The URL can be used to link to this page

10/25/199022795 Barton Road Grand Terrace California 92324-5295 Civic Center (714) 824-6621 Byron R Matteson Mayor Hugh J Grant Mayor Pro Tempore Gene Carlstrom Barbara Pfenmghausen t Jim Smgley Council Members Thomas J Schwab City Manager FILE COPY October 25, 1990 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE Regular Meetings 2nd and 4th Thursdays — 6 00 p m 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 October 25, 1990 GRAND TERRACE CIVIC CENTER 6 00 P M 22795 Barton Road * Call to Order - Invocation - Tom Turpen, Student, California Baptist College * Pledge of Allegiance X Roll Call STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL ACTION CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - -- --- 1 Approval of 10/11/90 Minutes Approve 2 Approval of Check Register Number CRA102590 Approve ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY .,JNVENE CITY COUNCIL 1 Items to Delete 2 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS A Report on San Bernardino Basin Water Contamination Clean-up Program - Gene McMeans, Riverside Highland Water Co B BFI - Recycling Program for Grand Terrace 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 without discussion Any Council Member, Staff Member or Citizen may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion Approve A Approve Check Register Number 102590 r COUNCIL AGENDA 10/25/90 - Page 2 of 3 B Ratify 10/25/90 CRA Action C Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda D Approve 10/11/90 Minutes E Bond and Cash Deposit Releases - Forest City Phase II F Schedule November and December Council Meetings G Accept Grant Deeds for Storm Easement H Soliciting Permit (Superior Water System) 4 PUBLIC COMMENT 5 lI7 17 ORAL REPORTS A Committee Reports 1 Crime Prevention Committee (a) Member Appointment 2 Parks & Recreation Committee (a) New Sandbox for Terrace Hill Park 3 Historical & Cultural Committee (a) Minutes of 10/1/90 B Council Reports PUBLIC HEARINGS - 6 00 P.M A AN URGENCY ORDIRT97-79 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE AMENDING GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 10 08, DEALING WITH ESTABLISHMENT OF SPEED LIMITS FOR VARIOUS STREETS IN THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE UNFINISHED BUSINESS A SECOND READING - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE RELATING TO VIEWING RE- STRICTIONS OF PUBLICLY DISPLAYED EXPLICIT MATERIALS WITHIN THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE B Future Michigan Sidewalk Improvements C Site Location of Senior Center STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve Approve Accept Appoint Approve Accept Adopt Adopt COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA 10/25/90 - Page 3 of 3 8 NEW BUSINESS A The City's position relative to State Budget Actions B Appeal - CUP-90-04 (Taylor Lumber) C Appeal - CUP-90-05, SA-90-05 (Alpern) D Appeal - CUP-90-06, E-90-04 MM Accessories) 9 CLOSED SESSION ADJOURN THE NEXT REGULAR CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 8, 1990 AT 6 00 P M ---------------------------------------------- AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS FOR THE 11/8/90 MEETING MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BY NOON 11/1/90 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Deny Deny Deny COUNCIL ACTION PENDING C R A APPROVAL CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 11, 1990 A regular meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency, City of Grand Terrace, was held in the Council Chambers, Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on October 11, 1990, at 6 00 p.m. PRESENT Byron Matteson, Chairman Hugh J. Grant, Vice -Chairman Barbara Pfennighausen, Agency Member Gene Carlstrom, Agency Member Thomas J. Schwab, Executive Director Juanita Brown, Secretary David Sawyer, Community Development Director Joe Kicak, City Engineer John Harper, City Attorney ABSENT Jim Sinqley, Agency Member Randall Anstine, Assistant City Manager APPROVAL OF SEPTEMBER 27, 1990 CRA MINUTES CRA-90-35 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY VICE-CHAIRMAN GRANT, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (AGENCY MEMBER SINGLEY WAS ABSENT), to approve September 27, 1990 CRA Minutes. Chairman Matteson adjourned the CRA meeting at 6 10 p.m., until the next regular City Council/CRA meeting, which is scheduled to be held on Thursday, October 25, 1990 at 6 00 p.m. CHAIRMAN of the City of Grand Terrace SECRETARY of the City of Grand Terrace C R A AGENDA ITEM NO. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CHECK. NUMBER VENDOR, 22458 22465 22482 22494 22506 n m z v z 0 GENE CARLSTROM HUGH GRANT BYRON MATTESON BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN JAMES SINGLEY CITY OF GP( T E RD AC E PEI NG C R A APPROVAL. DATE OCTOBER 25, 1990 CHECK Rtb.STER NO 102590 OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF OCTOBER 25, 1990 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT STIPENDS FOR OCTOBER, 1990 $150 00 STIPENDS FOR OCTOBER, 1990 150 00 STIPENDS FOR OCTOBER, 1990 150 00 STIPENDS FOR OCTOBER, 1990 150 00 STIPENDS FOR OCTOBER, 1990 150 00 TOTAL $750 00 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 THOMAS SCHWAB TREASURER CT-Ti 0P GR TEDIR ,CE DATE OCTOBER 25, 1990 FENWINu %ol1 T i INCIL APPROVAL CHECK N-,b_STER NO 102590 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF OCTOBER 25, 1990 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION Af;OUNT P6929 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 10/5/90 $ 215 50 P6930 PRICE CLUB ANSWERING MACHINES, TWO, FOR CHILD CARE 117 40 P6931 HQ OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES 392 98 P6932 STATE COMPENSATION INS FUND WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE FOR SEPTEMBER, 1990 2,499 05 P6933 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 10/9/90 174 29 P6934 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT SUI INSURANCE FOR THIRD QUARTER, 1990 1,262 08 P6935 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 10/12/90 482 93 P6936 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 10/12/90 49 16 P6937 STATE OF CALIFORNIA FINGERPRINT CLEARANCE FOR CHILD CARE 148 00 P6938 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 10/16/90 380 01 P6939 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS FOR 10/16/90 218 69 P6940 TOYS R US GIFT CERTIFICATES FOR RED RIBBON WEEK 265 00 P6941 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT PERS FOR PAYROLL ENDING 10/12/90 2,781 99 P6942 G T AREA YOUTH BASKETBALL DONATION 1,500 00 8P6943 TIDWELL RETIREMENT DINNER RESERVATIONS FOR SINGLEY, MATTESON AND SCHWAB 120 00 6944 G T ELEMENTARY PTA BOOK PRIZES/DOOR DECORATING CONTEST 200 00 �6945 G T AREA YOUTH BASKETBALL DONATION, ERROR ON ORIGINAL CHECK, BALANCE 50 00 � 2442 JUDY DUNCAN REFUND, RECREATION EXCURSION 30 00 2443 GARY HARRIS TIMER, TOUR -DE -TERRACE 283 25 2444 TERRACE VILLAGE R V PARK REFUND, SPECIAL EVENT SIGN DEPOSIT 100 00 >22445 CA COUNCIL/ENG /SURVEYORS COPIES, SUBDIVISION MAP ACT 9 00 42446 STANLEY JARRETT REFUND, HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT APPLICATION 50 00 rC2447 MAUREEN PARKER REFUND, WASTE WATER DISPOSAL SERVICES 11 90 BRUCE LEWIS REFUND, WASTE WATER DISPOSAL SERVICES 17 00 v*22448 � 1 CITY OF GR� TERRACE DATE OCTOBER 25, 1990 CHECK REG�TTEP, NO 102590 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF OCTOBER 25, 1990 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 22449 SHAWN JOHANSON REFUND, WASTE WATER DISPOSAL SERVICES 11 90 22450 RUBY HAMILTON REFUND, WASTE WATER DISPOSAL SERVICES 61 00 22451 AT&T INFORMATION CENTER MAINTENANCE ON PHONE, OCTOBER, 1990 162 60 22452 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION ZONING NEWS, 1991 25 00 22453 BASTANCHURY BOTTLED WATER BOTTLED WATER FOR CIVIC CENTER AND DAY CARE 113 34 22454 BECKLEY CARDY SUPPLIES FOR CHILD CARE 365 37 22455 BROWN, HARPER, BURNS & HENTSCHKE LEGAL SERVICES FOR SEPTEMBER, 1990 2,816 25 22456 CA PRISON IND AUTHORITY U S FLAGS 100 41 22457 CAL -TYPE OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES 229 83 22458 GENE CARLSTROM STIPENDS FOR OCTOBER, 1990 150 00 22459 CHILDCRAFT SUPPLIES FOR CHILD CARE AND TINY TOTS 390 04 22460 DAVE'S TROPHIES TROPHIES FOR TOUR -DE -TERRACE 33 09 22461 EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY MAINTENANCE ON KODAK COPIER, SEPTEMBER, 1990 AND EXTRA COPIES 193 49 22462 EASTMAN KODAK CREDIT CORP LEASE PAYMENT ON KODAK COPIER FOR NOVEMBER, 1990 223 27 22463 EWING IRRIGATION SUPPLIES IRRIGATION SUPPLIES FOR PARK 86 18 22464 KAREN GERBER MONITOR FOR CIVIC CENTER, 10/4 & 10/8/90 45 71 22465 HUGH GRANT STIPENDS FOR OCTOBER, 1990 150 00 22466 W W GRAINGER, INC CHAIN FOR BALL FIELD 310 23 22467 STANLEY HARGRAVE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 10/16/90 35 00 22468 LYNELL HARLOW INSTRUCTOR, STENCILING 112 50 22469 JERRY HAWKINSON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 10/16/90 35 00 22470 WILLIAM HAYWARD INSTRUCTOR, KARATE 336 00 22471 HEALTH NET HEALTH INSURANCE FOR NOVEMBER, 1990 2,723 97 2 CTT� OF GRr" TERRACE DATE OCTOBER 25, 199 CHECK REG-l"STER NO 102590 CHECK. OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF OCTOBER 25, 1990 NUMBER6ER VENDOR ENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 22472 HERMAN HILKEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 10/16/90 $ 35 00 22473 HOLDEN PEST CONTROL PEST CONTROL FOR COMMUNITY CENTER, SEPTEMBER, 1990 22 00 22474 HYDRO-SCAPE PRODUCTS LANDSCAPE SUPPLIES FOR PARK 367 22 22475 INLAND COUNTIES INSURANCE LIFE INSURANCE FOR NOVEMBER, 1990 104 25 22476 INLAND EMPIRE STAGES LIMITED BUS FOR TAHOE EXCURSION, BALANCE DUE 320 00 22477 INMARK NAME PLATES, HISTORICAL & CULTURAL COMMITTEE 87 80 22478 KICAK & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR 9/10-10/7/90 18,086 78 22479 LAKESHORE CURRICULUM SUPPLIES FOR CHILD CARE 133 75 22480 AECIL LUCAS MONITOR FOR CIVIC CENTER, 10/4,10/9,10/10, & 10/16/90 79 50 22481 MCI TELECOMMUNICATIONS LONG DISTANCE PHONE 26 55 22482 BYRON MATTESON STIPENDS FOR OCTOBER, 1990 150 00 22483 MCKENZIE-SCOTT COMPANY TYPEWRITER RIBBONS 193 70 22484 MONROE SYSTEMS CALCULATOR RIBBONS 43 92 22485 MUNIMETRIX, INC SOFTWARE RENTAL, CITY CLERK, (THREE MONTHS) 151 41 22486 RAY MUNSON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 10/16/90 35 00 22487 NCR CORPORATION SOFTWARE SUPPORT/MAINTENANCE FOR NOVEMBER, 1990 59 78 22488 NATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION HALLOWEEN BAGS, RECREATION 141 15 22489 PHIL PAGE OPEN/CLOSE PARK ON DEBERRY, AUG/SEP , 1990 160 00 22490 PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONES FOR CHILD CARE, COMPUTER MODEM, FAX MACHINE, AND CIVIC CENTER PAY PHONES 171 98 22491 THE PETRA COMPANIES PRINT CHILD CARE RECEIPTS AND HALLOWEEN FLYERS 547 15 22492 CORINNE PETTIT INSTRUCTOR FOR LOW IMPACT AEROBICS 81 00 22493 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT FOR CHILD CARE 313 24 22494 BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN STIPENDS FOR OCTOBER, 1990 150 00 3 r- CHECK NUMBER. VENDOR 22495 KATHY PIERSON 22496 PRECINCT REPORTER 22497 RIVERSIDE HIGHLAND WATER COMPANY 22498 JOHN ROBERTS 22499 ROYAL CARE 22500 S & S ARTS & CRAFTS 22501 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 22502 SHERIFF FLOYD TIDWELL 22503 SAN BERNARDINO IND CLINIC 22504 SIGNAL MAINTENANCE, INC 22505 JIM SIMS 22506 JAMES SINGLEY 22507 LOUISE SMITH 22508 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY 22509 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY 22510 SPEEDEE OIL CHANGE/LUBE 22511 THE SUN 22512 CATHY TOTH CITE OF GR,� TERRACE DATE OCTOBER 25, 1990 CHECK RECiSTER Q 102590 OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF OCTOBER 25, 1990 DESCPIPTION INSTRUCTOR FOR TINY TUMBLERS AND GYMNASTICS DBE GOALS, PUBLIC NOTICE WATER FOR MOUNT VERNON/ARLISS, BARTON RD , CANAL- MICHIGAN, PARK ON DEBERRY, BARTON/PALM, FIRE STATION, PARK ON MERLE CT , CIVIC CENTER, AND ROBIN WAY PAYMENT FOR NOVEMBER, 1990 FOR PARK ON G T ROAD REPLACE RAINBIRD AND LANDSCAPE MAITENANCE FOR TERRACE PINES DISTRICT -SUPPLIES FOR CHILD CARE PAYMENT FOR PARKING CITATIONS FOR 7/1-9/30/90 LAW ENFORCEMENT AND CRIME PREVENTION OFFICER FOR NOVEMBER, 1990 PRE -EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS SIGNAL MAINTENANCE FOR SEPTEMBER, 1990 AND REPAIR SIGNAL AT CANAL/BARTON PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 10/16/90 STIPENDS FOR OCTOBER, 1990 LOCAL MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT ELECTRIC FOR STREET LIGHTS, CIVIC CENTER. COMPLEX, BALL PARK LIGHTS, LIGHTS AT PARKS ON DEBERRY AND PICO, AND SIGNALS GAS FOR CIVIC CENTER COMPLEX OIL CHANGE FOR CITY TRUCKS/VAN LEGAL AD AND NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING INSTRUCTOR FOR AEROBICS AHOU NT $ 455 20 67 83 4,367 52 6,871 76 280 31 221 36 28 50 74,432 00 115 00 325 88 35 00 150 00 14 15 7,699 97 144 75 70 88 250 56 55 20 M CHECK, NUMBER VENDOR, 22513 TRI-COUNTY OFFICIALS 22514 T-SHIRT CLINIC 22515 FRAN VAN GELDER 22516 VISA 22517 WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY CITI Or GRE' TERRACE DATE OCTOBER 25, 1990 CHECK REG-STER NO 102590 OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF OCTOBER 25, 1990 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UMPIRES FOR SLO-PITCH SOFTBALL, 9/24-10/15/90 T-SHIRTS FOR TOUR -DE -TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 10/16/90 MEETING, CHILD CARE, MANAGEMENT SEMINAR, CCPOA SEMINAR, PESTICIDE SEMINAR, AND PLANNING SEMINAR CALIFORNIA CODE UPDATES TOTAL 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 THOMAS SCHWAB FINANCE DIRECTOR $ 324 00 1,340 67 35 00 1,777 79 40 76 $140,633 68 5 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE PENDING CiTY COUNCIL APPROVAL CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 11, 1990 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order in the Council Chambers, Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on October 11, 1990, at 6 00 p m PRESENT Byron Matteson, Mayor Hugh J Grant, Mayor Pro Tem Barbara Pfennighausen, Councilmember Gene Carlstrom, Councilmember Thomas J Schwab, City Manager/Finance Director Juanita Brown, City Clerk David Sawyer, Community Development Director Joe Kicak, City Engineer John Harper, City Attorney ABSENT Jim Singley, Councilmember Randall Anstine, Assistant City Manager The meeting was opened with invocation by Pastor Tom Comstock, Assembly of God, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Pro Tem Grant Mayor Matteson convened City Council meeting at 6 03 p m Mayor Matteson reconvened City Council meeting at 6 10 p m ITEMS TO DELETE None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 2A Mayor Matteson read a Commendation for Grand Terrace Explorer Scout Post 2B Mike Dean, Grand Terrace Area Youth Basketball, indicated that the youth basketball league has experienced tremendous growth as the youth of Grand Terrace become increasingly more aware of the program's existence and asked Council for a contribution of $1,550 to offset increased costs of gym time, insurance, and referees CC-90-159 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY WAS ABSENT), to approve a contribution of $1,550 to Grand Terrace Area Youth Basketaball COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # ,Sl:) Council Minutes - 10/11/90 Page 2 2C Mayor Matteson presented an award for the Barton Road Specific Plan to Community Development Director Sawyer, which is a State-wide award presented by the American Planning Association for out- standing planning project during the year of 1990 Community Development Director Sawyer accepted the award and gave a slide presentation showing the progress of the Barton Road Specific Plan CONSENT CALENDAR CC-90-160 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY WAS ABSENT), to approve the Consent Calendar A APPROVE CHECK REGISTER NO 101190 B RATIFY 10/11/90 CRA ACTION C WAIVE FULL READING OF ORDINANCES ON AGENDA D APPROVE 9/27/90 MINUTES E RESOLUTION - TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT, ARTICLE 8a FUNDS 1990/91 F APPROVE SALE OF SURPLUS RESCUE VEHICLE PUBLIC COMMENT Ed O'Neal, Ca me Prevention Committee, 22608 Minona Dr , Grand Terrace, indicated that he attended the California Crime Prevention Officers meeting in San Jose September 19-21, and heard valuable information regarding education of children He indicated that an elderly couple was recently robbed and cautioned everyone not to let strangers in their homes He felt that Grand Terrace needs more Neighborhood Watch Programs and encouraged the residents to get involved He reported that Red Ribbon Week is coming up and there will be a program hosted by the Lion's Club on October 26th at the Civic Center Dick Rollins, 22700 De Berry St , Grand Terrace, indicated that the speed limi:F is not observed on De Berry Street and requested that Council direct the Sheriff's Department to increase patrol on De Berry Street during the morning hours when students are present David Terbest, 21900 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, stated that the Chamber Installation Dinner will be held on October 20th in his Conference Center He indicated that he received a letter from the City Manager regarding the renewal of his Conditional Use Permit for that Conference Room and stated that it was his understanding that the renewal would go before Council rather than back to the Planning Council Minutes - 10/11/90 Page 3 Commission He indicated that he is not willing to start over again He indicated that without adequate signage he will have to close the room as of January 1st because it is not financially feasible City Manager Schwab, stated that he checked the tapes from the Council meeting and they di d not state whether or not the renewal should come to Council rather than the Planning Commission Community Development Director Sawyer, indicated that condition number 8 of the Conditional Use Permit states that it should go back to the Planning Commission for renewal - Mayor Matteson, indicated that Council approved the conditions of the Permit and the renewal should comply with those conditions He recommended that Mr Terbest go before the Planning Commission for renewal and see what happens Councilmember Pfennighausen, indicated that the Conditonal Use Permit is not the only area of concern She expressed concern that Mr Terbest is not able to get adequate signage Captain Spivey, Lytle Creek Station No 20, indicated that his station purchased our rescue vehicle and thanked Council for holding the unit and allowing payments He presented Council with the first check for $2,500 Herman H i 1 key, 23196 Glendora Dr., Grand Terrace, stated that he is a Candidate for City Council and indicated that he is in favor of strong police protection, quality shopping along Barton Road, Senior Citizens and the best education for the children He indicated that on Barton Road, Colton is widening the entrance way to Washington heading up the hill from Washington up Barton Road He expressed concern about narrowing from four lanes to two lanes and suggested that the City coordinate something with the City of Colton He stated that the City is divided by newspaper and telephone service, indicating that half of the City reads the Press Enterprise and half read the Sun Telegram, half of the City is on the Riverside exchange and the other half is on the Colton exchange City Engineer Kicak, indicated that widening the street probably would not impact our street because the area they are constructing right now is considerably removed from our City limits Mayor Matteson, indicated that he had a meeting with a representative of the telephone company and our long distance area is changing Whether you have a Riverside or Colton number, you will be able to call the same areas City Manager Schwab, indicated that that will be affective December loth Council Minutes - 10/11/90 Page 4 Tony Petta, 11875 Eton Dr , Grand Terrace, congratulated the Planning Department on the Specific Plan Award He indicated that the young people population is expanding considerably and felt that it is time that we think about some permanent recreation facilities for our young people He referred to the Conditional Use Permit discussed earlier in the meeting by Mr Terbest and felt that the City should do all it can to keep existing businesses thriving ORAL REPORTS 5A Committee Reports 1 Crime Prevention Committee (a) Minutes of 9/10/90 CC-90-161 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY WAS ABSENT), to accept the Crime Prevention Committee Minutes of September 10, 1990 2 Parks & Recreation Committee (a) Minutes of 10/1/90 ' Councilmember Pfennighausen, asked why Council has not been asked to judge the Halloween Costume contest as has been done in the past She encouraged the residents to take their children to the Halloween Haunt and keep them off the streets on Halloween because candy may be tampered with She reported that people have been using the new wood ground cover for their barbecue and asked that they leave it where belongs City Manager Schwab, indicated that if it is the consensus of Council that they would like to be the judges, that certainly will be the case It was the consensus of Council that they would like to judge the Halloween contest CC-90-162 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY WAS ABSENT), to accept the Parks & Recreation Committee Minutes of October 1, 1990 5B Council Reports Mayor Matteson, reminded the residents that saturday is free dump -day He reported that on November loth the Blood Bank will be at the Terrace View Elementary School He reported that Mayors from 15 Cities met this week to protest Senate Bill 2557, which is the taxation pass -through from the County to the Cities on booking fees and charging the Cities for billing property tax He Council Minutes - 10/11/90 Page 5 indicated that the League of California Cities is organizing to fight this and get the Bill reversed He reported that on October 13th the Chamber of Commerce is sponsoring the Little Miss Grand Terrace contest at the Community Center and for information, residents can call the Chamber of Commerce He reminded everyone that the removal of political signs is a misdemeanor and the Sheriff's Department will prosecute anyone who removes them He indicated that the Chamber Installation is on October 23rd and tickets can be purchased at the Chamber of Commerce Councilmember Pfennighausen, stated that she is a Candidate for City Council She agreed that political signs should be left alone and encouraged everyone to leave the signs where they belong She made reference to Senate Bill 2557 dealing with booking fees and felt that the perfect solution would be to do away with the County Government and allow the Cities to collect the taxes and provide their own services She felt that the sales tax should be changed to a per capita basis to be fair in this day and age and suggested that we should start putting pressure on our legislators in Sacramento She felt that Neighborhood Watch can only be successful when the residents keep aware of their neighborhood and stated that an organized Neighborhood Watch can be extremely helpful in case of a disaster She indicated that in past years the suggestion of recreation facilities has fallen on deaf ears and felt that Council should reconsider as was suggested by the General Plan Consultants and hoped that a 10 acre parcel is available Councilmember Carlstrom, commended the Citizens Patrol for their work detering crime and for the time they volunteer Mayor Pro Tem Grant, expressed his appreciation to the hard work of the volunteers on the Tour de Terrace He indicated that it was a great success and felt that the program is a great idea Councilmember Pfennighausen, indicated that not all of our residents read the Press Enterprise or the Sun Telegram and felt that we need to think of some avenue of getting information out to our citizens on a regular basis as to what is going on PUBLIC HEARING 6A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE RELATING TO VIEWING RESTRICTIONS OF PUBLICLY DISPLAYED EXPLICIT MATERIALS WITHIN THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE — Mayor Matteson, indicated that during public participation of the Council meeting on August 23, 1990, Council Candidate Ron Christianson provided a copy of the newly adopted County Blinder Rack Ordinance and requested Council to consider such an Ordinance for the City of Grand Terrace In a survey of the stores in Grand Terrace, there are instances where we would require that blinder racks be installed Council Minutes - 10/11/90 Page 6 Mayor Matteson opened discussion to the public Ron Christianson, 22422 Raven Way, Grand Terrace, indicated that the Ordinance requires those businesses which are selling sexually explicit material to put that material in a rack that has a blinder so that the youth of the City will not be able to see it when they are walking through the public store He felt that the Ordinance is not unduly burdensome on the business community and would serve an important purpose protecting our children from this material Councilmember Pfennighausen, asked who would be responsible for enforcing the Ordinance if it