignment of Commerce Way will be as shown in the Master Plan of Highways. The location of Commerce Way has been relocated west, I adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way. It will travel north from Main Street to Van Buren Street and continue northeast along I-215E to its original proposed location above DeBerry Street. This section of i roadway, along with the existing section of Commerce Way, will be classified as a secondary highway. A portion of Commerce Way is already constructed with a 1 curb-to-curb width of 62 feet. It will not be necessary to widen the additional two feet to conform with the General Plan roadway width requirements. Commerce i Way will serve the business and light industrial areas as they continue to develop and will provide� a link to the freeway interchange at Iowa Avenue via Main Street. I iVII-7 1 I Major Divided - 120' I ( 6 Lanes, Divided ) ! . -. " -... . ...::.-i-i"::':.f:::' I --= I Modified Major - 100' ( 6 Lanes ) I 1,..... i I i Left Turn Channelization I Major - 100' f ( 4 Lanes, Divided ) I • gi. „....,... ,Sri aMUM ` •� 4/0.paimummuna I I Typical Cross — Section Figure Vil — 2 M 11 SECONDARY - 88' ( 4 LANES, UNDIVIDED ) tio- •'r% is COLLECTOR - 66' ( 2 LANES, UNDIVIDED ) Pi .ice. TYPICAL CROSS—SECTION Figure VH — 3 I Access across the Gage Canal from Canal Street presents a special circulation problem since the Gage Canal Com- pany has stated they will only allow three crossings. Consideration of crossings will require close coordination between landowners, the Gage Canal Company, and the City. A map showing the City's Master Plan of Streets and Highways is presented as Figure VII-4. As development proceeds in the City, it will be neces- sary to develop programs to monitor traffic situations and to implement solutions for individual problems. These solutions will include roadway striping, regulatory and warning signs, and traffic signals. All intersections involving secondary and/or major high- ways and freeway on- and off-ramp intersections should be monitored for adverse traffic conditions Specific attention should be given to Barton Road west of Mt. Vernon Avenue, as this will continue to be the most heavily traveled surface street in the City. ` / Concern was not expressed for bikeways in the communi- `� ty. Due to the size of the community, topographical restraints and layout of the street system, bikeways are not proposed. Streets proposed will accommodate bicycle lanes if future needs or demands occur. In the future a regional bikeway plan may be in order to serve the area. PUBLIC The Riverside Transit Agency (RTA) provides TRANSPOR- bus service in Grand Terrace. RTA has one bus line TATION (Route 25) through the City which makes eight round trips from downtown Riverside to the V.A. Hospital in Loma Linda on weekdays. Seven round trips are made on Saturdays and no service is provided on Sundays. Buses operate approximately every one and one-half hours. RTA does not, at this time, operate a dial-a- ride system in Grand Terrace. Route 25 links Grand Terrace to the regional public transit. The line may be taken to downtown Riverside where connections can be made to the Southern Califor- nia_ Rapid Transit District buses to Los Angeles and San Bernardino. Public_ _transit to _ Ontario Airport and AMTRAK's San Bernardin. station is also accessible through downtown Riverside. Implementation Policies -- EXTENSION OF UTILITIES SERVICES AND OTHER FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS WILL BE BASED UPON AN ADOPTED CITY CAPITAL IM- PROVEMENT PROGRAM. VII-10 -- CITY-WIDE CIRCULATION DEMANDS, WILL BE SATISFIED BY A PLANNED EXPANSION OF NEW CONSTRUCTION OF STREETS ANDI HIGHWAYS AS ( PART OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEME TS PROGRAM. -- THE FISCAL PROGRAMMING OF ON-GOING STREET MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENTS WILL CONSID- ERI THE USE OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS TO THOSE PROPERTIES WHICH MOST DIRECTL BENEFIT. 