is passed Ron Christianson, 22422 Raven Way, Grand Terrace, indicated that he thought both the Code Enforcement Officer and the Sheriff's Department could enforce the Ordinance City Attorney Harper, stated that that is correct and indicated that this type of Ordinance is fairly common in public agencies Mayor Matteson returned discussion to Council Mayor Pro Tem Grant, indicated that he is in favor of the Ordinance Councilmember Carlstrom, indicated that the Ordinance includes live or recorded telephone messages when transmitted, disseminated, or distributed as part of a commercial transaction and asked what kind of control you have over a 900 number where a person can call in for a pornographic message Councilmember Pfennighausen, agreed with Councilmember Carlstrom's concern regarding 900 numbers City Attorney Harper, indicated that adult video tapes would have to be screened from the view of minors He indicated that we can't control telephone messages, this Ordinance is intended for those businesses in Grand Terrace that might offer that kind of thing to adults, that it not be available to minors CC-90-163 -MOTION BY MAYOR MAFTESON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY WAS ABSENT), to adopt the first reading of a Blinder Rack Ordinance relating to viewing restrictions of publicly displayed explicit materials within the City of Grand Terrace NEW BUSINESS 8A Appeal SA-90-20 (Vesely - Malprop Partners) Community Development Director Sawyer, reported that this is an appeal of the Site and Architectural Review Board's denial of proposed renovations and alterations to an existing commercial Council Minutes - 10/11/90 Page 7 structure located at 22524 Barton Road He made a presentation explaining the issues which are inconsistent with the Barton Road Specific Plan and indicated that in order to bring the project into compliance, staff recommends the project be redesigned, the existing building be removed and new structures be designed and located in compliance with the Barton Road Specific Plan He strongly recommended the City Council uphold the Site and Architectural Review Board's decision and deny the applicant's appeal based on the proposed project's nonconformance with the Barton Road Specific Plan, Grand Terrace Municipal Code and General Plan Following discussion by Council and the applicant, City Attorney Harper advised that due to the fact that Council cannot reverse Code requirements his suggestion would be that Council uphold the Planning Commission's recommendation to deny the appeal and that the applicant come back to the Planning Commission with a redesigned project CC-90-164 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY MAYOR MATTESON, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY WAS ABSENT), to uphold the Site and Architectural Review Board's decision and deny the applicant's appeal 8B Hosting a War on Crime Commission Meeting City Manager Schwab, indicated that we received a request from the Community Services Officer to ask Council for the authority to host a County War on Crime Prevention meeting here in City Hall The meetings are generally hosted by the City that they are held at This particular group has been meeting with the Community Services Officer for approximately four years and she is requesting that the City fund a breakfast -meeting for approximately 45 people at an approximate expenditure of $200 He recommended that Council approve the request with $200 from the unappropriated general fund CC-90-165 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY MAYOR MATTESON, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY WAS ABSENT), to appropriate $200 from the unapropriated general fund for the purpose of hosting a War on Crime Commission Meeting Council Minutes - 10/11/90 Page 8 ORDER OF ADJOURNMENT Mayor Matteson adjourned the City Council meeting at 8 45 p m , until the next regular CRA/City Council meeting, which is scheduled to be held Thursday, October 25, 1990 CITY CLERK of t e City of Grand Terrace MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace C 'rnia 92324-5295 Civic Center (714) 824-6621 Byron R Matteson Mayor Hugh J Grant Mayor Pro Tempore Baibara Pfennighausen Jim Singley 'Gene Carlstrom Council Members Thomas J Schwab City Manager W 0 12-9 1099 S T A F F R E P O R T Date September 12, 1990 Meeting Date September 27, 1990 Subject Bond and Cash Deposit Releases Phase II of the Forest City Project has been completed It is there- fore appropriate to release the bonds and cash deposits securing the required improvements The items subject to release are the follow- ing 1 CASH DEPOSIT Subdivision, Guaranteeing Performance (Setting of Final Monuments) $ 3,000 00 2 BONDS Material and Labor Bond (Water) $12,500 00 Material and Labor Bond (Sanitary Sewer) $ 1,850 00 Material and Labor Bond (Road) $40,000 00 Improvement of Subdivision (Road) $80,000 00 Improvement of Subdivision (Water) $25,000 00 Improvement of Subdivision (Sanitary Sewer) $ 3,700 00 Improvement of Subdivision (Landscaping) $10,000 00 Staff recommends that City Council deposit and the bonds JK/ct release all the above listed cash COUNCIL AGENDA l7EM # 3 E CITY CLERVS DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DATE October 19, 1990 CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE October 25, 1990 SUBJECT: RESCHEDULING COUNCIL MEETING DATES FOR NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER FUNDING REQUIRED NO Below are calendars for the months of November and December, indicating presently scheduled Council meetings. Since there are Council meetings that fall either on or around holidays, Council needs to decide on alternative dates Please note, that if an issue comes up that needs Council's attention, Council can call a Special Meeting. Noveznb ez S M T W T F S ]os c6 1 2 J0J 3 l00 4 J00 5 )10 6 ]II 7 8 9]I] )t 10 M 11 I 12 ) ] 13 J 9 )t3 ) 0 14 15 16 JJ 17 Jl] 18 J}J 19 )2 20 ]}S J } 21 22 23 J 24 ]}9 25 ]]0 26 ]ll 27 ])} ]J 28 29 30 STAFF RECOMMENDS COUNCIL December S M T W T F S ]JS 2 3 4 a 0 ] 1 5 7 ] } 8 393 9 ]I ) f 10 11 _6 ]94 ]90 12 13 14 J�9 15 J50 16 — 5} 17 18 J5] JSS 19 20 21 ]56 22 21/3024/31 53 25 ]60 J6} 2627 28 J6] 29 Schedule one Council meeting either on November 12, 13, 14 (November 15 is City/County meeting in Lake Arrowhead) and one December 13 which will be the City Birthday Party. COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # 3 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace ifornia 92324-5295 i Civic Center (714) 824-6621 Byron R Matteson Mayor Hugh J Grant Mayor Pro Tempore Baibara Pfennighausen Jim Singley Gene Carlstrom Council Members Thomas J Schwab City Manager W 0 12-5 2709 S T A F F R E P O R T Date October 16, 1990 Meeting Date October 25, 1990 Subject Grant Deeds for Storm Easement Attached are two grant deeds for a storm easement for a facility to be constructed by Keeney and Sons The easement is located northerly of Barton Road between Grand Terrace Road and the industrial development adjacent to Southern Pacific Rail- road ,lust north of Barton Road The easement is 15 feet wide, 7 5 feet on Mr and Mrs Liles' property and 7 5 feet on Mrs Hughes' property The storm drain system to be constructed within that easement will join an existing system through the industrial complex Staff recommends that 1 City Council accepts the grant of easement 2 Direct the City Clerk to record the documents COUNCIL AGENDA ITEAA S 3� Older No Escrow No Loan rio A P N 0275-223-26 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 SPACL ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDERS USE MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX S Computed on the consideration or value of property conveyed OR Computed on the consideration or value less liens or encumbrances remaining at time of sale Signal Jre of Declarant or Agent aeterm ring tax Firm Vame GRANT DEED FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDER-,TION rtLLillt of whuh Is hcrLl,y cl4 iowl(d(I(d Camou Hughes herebN CRANT(S) to the City of Grand Terrace the real property in the City o Grand Terrace County of San Bernardino Sate of California described as Northerly 7 50 feet oT that certain parcel described as follows The South 60 feet of the North 160 feet of the following described property, measured along the ✓rest line of Grand Avenue The Easterly one and one-half acres of that portion of Block "I" of resubdivision of Crand Terrace Tract, in the City of Grand Terrace, County of San Bernardino, State of California, as per maD recorded in Book 1, Page 33 of Records of Survey, in the office of the County Recordei of said County described as follows Beginning at a point on the Wester ly line of Grand Avenue 379 49 Teet Southerly front Cne Northeast corner oT the Southerly 8 04 acres of Block "I", said point being the SOUtnedst corner of the property conveyed to Clifford L Davis, et ux, by deed recorded February 1, 1940, in Book 1381, Page 486, Official Records of said County, thence Southerly along the West line of said Grand Avenue, 357 11 feet to the North line of Palrr Avenue, thence West along Palm Avenue to a point 120 feet Easterly, measured at right angles from the center line of the Southern Pacific Railway right of way, thence Northeasterly parallel to said center line 100 feet, thence Northwesterly at right angles to said railway right of way, 100 feet to point on the Southeast line of said right of way, thence Northeasterly along said right of way to point due west of point of beginning, said point being the Southwest corner of the property conveyed to Davis above referred to, thence East to POINT OF BEGINNING Said parcel is being granted to the City of Grand Terrace as a storm drain easement for the purpose of constructing, replacing, operating and maintaining a storm drain Dated -- -- X�; W-1 ��L.�� L � 1�=' --- - �l �'� -- - STATE OF CALIFORNIA r Iss -- - - COUNTY OFF—�.— onL''t✓ _is ; i6 9--------- -- - -- oefore me the unders!9ned a No ary �Du:) c in and for said Slate per sonally appea ed1+�'_._�--- p�r%onnlly Lnrwn to it, Ior 1 tov[d o m, on th blsi% of ih Iictory evidt nct.l In be In(. pu on( ) who L nirnerm i�ImY %uhser br d to thL Nithm ms rumcnl and ncknov,ledgec o 11L untie/shy/tht y executed the same 0=nc rhttA7T4t r CALUr O(I V I r^i oct, l�n _ tycc-L A TN ESS my hand and o ficial sea WJ 1,_l__ Sig^ature (This area to o fic at notar at seal) ,002 16182) Order No Escrow No Loan No A P N 0275-223-25 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace CA 92324 MAIL TAX STAT= ENTS TO I V I / I IIVI I'll L INI I (JI( Ill 1 ()ItI 1 11 1 1 DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX S Computed on the consld Lratlon or v Ilue of property conveyed OR Computed on the consideration or value less (lens or encumbrances runalning at time of sale S gnatu o of Ducl rant or Agent o term ning tax F rm Name GRANT DEED FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION recei,x of which Is hertbl ac-nowlLdged William C Liles and Billie M Liles, husband and wife as ,joint tenants, hereby GRANT(SI o the City of GI and Terrace the real prooerty I^ he City of Grand Terrace County of San Bernardino State of California described as A 7 50 storm drain easement over a portion of that certain parcel land in the City of Grand Terrace, as described in Book 2201, Page 305 of official records, and shown on Record oT Survey 57/18, as filed in Record of Surveys August 15, 1985, all being recorded in the office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, State of California, more ` particularly described as follows Beginning aL the centerline inuetsertion of Grand Terrace Road (73 0 wide) and Balton Road (60 0 wide) a, hown nn ,,fill Rccurd of Su)y(y 1)//Il' Ih(nce Norlh 11 56 21 f I I 286 20 fecL alc,rlg the centerline of said Grand Icrrdce Road, Thence North 71" 05 3/ West, 22 00 feet, Thence North 89e 59 03- West, 14 81 feet to the TRUE POINT Of BEGINNING, Theme continuing North 89e 59 03 West, 203 12, Thence NORTH, 7 50 feet, Thence South 89 59 03- East 203 24 feet, Thence South 11' 54 23- West, 8 12 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BCCiNNING Said parcel is oeing granted to the City of Grand Terrace as a storm drain easement for the purpose of constructing, replacing, operating and maintaining a storm drain Dated STATE OF CALI ORNI- tss COUNTY OFc✓.v �a�'t-o 0,— OC6;R:w /S, /990 bt Inr nit the unr' rrsI�Q—r�a�Not-try Public in and for tied St�tln per son ally appen rLd ri(/—�C.C,(.,�vriv C _ (]c,�,[� AOFFICIAL SEAL �ELIZABETN J NICKELL NOTARY PUBLIC O CxT FNIA .. , _ or ,roved to me on the bases of satisfactory � E¢1tN41mINJ COI.Ar,`! evldenca) to be the perso^tsl whose name(s) Israre subs,rlbed to the U Y COMM EXP MAY 15 1991 00 » wt hen instrument and acF e+ [edged to me that he/she/they Axecu od the same WITNESS my hand and o" c al seal T (Th s a ea for off c at notar al seal) Signature— r��[w —' 1002 (6/82) 4 'IdL T y ST T= E -c AS Il'RE�7IFD ,ROVE CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DATE October 19, 1990 CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE October 25, 1990 SUBJECT- SOLICITING PERMIT APPLICATION -SUPERIOR WATER SYSTEMS, INC FUNDING REQUIRED NO Attached is a copy of Superior Water Systems, Inc application for a soliciting permit The representative of the company proposes going door to door soliciting water systems Since the owner/representative has shown proof of being a veteran, he was required to pay an application fee, but will not be required to pay a license fee He also has a current Home Occupation Permit with the City of Grand Terrace STAFF RECOMMENDS COUNCIL APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO SOLICIT SUBMITTED BY SUPERIOR WATER SYSTEMS, INC COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # &4 CITE OF GRAND TERRACE APPLICATION FOR PEDDLING, SCL.ICITINC OR HAWKING LICENSE (Pursuant to requirements of Chapter 5 64 Grand Terrace Municipal Code) TO C,-y Clerk's Office CI-y of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Second Floor Crand Terrace CA 92324 Date , 7 ,�� Appllca'lon Is hereby made for a City of Grand Terrace license to engage In the business of peddling or haw,cing goods wares, merchandise or of sollcl;ing orders for goods or services or of offering services for repair or Improvement of real property exceeding $25 00 In cost or value wl-hln the City of Grand Terrace pursuant to the prov slon of Chapter 5 64, Grand Terrace Municipal Code wltti the knowledge tha' If approved the required license fee shall be paid to the City of Gra-id Terrace Finance Departnen' i nDp I ican"s Legal Name 1 i /Zx�wi, .il- Addrpss ? ,:-, um er and L P, (I' PeI'glous or NonorofIt Organ Izat[on answe- `he following ) v Bus ness Address Date Artl�les of Incorporation flied with the 01+y ClerF's Office 2 ApDlicant Dartners or other, persons who w I i I engage In SOIILltIng pedaling or hawking (Note Each person must obtain a separate license) 2",./ Social Security Number Driver's License Number 3 Specific locations and time of day appllcan; Intends 'o hawk peddle or solicit at each location (dr "en permission of proper''y owner mus' be submitted wit appllca+lon for all wawker's license) d The supplier of the goods to be sold and a description of eery type merchandise or service 'ha+ Type o Opera{lon ('eddling Soliciting Hawking) 6 Has applicant or persons named In Section 2 of this application eve- been convlc'ed o -heft fraud burglary bat�ery or been adjudged a sex of ender In California? ( ) Yes ( No (Failure to provide correc'' Information wlII result In denial or reIOcatIon o'f license ) Explana{lon (Give reason and disposition) 7 nescr i pt ion Hair . 1't� `/ Eyes`Z,"',_, " _ce 8 Bir-h Date- /S _ZTPlace o Blr+h_1� I'-aruralized DIaLe and date varrled ( ) Single Maiden Name _ _ Spouse s Name 10 Have you Pver used any other name ( ) Yes ( KNo If so olve name or naves, and reasons 'or use 11 Dr, tot have a oermi{ to ca-ry a concealed weapon? ( ) Yes ( ) No if so Dive dat, and place o i.suanc.e 12 Occupation and employment during past flfL veers Firm Address ccupayion A COPY OF T4E STATE SALES TAX FCW IT (CALIFORNIA REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE 6066) MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE APPLICATION I I the undersloned, hereby c-1 arP 'hat I have carefully read Sec -Ion 5 64 of the Grand Terrace municipal Code Ttr- I ande-1-and I' ' --oug" y and dill car-y out ,vrry provision thereof I furiher state that the > arcmen*s and answer cor;a _d Ir ihlc appllri�lon ire, trot to tic be.,,T Of my knowledge and belief knowing r an) �uffirlenl cause for dcnlal or rc�ocatlt n or sdld Ilcanse I declare Thai 'here Is no known cloud on I'Ie o ownership of the goods io b� ,.old / i aurlare urJ�- penait) of -jury that ne following�I ru and co r ect DatP j /% C _ - t — _ Slora'u-e - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - / - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - FEE 7 00 PER QUARTER (S30 Application Fee Applied to License) hereby apply or one o '�� _'lowlnl exPmp Ions end to%e .,ubnitted va'Id proof `Illy ( ) ' rrc'A,r Iq (`-' Veteran l rellyIcus or Ncnprc - (�_ 'Over 55 +*+ ( � Special Veteran `See 'Lnlcioal Cac- lon D o4 **L e'-cr rom Daren--eoulred `"A,u-noriza'ion Tron >-erans' Affa'-s -squired Spee,lal Veterans' Exemptlon require, proo` trat app'ican- owr ood (Buslness ana Irofessrons Code Sec 16102 ) SDEG'AL VETERANS' E)EMP- CTATEMENT I hereby cer " f} ttat 1 own all e �f}� -e Terchandise that I plan to hawk peer- or vena c Slnnatur n°-er approval the II-ense f=- ,hall bo pale to the rinance'D partment C11 y of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton cad r,rand Terrace CA Q232- I RZCO1f IE1'D ThHT Tr' I S APPL IC - -ate BE ( ) Approved ( ) Dented SHEPIFF S DEPAPTMEN'T ' By I i reau r-ra,r r( Fnvlronrti - 'ieal,h Sere Ices have bP�n m f and `he appl Ica) Ion Is recmrended Tor �Dproval (poi necessary ' a 'icani Is not handling food __-c ENVIRON-IENTAL HEALTH SERVICES By -a ker's location(s) mee s alt-licable 7onine Code requirements Oa'e ENVIRCUME"1TAL ENFORCEMENT By (Reo�-ts and recommenda' ons -- - returned `o the Clt, Cler, within ten (10) days after rele-ral ) I ^p lrce'lon Fee Paid E I r CDsh CAr-I'rF11-hr�-r, or Mone -'er Ica, Pa, subni".mac S-ate Saps Tax De rii� erriten ptrrrission of Owne- tiT "awker Il-ei�e prliec or) drrtic.n pt.rmrs_ on o' pare - If under r4 yc_rs of aye CITY COUI 11_ A-TION ( ) Aoo-oveo ( ) Denrcd NITA BROWN City Clecrc Date C O M M I S S I O N A N D C O M M I T T E E R E P O R T S COUNCIL MEETING DATE COMMISSION/COMMITTEE o 41 2 9a Crime Prevention SUBJECT Member appointment PROBLEM Facts ALTER,NATI,VES SOLUTION One vacancy exists on the committee DATE 10-10-90 1- Appoint one of the two committee alternates to fill this position 0 1�r, ti� Alt Bea Gigandet has expressed a desire to be a regular committee member Committee recommends Bea be appointed - ref item 11 B of the CPC oct 10 minutes REQUESTED ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY COUNCIL AND/OR STAFF Act per the recommended solution and appoint Jo Ann Johnson (application on file) to the alternate com- mmittee position vacated by Bea Gigandet, ref item 11C of the Oct 8th CPC minutes COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM# 5Y4(�> PARK AND RECREATION COMMITTEE ACTION ITEM COUNCIL MEETING DATE - SUBJECT MATTER- A NEW SANDBOX FOR TERRACE HILL PARK REQUESTED ACTION - The committee of Park and Recreation request the building of a sandbox with a bench or two on the street side of the present playground equipment Funds are available and the cost is the cememt curbing and sand plus the cost of the benches The new ground cover is not conductive to dugging by very young children A seperate area would be safe and fun Parents like to sit near young children while they play Drawing enclosed Lenore K Frost COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM i ' � 1 7-1 COMPLIMENTS OF I- oc�D� (71,) 0 0232 -Pxt �@ SO CALIF (800) 821 3817 HISTORICAL & CULTURAL ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE RECEIVED Minutes of the October 1, 1990 Meeting 0 C T 0 9 1990 '_�ITY CLERK'S DEPT The meeting was called to order by Chairman Viola Gratson at 7 PM. Those present were Viola, Hannah Laister, Ann Petta, Marie Schmidt, Irene Mason, Pauline Grant and Randy Anstine. The minutes of the September meeting were read. Paragraph #5, first sentence was changed to read "Plaque on cornerstone will read that it was the site of the G.T. Barbara Shop and the Liquor Store". Motion to accept was made by Ann, seconaed by Irene. Treasurer's Report $2,000.00. Flyers and posters for the Country Fair have not been deducted as yet. Pictures of the building on the northwest corner of Barton & Mt. Vernon have been taken; also the old Fruit Stand on Barton & Preston which will be torn down. The Committee has been invited to take part in the Halloween Haunt sponsored by the G.T. Recreational Services. The Committee will not be able to participate as we are too involved in the Country Fair. A note will be sent. Plaques for Sister -City Plates Randy showed samples and the Committee made their choice. Randy will have 8 plaques made. Country Fair Flyers & posters ready for distribution. Good write-up in the Chamber newsletter. Publicity out on cable TV, radio and newspapers. There will be a special last-minute I meeting on October 24th at the Chairman's home. { Sharon Korgan presented a program to the Committee on Red Ribbon Week, October 20th-26th. This is Crime Prevention Month. She asked the Committee to be a part of her program on the 26th on Drug Awareness which the Committee will do. The next meeting will oe November 5th. The meeting was adjourned at 8 05 PM, motion made by Marie, seconded by Ann. Respect full submitted, �46�J� Hannah Laister, Secretary COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # ,�f4,� (o) 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace ltfoinia 92324-5295 Civic Center (714) 824-6621 Byron R Matteson Mayor Hugh J Grant Ma)or Pio Tempore Barbara Pfennighausen Jim Singley IGene Carlstrom Council Members Thomas J Schwab City Manager W 0 12 S T A F F R E P O R T Date October 15, 1990 Meeting Date October 25, 1990 Subject Speed Zone Study and Speed Zoning Ordinance As required by California State Statutes, each agency must perform traffic study at least every five years in order to be able to enforce th speed limits through the use of radar Such a study was completed and based on that study, speed limits are hereb recommended for the major thoroughfares within the City All other street' not specifically identified within the report should be considere( residential streets with a prima facie speed limits of 25 miles per hour Following are recommended speed limits on other streets within the City 1 BARTON ROAD - I-215 Freeway to East City Limits (a) Existing Speed Limits (1) Mt Vernon to I-215 - 35 MPH (2) Mt Vernon to Easterly City Limits - 40 MPH (b) Critical Speed Limit in that area vary from 42 to 45 MPH There are several driveways, especially west of Mt Vernon that provide access to Barton Road With these driveways, especially south side of Barton between Canal and Mt Vernon, reduction for Posted speed limit to 40 MPH is deemed necessary and ,justified RECOMMEND Barton Road between I-215 Freeway to Easterly City Limits be posted at 40 MPH in both directions 2 MT VERNON AVENUE - Grand Terrace Road to Barton Road (a) Existing Speed Limit - 40 MPH both directions (b) Critical Speed Limit (1) Southbound - 49 MPH (2) Northbound - 42 MPH COUNCILAGENDA ffEM # (P 4 Staff Report to Thomas Schwab October 16, 1990 Page 2 There are five major points of access into Mt Vernon within the limits specified These include two points from Forest City Grand Terrace, one from Advocate School and two local streets, Minona and Brentwood In addition, the intersection of Canal -Grand Terrace Road with Mt Vernon must be taken into consideration RECOMMEND Mt Vernon Avenue between Barton Road and North City Limits be posted at 40 MPH in both directions 3 MT VERNON AVENUE - Barton Road to Main Street (South City Limits (a) Existing Speed Limit - 45 MPH (b) Critical Speed Limit (1) Southbound - 45 MPH (2) Northbound - 43 MPH RECOMMEND Mt Vernon Avenue between Barton Road and South City Limits remain posted at 45 MPH I 4 MAIN STREET - Mt Vernon Avenue to West City Limits (a) Existing Speed Limit - Westbound - 40 MPH (b) Critical Speed - 46 MPH (Westbound) RECOMMEND Main Street - Mt Vernon Avenue to West City Limits be posted at 45 MPH 5 MICHIGAN STREET - Barton Road to Main Street (South City Limits) (a) Existing Speed Limit (1) Northbound - 35 MPH (2) Southbound - 35 MPH (b) Critical Speed - 38 MPH RECOMMEND Michigan Street - Barton Road to Main Street remain posted at 35 MPH in both directions Staff Report to Thomas Schwab October 15, 1990 Page 3 6 DeBerry Street, Pico Street and Van Buren Street, although all of these carry functional classification as collectors, the frequency of driveway locations as well as frequent street intersections dictate that these streets be recognized as residential, with Prima Facie speed limits as 25 MPH In addition the posting of "25 MPH WHEN CHILDREN PRESENT" in all school areas is considered as required regardless of