1 -- COMMITMENT OF PUBLIC FUNDS TO PROVIDE NECESSARY-OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR DEVEL- . OPMENT OF VACANT PRIVATE PROPERTY WILL CONSIDER THE NET REVENUE WHICH THE DEVEL- OPMENT WILL PRODUCE FOR THE CITY ' OVER TIME. 1 ` -- PUBLIC TRANSIT WILL BE ENCOURAGED BY CITY PARTICIPATION IN LOCAL AND REGIONAL TRAN- I SIT PROGRAMS AND, BY SPECIAL CONSIDERA- TION IN LARGE, NEW DEVELOPMENTS WHEREVER FEASIBLE. i -- THE EXTENSION, IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTE- NANCE OF STREETS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS WILL BE BASED UPON AN ADOPTED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. • -- THE PRIORITIZATION OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE CITY'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM WILL BE BASED ON: 1 ) THE SIZE OF THE AREA OF BENEFIT; 2) THE SEVERITY OF I THE PROBLEM THAT THE STREET IMPROVEMENT IS INTENDED TO ELIMINATE; AND 3) THE :CITY'S ABILITY TO PROCURE FUNDING THEREFOR. 2 -- THE CITY WILL AGGRESSIVELY PURSUE ALL POTENTIAL SOURCES OF FUNDING FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS AND MAINTENANCE AND WILL ■ OPTIMIZE THE USE OF SUCH FUNDS. IN CARRY- ING■ OUT THIS POLICY THE CITY, OR ITS' REDE- VELOPMENT AGENCY, WILL. ; -, 1 . UTILIZE FEDERAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDS FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE. 11 2 CONTINUE TO USE STATE GAS TAX FUNDS AND OTHER STATE SUBVENTIONS FOR ELI- i GIBLE STREET IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTE- NANCE PURPOSES. N V11-12 has been VII-13 omitted 3. PURSUE THE USE OF FEDERAL AID URBAN FUNDS FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON ELIGIBLE STREETS. 4. ALLOCATE TAX INCREMENTS BEING GENER- ATED BY THE GRAND TERRACE REDEVELOP- ; MENT PROJECT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS AS PRIORITIES PERMIT. 5. PURSUE THE USE OF FEDERAL HIGHWAY SAFETY ACT FUNDS TO ELIMINATE SAFETY i HAZARDS ON LOCAL STREETS. 6. ATTEMPT TO USE ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS WHEN FUNDING IS OTHERWISE UNAVAILABLE, WHEREBY THOSE PROPERTIES DIRECTLY BENEFITTING WOULD BE ASSESSED FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT OR MAINTENANCE COSTS 7. UTILIZE THE MELLO ROOS COMMUNITY FA- CILITIES ACT TO FUND STREET IMPROVE- MENTS WHEN REQUESTED BY PROPERTY OWNERS. THIS MECHANISM WOULD BE MOST VIABLE IN THOSE AREAS OF THE CITY WHERE A SIZEABLE AMOUNT OF VACANT OR [ UNDERDEVELOPED LAND IS OWNED BY A LIMITED NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS. 8. ESTABLISH A TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE TO BE ASSESSED ON ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT WITH- IN THE CITY. THIS FEE WOULD BE IMPOSED AS A CHARGE PER DAILY VEHICLE TRIP GENERATED BY A PROJECT WITH THE TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLE TRIPS CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF TRIP GENERATION FACTORS GENERALLY ACCEPTED WITHIN THE TRANS- PORTATION ENGINEERING PROFESSION. THE FEES COLLECTED IN THIS MANNER WOULD BE UTILIZED FOR CITY-WIDE TRAFFIC CON- TROL AND OTHER STREET IMPROVEMENTS. -- THE STREET CROSS-SECTIONS PRESENTED IN THIS ELEMENT WILL SERVE AS THE CITY'S STREET STANDARDS TO WHICH ALL STREET WILL ULTIMATELY BE CONSTRUCTED. -- THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO OBTAIN STREET DEDICATION ON THE BASIS OF ITS MASTER PLAN OF STREETS AND HIGHWAYS, WHICH IS SHOWN IN FIGURE VII-4 OF THIS ELEMENT, AND THE ASSO- CIATED CITY STREET STANDARDS. VII-14 -- THE CITY WILL REQUIRE THAT ANY MISSING STREET IMPROVEMENTS BE CONSTRUCTED AT THE TIME THAT DEVELOPMENT OCCURS ON VA- CANT OR UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTY. - THE CITY WILL PURSUE THE EXECUTION OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) FOR THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO. THE BARTON ROAD/I-215 FREEWAY INTERCHANGE, INCLUDING -RAMP MODIFICATIONS AND BRIDGE • WIDENING. -- THE CITY WILL ESTABLISH UNIFORM STREET LIGHTING AND SIGNAGE STANDARDS. -- THE MINIMUM ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF SERVICE k, (LOS) FOR THE LOCAL STREET SYSTEM SHALL BE LOS "C". -- THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO REQUIRE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDE ADEQUATE I OFF- V STREET PARKING IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE NEED FOR ON STREET PARKING. -- THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO OUTE TRUCK TRAFFIC AWAY FROM RESIDENTIAL AREAS -- THE CITY WILL PROMOTE AND FACILITATE THE USE OF THE BICYCLE AS AN ALTERNATIVE MODE OF TRANSPORTATION THROUGH THE DEVELOP- MENT OF A CITY-WIDE NETWORK BIKEWAYS. - THE CITY WILL ENCOURAGE AND FACILITATE PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT BY CREATNG ENVIRON- MENTS THAT ARE CONDUCIVE TO ALKING AND MAINTAINING A "HUMAN SCALE" OF DEVELOP- MENT. -- THE CITY WILL WORK CLOSELY ITH THE RE- GIONAL TRANSIT AGENCIES TO ENSURE THE