the posted speed limits on other portions of these streets All other streets within the City Limits of the City of Grand Terrace should be considered residential with Prima Facie Speed Limit of 25 MPH Attached is an Urgency Ordinance, specifying the speed limits as recommended above Staff recommends that 1 City Council conduct a Public Hearing 2 Adopt the Urgency Ordinance for Speed Zoning as recommended in I this report AN I .di izDINANCE OF THE CTTY •kkl* OF r E =Y OF MAND TRURACE,v=•:a MsJqDjWa es 11 TERRACE MNICIPAL••1 • r• = 10.08, ESUfflLISHIM SPEED LIMITS r• VARIOUS STREETS INr i CTrY • • CRAM 0P • •+• WHEREAS, the City of Grand Terrace, through its Traffic Consultant, has conducted speed zone surveys on various City streets, and WHEREAS, the City Staff has evaluated traffic conditions and street hazards in each area, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES I-3EREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS Section 1 Section 10 08 010 is hereby amended to read as follows 1110 08 010 Barton Road, Mt Vernon Avenue, De Berry Street, Palm Avenue, Main Street and Michigan Street - Findings The City Council finds, pursuant to traffic and engineering studies conducted during 1990, that speed limits on Barton Road, Mt Vernon Avenue, De Berry Street, Palm Avenue, Main Street and Michigan Street are hereby established to provided for the protection of the general public and to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic in a reasonable and safe manner I Section 2 Section 10 08 020 is hereby amended to read as follows 1110 08 020 Barton Road, Mt Vernon Avenue, De Berry Street, Palm Avenue, Main Street and Michigan Street - Limits Designated The Prima Facie speed limits shall be as set forth in this section on those streets or parts of those streets designated as follows when signs are erected given notice thereof A Barton Road from I-215 Freeway to East City L]mt, 40 Miles Per Hour, B Mt Vernon Avenue from Barton Road to Grand Terrace Road, 40 Miles Per Hour, C Mt Vernon Avenue from Barton Road to South City Limits (Main Street) 45 Miles Per Hour, D De Berry Street from Mt Vernon Avenue to East City L=ts, 25 Mlles Per Hour, E De Berry Street from Mt Vernon Avenue to West City Limits, 25 Miles Per Hour, F Palm Avenue from Barton Road to Honey Hill Drive, 25 Miles Per Hour, G Michigan Street from Barton Road to South City Limits (Main Street), 35 Miles Per Hour, and H Main Street from Mt Vernon Avenue to West City Limits, 45 Miles Per Hour " Section 3 Declaration of Urgency This Ordinance is hereby declared to be an Urgency Measure and is for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety The facts constituting the urgency are that the speed limits contained herein have been determined to be those necessary to facilitate the safe and orderly movement of traffic in a reasonable manner Section 4 Effective Date This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect imnnediately upon its adoption Section 5 Posting The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in (3) three public places designated for such purpose by the City Council within (15) fifteen days after its adoption Section 6 Adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on the day of , 1990 ATTEST City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof I, , City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held on the day of , 1990, by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN Approved as to form City Attorney City Clerk -2- ORDINANCE NO 128 AN ORDINANCE 01, IIIE CITY OF GRAND I ERRAC'L RLLA LING TO VIEWING RES I RIC110NS OF PUBLICLY DISPLAYED EXYL IC'17 MAIERIALS WIIIIIN THE CITY OI GRAND I LRRi1 CE I IIL C1 I Y COUNCIL OI ME, MY Y OF GRAD 1 ERRACE DOES IfI,"RI_BY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS Section I Defillitimis Unless otllel wise stated, Molds and 1e►lll5 are (](.tined m follows (a) IIXIIIBI r means to slloN+ (b) IIARMI{UL MAVII?R means matte], taken as a Nlhole, which to tile (lti el age 1)CI 5011, applying c011tempol aI y g,lteNi 1de standal ds, appeals to the pr ul sent Intel est, and Is Illattel which, lalcen as a whole, depicts of describes in a patently offensive Ntia) sexual conduct and which, takell as a N0101e, lacks Sellous litelaiN altlstl(, political, of scientific value foI minoiS (Q KNOWINGLY means being aw," C of the char actel of the 111a tteI (d) MA VI ER means any book, rllagatlnC, llewspapel N ideo 1 eo-Ol ding, OI Otilel pl Inted oI Nvi lteil matei ial OI all)' pled]] e, diawing, photogI aph illotloll plctlli e, 01 othei plctoi lal I epiewntatioll OI ally StatllC or OthCl flgul e, OI any 1 ecol ding, tl ansc11pt1011 01 Illechallical chemical, 01 electl ]cal 1 epl Odllctioll of ails' other 11 ticleS, equipment, Illachines oh mateIlals MATTER also includes live o1 iecoided 1Clcphone messages whell tlrinsmitted, disseminated, Or distiibuted m part of a colllillelclal tl111Sact1011 (e) MINOR means any per Son midei 18 years of age M PERSON Illean5 all), Individual, partneishlp f it ill, ISSOclatmll, colpolatioll, Or othel legal entity Section 2 RCgun emeIlt of Blindei Racks NO mates ial N5hicll Is liar lllfill to nunors Shall be displayed in any public place, other than a public place fi on] which minoi s ,lie excluded, unless "blmdel i acks" ai e placed III fi ont of the mate] Ial so that the loNti ei two-thn cis (2/3) of the mates ial is not exposed to view Section 3 Penalty Any person who violates this chapter is guilty of a misdemeancii, punishable In accoIdance vrith the p10visions of Chapter 1, Section 1 16 020 of this Code COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # 7 A I ORDINANCE NO 128 PAGE 2 Section 5 Effective date This Oi dlnanc.e shall be in full force and effect at 12 01 a m on the 31st day after its adoption Section 6 Validity If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or pill ase of this chaptei is foi any ieason held to be invalid, such holding of holdings shall not affect the validity of tIle iemaining poitions of the chaptei The City Council hereby declares that it would of passed this chapter and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase ilrer eof it i espective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences clauses, phi ases be declared invalid Section 7 Postina The City Cler k shall cause this Oi dinance to be posted in three (3) public places designated for such purpose by the City Council First read at a regular meeting of ttie City Council of said City held on the 11th day of October, 1990, and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the 25th day of October 1990 ATTEST CITY CLERK MAYOR of the City of Gland 'I ei lace and of the City Council thereof ORDINANCE NO 128 PAGE 3 1, JUANITA BROWN, City Clei k of the City of Gi and Tei i ace, do hei eby ceiti[y that the foi egoing Oi dinance Was inti odiiced and adopted at a iegulaz meeting of the City Council of the City of Giand Teriace lield on the 27th day of Septembei, 1990, by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN CITY CLERK Appi oved as to foi n, CITY ATTORNEY DATE October 16, 1990 S T A F F R E P O R T CRA ITEM ( ) (-OUNCIL ITEM (x) MEETING DATE October 25, 1990 $UBJECT FUTURE MICHIGAN SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS ------------------------------------------------------------------ FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED At the City Council Meeting of August 9, 1990, the City Council discussed the possibility of adding curb, gutter and sidewalk on Michigan Street between De Berry and Van Buren. It was staff's recommendation at that time that, should improvements be desired in the future, we should consider the alternative to place curb/gutter/sidewalk along the west side. This would limit the impact that construction would have on the east side because of the necessity to move the sidewalk and retaining walls closer to the residences. Also, its affect on the slopes of the driveway 2 would be unacceptable. Staff was directed to contact each individual homeowner and determine their desires. The attached memo from the City Engineer summarizes the homeowners' preferences which are as follows 1. Do nothing on the east side of Michigan. 2. Install sidewalk on the west side. 3. If installed on the east side, construct four foot sidewalk ad3acent to curb, remove and replace all of their walls directly behind the four -foot wide sidewalk. 4. Sloping of the front yards within the public right-of-way from back of the four foot side- walk to their property line is not an accept- able solution. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT IF SIDEWALKS ARE TO BE INSTALLED IN THE FUTURE, THAT THE ALTERNATIVE TO INSTALL CURB/GUTTER/SIDEWALK ON THE WEST SIDE BE THE PREFERRED OPTION, AS IT WAS DONE ON MICHIGAN BETWEEN VAN BUREN AND PICO. TS bt COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # � a MEMORANDUM 12 427 DATE September 5, 1990 TO Thomas Schwab, City Manger FROM Joseph Kicak, City Engineer RE Michigan Street Sidewalk ------------------------------ On September 4, 1990 I met with the four property owners on the east side of Michigan, south of DeBerry regarding the installation of sidewalk along the frontage of their property The four properties involved are those where the wall extend into the right-of-way along their frontage Following four owners were present at the meeting on site 1 Mrs Pardida 2 Mr & Mrs Snow 3 Mr & Mrs Kendall 4 Mr & Mrs Amabisca I explained the concerns of the City Council regarding the pedestrian safety in that area and the alternatives that were being considered Specifically, installation of the sidewalk along the frontage of the four parcels they own to complete the sidewalk on the east side, and the installation of sidewalks on the west side of Michigan Their unaminimous choices in the order of their preference were the following 1 Do nothing on the east side of Michigan 2 Install sidewalk on the west side 3 If installed on the east side, construct four (4 ) foot sidewalk adjacent to curb, remove and replace all of their walls directly behind the four foot wide sidewalk 4 Sloping of the front yards within the public right-of-way from back of the four (4 ) foot sidewalk to their property line is not an acceptable solution JK dlk DATE S T A F F R E P O R T CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (x) MEETING DATE October 25, 1990 SUBJECT APPROVAL OF LOCATION OF SENIORS' CENTER FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED October 25, 1990 City Staff, working with the Grand Terrace Seniors, have developed a proposed location for the Seniors' Center and its required parking Standard required parking is for a sixty -space lot. With this report are two maps, one is a copy of an aerial photo showing the size and location of the Seniors' Center, the parking lot, and a proposed future Child Care Center. Also attached is an assessor's parcel map showing the entire parcel and its dimens-Lons, as well as the scope of the work for this pro3ect, which includes only the Seniors' Center and the parking lot. The Parks and Recreation Committee, on October 24, held a special meeting to review the proposed placement (minutes are attached). After review and discussion, the Parks and Recreation Committee voted four to one, with one member absent, to accept the City Manager's plan for location of the Seniors' Center and parking lot per the attached drawing with the Child Care location being decided at alater date. Staff, upon direction of the City Council, will begin the necessary soils work, as well as to design a grading plan, plot plan, and to prepare a bid to complete the necessary on -site work. The Seniors' modular facility is currently under construction Staff will need to expedite the on -site work to facilitate the placement of the modular facility Staff may call upon the City Council to call a special meeting to award a bid for the work. 000NC1L Aa=A # X STAFF REPORT -- APPROVAL OF SENIORS' CENTER LOCATION October 25, 1990 Page Two STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF AND THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMIITTEE TO SITE THE SENIORS' FACILITY AND PARKING LOT AS PROPOSED, AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS TO GO OUT TO BID FOR THE REQUIRED ON -SITE IMPROVEMENTS TS bt Attachments THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MINUTES FOR SPECIAL MEETING, OCTOBER 24, 1990 Members Present Lenore Frost, Co -Chairperson Marcia Johansen, Co -Chairperson Wm. N. Johansen JoAnn Johnson Richard Rollins Absent Sylvia Ann Robles Staff Present Thomas Schwab Randall Anstine Karen Gerber Betty Trimble A special meeting was called of the Parks and Recreation Committee to discuss the location of the future Seniors' Center. Lenore Frost went on record to state that she was opposed to the location proposed (maps attached). She indicated that there is so little acreage in Grand Terrace for a park with picnic facilities, etc., the parking lot location takes up too much park space and leaves room for nothing else. Thomas Schwab indicated that the Parks and Recreation Committee had recommended that this be a passive park site and this would be passive activity. This recommendation came about because of concerns from the adjacent homeowners to this site. Lenore Frost again asked to go on record to state, at the time the land was purchased that it would be for recreation purposes only, and that there had been no discussion of a Seniors' Center or Child Care Center. She suggested that the Senior Center be located next to the house on the corner of Mt. Vernon (west side), and utilize the Edison Easement with our land across the street to put in diagonal parking, with four handicapped spaces next to the Senior Center. This would leave more space for a green area, rather than a parking lot in the middle of the land. Lenore Frost wanted to go on record that she is for a Seniors' Center, but not at this location. She was informed that this will go before Council on Thursday, October 25, regarding this location. Marcia Johansen stated that she considered the Seniors' Center to be a recreational facility and there will be recreational facilities on this land. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE MINUTES October 24, 1990 Page Two Richard Rollins stated that he had canvassed citizens in the area, and Mr. Webster had suggested that the Seniors' Facility be placed next to his property because he will ultimately sell his property to the City. Randall Anstine and Karen Gerber empathized with Lenore Frost in that we were putting a parking lot in an area that could be green space. Mr. Anstine stated, however, that there are two drawbacks in placing the facility where Lenore wants -- traffic along that road and the need to construct a storm drain on that spot. We would need an underground structure to pick up the water that would collect During the rainy season that area is all under water. Lenore Frost still would like us to propose to the Edison Company that we use some of their property for parking, along with our property, and have the parking spaces angular. Randall Anstine reminded the Committee that Edison does not want parking on their easement, and would not approve a parking lot for a park and ride that was proposed in the past. Richard Rollins indicated that he felt that the layout was fine, but felt that the Child Care Center could go to another location -- possibly to the back of the parking area. However, the location of Child Care could be done at another time. Mr. Rollins made a motion, second by Wm. Johansen, to accept the City Manager's plan for location of the Seniors' Center and parking lot per the attached drawing with the Child Care location being decided at a later date. Motion carried four to one with Lenore Frost voting NOE and Sylvia Robles being absent y f S�'i:_vi rJ^ �T'rS�F� rrl +i�t a4 1 S L J� 7 1 iIF 41 x �1F7'�-�i �•��-�'�4 '"��y6. �.�.`�zy� � sy�y��t; ^fi,� �`` `� a' Eck ;µ•�� ' ��; r~~ r� y 7 '> ti C�Y7�i�^.�ti'S"nn�+.w:s~t•`y`'��,�✓�%.•r+'L� }''4ijf;+4��c�n�•�RA�� t�'�`j {,f��..,t4'�•� ,Y� J?�`,�� ,itr ~a'4n p axe; tis,�s,ikiyr"t� {. �at{7yy� �,.Y•)S"t�f},� 5��,�`�q'13�-.a^ rnz a, �r� J�a�,:.LF;j+�`y'T�,i„S�r•�r�C �'� :xY, 2nt )' 1 j•. �� f �aZ 4 'h� �,�; R f It7�,�{+4.�y�'j ri. 4 C��'A�� F� �r,TJ �•t S�� y � �`� in '� i7 � .+✓ ,. �S 6� i` i 7t3' Sax a✓ >, .y y �c `r �Y cf}rlT"*�` s'}.'�,l •'1 r a,,r 3r err. •+ly"'.`�+. i ,r �# i t �t�3 r{♦ vs '� e� (,'k>, I J r :�i4P,�_, .�ec�l' � `�-f �a st.? ilPrr3iS..r,`s"y Y1M y'�r 1 �LiRf�a'.� icTi �f(�SPi1i'��"'..cw�'•t'r�#"Q;'iF iX`.��,�.i2�4 r-I IC��i„};ry�K� �,i'~� ��""'` . t '!)}� : ''�i f �• tr t��a,fJr K ,.. � � f r^ �xlr ;��,•"}��Ggj `i S.ss'�a"" �.iK' C �3 y , }rY^'.it�1. iK �.. .,,.�;},i:�e'c' i.� �fiaMf `ryliti.. r'i yr-iiV�KR�ri • j �[ P 1`P^" ••�f'w't t >f (, �'1r , '~.Y �aTl ° a 140_ t r uA � m r , j •, jx /"dam 4� +Y+I '� 6 "'.x 1 o L Yf ^+ R X .yR y. ¢t 4 �r" Z�, mL �i; �f 4 !" . rt �� cc �c r `711 'nq�4P*k•'1 � Y � �!•�' RTC✓ w - �,��V�-' �+' d t �� { �4'cP+ � � ` �6�4. ��;•;rw•tik y s'1'*�irR j, 1 y t "`;�'s ,f ,�T,a l � �.sa T' .n';i"r.X�4r y r'' i 1 t ,,.J., .� ♦ , �� ".,+, •ii 7i s ' `Y'�� iQ7rt}�'i 4. �f r ft?! R, t ; '`'�.R .�dy � �' ,'w r�yrrC�� a 4 � r �•iiij`i` ] " ... � a"� .J1 � ~l ��}. i �`L} 5 r J WyS�'r aft 2r XL �- � r•^�i�{yv��li's f � ` ` .r �l i, + af'srn ^t rrY u * � ~t4 - x 4i'f :+t•ai^ �` � `>,, k � xd n -� � ra' r�• ,�7 .}��41n ri,� t �y..ykt��c^t4.r� i r+~ L` ; t u �� `�,,x' � {)fit _ iii• !s. �a'�r. ��i"'n��'�ST�I�` .. ' .Xp+a4 J'YM F c NN 8,� Y ° \bay ; 7 .IN olton City ;rand Terrace City ax Rate 16002, 2008 . "J L9 CRA ITEM ( SUBJECT DATE STAFF REPORT COUNCIL ITEM (XX) MEETING DATE October 18, 1990 Oct 25, 1990 THE CITY'S POSITION RELATIVE TO STATE BUDGET ACTIONS/' ----------------------------------------------------------------- FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED XX The State of California, in adopting its current budget, gave the County the authority to collect booking fees and to charge Cities the cost of collecting taxes and special assessments At the San Bernardino County City Manager's meeting, it was agreed that we would unite to lobby the County not to impose the booking fees and the State to repeal its action The Cities feel that it is unfair to charge Cities to provide State mandated, County funded programs Our position is that the individual City taxpayer will be, in effect, paying twice for the costs of these services, once through the County's collection of property tax and again through the General Fund of the City Four hundred and fifty seven Cities in California have adopted a balanced budget, and this action by the State has required the vast majority of these Cities to go back to budget hearings to determine which programs will be cut Many Communities are considering drastic action in a proposed refusal to book all except serious felony arrests This will allow individuals that are a threat to society, back on the streets This is particularly acute in the area of domestic violence, where it is extremely necessary to take the arrestee out of the domestic situation I do not recommend such drastic action The Sheriff's Department will continue to book arrestees from Grand Terrace into County Jail Although the County has yet to indicate a firm percentage, booking fees for the City of Grand Terrace will cost the General Fund approximately $40,000 based on the approximate annual bookings of 260, in a cost range of $140 to $160 per booking In addition, there will be an approximate 2 to 3 percent cost increase to collect property taxes and special assessments This will result in a loss of approximately $20,000 to $30,000 to the General Fund The City of Grand Terrace is in the fortunate position of having revenue in the General Fund that exceeds current annual expenditures, however, this action sets a dangerous precedence for the future COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # ' 4 City's Position 10/25/90 Page 2 Relative to State Budget Actions The State attempted, again this year, to divert Motor Vehicle In - Lieu taxes, although they were not successful If the State were to be successful in their attempt in the future, It would have devasting effects for most Communities, including Grand Terrace This tax accounts for 13 percent of the General Fund revenues Cities are being asked, at the League level, to adopt a Resolution protesting the State's action, and at the County level, to adopt a Resolution urging County Supervisors not to impose booking and collection fees If such fees are imposed, we, the Cities of the County of San Bernardino, will not pay STAFF_ RECOMMENDS. COUNCIL ADOPT TWO RESOLUTIONS OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE 1 OPPOSING THE ACTIONS OF THE STATE RELATIVE TO THE BUDGET 2 URGING THE COUNTY NOT TO IMPOSE BOOKING AND COLLECTION FEES TS yj m RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING THE COUNTY'S IMPOSITION OF FEES FOR BOOKING PRISONERS WHEREAS, the State Legislature finally balanced its budget in August by underfunding counties by $800 million and told counties to begin charging cities to book prisoners, and WHEREAS, every city It in San Bernardino County has adopted a balanced budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1990, and WHEREAS, if San Bernardino County elects to charge cities for booking prisoners, every city budget in the county will be thrown into a deficit position, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace does hereby urge the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors to NOT implement the booking fees authorized by SB 2557, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Grand Terrace, following the precedent established by the County in refusing to pay court fines and forfeitures legally due cities, does hereby express its Intent to refuse to pay any and all booking fees should the County elect to charge cities for processing prisoners PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 25th day of October 1990 BYRON R� MATTESON,�MAYOR CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ATTEST JUANITA'aROtJN, CITY~CLERK�� APPROVED AS TO FORM JOHN HARPER,�CITY TTTORNET—___ RESOLUTION NO PAGE 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )ss CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ) I, JUANITA BROWN, CITY CLERK of the CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested by the City Clerk, all at the meeting of said City Council held on the 25th day of October 1990, and that the same was passed and adopted by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT 11 ABSTAIN CITY OF GRAND TERRACE RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE REPEAL OF SB 2557 WHICH SHIFTS STATE AND COUNTY COSTS TO CITIES WHEREAS, after the longest budget stalemate in California's history, the Governor and California Legislature finally enacted a 1990/91 budget package that shifts state and county costs to cities, and diverts city revenues to finance state/county responsibilities, and WHEREAS, counties are an administrative arm of the state with responsibilities for carrying out state programs, while cities are in a different business of providing local municipal services which are determined locally and have no responsilities or authority for administering state or county programs, and WHEREAS, the Governor and California Legislature have shiFted state and county financial responsibilities to cities, and WHEREAS, all 457 cities in California balanced t h e 1 r budgets only to find their budgets were subsequently thrown out of balance by cost shifts and revenue losses designed to balance the budget of the state, and WHEREAS, the actions in the State budget package were enacted by passage of SB 2557, which ( I ) directed counties to charge cities, school districts and special districts for the county function of administering the property tax, (2) authorized counties to charge cities for booking prisoners arrested by city employees, and (3) allowed counties to retain property tax revenues that should otherwise go to 90 "No and Low Tax Cities", and WHEREAS, these shifts of city revenues to counties were specifically enacted to replace cuts in state revenue for counties that should have funded state responsibiIites carried out by counties, and WHEREAS, the Governor and California Legislature have avoided their financial responsibilites by enacting measures that are poor public policy, which rob from one local government to finance another, and result in no real solution to the continuing financial problems facing all levels of government in California, and RESOLUTION NO PAGE 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace support the repeal of SB 2557 and the protection of cities from the state budget process, and support alternatives that will provide adequate long-term funding for cities and counties 1990 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 25th day of October ATTEST JUAPJITA BROWN'; CITY�CLERK�� APPROVED AS TO FORM JOHN— 1R-- ARPER,—CITY—ATf�RIVEY--" B'YRON Rr MATTE'SON, MAYOR CITY OF GRAND TERRACE RESOLUTION NO PAGE 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )ss CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ) I, JUANITA BROWN, CITY CLERK of the CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the Foregoing Resolution No was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council, approved and signed by the Mayor, and attested by the City Clerk, all at the meeting of said City Council held on the 25th day of October 1990, and that the same was passed and adopted by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT I ABSTAIN JT71TT7T7TUWR �Ii�-JCL ��- CITY OF GRAIJD TERRACE Planning Department TO City Council FROM David Sawyer, Community Development Director DATE October 25, 1990 SUBJECT: Staff Report File No SA-90-04R1/CUP-90-04R1 Request An appeal of the Planning Commission's Condition of Approval No 5 �I APPLICANT Taylor Lumber (Denny Hutmk) Property Owner - Thompson Equities LOCATION- 21800 Main Avenue (APN# 277-111-22/24/28/29) ZONING AND LAND USE PropexU GP Zonin Land Use Subject Property I MR Storage Buildings To the West I M2 Storage of Commercial Trucks and Southern California Edison Facilities 22795 Barton Road 9 Grand Terrace, California SAl,'�►��iP �� Property GP Zoning Land Use To the East I MR Lumber Yard To the North I MR Vacant Lot To the South Riverside County Single Family Residences ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A Negative Declaration was previously prepared and approved for this project BACKGROUND On October 2nd, 1990, the Planning Commission approved a revision to Conditions No s 5 and 6 The applicant had requested that these conditions be revised to allow 'Taylor Lumber" to open for business prior to the completion of the required interior parking lot improvements being completed The applicant submitted copies of a proposed temporary parking lot plan and copies of a proposed permanent parking lot plan Neither of the two plans met the City's requirements for interior parking lots within the MR District The Planning Commission did revise Conditions No s 5 and 6 to permit the temporary improvements for a period of 12 months at which time the Planning Commission required that the parking lot be completed in accordance with the City's Parking Ordinance On October 10, 1990 the applicant filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision regarding the permanent parking lot improvements Included with this report is Planning Commission's staff report and minutes for the meeting of October 2, 1990 regarding this item DISCUSSION Pursuant to Section 18 66 040 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code, certain findings must be made for approval of a Conditional Use Permit These findings as well as staffs recommended response with respect to the applicant's request are as follows I Will the proposed revised CUP be detrimental to the general health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or within the City? This finding must be made in the negative Yes The proposed revision as requested by the applicant is inconsistent with the Grand Terrace Municipal Code, Title 18, Chapter 18 60, "Off -Street Parking", which has been adopted by the City of Grand Terrace to protect the general health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the City and it's citizens Other manufacturing and industrial related projects have developed in accordance with this Chapter of the Municipal Code and thus the approval of this revision would constitute a special privilege to this applicant 2 Will the proposed use be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City? This finding must be made in the negative Yes The development of this site inconsistent with the regulations of Title 18 as it applies to parking regulations for manufacturing and industrial uses, will be detrimental to this property as a result of diminished safety elements required by the Municipal Code 3 Will the proposed use be consistent with the latest adopted General Plan9 This finding must be made in the positive No The proposed revision would result in a project inconsistent with Title 18 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code which is the document adopted by the City to enforce the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan 4 Are conditions necessary to secure the purpose of this sections This finding may be made in either the positive or the negative Yes The conditions of approval as listed below are recommended by staff and approved by the Planning Commission CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The Planning Department recommends the following conditions of approval be revised to read as follows, 5 A detailed landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department Said plan shall include the Main Street parkway area and a specialized entry treatment, temporary interior improvements and future interior improvements. Said "future" improvements shall meet the requirements of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code. 10 All conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to occupancy of the site Conditions #5 and #6 may be deferred for a period of 12 months RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends the Grand Terrace City Council uphold the Planrung Commission's Conditions of Approval No s 5 and 6 for SA-90-04R1 and CUP-90-01R1, thereby denying the applicant's appeal Respectfully subnutted by David Sawyer, Community Development Director 1�—. Planning Department TO Planning Commission/Site and Architectural Review Board FROM. David Sawyer, Community Development Director DATE: September 27, 1990 SUBJECT. Staff Report File No SA-90-04R1/CUP-90-04R1 Request An application to revise conditions #6 and #10 relating to parking and landscaping requirements and occupancy APPLICANT. Taylor Lumber (Denny Hutnik) Property Owner - Thompson Equities LOCATION: 21800 Main Avenue (APN# 277-111-22/24/28/29) ZONING AND LAND USE: TropeTropedy GP Zonin Land Use Subject Property I MR Storage Buildings To the West I M2 Storage of Commercial Trucks and Southern California Edison Facilities ITEM 4 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 • (714) 824-6621 ,ITEM 6 Pi operty GP Zoning Land Use To the East I MR Lumber Yard To the North I MR Vacant Lot To the South Riverside County Single Family Residences ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A Negative Declaration was previously prepared and approved for tlus project BACKGROUND On March 20, 1990, the Planning Commission approved this project subject to the conditions contained in the attached resolution (Attachment B), subsequently, the City Council approved a deferment agreement deferring the completion of the perimeter walls required in condition #7 PROPOSED REVISIONS - The on September 4th, 1990, the applicant had completed the majority of the required conditions with the exception of conditions #5 and #6 The applicant had completed some landscaping and parking improvements but had not submitted the required plans and the improvements did not meet the Grand Terrace Municipal Code However, the applicant was at that time requesting occupancy of the site on September 17th, 1990 A compromise was worked out between the applicant, the City Manager's Office and the Planning Department to allow the applicant their occupancy subject to the applicant submitting a $15,000 cash deposit with the City, submitting the required parking, landscaping and irrigation plans to the Planning Department and applying to the Planning Commission for revisions to their CUP and SAR approvals The applicant is currently requesting the following The existing parking and landscaping improvements (Attachment Xs Exhibit A) be approved on a temporary basis for a period of 12 months 2 The proposed "future plan" (Attachment Xs Exhibit B) be approved and deferred for a period of 12 months 3 Condition #10 be revised to permit deferment of interior parking and landscaping improvements 4 A barbed wire extension be approved along the top of the Main Street perimeter wall PLANNING ISSUES Both the "temporary" and "future" proposed improvements do not meet the City's parking ordinance (lacks adequate landscaped planters and islands and irrigation) Consistent with the previously mentioned compromise, staff will recommend approval of the "temporary" improvements for a period of 12 months, but cannot recommend approval of the proposed "future" improvements because of they do not meet the City' parking requirements Pursuant to Section 18 66 040 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code, certain findings must be made for approval of a Conditional Use Permit These findings as well as staff responses to them are as follows 1 Will the proposed revised CUP be detrimental to the general health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or within the City? This finding must be made in the negative No The proposed revision will not have a detrimental impact to the general health, ~' safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the use or within the City 2 Will the proposed use be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City? This finding must be made in the negative. No The occupation of this site for the revised CUP, subject to the approved conditions will not be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City 3 Will the proposed use be consistent with the latest adopted General Plan This finding must be made in the positive. Yes The current General Plan land use designation for this property is "Industnal" and the proposed use is a permitted use in the Restricted Manufacturing District with a conditional use permit. 4 Are conditions necessary to secure the purpose of this section This finding may be made m either the positive or the negative. Yes The conditions of approval as listed below are recommended by staff CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The Planning Department recommends the following conditions of approval be revised to read as follows, 5 A detailed landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department Said plan shall include the Main Street parkway area and a specialized entry treatment, temporary intenor improvements and future interior improvements. Said "future" improvements shall meet the requirements of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code. 10 All conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to occupancy of the site Conditions #5 and #6 may be deferred for a period of 12 months. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends the Grand Terrace Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution (Attachment A) approving CUP-90-OlRl subject to the conditions of approval contained therein, and the Site and Arclutectural Review Board approve SA-90- 04R1 subject to the same conditions required for CUP-90-01R1 Respectfully submitted by David Sawyer, Community Development Director RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CUP-90-04R1, A REVISION OF CONDITIONS #5 AND #10 OF CUP-90-04 WHEREAS, the Apphcant, Taylor Lumber, applied for a revision to conditions #5 and #10 of CUP-90-04, and WHEREAS, the proposed use is determined to be a permitted use with a conditional use permit per Section 18 36 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code, and WHEREAS, a negative declaration for this project has previously been prepared and approved for this project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held before this body on October 2, 1990, for the purpose of considering the proposed revisions NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace, California, that the following findings have been made 1 The proposed revision will not have a detrimental impact to the general health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or worlang within the neighborhood of the use or within the City 2 The occupation of this site for the revised CUP, subject to the approved conditions will not be inlunous to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City 3 The current General Plan land use designation for this property is "Industrial" and the proposed use is a permitted use in the Restricted Manufacturing District with a conditional use permit. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the following conditions of approval for CUP- 90-04 are hereby revised to read as follows, ATTACHMENT A 5 A detailed landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department Said plan shall include the Main Street parkway area and a specialized entry treatment, temporary interior improvements and future interior improvements Said "future" improvements shall meet the requirements of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code 10 All conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to occupancy of the site Conditions #5 and #6 may be deferred for a period of 12 months NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE HEREBY APPROVES CUP-90-04R1 BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Comnussion of the City of Grand Terrace, California, at a regular meeting held on the 02nd day of October, 1990, by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN ATTEST Deputy City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM John Harper, City Attorney Jerry Hawkinson, Chairperson Planning Commission ` r � \ � V\ RECT MA4 211990 RESOLUTION NO 90-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CUP-90-04 A REQUEST TO OPERATE A WHOLESALE/RETAIL LUMBERYARD FACILITY AT 21800 MAIN STREET WHEREAS, the Applicant, Taylor Lumber, applied for a conditional use permit to operate a wholesale/retail lumberyard facility at 21800 Main Street (attached as Exhibit A), and s WHEREAS, the proposed use is determined to be a permitted use with a conditional use permit per Section 18 36 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code, and WHEREAS, a negative declaration for this project has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and is attached as Exhibit B, and WHEREAS, a properly_ noticed public hearing was held before this body on March 20, 1990, for the purpose of considering the proposed project NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the Cit}, of Grand Terrace, California, that the following findings have been made 1 The proposed use has been reviewed by the appropriate City reviewing agencies and their comments and recommendations are included as conditions of approval to insure this use will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or worlang within the neighborhood of the use or within the City 2 The occupation of this site for the proposed use, subject to the conditions listed below will not be mjunous to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City 3 The current General Plan land use designation for thrs property is GC and the proposed use is a permitted use for this location as a result of the Qty's Municipal Code Section ATTACHMENT B 18 63 with regards to nonconforming buildings BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the proposed project is subject to the following conditions of approval, 1 All conditions as recommended by the Department of Engineering/Building and Safety in their Memorandum dated March 15, 1990, and attached as Exhibit C 2 All conditions as recommended by the Forestry and Fire Warden Department in their Memorandum dated February 28, 1990, attached as Exhibit D 3 The applicant shall pay the appropriate school impaction fee to the Colton Unified School District 4 The applicant shall provide to the Planning Department a Will Serve Letter from the appropriate Water District 5 A detailed landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department Said plan shall include the Main Street parkway area and a specialized entry treatment 6 A detailed site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning and Building and Safety Departments showing in detail all zntenor circulation patterns, parking areas, accessways and firelanes in accordance with the Grand Terrace Municipal Code 7 A six foot high solid block wall shall be required along the southerly property line adjacent to the Main Street right-of-way and shall be completed prior to the occupancy of the site At the time any adjacent industrial property develops, a six foot high solid block wall shall be constructed along the adjoining property line of such development and any adjacent street right-of-way The type of material and finish of the walls shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to construction Until such time the adjacent properties develop, the remaining perimeter of the property shall be fenced with a fencing material approved by the Planning Department 8 The hours of operation for public business shall be from 7 00 am to 7 00 pm, Monday through Saturday and no activity shall occur within the facihty on Sunday after 9.30 pm on any day of the week. All milling activity shall be restricted to 8 00 am to 6 00 pm, Monday through Saturday 9 The applicant shall provide in writing to the Planning Department, Railroad Company approval for access of the proposed railroad spur (Submitted to the Planning Commission on March 20, 1990 ) 10 All conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to occupancy of the site 11 The proposed project shall be constructed in accordance with the Site and .Architectural Design approval (SA-90-04) as approved by the Site and Architectural Review Board on March 20, 1990 12 All aspects of the proposed project including landscaping, irrigation systems, and building maintenance shall be maintained in a clean and functional manner to the satisfaction of the Planning Department in accordance with this approval and the overall goals and objectives of the City of Grand Terrace NOW THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE HEREBY APPROVES CUP-90-04 BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS t PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace, California, at a regular meeting held on the 20th day of March, 1990, by the following vote AYES 7 - Chairman Hawkinson, Commissioners Buchanan, Hargrave, Hilkey Munson, Sims and Van Gelder NOES 0 ABSENT 0 ABSTAIN 0 Je"Proawkinson, Chairperson P?afimu Commission ATTEST City CI k APPROVED AS TO FORM JD66A,- John Harper, Uly Attorney GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR. MEETING OCTOBER 2, 1990 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 October 2, 1990 at 7 00 p in by Chairman Jerry Hawkinson PRESENT Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Comnussioner Herman Hilkey, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Jim Suns, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner David R Sawyer, Community Development Director Maria C Muett, Assistant Planner ` Maggie Barder, Planning Secretary ABSENT. None PLEDGE Jun Sims, Commissioner PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6.30 P.M. Information from staff to Planning Commissioners Information from Planning Commissioners to staff. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENED AT 7:10 P.M. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None 1 MOTION J VOTE PCM-90-148 The Community Development Director paraphrased the motion based on the finding that the drawings do not contain the adequate information, and the information they do contain does not meet the current parking code requirements Commissioner Hargrave added that it doesn't meet the safety and health and U B C requirements Motion carries 6-1-0-0 Vice -Chairman Buchanan voted no The Community Development Director stated that there is a 10 day appeal period ITEM #4 CUP-90-04R1 TAYLOR LUMBER CO, INC /THOMPSON EQUITIES 21800 MAIN STREET GT AN APPLICATION FOR REVISION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A WHOLESALE AND CONTRACTOR LUMBER SALES OFFICE The Community Development Director presented the staff report Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked about the barbed wire extension The Community Development Director stated that this came up from a staff design concept He said that staff was pleased with the wall erected and the landscaping in front He said that the landscaping was done prior to submitting any plans and none have been submitted yet, but they did put barbed wire fencing along the top of the perimeter wall and staff has required that this be removed, but the applicant has indicated that there have been some secunty problems, so they want to keep the barbed wire He stated that staff feels it detracts from the environment that has been created Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked if the use of barbed wine was restricted by ordmance or building code requirements, and asked if the City prohibits its use The Community Development Director stated not that he is aware of. 16 Z Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked if this was run by the City Engineer to determine whether or not the barbed wire, at that height, complies with other building code requirements The Community Development Director stated that it has not Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked for specifics on what aspects of the future improvements don't satisfy the municipal code The Community Development Director indicated this on the future plan He stated that the public will be in the parking area, and he indicated the area where staff recommends they meet the parking code requirements He said that they would need tree islands for every five spaces He said that the number of spaces is fine Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked if this is a parking code requirement, can the commission through modification of conditions on a conditional use permit modify that if they choose to, or would it require the applicant to apply for a variance The Community Development Director stated that if they were to accept anything other than the code requirements, he would recommend that a variance be applied for Commissioner Sims asked about the scenario of the $15,000 cash deposit The Community Development Director stated that this was a compromise which the City Manager and himself and the applicant came up with to allow him to open up for business on September 17 rather than wait until they came to the commission for this decision. Chairman Hawkinson called up the applicant DENNY HUTNIK 21800 MAIN STREET G T. Mr Hutmk stated that the code requirements seem to be standardized, and the parking requirements seem to be set up as if they were a major department store, but they are a lumber facility He said that the City required a 6' high wall, which they put up, and they put landscaping out front. He said that they took a poll from the neighbors, who all wanted to see a nice parkway. With regard to the interior parking lot, he said that in the area, all properties are stepped, with anywhere from 6-10' property elevations, and if 17 you put planters in, they will require retairung walls He said that Inland Timber is above them, and through talk with the neighbors, they were able to get them to pave their whole facility, and now, if they cut up their parking lot along their edge to put in planters, once you start watering, this wets down the earth along their parking lot, so they would have to put in retaining walls to retain the soil He said that below them is an older plating company, which drops between C-10', and if they cut up their parking lot and put planters there, water will drain downhill, and they will need retauung walls, which are very costly He said that 85% of their clients operate by telephone, and people who drive in don't come into the employee parking area and are not allowed to wander around He said they don't keep lumber inside the store, so there is no reason for anyone to hang around He questions the code as far as practicality of going through this major undertaking He said there is no reason to put flowers behind a block wall, and around the building, they propose to put there trees on the surface in planters that they build Commissioner Sims mentioned the retaining walls, and recommended that they look at the option of drip irrigation Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked about the barbed wire Mr Hutmk stated that the original fence is barbed wire, and when they put the block wall up, they had problems, so they added barbed wire He said that there is a gang problem in the area, and T M Cobb put barbed wire up for the same reason. They considered infrared or beams of light, but this is an industrial area with animals running through there, and the winds blow very hard, and if they used beams of light, the sheriffs department will be down there every day trying to figure out who has been breaking in He spoke to the local law enforcement and citizen's patrol, who suggested barbed wire He said that he discovered a piece of someone's shirt stuck on the fence one morning Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that he doesn't have a problem with barbed wire as long as the Building Department looks at it to make sure it meets code requirements Commissioner Hargrave asked how much sales volume his firm generally does and how much sales tax that might mean to the City Mr Hutnik stated that right now the industry is down, and they are down to $10 - $15 million per year, which gives the City 1% 10.36 P.M. - PUBLIC HEARING OPENED We BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN 22111 LADERA STREET GT Ms Pfenmghausen stated that she hates barbed wire, but there is a reality when you cross Main Street, and they need to deal with it, as they could probably unload that whole lot by parking trucks blocking the view of the neighbors across the street and be gone in one rught She said that she doesn't think there is anyway they can be prohibited from using barbed wire She said that, regarding the parkmg requirements, if you look at the code, as soon as they were required to build a 6' block wall and then cite the code for the parking lot specifications, the City is in violation of its own code She said that the specifications were set up essentially for open parking lot areas in commercial areas such as Barton Road, and within the code, height limits were set as to how high berms and walls can go, which she believed to be 3' She said that nobody will see the things they want on the inside of the wall, and she felt it was ridiculous that they first violated the landscaping requirements by telling them to build a 6' wall, but now are telling him to landscape inside the wall 10 40 P M - PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED MOTION PCM-90-149 CUP-90-04R1 Chairman Hawkinson brought it back to commission Commissioner Hargrave was in favor of leaving the barbed wire there Vice -Chairman Buchanan had no problem with the barbed wire as long as the other requirements are met Commissioners Van Gelder and Sims did not have a problem with the barbed wire Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to approve CUP-90-04R1 as conditioned by staff Commissioner Sims second Commissioner Munson asked if the applicant could apply for a variance at any time The Community Development Director stated that the resolution attached will require that they meet the parlang code requirements in the future He said 19 MOTION VOTE CUP-90-04R1 that applying for a variance would be a waste of time and money as there are no findings that could be made Motion carries 7-0-0-0 The Community Development Director stated that there is a 10 day appeal period PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10 53 P M SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED AT 10 53 P M ITEM #5 SA-90-17 K & M RC ACCESSORIES 22474A BARTON ROAD G.T. `- AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A RACE TRACK AND LIGHTING FOR REMOTE CONTROL CARS IN THE BRSP DISTRICT MOTION PCM-90-150 SA-90-17 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-150 Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to deny SA-90-17 Commissioner Sims second Motion carves 6-1-0-0 Vice -Chairman. Buchanan voted no 20 ITEM #6 SA-90-04R1 TAYLOR LUMBER CO, INC /THOMPSON EQUITIES 21800 MAIN STREET GT AN APPLICATION FOR REVISION OF SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPROVAL OF A WHOLESALE AND CONTRACTOR LUMBER SALES OFFICE MOTION PCM-90-I51 SA-90-04R1 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-151 Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to approve SA-90-04R1 as conditioned by staff Commissioner Suns second Motion carries 7-0-0-0 SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD ADJOURNED AT 11:55 P M NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO BE HELD OCTOBER 16, 1990 Respectfully submitted, David R Sawyer Community Development Director 10-12-90 21 Approved by, . 