CONVENIENT AND AFFORDABLE BUS SERVICE CONTINUES TO BE AVAILABLE TO LOCAL RESI- DENTS. t -- THE CITY WILL ENSURE THAT LOCAL STREET j IMPROVEMENTS ARE DESIGNED ill TH PROPER ATTENTION TO COMMUNITY APPEARANCE AND AESTHETICS AS WELL AS THE NEED TO MOVE TRAFFIC SAFELY AND EFFICIENTLY. I VII-15 STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Goals and objectives for the Circulation Element are listed in this section. Goals -- To provide for a transportation system which supports planned land uses and improves the quality of life. f -- To promote the safe and effective movement of all segments of the population and the efficient transport of goods. -- To make efficient use of existing transportation facilities -- To protect environmental quality and promote the wise and equitable use of economic and natural resources. k Objectives I -- To encourage State, regional, and local governments and agencies to achieve a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system consistent with the City's social, economic, and environmental needs and Igoals. -- To develop transportation planning, services, and facilities that are I coordinated with and support the land use plan. -- To develop a balanced system of circulation which incorporates motor vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, and other private and public transpor- tation modes with greater safety and increased energy efficiency. -- To encourage the continuance of a public transportation system that will 1 ) provide a viable alternative to the automobile; 2) satisfy the i transportation needs of commuters, the economically disadvantaged, the aged, the young, and the handicapped, and 3) promote service at a 1 reasonable and equitable cost to both the users and the general commu- nity. I 1 1 I i IVII-16 DATE: August 6, 1992 STAFF REPORT CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) MEETING DATE: August 13, 1992 SUBJECT: COUNTY GRAND THEFT AUTO PROGRAM Attached is a staff report provided by the Sheriff's Department regarding adoption of a resolution supporting a $1.00 DMV fee per vehicle to implement a County Grand Theft Auto Program. The Sheriff's Department will make a presentation, and be available for Council discussion. TS:bt COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM# 811 RESOLUTION NO. 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY i OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA REQUESTING AN INCREASE TO VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEES TO ENHANCE VEHICLE THEFT PROGRAMS WHEREAS, California Vehicle code 9250 14 provides that upon request a county may ask the California Department of Motor Vehicles to collect a$1 00 fee from every motor vehicle registered within each county, and WHEREAS, the Vehicle Code also designates that the funds collected shall be used to investigate and prosecute vehicle theft crimes, and WHEREAS, money allocated to a county shall be expended to f nd programs which enhance the capacity of local police and prosecutors to deter, investigate d prosecute vehicle theft crimes, NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved that the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace requests an increase of $1 00 per year to the vehicle registration fee for the purpose of enhancing the capacity of local police and prosecutors to deter, investigate alnd prosecute vehicle theft crimes and further endorse the programs as in the attached presentation outline APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of August, 1992 ATTEST City Clerk of the City of Mayor o the City 'of Grand Grand Terrace and of the Terrace and of the City City Council thereof Council thereof \` 1853 t,; i\ 0 . �s�dt rli/ j/a ,...... v ..,..jr, s DA W ' PI County of San Bernardino August 6 , 1992 _ Tom Schwab, City Manager City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, Ca 92324 Dear Tom: I have attached some background information on the $1 . 00 Vehicle Use Resolution. We will be available during the next council meeting to address any questions that the council may have as to the specific dollar amounts and program specifics of the Grand Theft Auto Program Hopefully this data will be beneficial to you regarding this subject. We look forward to working with your staff and the members of your city council to gain support of the program. Sincerely, Dick il •iams, Sheriff -.