7 rry a on Ch Planning Commission 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace alit 1 92324-5295 Civic Center (714) 824-6621 Planning Department October 3, 1990 Taylor Lumber Company, Inc Attention Denny Hutmk 21800 Main Street Grand Terrace, CA 92324 RE SA-90-04R1/CUP-90-04R1 Revision of Site and Architectural Review approval and Conditional Use Permit for a wholesale and contractor lumber sales office Conditions #5 and #10 (Parking and Landscaping/Irrigation Requirements) Dear Mr Hutmk, This is to inform you that on October 2, 1990 the City of Grand Terrace Planning Comnussion and Site and Architectural Review Board approved revision (SA-90-04R1 and CUP-90-04R1) to conditions #5 and #10 of SA-90-04 and CUP-90-04 5 A detailed landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submrttted to and approved by the Planning Department Said plan shall include the Main Street parkway area and a specialized entry treatment, temporary interior improvements and future interior improvements. Said "future" improvements shall meet the requirements of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code. 10 All conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to occupancy of the site Conditions #5 and #6 may be defered for a period of 12 months. Upon concensus of agreement, the Planning Commission agreed to allow the barb wire on top of the Main Street block wall to remain. A Deferment Agreement for Conditions #5 and #6 must be filed with the City There is a ten day appeal process available During this period you may appeal the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council If you wish to appeal this decision, please contact the City Clerk's Office for the appropriate application (Appeal fee is $133 dollars) Sincerely, David R Sawyer, Community Development Director cc Thompson Equities 21900 Main Street Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Taylor Lumber Company, Inc Attention Terry Wesslyn 411 S Manchester Anaheim, CA 92802 APPLICATION FOR APPEAL APPELLANT NAME ADDRESS CITY PRONE NO SUBJECT PROPERTY ADDRESS APPEAL This application is for the purpose of appealing the following A Planning Commission Decision t A Site and Architectural Review Board Decision a V Other File or Permit number /, J1 .50 -04- RFCFly,co OCT , � fsso rycC��KSD EPr Please specify what portions of the Planning Commission's or Site and Architectural Review Board's decision you are appealing Please state any facts regarding this case which you feel are in dispute _:Z Please explain why you feel the Plarimng Commission's or Site and Architectural Review Board's decision should be changed by the City Council Be specific and include any evidence which supports your position U ,r'- L..� ,� ic107' •S/.9lJF A ?�USi�S-S 1�.�-ram .� /�f1,�7 STAT ET�'f OF VERIF CATT�N b,� .�vi� o ,� F.�.�a�i vs�• I verify e rmation I have provided m this application is true and correct Appellant Date \PLANNING\CE\API.APPL `_-,, I Planninc, Department TO City Council FROM David Sawyer, Community Development Director DATE October 25, 1990 SUBJECT Staff Report File No SA-90-05 Request An appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of CUP- 90-05 and Condition No 2 of SA-90-05 APPLICANT LOCATION ****************************** Rick and Jane Alpern 22996 Palm Avenue ZONING AND LANDUSE PropejU GP Zonin Land Use Subject Property LDR R1-7 2 Residence To the West LDR R1-7 2 Residence To the East LDR R1-7 2 Residence To the North LDR R1-7 2 Residence To the South LDR R1-7 2 Residence 22795 Barton Road 0 Grand Terrace, California b 4Ii. AG A4 # 0 -5C BACKGROUND On July 24, 1990, the Planning Commission denied CUP-90-05, a request to locate a satellite dish antennae 25 feet in height (a conditional use permit is required for an antennae which exceeds 20 feet in height) The Planning Commission did approve SA-90-05 subject to certain conditions of approval, including Condition No 2, which required that the satellite dish antennae be mounted at ground level in the rear yard and in no case shall any portion of the dish extend above the eave line of the house On August 2nd, 1990 the applicant filed an appeal with the City Clerk's Office and requested that this item not be heard until the meeting of October 25, 1990 Included with this report is Planning Commission's staff reports and minutes for the meetings of April 17, 1990, July 10, 1990 and July 24, 1990 regarding this item RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department's analysis remains as presented in the attached staff report for April 17, 1990 The Planning Department recommends the Grand Terrace City Council uphold the Planning Commission's denial of CUP-90-05 and approval of SA-90-05 subject to the conditions as approved by the Planning Commission/Site and Architectural Review Board, thereby denying the applicant's appeal Respectfully Submitted, David Sawyer, Community Development Director TO FROM. DATE - SUBJECT: APPLICANT. LOCATION: Planning Department Planning Commi sioa Mana C Muett, Assistant Planner April 17, 1990 Staff Report File No SA 90-05 Request. An application for Site and Architectural Review Approval of a satellite dish in a R-1/7.2 Zone District. Rick and Jane Alpern 22996 Palm Avenue ZONING AND LANDUSE: PropeM GP Zonin Land Use Subject Property LDR RI-7 2 Residence To the West LDR R1-7 2 Residence To the East LDR RI-7-2 Residence To the North LDR RI-7 2 Residence To the South LDR R172 Residence ATTACHMENT B- PC MEETING 'APRIL 17,1990- 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 . (714) 824-6621 t--._� BACKGROUND On March 13, 1990, the applicant subn-utted an application for Site and Architectural Review approval of a satellite dish mounted on a pole located in the rear yard of 22996 Palm Avenue (Attachment A) According to the Grand Terrace Code Definitions (18 06 020) an accessory structure is a building, part of building, or structure which is subordinate to, and the use of which is incidental to that of the main building, structure or use on the same lot. " Pursuant to Grand Terrace Municipal Code, Residential Ordinance Site Development Standards 18 12 040 In the R1-7.2 District, accessory structures shall not exceed eight (8) feet in height unless approved by the Site and Architectural Review Board, and in no case shall exceed twenty (20) feet m height On March 8, 1990, the applicant was served a Notice of Violation for construction of an accessory structure over 8' without Site and Architectural Review approval As a result the applicant is before you this evening DISCUSSION Architectural Design The satellite dish is 10' m circumference and is mounted on a steel pole weighing 180 lbs The pole is attached onto the house by a steel bracket and is anchored in cement to the ground. Matenals are not available but attached in your packet is a brochure of the satellite receiver The apphcant has mdicated that they recently had their home painted and had the satellite dish painted to match. Refer to the photographs of various angles of the home and the satellite dish Site Plan The siteplan which has been submitted points out the location of the satellite dish and setbacks on the property Staff feels the satellite dish should be mounted on ground level and any future placement of the satellite dish must meet setback requirements for the R-1/7.2 District. COMMENTS REVIEWING AGENCY City Engineer's Office Refer to memorandum dated Apnl 11, 1990 from the City Engineer's Office/Building and Safety Department (Attachment B) f ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS Staff mailed notification letters to the adjacent property owners regarding this project (Attachment C) PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Department recommends approval of SA-90-05 subject to the following conditions 1 The proposed project shall be constructed in accordance with the Site and Architectural design as approved by the Site and Architectural Review Board on April 17, 1990, attached as Attachment A, minor changes and/or clarification may be made by the Planning Department- 2 The applicant shall mount the satellite dish at ground level and in no case shall any portion of the dish extend above the eave line of the house 3 The applicant shall move the satellite dish sufficient distance to meet the 10' driveway sideyard setback, 5' alternate sideyard setback, and 20' rearyard setback requirement. 4 Comply with City Engineer's recommendations in memorandum dated April 11, 1990 (Attachment B). Respectfully Submitted, Mana C Muett, Assistant Planner AsS�ssa-es /0/jl?C�- 4, /,1v 476-s31--sa-go-os f c- M 9 J - �rrr f \ �QI 14 BUILDING ELEVATIONS -Photos of all sides of house enclosed -The Dish and pole height above the roof is a combined total of 9' (The height of the pole from ground to top is 20' ) MATERIAL BOARD -A brochure of the satellite receiver is attached We do not have a brochure of the Dish However, the Dish is 10' in circumference and is mounted on a steel pole weighing 180 lbs The pole is securely mounted onto the house by a steel bracket and is cemented into the ground PLEASE NOTE: Our satellite dish could not be mounted on the ground on the East side of our property as it was unable to pick up any signals It could not be mounted in our backyard as there is a large pool and spa which encompasses the yard The only alternative we had were to 1) mount the satellite dish in the West corner of our front yard; or 2) mount it 3ust high enough above the roof to receive signals. We recently had the exterior of our house painted and had the satellite pole painted the same color so that less attention would be drawn to it. W 0 12-8 5136 � c►rr °) RONYD TERR C 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace ifornia 92324-5295 Civic Center 1) 824-6621 Byron R Matteson MdyOC Hugh J Grant Mayor Pro Tempon, -bara Pfennighausen Jim Singley Gene Carlstrom C'1au11u1 Members Thomas J Schwab Crry Mdndger 1 M E M O R A N D U M TO David Sawyer, Community Development Director FROM Joseph Kicak, City Engineer DATE April 11, 1990 SUBJECT SA-90-05 Following are the recommendations of this office as conditions of approval for subject proposal- 1. Provide detail design for the footing and the support of the satellite dish 2. Obtain the necessary building permit ATTACHMENT B c►rr `) T u Planning G2(ifiD T��E Department March 29, 1990 Property Owner 23006 Palm Avenue Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Re SA-90-05, 22996 Palm Dear Owner, According to the Grand Terrace Municipal Code Residential Ordinance 18.020 040 (E), "In the RI-7.2 Distnct, accessory structures shall not exceed eight (8) feet is height unless approved by the Site and Architectural Review Board, and in no case shall exceed twenty (20) feet in height. This is to inform you that the property owner of 22996 Palm Avenue has submitted a Site and Architectural Review application for approval of a satellite disk. Staff has been directed by the Planning Commission to inform the adjacent property owners of this application. Please inform the Planning Department of any comments you may have regarding this project by Apn1 11, 1990. Or if you wish you may speak before the Planning Commission on April 17, 1990, at 7:00 p m. Sincerely, David R. Sawyer, Community Development Director DRS/mcm 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 • (714) 824-6621 ATTACHMENT C GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING APRIL 17, 1990 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 April 17, 1990 at 7 00 p m. by Chairman Jerry Hawlanson. PRESENT. Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner Herman Hilkey, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner David R Sawyer, Commumty Development Director Maria C Muett, Assistant Planner Maggie Barder, Secretary John. Harper, City Attorney ABSENT- Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman Jun Sims, Commissioner PLEDGE- Ray Munson, Commissioner PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6:30 P.M. Information from staff to Planning Commissioners Information from Planning Commissioners to staff Discussion of League of California Cities Planning Commssioners Institute PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M. 1 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-38 stated that he will go along with the others and vote against it because he thinks in five years it will come up again, and it will be an eyesore Motion carries 3-2-2-0 Chairman Hawkinson and Conurussioner Van Gelder voting no Commissioners Buchanan and Sims absent The Community Development Director stated that the project is denied and there is a ten day appeal period that they may appeal the decision to the City Council Chairman Hawkinson asked if the vote of 3 to 2 is based only upon the Commissioners present or is it based upon the entire body The City Attorney stated it is the majority of those present. ITEM #8 SA-90-05 RICK AND JANIE ALPERN 22996 PALM AVENUE G.T. ANAPPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A SATELLITE DISH IN A R1-7.2 DISTRICT The Assistant Planner presented the staff report. Commissioner Hargrave stated that, according to the drawing, where they place the dish seems to meet all the recommendations The Assistant Planner stated that other than the ground mounting, when looking at the height aspect Commissioner Hargrave asked if this would mean that the applicant would have to move the dish right on top of the pole down to ground IeveL The Assistant Planner stated that either that or any other location as long as it meets setback requirements 42 RICK ALPERN 22996 PALM GT Mr Alpern apologized as he did not know they needed a permit to put it up He stated that they have a problem in that the satellite they have has to face south He stated that because they have no other room to mount the satellite in the backyard, there was no other place to mount it unless they stuck it in the frontyard, it has to have clearance on top of the house He stated that it was either that or the left side of the house, so they asked their neighbors, and none of them seemed to have a problem He stated that if you look directly in front of their house, you can't even see the satellite - you actually have to be at an angle to the house, and if you are down the street you can see it. He stated that they have no neighbors on the side of the house where the satellite is - all they have is a road and a water holding tank. He stated that he was misinformed by the satellite people, as they said he did not need a permit He said that they got together with an engineer that he knows and had him construct a way that they could put it out and mount it in a safe manner, they mounted it on a steel pole, braced it to the house, and set it in concrete, so there should be no safety discrepancy - the only thing would be the way that it looks. He stated that he could go into the various reasons of why they enjoy satellite sports enthusiast, educational purposes, community programming, workshops, etc He stated that he has no other place to mount it on the house, unless he were to move it to the front yard He stated they did look at the opposite side of the house, but the neighbor would have been looking at it, and they would have had to cut down a bunch of trees, because in order to have satellite, you need to have clearance in front of it. He stated that he can't lower it because his house would block it He stated that if it was voted down, he would love to be able to submit other plans, but unless they put it in the front yard, he wouldn't know where else to put it. He stated that he did check with the neighbors, he thinks they have a beautiful house on the block and they keep it nice Commissioner Hargrave asked if the neighbor to the north had any objections. Mr. Alpern stated that they did not ask them because they really can't see it, as they are on the down side to the right. He stated that the views are out the other way and up to the mountains, so it just doesn't block anybody's view Chairman Hawkinson asked if he installed it himself. Mr. Alpern stated that the satellite dish company installed it. He stated that, in talking with them, he asked an engineer if this would work. 43 Commission Munson asked who can see the dish Mr Alpern stated that the people below Observation or Paradise across the street from them, but it is not really in their line of vision Commissioner Hilkey asked what was inside the backyard, just inside the wrought iron and block wall Mr Alpem stated that there is a small grass area, but in order to put the satellite there, it would have to go all the way to the back and there is no room because it has to be able to view over the house Commissioner Hilkey asked if there was a space in the northwest comer Mr Alpem stated they had brought out an electronic device that monitored the signal and they said that it wouldn't have the proper clearance Commissioner Munson asked about landscaping on the fence along Paradise Mr Alpem stated that they have a wrought iron fence and they own the hill, and it is actually a slope that goes down. He stated that if you actually drove by you would see it is not an eyesore because it is hidden, as it is actually behind the house The Community Development Director clarified that it is hidden for the most part traveling west downhill on Palm. He stated it is very visible traveling uphill on Palm, and it is visible driving south on Observation and north on Observation. Mr Alpem stated that 1t is certainly a lot less visible than a lot of the antennas that come way up and are on top of the middle of the houses The Community Development Director stated that there are very few antennas in that area. Mr. Alpem stated that there are seven. Commissioner Munson asked if they were trying to establish a policy for future satellite dishes as well as try to make sure that the ones that are currently m the City are safe The Community Development Director stated that they are looking at Site and Architectural Review and making sure that the satellite follows their existing code He stated that staff has reviewed it and consider satellite m structures as an accessory structure and then they look at the code as far as how it addresses accessory structures He stated that it is the same issue as what they had with the patio, as both items are accessory structures He stated that if it is under eight feet, it can go anywhere in their yard as long as it is meeting the setback requirements, if it is above eight feet, it needs to have Site and Architectural Review, it cannot be above 20 feet, according to the code Chairman Hawkinson stated that he has tned awfully hard to go along with what he just descnbed, but he is having a very difficult time separating a satellite dish from a television antenna, as far as how he is interpreting this as a structure The Community Development Director stated that they have to go to the code and its definition section Chairman Hawkinson asked if this particular site be a little unique if this is the only place it can go and be functional, as somewhat of a vanance The City Attorney stated that it is not really a variance He said that there isn't really an obligation of the Commission to find that in every piece of property they will be able to put a satellite dish that will have a south view over a house He stated that this isn't suggesting that his approach is not satisfactory in this case, but it wouldn't be in all cases Chairman Hawkinson stated that it sounds like everybody that puts a satellite dish up is going to come before this body The Community Development Director stated that if they are over eight feet high, yes they will Chairman Hawkinson that this one may be better done aestheticAuy than some that are done within the legal hmnt. He asked how it would be if it was planted in the middle of the front yard and was within the height requirement, or even the side yard The Community Development Director stated that either way, it would be going as an accessory structure Chairman Hawkinson stated that he is having a very difficult time calling this a structure versus a gizmo that gives him a better signal from his television set. The City Attorney stated that the distinction of the definition is that it is a 45 structure in that it is separate and apart from the primary structure of the house, and obviously you cannot say the same thing about an antenna which is stuck on the house The Community Development Director stated that their definition of an accessory building for everyone to hear is "A building, part of a building or structure which is subordinate to and the use of which is incidental to that of the main building, structure or use on the same lot, it does not mean separate living quarters or guest house " He stated that a fence is even considered a structure He said that they have an out on this though, an accessory structure cannot be more than 20 feet high, and staff won't recommend this, but if they are looking for an out to get around the 20 foot high limitation, Section 18.57 80 talks about height limit exceptions, and states that, "chimneys, copulas, flag poles, monuments, radio and other towers, water tanks, church steeples, and similar structures and mechanical appurtenances may be permitted in excess of height limits provided a use permit is first obtained in each case" He stated that if they considered this as a "radio or other tower", which would not be stretching it too much, this could be allowed to go above the 20 foot height limitation if it has a Conditional Use Permit. He stated that staff feels that anything of this magnitude, visible above the roof line, is a detriment to the design and architecture of the neighborhood and the structure, and this is why staff feels it should be brought down to the ground and should be ground -mounted Chairman Hawkinson stated, supposing he was in this position, he was going to put this thing in and found out that the only place it would possibly work would be the place where he has got it, would he have grounds for a suit saying they are prohibiting him from enjoying satellite television. The City Attorney stated no, because there is no right to receive satellite, just like there is no absolute right to have short wave antennas He stated that there is some satellite television litigation, but there is a whole lot -of short wave antenna litigation. He said that 15 years ago, more or less, the state of the law was that a City could not restrict short wave antenna height because if you made them short, it was impossible to receive a signal, but this is no longer a law and hasn't been for about 10 years He stated that the same thing presumably applies to satellite, although there is no case that he is aware addresses it quite that directly, as most satellites aren't elevated on poles Commissioner Hargrave stated he and his neighbor probably have the best view of his dish because they look toward Blue Mountain and the back of his house, which is where his dish is He stated that he thinks he did a wonderful job of aesthetically tuning it mto the house, and if anybody would be miffed, it would probably be him and his neighbor about any horizon pollution that could be there He stated that he has it there, he has done a very, very good job, and has toned it into the house to where you probably wouldn't be noticing it He stated that he is going to vote for approval of this, but he does want to bring in the Community Development Director's exception, as he things they put this under the permitted use under the exception rules as a condition The Community Development Director stated that they can't do that, as it requires a public hearing, and they would have to reschedule it Commissioner Hargrave stated that they should reschedule it if that is what it would take He stated that he thinks it should stay, as bringing it down to the ground would not make any sense, and there is no place to put this thing in his backyard that makes any sense at all, and he sure does not want it in the front yard He stated that it is unfortunate that he trusted the contractor He stated that neither he nor his neighbor find it objectionable and they have a perfect view of it. He feels he is trying to comply and is wilhng to give him the benefit of the doubt, let him leave it there under the conditional usage factor and in the future, if it doesn't work out, then they have some recourse to come back and talk to him. He asked if they have to deny this project The City Attorney stated that, as a practical matter, they have to deny it because it doesn't comply with the code, but suggest to the applicant that he reapply for a Conditional Use Permit He stated that one of the advantages of that is that the neighbors get the opportunity to make comment. Commissioner Hargrave stated that it also protects him from someone saying that no one told them about this The City Attorney stated that, unfortunately with a 20 foot high limitation, they don't have much choice Commissioner Hargrave asked what fees the apphcant would incur to do this The Community Development Director stated that he has submitted $100 for Site and Architectural Review and even if he does do the Conditional Use Permit, Site and Architectural Review is still required, so it would be an additional $100 for the Conditional Use Permit, and he would suggest that they continue the Site and Architectural Review until such time that the C.0 P. hearing has been held, and then they can make a determination as to whether it is per code or not. ' Mr Alpern stated that this seems good to him, but he is a little confused, as 47 MOTION PCM-90-39 SA-90-05 nobody seems to really object and they haven't taken a vote He asked why, since it picks up radio signals as well as television signals and is considered a radio tower, why couldn't they just approve it that way The City Attorney stated that this exception does require a Conditional Use Permit Mr Alpern asked if they could have any other variances The City Attorney stated that all of these things require a public hearing no matter how they do it Mr Alpern asked if they could just have an approval because nobody objects Commssioner Hargrave stated that he is trying to give him the easiest way for $100 if he would accept it Mr Alpern stated that he is not worried about the $100 Commissioner Hargrave stated that they are trying to give him some protection in case somebody does come to him and say he is in violation of the code, which technically he is even though he didn't know it Mr Alpern asked what he does when he files the petition. Commissioner Hargrave stated that he should coordinate with the Community Development Department. Commissioner Hargrave made the motion to continue SA 90-05 Commissioner Munson second Commissioner Van Gelder stated that she is trying to come up with a middle- of-the-road solution. She stated that she understands there are about eight people m town that have satellite dishes and will be coming in for approval The Community Development Director stated that they have cited five. Commissioner Van Gelder stated that she knows they can't assume that anybody else coming in and putting up a satellite dish is automatically going to know that they need a permit, but if they do know, the only appropriate term she can think of is to somehow grandfather in the ones that are already here, because there was no regulation in place or they didn't know about it The City Attorney stated that the regulation has always been in place, and he can't imagine any satellite dish that pre -dates some accessory use requirement in their zone, as even the County has sirrular requirements Commmssioner Van Gelder asked if they make them go tear it down The City Attorney stated that they sure do Commissioner Van Gelder stated that they had some three bedroom apartments that were supposed to be two bedrooms, and nobody made them tear those down The Community Development Director stated that this was a separate issue Commissioner Van Gelder stated that she knows it is different, but she doesn't think the City is very strong on tearing it down if it is not appropriate The Community Development Director stated that permits were issued for the three bedroom apartments, and whether everyone agreed whether or not they should have got permits or not, they received permits and they are legal structures, however, if they want to go back and look at the Hartzell case for code enforcement, they went in and hauled away junk and tore down part of his structure He stated that they have done that, and the cities have the power and have done it in the past. He stated that being a young City, they haven't had to go to that extreme, but they do have the power to do it Commissioner Van Gelder asked, for instance, about a satellite dish that has been put up, and there is no other way that they can receive satellite messages The City Attorney stated that she is making satellite dishes something different than other types of accessory structures, and it is no different than the guy who had the patio cover and wanted to have an observation deck; you still have to measure it by the standard of its impact on the neighbors and all the architectural review standards He stated that there isn't any inalienable right to have a satellite dish for every piece of property in the City of Grand Terrace. The Community Development Director stated that it would be a lot easier if it was not already up and paid for. .,, MOTION VOTE PC-90-39 Commissioner Munson asked if both of these satellite dishes are the same, and if they could handle them both under the first motion, or will they both have to come back The Community Development Director stated that the next item on the agenda is also a satellite dish, but that one is not over 20 feet, so they don't have the height restriction issue Motion carries 5-0-2-0 Commissioners Buchanan and Sims absent ITEM #9 SA-90-07 RAUL MARTINEZ 22683 MIRIAM WAY GT AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A SATELLITE IN A RI-7 2 DISTRICT The Assistant Planner presented the staff report. RAUL MARTINEZ 22683 MIRIAM WAY G.T Mr Martinez apologized as he did not know that there were permits to be granted through the City, and he contracted through Home Satellite, Inc out of Riverside, with the owner Charles Chisholm, who is not here tonight, so he will try to answer any technical questions there are of the satellite dish itself. He stated that when Mr. Chisholm came out and sold him the satellite back in December of 1989, he brought out his monitoring equipment and told him that the site as they see now on the schematic is possibly the best location for reception of a satellite signal, the reason being that he has two more trees to the south, and slightly west of the satellite dish, there is a tree m the property line to the west and slightly south that hangs over and almost touches the satellite dish as it sits now, and the shrubbery along the southern property line to the west and east is at least in excess of 15 feet in height, and according to Mr Chisholm, he would need a clear signal in order to receive the best possible reception, and this is why they had it mounted on the pole and tried to hide it behind the house as best as possible He stated that the maximum 50 r � April 18, 1990 Rick and Janie Alpern 22996 Palm Avenue Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Re SA-90-05 Satellite Dish Dear Mr & Mrs Alpern, Planning Department On April 17, 1990, the Planning Commission continued your Site and Architectural Review indefinitely You were directed to submit a Conditional Use Permit application for this use Once the Conditional Use Permit application has been filed then it will be scheduled for the next appropriate Planning Commission Meeting along with the Site and Architectural review (SA-90-05) 6621 If you should have any questions, please contact the Planning Department 714-824- Sincerely, Mana C Muett, Assistant Planner 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 • (714) 824-6621 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT. APPLICANT. LOCATION DISCUSSION - Planning Department Planning Comnussion Maria C Muett, Assistant Planner Y� July 5, 1990 Staff Report File No SA-90-05 and CUP-90-05 Request An application for a Conditional Use Permit approval of a satellite dish in a R1-7 2 District Rick and Jane Alpern 22996 Palm Avenue On April 17, 1990, your body continued the Site and Architectural Review of SA-90-05 indefinitely until the applicant submitted a Conditional Use Permit for a satellite dish measuring over 20' feet This project is categorically exempt per Section 15303, Class 3, under the California Environmental Quality Act It was staffs opinion in the earlier review of SA 90-05 project, and staffs opinion is the same, that the applicant mount the satellite dish at ground level and in no case should any portion of the dish extend above the eave line of the house Therefore, with the applicant wishing to keep the satellite dish above the allowable height it is staffs recommendation that the Conditional Use Permit be denied based on excessive height in the R1-7.2 District Respectfully Submitted, �f oe ;%744u.J9 ITEM T � � � Mana C Muett, _ Assistant Planner ITEM 6 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 0 (714) 824-6621 s� J � — l � r s y _♦ �f r goo V CV 4/6-631-� � Y ATTACHMENT �; ;=.� Apr• -- ?�4c3ii'L..CCLpti.r.ri i ii / x it A , f L ,.< tit �� r •� 1 ` rr s - - 0 Buttonhook feed support system Models QD 0100 and MT 0200 Antenna Features (Model QD 0100) )ur-piece constr,,ction pre -assembled esign with 10' robed expanded mesh in place for fast easy installation ■ 20 extruded support ribs formed to accurate parabolic curve for clean smooth appearance ■ Inner support ring 'or more uniform stress distribution ■ Quad feed support system • Optional buttonhook feed support system • 12" diameter 1C gouge buttonhook support plate for greater stability to high wind areas ■ Eosy-To-reach up `rant buttonhook adjustment ■ Small diamond-s-ope rolled expanded mesh for u,)matcned Gerformcnce on C and Ku -bard --a orecistor, surface tolerance 38-y ccen • Completely seaea vith sever) -step the moset smo,ceo chrome oowcler coat finish for mex n.,m UV and weather protection ■ Rust-,esistant fas erers ■ SI-Iroud Includea weather protection of electronics • Antenna individually packaged • Appearance un^laTched by any other antenna of this p ce 1 D3W W NEGARD Cleo 0 Best FEATURES AND SPECIFICATIONS Antenna Specifications (Model QD 0100) Reflector D-ameter '0' (3 meters) Hole Size Diamond 155 x 100" Frequency Range C-bond 3 7-4 2GHz Ku -band 117-12 2GHz Ga,n C-band 40 OdB Ku -band 48 OcB c t2GHz F/D Ratio 0 35 Feed Type Prime Focus Depth 21-1/2" Focal Length 40-1/2" Gauge 032 Expanded Aluminum Operating Temperature -40`F to - 140'F Finish Smoked Chrome Powder COOT Shipping Weight 113 'bs reflector Carton Dimension 66 'x 66" x 15" MT 0220 Mount for Quad Feed Support System Comolete exce: or 3 OD a,ound pine Quad Feed Support System Models QD 0100 MT 0220 and QF 0220 antenna suppor' r,rg ossemoiv deciino lion adjustment latitude plvo beam and shroud Shipping Weight 64 los Carton Dimensions 36 75" x 3f; 25" x 12' QF 0220 Quad Feed Support Legs and Hardware (use with MT 0220 Mount) MT 0200 Mount with Buttonhook Feed Support Complete except for 3 - OD ground pipe Includes hardware package an- tenna support ring assembly declination adjustment latitude pivot beam shroud and buttonhook/buttonhook su000rt Shipping Weight 63 lbs Carton Dimensions 36 75 ' x 30 25 ' x 12' Mount Features (Models MT 0220, MT 0200) 1 Oversize 32' dtarr,ete' t -�cK_L c zu,^-cor- ng roonccted ,ror- 2 ' a-gle r:;- s I-ck `or more slocd,Tv 2 EtgnT welded cT,cchme^, coin's Tor reflector 3 Fully-aa;ustaoe dec, noT,c" se. rg to ensure accurate satellite arc , ick ng 4 Heavy-auty on-Itte bushtrgs aT c PIVOT pouts 5 Heavy-duty lock dorm bogs collar r,ls standard 3 OD ground otpe 6 East or West Coast actuator placement 7 Rust-resistonT hardware ■ Maximum UV and weather protectior with seven -step thermoset smoked chrome powder coat finish on all surfaces • 100% pre -assembled and packed to one carton Wtnegard Company - 3000 Kirkwood Street ■ Burttnglon IA 52601 1007 319 754 0600 • FAX 319 754 0787 GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING TULY 10� 1990 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 July 10, 1990, at 7 00 p in by Chairman Jerry Hawkinson PRESENT Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Jim Sims, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner Joe Ktcak, City Engineer David R Sawyer, Community Development Director Maria C Muett, Assistant Planner Maggie Barder, Secretary ABSENT: Herman Hrlkey, Commissioner PLEDGE Jim Sims, Commissioner PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6 30 P.M Information from staff to Planning Commissioners Information from Planning Commissioners to staff Presentation of Advocate School perimeter fence alternative of vinyl -coated, black, chain -link with painted black, galvanized posts PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None ITEM #S CUP-90-OS RICK AND JANIE ALPERN 22996 PALM AVENUE GT AN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SATELLITE DISH IN A RI-7 2 DISTRICT The Assistant Planner presented the staff report Commissioner Munson asked how the average property owner would know that he is required to have a permit for a satellite dish The Assistant Planner stated that it is stated in the ordinance, but the City doesn't necessarily handout brochures to individual property owners when they purchase a home Commissioner Munson recommended that a bulletin go out in the sewer bill stating that a permit is required for a satellite dish and that the Chamber of Commerce include it in their newsletter Commissioner Hargrave asked if staff had any feeling about an alternate site The Assistant Planner stated that she wasn't present at the meeting when this was discussed, but she understood there was some discussion with the applicant as to other possible locations Chairman Hawkinson called up the applicant RICK ALPERN 22996 PALM AVENUE GT Chairman Hawkinson asked if the dish was ever located in a different area. Mr Alpem stated that it was not, and in the last meeting, they went over the different locations of where it could be, but the satellite company brings out a monitor to measure the where strength of the signal is, and since a satellite has to face south and his house faces north, it had to go over the house, and the only other alternative was putting it in the front yard, and he felt the neighbors wouldn't like that. He stated that he had no idea a permit was required, so they went ahead and had it mounted on the least objectionable place which was on the side of the house He stated that they had asked the neighbors if they had any objection and they said no 17 Chairman Hawkinson asked if he had asked the neighbors on all adjacent sides Mr Alpern stated that he had asked the neighbors on the left side of his house and the neighbors directly across the yard, but there are no other neighbors directly next to them as they are on a hillside Commissioner Hargrave asked if there was any space on the west side of the house before reaching his fence line and going down his slope Mr Alpern stated that they had thought about that, but this imposes on the neighbor to the left, and they would have to remove a tree that had been there many years, and it aught have to be higher for clearance of the other side of the house Comnussioner Munson asked if he was aware he needed a building permit Mr Alpern stated that he was not, and that he had asked the satellite company if he needed a permit and they said no He stated that as he further read the contract, he found it is their responsibility to get a permit if necessary, but he had no idea He stated that his insurance company even described it as an antenna, so everyone has their own definition. Commissioner Munson asked if the dish was laying on the side today Mr Alpern stated that since they had problems with the dish itself, the company decided to bring it down to work on it since it was windy, and he rested it on the side of the wrought iron fence, and the weight of it put it right down Commissioner Munson asked if there was any other place to put the dish Mr' Alpern stated yes, on the east side of the house, but this would require taking out a substantial tree that has been there a long time and a couple of other trees that have been there a while, and it would be tremendously more noticeable, and it still might have to be over 20 feet in order to maintain reception Chairman Hawkinson asked what the current height is Commissioner Hargrave stated that the report says the height is 20 feet plus the size of the dish Mr Alpern stated that the dish is 10 feet, but 1/2 mounts below and 1/2 mounts above the pole, which puts the height at 25 feet Commussioner Hargrave stated that he would vote against staffs recommendation He stated that his front yard looks up into the applicant's backyard, so he has a very good view of it, and he has done a very good job of trying to disguise it as best as he can, and he has done it in a very pleasing and aesthetic manner He stated that he would suggest that the Conditional Use Permit only be allowed for the time that this particular property owner is in the house, and upon vacation of the property either as a rental or in selling the house, the Conditional Use Permit would automatically expire Commissioner Van Gelder stated that she feels deeply for the applicant, but on the other hand, where do you draw the line PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 10 07 P M PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 10 07 P M MOTION PCM-90-89 CUP-90-05 Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to have condition #1 read that the Conditional Use Permit is not transferable either to renters or to new property owners Corntmssioner Munson second The Community Development Director stated that this is an enforcement nightmare as the Planning Department is not notified when a property is sold or when a property goes to a renter He stated that the only way they are notified is through the assessor's update rolls, and they would have to wait for every one of those and check to see if that address was on it He stated that the only alternative would be an annual review or 5 year review of the Conditional Use Permit, but staff recommended that if they are going to go along with the Conditional Use Permit, they should just approve it, as it is not something they are going to be breaking rules with as it is there He said that if they change the location, that would change the conditions of the Conditional Use Permit and staff would notice it Commissioner Hargrave stated that he would like to take his recommendation and put the burden on Mr Alpern to come in and apply for renewal of the Conditional Use Permit on an annual basis, and if he doesn't, it expires Chairman Hawkinson asked if they got the height of the satellite, would this get it back into conformity 19 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-89 MOTION PCM-90-90 CUP-90-05 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-90 The Community Development Director stated if it dropped below 20 feet, this would eliminate the need for a Conditional Use Permit Commissioner Hargrave amended his motion to incorporate the annual renewal of the Conditional Use Permit, that it automatically expires unless it is renewed and approved on an annual basis Commissioner Munson concurred Motion carries 5-1-1-0 Commissioner Sims voted no Comnssioner Hilkey absent Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to approve CUP-90-05 as conditioned Commissioner Munson second Motion fails for lack of majority 3-3-1-0 Commissioners Van Gelder, Hargrave and Munson voted yes Commissioner Hilkey absent Commissioner Buchanan stated that he voted against the item because, while he has sympathy toward the applicant's position, he is concerned that they start setting a dangerous precedent by approvals based on unfortunate situations He stated that a satellite dish is not necessary Commissioner Sims agreed Mr Alpem stated that he enjoys satellite for educational programming and for a daughter that is growing up He said that he understands it is not his inalienable nght to receive satellite, but as opposed to mounting it anywhere else, the way his lot faces and the way it is structured is unique, and the reason they continued this at the last meeting was to get the Conditional Use Permit, and nobody had any objections at that point. He stated that as opposed to putting it in the front yard, he put it in a place that is inconspicuous, but what they have is a difference of about 4 1/2 feet. He W stated that he has painted the pole and portions of the dish, he checked with the neighbors and none of them seemed to object, and he doesn't know if this is precedent -setting, as how many houses face north that are that tall, have no other access and have pools in it He stated that most of the lots in the neighborhood have twice the size backyard as he does Chairman Hawkinson asked if the Grand Terrace cable system is not a viable alternative, as you can get two PBS stations Mr Alpern stated that he did not enjoy the service from the local cable company as he had problems with reception and they didn't help him out He stated there is are more educational stations, including one called MEU that gives nothing but educational seminars and learning experiences for his child He stated that cable had 38 or 40 channels and satellite provides 160 to 170 channels Commissioner Munson asked how long he had the dish Mr Alpern said about 7 months He stated that they were prepared from the first meeting, but there were continuances of the meetings Chairman Hawkinson asked how much time per day he spent watching television Mr Alpern stated that he works from 7 a m to 8 or 9 p m almost every day, so he probably watches television about an hour and a half a day, but his wife is very much into education and would like their child to get all the programming, and they watch it probably 3 hours a day Chairman Hawkinson asked what would happen if he lowered the dish Mr Alpern said he wouldn't get anything as the dish would be facing right into the house since it has to face south and move east to west He stated that he could put it in front of his front fence if it wasn't objectionable Commissioner Buchanan asked staffs view on the precedential effect of an approval and how it figured into staffs recommendation for denial The Community Development Director stated that it had very little to do with it, as they look at every case on an individual basis Commissioner Munson stated that they initially had five dishes they were concerned with He stated that the general public had not been informed that they need a permit, and bearing that in mind, the five dishes probably should 21 MOTION PCM-90-91 CUP-90-OS MOTION VOTE PCM-90-91 MOTION PCM-90-92 CUP-90-05 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-92 be allowed Commissioner Buchanan made a motion to add as condition #2 that the Conditional Use Permit be non -transferable to any renter or new owner Commissioner Hargrave second Chairman Hawkinson asked if this would be reviewed each year The Community Development Director stated that this is still a procedural nightmare as a new property owner buys the dish as part of real property and then staff has to tell the new owner they don't have a right to have it Motion fails 1-5-1-0 Commissioner Hargrave voted yes Commissioner Hilkey absent Commissioner Munson made a motion to approve CUP-90-05 Commissioner Hargrave second Commissioner Hargrave stated that he is not making a motion for a condition, but this should expire every year Commissioner Munson asked if he would be subject to an annual fee The Community Development Director stated that he would Commissioner Munson stated that he didn't know how they would enforce this He stated they should vote and get the applicant off the top of the fence COMMISSIONER MUNSON CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. 