• ii Rod oop , Lieutenant Central station RH.al Attachment SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT 655 East Third Street • San Bernardino California 92415 0061 Post Office Box 569 • San Bernardino California 92402 0569 SUBJECT $1 . 00 Vehicle Use Resolution I BACKGROUND In 1990 state legislation was enacted that allowed the Department of Motor Vehicles, at the request of ndividual counties, to collect an additional $1 . 00 per veh cle in registration fees. The fee collected by the DMV will be returned to the counties for vehicle theft prosecution, enforcement and prevention programs. In order for the fees to be collected, the county Board of Supervisors must pass an ordinance requesting the Department of Motor Vehicles to collect the fees. Earlier this year, Sheriff Williams, District Atorney Kottmeier, and every Chief of police within San Bernardino County conducted a workshop on this issue. It w s determined that implementation of this new law would have a positive impact on grand theft auto deterrence within San Bernardino ,- County. 5 I In June of this year, a proposal was submitted to the Board of Supervisors for consideration. It is our understanding that the Board would like to have as many cities within San Bernardino County as possible support our efforts by adopting a city resolution. We are asking the City of Grand Terrace to adopt a resolution in support of the Grand Th ft Auto Program. PROGRAM , It is estimated that the passage of the proposed County , Ordinance would bring approximately $1, 014,600 . 00 annually to San Bernardino County. Once the program is adopted, funding will be provided on a quarterly basis through the County Auditor Controller. We have addressed three main areas of concentration for 'our proposed program; Prosecution, Enforcement and Education. The Prosecution component will fund three full-time Deputy District Attorneys and support staff to prosecute nothing but Grand Theft Auto cases $1.00 VEHICLE USE RESOLUTION PAGE TWO The Enforcement component will provide funding for four investigators, one supervisor and support staff. The Enforcement Unit will work on a regional basis and will be headquartered in the greater San Bernardino area. Due to our size and geographic locations throughout San Bernardino County, the Sheriff' s Department will manage the enforcement portion of the program. The third and final area consists of an Educational Component that will directly benefit each city within San Bernardino County. Funds will be made available for prevention and educational programs for each city and unincorporated area within San Bernardino County STATISTICS Grand Terrace had 121 GTA' s in 1991 . Total Grand Theft Auto Cases Within San Bernardino County are as follows. 1991 14, 940 1990 14, 529 1989 13, 721 1988 11 , 530 1987 9 , 588 1986 7 , 546 Nationally, an automobile is stolen every 12 seconds. CONCLUSION California Vehicle Code Section 9250 .14 , the law creating the $1 . 00 Vehicle Use Resolution, is an excellent opportunity for us to increase our funding efforts tb combat auto theft within San Bernardino County. It has also created an opportunity in which to convey to the citizens of our community that local governments are working together to address an ever increasing problem. The creation of the enforcement component of the program will in no way take away any resources or personnel from your existing law enforcement programs. It will however, provide your local law enforcement officers an additional resource at no cost to your general fund Unless amended, the bill allowing the collection of the vehicle fee will sunset in December of 1995. Time is of the essense in getting a county ordinance passed. We are also in the process of lobbying the insurance industry and our state legislators to create lower auto insurance rates for counties that have enacted such ordinances . City of Grand Terrace GTA Statistics - 12 Month Study 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN GTA 5 11 10 5 13 3 12 11 10 14 8 9 GTA City of G GTA Statistics - Quarterly Comparison 20 Hill' 1H1,H* rm 15 , ,, l 1�1, 1 1 Ili, l I . iil 1,11E .„11 ,1 ,, s1 . . ' 11 o , , i , 01990 ` , , i ; II ' I I I I it 10 i 1 ;} ,i1' : 11, J°1 1991 {i` 1!, i i 11, 1 J ,, ;; Illll,; i,W,il1 � 1992 ',. 1 11 ,,111j, 1;1 1'11 111 �i {1,. I1 I ,1 �� i� ow,I NI 11 11 1' i ' I 1 1 ;I Tr1 1 .,,,, 5 1 " II:itli'H 14 l (Ili};j� I1 1 •1 ;}•,'9 10 I' a„111 ,,,, o-' I ( 1 1 I r ' Ii1 it Iil, I11111 1 , 9i 1 II: II't , {,II lI* I �1� 'I ' I I Dill I i` 51III , 0 I., • ill ,,,,, ,• 111111 1,E APR MAY JUN tiJ