22 MOTION PCM-90-93 CUP-90-OS MOTION PCM-90-94 CUP-90-05 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-94 Motion fails 1-5-1-0 Commissioner Munson voted yes Commissioner Hilkey absent Commissioner Sims made a motion to deny CUP-90-05 Commissioner Van Gelder second The Community Development Director stated that the applicant asked for a continuance until Commussioner Hilkey was present, as one of the votes previously was a tie vote of 3-3, which may have given him approval of the project Comnussioner Sims withdrew the motion Commissioner Van Gelder concurred Commissioner Munson made a motion to continue CUP-90-05 to the Planning Commission Meeting to be held July 24, 1990 Commissioner Van Gelder second Commissioner Buchanan expressed discomfort with the notion of commissioner shopping Motion carries 6-0-1-0 Commissioner Hilkey absent Mr Alpem stated that they are talking about a motion that really needed to be voted on again, which was Commissioner Hargrave's first motion which was a tie He stated that nobody brought this motion back up He stated that he would like to see a vote and would be happy with the response on that and would accept it for both provisions He stated that he is willing to do the Conditional Use Permit, and he is truly under the belief that when he was up there last time, the Commission told him to get a Conditional Use Pernut and everything would probably be okay without any problems, and he has done all of this He stated that he is asking for the other commissioner to be here 23 because that is what he was told to do, and now the story changes, and all he did was follow the directions He stated that he thinks he belongs in the City and he would just like a little consistency, so he would like to see a vote on that Chairman Hawkinson stated at this point, they have already continued this item Mr Alpern stated that he would appreciate an answer, and that at the April 17, 1990 meeting, he suggested putting a notice out so that people know about ` satellite dishes PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10.50 P.M. SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED AT 10 50 P M ITEM #6 SA-90-05 RICK AND JANIE ALPERN 22996 PALM AVENUE G.T AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A SATELLITE DISH IN A R1-7.2 DISTRICT MOTION PCM-90-95 SA-90-05 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-95 Chairman Hawkuison recommended that they continue this item to July 24, 1990 Commissioner Van Gelder made a motion to continue SA 90-05 to July 24, 1990 Commissioner Sims second Motion carves 6-0-1-0 Commissioner Hilkey absent. 24 7-10 9 o t K%, Planning Department July 11, 1990 Rick and Jane Alpern 22996 Palm Avenue Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Re SA-90-05/CUP-90-05 Satellite Dish in a R1-7 2 District Dear Mr & Mrs Alpern, This is to inform you that the Planning Commission continued your Conditional Use Permit application (CUP-90-05) and the Site and Architectural Review (SA-90-05) for a satellite dish (over 20 feet) located at 22996 Palm Avenue, to the July 24, 1990 Planning Commission Meeting at 7 00 p in If you should have any further questions, please contact the Community Development Director at 714-824-6621 Sincerely, Maria C Muett, Assistant Planner mcm/ 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 0 (714) 824-6621 Planning Department TO Planning Commission P , `- FROM David R Sawyer, Community Development Director DATE. July 20, 1990 SUBJECT: Staff Report File No CUP-90-05 and SA-90-05 Request An application for Conditional Use Permit approval and Site and Architectural approval of a satellite dish in a R1-7 2 District APPLICANT• Rick and Jame Alpem LOCATION. 22996 Palm Avenue DISCUSSION On July 10, 1990, the Planning Commission continued this project until the July 24, 1990 meetmg Respectfully submitted, David R. Sawyer ly Community Development Director DRS mb ITEM 6 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 • (714) 824-6621 ITEM 7 GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING YULY 24, 1990 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 July 24, 1990, at 7 00 p in by Chairman Jerry Hawkinson PRESENT Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner Herman Hilkey, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Jun Suns, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner Joe Knca.k, City Engineer David R Sawyer, Community Development Director Maria C Muett, Assistant Planner Maggie Barder, Planning Secretary ABSENT None PLEDGE Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6 00 P.M Planning Commission, staff and applicant convened at the site of 22872 Main Street (SP-90-02, TTM-90-02, E-90-03) to observe and discuss the terrain of the project. Information from staff to Planning Commissioners Information from Planning Commissioners to staff PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION None Commissioner Hargrave asked if the manufacturing involved nailing with nail guns Mr Corolis stated yes, as well as spray painting, etc PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 10 35 P M PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 10 35 P M MOTION PCM-90-113 CUP-88-14R1 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-113 Commissioner Hargrave had a problem with 6 a m , since the noise ordinance goes to 7 a in He stated that he has no problem with 8 p m Commissioner Buchanan expressed concern with 8 p in as there is year-round school going into effect Commissioner Munson stated that the noise ordinance would govern this Commissioner Munson made a motion to approve CUP-88-14R1 as recommended by staff Commissioner Van Gelder second Motion carves 7-1-0-0 Commissioner Hargrave voted no ITEM #6 CUP-90-05 RICK AND JANIE ALPERN 22996 PALM AVENUE G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SATELLITE DISH IN A R1-7.2 DISTRICT The Community Development Director presented the staff report. Chairman Hawkinson asked if the applicant had anything to add. 25 RICK ALPERN 22996 PALM AVENUE GT Mr Alpern stated that he had a 7 1/2 in width foot satellite dish put up to replace the 10 foot dish to cut down the size and visibility and to comply He read the letter from the City Manager to him, and pointed out that there is another place to put the satellite dish, which is on the front lawn He stated that he has done everything he could possibly do and he went through the Conditional Use Permit process He said that he has on tape that the Community Development Director stated at the first meeting that anything over 20 feet needs a Conditional Use Permit, which is why they couldn't recommend it the first time He stated that at the last meeting, the person that went up after him had a satellite dish at 20'5", which is still over 20 feet He stated that there needs to be consistency Commissioner Buchanan asked what the overall height is Mr Alpem stated that the overall height is approximately 23 feet, but may be up to 25 feet, as he didn't re -measure it He stated that he feels the width is more important, and he paid $300 to make the width smaller Commissioner Munson asked if he talked to the installer about relocating it in the back yard at ground level Mr Alpem stated that he does not have the room, as he has a pool, and moving it would require moving the fence He stated that he has a problem with this as one of the reasons they go through a Conditional Use Permit process to allow the people in the neighborhood an opportunity to address their displeasure of what is being done, and if none of them are bothered, why does bother anyone else Commissioner Suns asked if it could be lowered to the 20 foot mark. Mr Alpem stated that he will not have clearance over the house for reception. Commissioner Suns asked if it could be put at 8 feet in the front yard, without other buildings affecting it Mr Alpem stated that he could, as there is nothing directly in front of his house Commissioner Hilkey stated that the problem is that the position of his house 26 L MOTION PCM-90-114 CUP-90-05 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-114 and lot is probably the worst for a satellite dish Mr Alpern stated that he is not interested in corning back every year to apply for a Conditional Use Permit and pay the fees Commissioner Van Gelder asked about the fence that would have to be moved Mr Alpern stated that there is a wrought iron and stone fence that would have to be moved Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to approve CUP-90-05 Commissioner Hilkey second Chairman Hawkinson stated that the height of the dish is still offensive, so maybe the side of the house would be the only way Commissioner Hargrave stated that the problem is that there is a 5 foot slope on the east side of the house which would be challenging engineering -wise He asked if they would have 20 feet with the slope and 15 foot setback The Community Development Director stated that there would be a 10 foot setback Commissioner Sims stated that he is going to be consistent and will vote no, as he doesn't feel it belongs where he has it Motion fails. 2-5-0-0 Commissioners Hargrave and Munson voted yes Mr Alpern stated that he had a tape with lying on it. Chauman Hawkinson informed Mr. Alpern that he was out of turn and already had an opportunity to talk. Mr Alpern stated that he would like another opportunity. 27 Chairman Hawkinson stated that they will declare a recess if he continues to speak out of turn Mr Alpern stated that his option is to walk out Chairman Hawkinson stated that be was out of line Mr Alpern stated, "You guys are a bunch of jew-haters, you keep someone's at 20 5 feet and you let it go, okay? Think about it Look at Webster's dictionary You let the black man keep it up but you don't let the jew keep it up " Chairman Hawkinson declared a five muiute recess 11:05 P.M. TO 11.15 P M - RECESS Chairman Hawkinson stated that the applicant was out of line and the accusations were unbelievable, but he truly felt they voted on the project on it the ment of the project itself PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11.15 P M SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED AT 1115 P M ITEM #7 SA-90-05 RICK AND JANIE ALPERN 22996 PALM AVENUE G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A SATELLITE DISH IN A RI-7.2 DISTRICT The Community Development Director presented the staff report Commissioner Sims asked if the intent was that the dish be in the back yard He stated that the condition does not specify front or back yard The Community Development Director suggested the Planning Commission amend the condition that it should be ground -mounted in the rear property and not visible from the front yard property He stated that the intent is that nothing is sticking up above the roof line. 9. MOTION PCM-90-115 SA-90-05 Comrrussioner Van Gelder asked what would be done if the applicant didn't comply The Community Development Director stated they would go through the nuisance abatement process Commissioner Hilkey asked if it would be appropriate to direct staff to contact an expert to clarify where these things have to be mounted The Community Development Director suggested the commission direct staff or recommend to City Council to direct staff to prepare a satellite dish ordinance and that in the preparation, investigate what it takes to make a satellite dish work, but this would be a separate issue from tonight's item and would have to be agendized Commissioner Munson stated that at the last meeting, staff indicated they were in the process of preparing a mailer for people to come and obtain from the Planning Department He stated that he suggested something go out in the sewer bill or Chamber of Commerce newsletter on the current status of satellite dishes The Community Development Director stated that the Planning Commission can not authorize staff s expenditure of funds, so he would need to have this from the City Council Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to approve SA-90-OS with further clarification as to condition #2 that the applicant shall mount the satellite dish at ground level in the rear yard, and in no case shall any portion of the dish extend above the eave line of the house Commissioner Sims second Commissioner Munson asked about the letter from the City Manager The Community Development Director stated that the City Manager responded to him with a letter stating that there is nothing the city has that would prevent him from placing an accessory structure that met the height requirements below 8 feet in his front yard, but it can not be within the front or side yard setback or nght-of-way Commissioner Hilkey asked if the motion would prevent the applicant from placing the dish between his home and the home directly east of him- 29 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-115 The Community Development Director stated that the motion approved it within the rear yard, which would be interpreted as behind side yard fence lines Commissioner Hargrave reinforced the idea from this body that they are not against satellite dishes as long as they are within limitations Motion carries 7-0-0-0 The Community Development Director stated that there is a 10 day appeal period for this item ITEM #8 SA-90-16 STEVEN W. AND KA.REN A. FOX SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PICO AND BLUE MOUNTAIN COURT G T. AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING IN A R1-20 DISTRICT The Assistant Planner presented the staff report Chairman Hawkinson called up the applicant STEVEN FOX 382 EAST BONNIEVIEW RIALTO Commissioner Hilkey asked if you can see through the gate in the front Mr Fox indicated the gate on the colored rendering, stating it is wrought iron and you can see through it. Commissioner Sims asked if he is going with concrete tile Mr Fox responded in the affirmative He stated that there are three bathrooms two upstairs and one with a shower downstairs, and the floor of the balcony is actually only 8 feet high and comes off of the master bedroom. 30 July 25, 1990 Rick and Jane Alpern 22996 Palm Avenue Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Planning Department Re CUP-90-05 and SA-90-05 An application for Conditional Use Permit approval and Site and Architectural approval of a satellite dish in a RI-7 2 District Dear Mr & Mrs Alpern, This is to inform you that the Planning Commission on July 24, 1990, denied your application for a Conditional Use Permit of a satellite dish (25 feet) located at 22996 Palm Avenue There is a ten day appeal period available to you If you so choose, you may file an appeal application with the City Clerk's Office and the fee for tlus is $133 00 dollars The Site and Architectural Review Board approved your Site and Architectural application for a satellite dish based on the following approved conditions 1 The proposed project shall be constructed in accordance with the Site and Architectural design as approved by the Site and Architectural Review Board on July 24, 1990, attached as Attachment A, minor changes and/or clarification may be made by the Planning Department 2 The applicant shall mount the satellite dish at ground level in the rear yard and in no case shall any portion of the dish extend above the eave line of the house 3 The applicant shall move the satellite dish sufficient distance to meet the appropriate residential setbacks 4 Compliance with the City Engineer's recommendations in memorandum dated April 11, 1990 (Attachment B) 22795 Barton Road 9 Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 9 (714) 824-6621 /„5 tl- a 3 The appropriate budding permit for the SA-90-05 may be pulled prior to July 24, 1991 If you should have any questions, please contact the Planning Department or City Clerk's Office Sincerely, M na C Muett, Assistant Planner in n RECEIVED A I I G 2 1990 CITY CLERK'S DEPT APPLICATION FOR APPEAL APPELLANT NAME ADDRESS 2-2' % /G 6T7 CITY rrYC/Y,� eG PHONE NO zy,5- ��/Vd SUBJECT PROPERTY / ADDRESS o�-7 � � �2 �'2 L/�'C A'P/Zc �P This application is for the purpose of appealing the following A Planning Commission Decision ✓ A Site and Architectural Review Board Decision Other File or Permit number C60 - 90 "05- F �fi - %0 J dS- Please specify what portions of the Planning Commission's or Site and Architectural Review Board's decision you are appealing f'Lc. n rao Please state any facts reg�rding'th`is case which you feel are in dispute C�-� /�. f-fU / p� 15Z,6- 6% /� Yz y I yiny CGY7� m ! O, o Please explain why you feel the Plan -rung Commission's or Site and Architectural Review Board's decision should be changed by the City Council Be specific and include any evidence which supports your position coif) ec 7 s az vt! STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION" I verit, that the information I have provided in this application is true and correct Appellant _ Date \PLANNING\CE\APLAPPL .10,YL hac-l--) az- G2, YZ O� ZLe, O Y(. �_ C/1�v�` C-c ✓ �C GCU ti0 TE : � �� Y� /- / �( I--- I Planning Department TO City Council FROM David Sawyer, Community Development Director DATE. October 25, 1990 SUBJECT: Staff Report, File No CUP-90-06/SA-90-17 Request An appeal of the Planning Commission's denial APPLICANT K & M Accessories LOCATION. 22474 A Barton Road ZONING AND LANDUSE Pro a GP Zoning Land Use Subject Property GC BRSP Retail - hobby shop To the West GC BRSP Retail/ Vacant To the East GC BRSP Retail To the North OC AP Vacant To the South GC BRSP Retail 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92 1: AdWft # �D BACKGROUND On October 2nd, 1990 the Planning Commission denied CUP-90-06 and SA-90-17 based on inadequate plans and unclear information submitted to the Planning Commission and the plans which were submitted proposed parking improvements inconsistent with Title 18, Chapter 18 20, 'Barton Road Specific Plan" requirements On October 10, 1990, Mayor Matteson filed an appeal with the City Clerk so that this item may be heard by the City Council Included with this report are the staff reports and minutes for the August 7, 1990, September 4, 1990 and October 2, 1990 Planning Cornnussion meetings regarding this item RECOMMENDATION At the time of this report no new information or materials have been received by staff, therefor the Planning Department recommends the Grand Terrace City Council uphold the Planning Commission's denial of CUP-90-06 and SA-90-17 Respectfully submitted by 1✓ David Sawyer, Community Development Director - TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: REQUEST: Planning Department Planning Commission David Sawyer, Community Development Director 61 Augustfi9r, 1990 Staff Report, CUP-90-06 & SA 90-17 K & M Accessories 22474 A Barton Road (Attachment B) A Conditional Use Permit for an outdoor remote control car race track. ZONING AND LANDUSE: PropeM GP Zonin Land Use Subject Property GC BRSP Retail - hobby shop To the Vilest GC BRSP Retail/ Vacant To the East GC BRSP Retail To the North OC AP Vacant To the South GC BRSP Retail ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: A Negative Declaration has been prepared for this project and as attached as Attachment Ns Exhibit B. 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 • (714) 824-6621 ATTACHMENT } E DISCUSSION. The applicant is proposing to operate an outdoor remote control model car race track (please refer to the apphcanfs application and letter attached as Attachment C). The Barton Road Specific Plan allows an outdoor activity if it is associated with a permitted hobby shop and it receives approval of a conditional use permit. To date, the applicant has constructed the race track, partially completed the control tower, t extended electrical service to this area and has begun operating the facility (please refer to Attachment D) Staff has been working with the applicant for several months regarding submittal of his application which is before the Planning Commission at this time. It is staffs understanding that the apphcant is requesting to operate the race track Friday evenings from 5.00 pin. to 10:00 p.m. (lights to remain on for clean up until 11:00 p.m.) and on Sundays from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.. The applicant has submitted a site plan (please refer to Attachment A's Exhibit A) which includes a lighting and landscaping plan and a list of the items and operating conditions he is requesting (staff has indicated to the applicant that it will be necessary for him to explain in detail, exactly what he is requesting in his presentation at the time of the meeting). REVIEWING AGENCY COAMENTS: The following responses have been received from the City's Reviewing Agencies: ENGINEERING BBULLDING & SAFETY The Engineering/Building & Safety Department's comments are included in their memorandum dated July 31, 1990 and attached as Attachment Ns Exhibit C. FORESTRY AND FIRE WARDEN DEPARTMENT The Fire Department's comments are included in their memorandum dated July 19, 1990 and attached as Attachment Xs Exhibit D. PLANNING ISSUES: Pursuant to Section 1&66.040 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code, certain findings must be made for approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The following staff analysis and recommended conditions of approval are based on staffs understanding of the project as submitted in the applicants application (Attachment Xs Exhibit A and Attachment C. The required conditional use permit findings as well as staff responses to them are as follows: I Will the proposed use be detrimental to the general health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or within the City? Thu finding must be made in the negative. No. As conditioned, and operated accordingly, the project will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed use or within the City 2. Will the proposed use be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City? This finding must be made in the negative. No. The occupation of this site subject to the conditions listed below will not be injurious to the property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. 3. Will the proposed use be consistent with the latest adopted General Plan? This finding must be made in the positive. Yes. The current General Plan land use designation for this property is GC -General Commercial. 4. Are conditions necessary to secure the purpose of this section? This finding may be made in either the positive or the negative. Yes. The conditions of approval as listed below are recommended by staff. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The Planning Department recommends the following conditions of approval; 1. All conditions as recommended by the Department of Engineering/Building and Safety in their Memorandum dated July 31,1990 attached as Attachment Xs Exhn'bit C. 2. All conditions as recommended by the Forestry and Fire Warden Department in their Memorandum dated July 19,1990 attached as Attachment Xs Exln'bit D. 3. 30 feet of right-of-way south of the Britton Way center line shall be offered for dedication to the City. Such dedication and associated street, curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements for the Britton Way right-of-way shall be completed upon request of the City. J 4 The area located u1 the Britton Way right-of-way shall be landscaped 5 The race track facility shall be completely fenced. Along the south, east and north perimeter lines of the track facility, the fence shall be five feet lugh and constructed of a solid material (wood cap and rail design or decorative block) The remainder of the required fence shall be vinyl coated chain link material four feet m height. 6. The existmg parking lot shall be improved to meet the standards of the Barton Road Specific Plan parking regulations. 7. Lights shall be limited to parking lights in accordance with the Barton Road Specific Plan parking regulations (maximum allowable height - 18 feet) and low level security lights. 8. Occupancy of the race track facility shall be limited to 75 persons. 9. Adequate seating area for 25% of the maximum occupancy shall be provided 10 There shall be no amphfied speaker system. 11 The hours of operation shall be limited to the following: U7 Saturdays - 10:00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. Sundays' - 10.00 a.m.. to 5 00 p.m. 12 When the track is not in operation, access to the track shall be secured and locked 13. A detailed planting and irrigation plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department 14. The proposed project shall be constructed in accordance with the plans approved by the Site and Architectural Review Board on attached as Attachment A's Exhibit A, minor changes and/or clanfication may be made by the Planning Department 15. All aspects of the proposed project including landscaping, irrigation systems, budding maintenance and operations shall be maintained in a clean and functional manner and operated in accordance with this approval and the overall goals and objectives of the City of Grand Terrace. RECOMMENDATION. The Planning Department recommends the Grand Terrace Planning Commission require the applicant to provide the Planning Commission wnth a revised site plan.. Said site plan shall, 1) Be accurately dimensioned, 2) Show the ultimate Britton Way right-of-way line, ` 3) Show all proposed structures (location and size accurately `1 dimensioned), 4) Show parking lot improvements per code, 5) Show location of required seating area, 6) Show location and type of all fencing, and 7) Show location of restrooms The Plannin Department recommends The Planning Commission continue CUP-90-O6 and SA 90-17 until such time the requested site plan is brought back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Department further recommends the Planning Commission direct the applicant to cease all activity associated with the race track facility until such facility receives approval. Respectfully submitted by David Sawyer, Community Development Director r-� RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CAU FORMA, APPROVING CUP-90-06 A REQUEST TO OPERATE AN OUTDOOR REMOTE CONTROL MODEL CAR RACE TRACK WHEREAS, the Applicant, K & M RC Accessories, applied for an outdoor remote control model car race track conditional use permit to be located at 22474 A Barton Road, and WHEREAS, the proposed use is a permitted use with a conditional use permit in the Barton Road Specific Plan's Village Commercial Zone; and WHEREAS, a properly noticed negative declaration has been prepared for this project, and WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held before this body on August 09, 1990 for the purpose of considering the negative declaration and the proposed project NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City �1 of Grand Terrace, California, that the following findings have been made: 1. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use or within the City. As conditioned below the project should not have a detrimental effect on the neighborhood or within the City. 2. The proposed use will not be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. As conditioned below the proposed use should not effect any physical property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. 3. The proposed use is consistent with the latest adopted General Plan. The current General Plan designates this property as GC - General Commercial. ATTACHMENT A BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the proposed project is subject to the following conditions of approval, All conditions as recommended by the Department of Engineering/Building and Safety in their Memorandum dated July 31, 1990 attached as Attachment A's Exhibit C. 2. All conditions as recommended by the Forestry and Fire Warden Department in their Memorandum dated July 19,1990 attached as Attachment Ns Exhibit D. 3. 30 feet of right-of-way south of the Britton Way center hne shall be offered for dedication to the City. Such dedication and associated street, curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements for the Britton Way right-of-way shall be completed upon request of the City. 4. The area located in the Britton Way right-of-way shall be landscaped. 5 The race track facility shall be completely fenced. Along the south, east and north perimeter hoes of the track facihty, the fence shall be five feet high and constructed of a solid material (wood cap and rail design or decorative block). The remainder of the required fence shall be vinyl coated chain link material four feet in height. 6. The ex sting perking lot shall be improved to meet the standards of the Barton Road Specific Plan parking regulations. 7. Lights shall be limited to parking lights in accordance with the Barton Road Specific Plan parking regulations (maximum allowable height - 18 feet) and low level security lights. 8. Occupancy of the race track facility shall be limited to 75 persons. 9. Adequate seating area for 25% of the maximum occupancy shall be provided 10. There shall be no amplified speaker system. 11. The hours of operation shall be limited to the following: - Saturdays - 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Sundays -10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 12 When the track is not in operation, access to the track shall be secured and locked 13. A detailed planting and irrigation plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department 14 The proposed project shall be constructed in accordance with the plans approved by the Site and Architectural Review Board on attached as Attachment As Exhibit A, minor changes and/or clarification may be made by the Planning Department. 15 All aspects of the proposed project including landscaping, irrigation systems, building maintenance and operations shall be maintained in a clean and functional manner and operated in accordance with this approval and the overall goals and objectives of the City of Grand Terrace. NOW THEREFOR, THE PLANNING COMIMSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE HEREBY APPROVES CUP-90-06 BASED ON THE ABOVE FINDINGS PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace, California, at a regular meeting held on the day of AYES - NOES: Jerry Hawkinson, Chairperson Planning Commission ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM John Harper, City Attorney i rr � r--- iCNl- CY a � ` r K ~ U d S _ V z � Q � t i a C� �I _ X ins s y Q, V x GI d � _ N , a K o n a f s d Sic to '5 s�,� (oi� SO9-6_L-1 ' r a eco�)-� M 1 ,EXHIBIT A I r pcNOUNG�t�s TQWEK �� ,�-� M-two p p p- t 60 N'fROLt-�K� TO EK t RN 6 t !T Planning Department NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pumant to the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, a Negative Declaration is hereby filed on the below referenced project, on the basis that said project will not have a significant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT CUP 90-06 and SA 90-17, application for a Conditional Use Permit and Site and Architectural Review to operate a remote control car race track and lighting for remote control cars in the Barton Road Specific Plan's Village Commercial Subarea within the General Plan's General Business Disiric L APPLICANT K & M RC A=ssories%W R M. Blake Owners- Quentin R. and Freda Smith LOCATION 2Z747A Barton Road, Grand Terrace (APN# 275-251730) . FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT EFFEGM Based upon the attached Initial Study, there is no sabstantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. --b7- ?-qo David Sawyer, F Date Community Development Director City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California. 92324-5295 Y- : (714�) 824-b521 -EXHIBIT B CITY OF GRAND TERRACE PLANNING DEPARTMENT INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY Background 1. Name of Proponent: City of Grand Terrace 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent. City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, CA 92324-5295 Attention: David Sawyer, Planning Director 3. -Date of Environmental Assessment: 4. Agency Requiring Assessment City of Grand Terrace AYA RC' A�esso�eies 5A-90 l7 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable ['0h,Z,1,g9 614 -040 6. Location of Proposal: 7o — Il Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are provided on attached sheets.) Yes Maybe No 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. !Unstable earth conditions - or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compac- tion or overcovering of the soil? c. Substantial change in topography or ' ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering or modi- fication of any unique geologic or physical features? e_ Any substantial increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or " or off site? Yes Maybe No f Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siitation, 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? g Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earth quakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? 2. Air. Will the proposal result in - Substantial air emissions or deterior- ation of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, whether locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial changes -in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Substantial -changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of -surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of -surface water qual- ity, including, but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? Yes Maybe No g Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addi- tions or withdrawals, or through inter- ception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations' h- Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies J1 1. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flood- ing or tidal waves? , u. 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, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species V of plants? _ (\ c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area of native vegetation, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment of existing species? d. Substantial reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: - a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including rep- tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or - insects) ? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? . c. Deterioration to existing fish or 1 wildlife habitat? Yes Maybe No 6 Noise Will the proposal result in_ a- Increases in existing noise levels-' b_ Exposure of people to -severe noise levels' 7 Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce substantial new light or glare' 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a t, �r substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an areal is 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in. a. Substantial increase in tithe rate of use of any natural resources? 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? b_ Possible interference with an emerg- ency response plan or an emergency t �, evacuation plan? jS 11. Population. Will the -proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth y (` rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? X ' 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the pro - proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? Yes Maybe No b Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking' n c_ Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems' d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 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 areas: a. Fire protection? }� b. Police protection? T iC c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational faci- lities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or re- quire the development of new sources ' of energy? 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a_ Power or natural gas? -- - -- -- - - Yes Maybe No b Communications systems' c- Water7 d Sewer or septic tanks? e Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 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? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal -result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction ,of a prehistoric or historic archaeo- logical site? b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building. structure, or object? c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? u ---- — _ - Yes Maybe No d_ Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environ- ment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environ- ment;al goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which oc- curs in a relatively brief, definitive period ,of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) �1 c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumu- latively considerable? (A project's impact on two or more separate resources may be relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substan- tial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? - 11 x VAN - X_ ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: 1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared -- find that although the proposed project could have a signi- ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signt- - ficant effect in this case because the mitigation measures (----,)described on attached sheets have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. 1 find -the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ate David Sawyer Planning Qu-ector � C-"r.Q2�_ tgnature For City of Grand Terrace III DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 3 b The development of this site has resulted in the over covering and contouring of a certain percentage of the soil This impact will be mitigated by utilizing proper drainage methods which reviewed and approved by the Building and Engineering Department 6. a,b The existing noise levels have increased as a result of the development of the subject site. This impact will be within the allowable levels as set in the Master Environmental Analysis for the General Plan and enforced through the City's Noise Ordinance and the required conditions of approval. 7. The proposed lighting for the evening hours of operation will be mitigated by the conditions of approval. The direction of f the lighting will be reflected on the subject site and not out onto - the surrounding properties. The current Parldng Ordinance mitigates this through height and light direction restrictions as well 13. a. The proposed project may cause additional vehicular movement resulting from additional vehicular trips to and from the project site. The impact will be within the Traffic Circulation of the General Plan. 13. £ There may be an increase in traffic hazards to motor vehic bicyclists, or spectators caused by additional vehide trips to and from the site. This increase is within the projected range of the Circulation Element and addressed in the Hazards Element of the General Plan. 2795 Barton Road Grand Terrace bru- " 2324-5295 _'vic Center (714) 824-6621 iyron R Matteson Mayor Hugh J Grant Mayor Pro Temporo M pfenmghausen Tim Smgley L—, Carlstrom cmacil Members Thomas J Schwab city Maws W.O. 12-8.5149 M E M O R A N D U M TO: David Sawyer, Community Development Director FROM- Joseph Kicak, City Engineer DATE: July 31, 1990 SUBJECT: SA-90-17, CUP 90-06 (K&M R.C. Accessories) Following recommendations should be considered as conditions of approval of the proposed project: 1. Identify assessor's parcel where the proposed project is to be constructed. 2. Provide structural design to required occupancy loading. 3. Provide ramp for handicap with hand rail and 1:12 slope. 4. Provide restroom facilities. 5. All improvements shall be designed by owner's civil engineer/architect to meet the requirements of the City. JK/ct FORESTRY AND FIRE WiARDEN DEPARTTMEN ll COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINC Fire ProtCction Planning Services - County Government Centex OFFICE OF PUBLIC SAFETY 385 No Arrowhead Avenue First Floor San Bernardino CA 92415 0186 FLOYD TIDWELL Director (714) 387-4212 387-4213 EMERGENCY SERVICES Date - mn N('o M �zC fKce--<— a(Ies 1.0 U-^he following circled conditions apply to your project. e Department Reference Number: � _ � V� Fir p _ l7 F-1 The above referenced project is protected by the San Bernardino County Forestry and Fire Warden Department. Prior to any construction occurring on any parcel, the applicant shall contact the Fire Department for verification of current Fire Protection requirements. All new construction shall comply with the existing Uniform Fire Code Requirements and all applicable statues, codes, ordinances, or standards of the Fire Department. The street address shall be posted with a minimum of four (4) inch numbers, visible from the street and during the hours of darkness the numbers shall be low voltage internally electrically illuminated. Posted numbers shall contrast with their background and be legible from the street in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code. Where building set backs exceed 100 feet from the roadway, additional contrasting four (4) inch numbers shall be displayed at the property access entrance. F- Prior to final inspection or occupancy each chimney used in, conjunction with any fireplace or any heating appliance in which solid or liquid fuel is used shall be maintained with an approved spark arrester as identified in the Uniform Fire Code. -5 Prior to any construction occurring, all fla=abie • - vegetation shall be removed from each building site a minimum distance of thirty (30) feet froqa any flammable building material, including a finished structure. F-6 Prior to final inspection or occupancy the development ar4 each phase thereof shall have two (2) points of EXHIBIT D vehicular access for fire and other emergency equipment, and for routes of escape which will safely handle evacuations as required in the development code_ F-7 Prior to final inspection or occupancy, private roadways which exceed one -hundred and fifty (150) feet in length shall be approved by the Fire Department having jurisdiction, and shall be extended to within one hundred and fifty (15 0 ) feet of, and shall give reasonable access to all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of any building. An access road shall be provided within fifty (50) feet of all buildings if the natural grade between the access road and the building is in excess of thirty percent (30). Where the access roadway cannot be provided, an approved fire protection system or systems shall be provided, as required and approved by the Fire Department. F- Prior to final inspection or occupancy a turn -around shall be provided at -the end of each roadway, one - hundred and fifty (150 ) feet or more in length and shall be approved by the Fire Department. Cul-de-sac length shall not exceed six -hundred (600) feet except as identified in the development code and approved by the chief. ' -9 Private road maintenance, including but not limited to grading and snow removal, shall be provided for prior to recordation or approval. Written documentation shall be submitted to the Fire Department having jurisdiction. Private fire access roads shall provide an all weather surface with minimum paving width of twenty (20) feet. F-10 Water systems designed to meet the required fire flow of this development shall be approved by the Fire Department having jurisdiction. The developer shall furnish the Fire Department with two copies of the water system improvement plan for approval and a letter from the Water Purveyor stating the availability of the required fire flow prior to recordation. -later systems shall be operational and approved by the Fire Department prior to any construction occurring. The required red fire flow shall be determined by appropriate calculations, using the San Bernardino County "Guide for the Determination of Required Fire Flow." In areas without water -serving utilities, the fire protection water system shall be based on IZFPA pamphlet number 1231 and Uniform fire Code requirements - F-10 MS-IL3 THROUGH ILS Water systems designed to meet the required fire flow shall be operational and approved by the Fire Department prior to any construction occurring. The required fire flow shall be determined by appropriate calculations, using the San Bernardino County "Guide For The Determination of Required Fire Flow". In areas without water -serving utilities, or fire protection water serving utilities, the fire - protection water system shall be based on N.F.P.A. l�1 Pamphlet Number 1231 and the San Bernardino County Uniform Fire Code, F-11 Prior to Building permits being issued approved fire hydrants and fire hydrant pavement markers shall be installed. Fire hydrants shall be 6" diameter with a minimum one 4" and one 2 1/2" connection. The hydrant and fire hydrant markers shall be approved by Fire Department. All fire hydrant spacing shall be 300 feet with the exception of single family residential. which may be increased to 600 feet maximum. 1 f��o(i- � F-12 Prior to final inspection or occupancy this development shall comply with Fire Safety overlay conditions as adopted in County Ordinance Number 3341. _ The development is located in Fire Review Area. F-13 Prior to issuance of a building permit a fuel modification zone in compliance with county standards is required. red. F-14 Prior to final inspection or occupancy, an approved Fire Department key box is required. If automatic electric security gates are used an approved lock switch is required on each gate in lieu of the box. Questions and/or comments may be directed to the Fire Protection Planning Section; County Government center, 385 North Arrowhead, 1st Floor, San Bernardino, calif a., - 92415-0186; or call (714) 387-4225. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, DAVID J. DRISCOLL, Chief county Fire Warden By e Protection c: VZ% Planning Officer CONDXTZONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION Planning Department City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 -OFFICE USF.QNLY Fsle '` - oD tcS bmY (d �-�,o Roogiv�E;v Assi n Fla7rner -AQplica€iou Fee4:"� O `` En�Irotim4nt$F _ - �Cattr vzg Pm -Em Rom( a - SITEADDRESS �ay%,4 �ae�-a•cl.eZ I. APPLICANT INFORMATION Applicant or company name 1< + F'►'► Contact person h? '/fie_ ff/„fir= Mailitng address �1 ptL opt City G p'aW5 -vexit rler' State ! Zip -q"q- 32-kf Phone (7lq ')Z2Z --O 9 9 or ( 7Iti Relationship to project Q Unb rt E (Z Property owner Gq -e t � �•..� K — �Izr S"i kl+ t�c� Maiilingaddress 40A iyZljnS2 ,; ` J U,� City -�,, `930 State 0-a, zip q ate (a 3 Phone ( iffy) M3 d 4f 03 or( - II. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Site address 1` 2, Assessoes Book Parcel(s) 7-10 Number of parcels _� Site size (square feet) / o' (acres) u Central plan land use designation. - - s ,�r t �� 1�:a ��•:� Zoning Overlay Zone Existing land u s) , �..�,.,, _ Number of existing buildings III. PROJECT DESCRnonoN Proposed use(s) art ''` & n44tOL ( ff TfZRek. ©gEm � �' S��l 1,4 ;COT- r� Egg- ro: oo - Square footage of proposed use(s) :5` p O O� I %-- Hours of Operation Number of employees Number of required parking spaces Parking provided - - ATTACHMENT C _� .19- S#iliii MS: I IV_ REQUIRED CETIrICATI0NS/AFf-IDAVITS Applicant s Certification I, ,W,&-maul /,y ��iaLL ��4X<--::- , the applicant, do hereby certify that theforegoingandfollowing information is trueand accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief Signature ,/(/tD�i1rr> /P1 (/�' Date -o-o Property Owner's Certification �W�,Ouentin R_ Smith --Freda Smi i-h Owen ccrt��tha� iJa �E currently the legal ownedbf the land descnbcd in this application and that-l-a-m aware of and have authorized this application k Date 90 Signature ��-J_ A 'f��l,,�� 1 300 Foot Radius Property Ownership List I, Cep t I I M VG 4a'- : — ]% hkef: , the applicant, certify to the best of my knowledge that the ownership list and radius map submitted with this application correctly show the latest available list of names and addresses on the San Bernardino County Assessor's records,, dated Signature ,{t J�`/-�,vt M /I►7� Date 0 �" J V_ SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A Application B. 300-Foot Radius Map and Mailing List - See attached instructions. C. 26 copies (one complete set colored for presentation purposes) of the following: V Site Plan - a fully dimensioned drawing showing: r/ All buildings, property fines and casements Z/ All parking spaces, driveways and drive aisles t-- All landscaped areas Walls and fences 6" Location of signs (caisting and proposed) -� Public improvements to the street centerline Site address, assessor's parcel number and zoning tG Property owner name and address t/ Applicant name and address �G Number of Iots and their sizes 'l North arrow, graphic and numeric scales Floor Plans D. Application Fee SrTE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPLICATION Community Development Department City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 GFFICE USE ONLY 4�a,-pt-No f Zjitc 8vbm:it0t;d 4 —N7*` RocrW�i- r 'D#afiomptata -ApplimatiQu— L-i SITE ADDRESS I IL 0 APPLICANT INFORMATION �C6A 'RcS Applicant or company name CC�SSO/L�CS Contact person L� Mailing address city &V ". 4 "cam State itZip Z 3 2 Phonc (�{ li ) --O or (� ` 7 3 I Relationship to project t j- Property owner •o, u .3- I ni S wi.w — P m ,-c�� Mailingaddress aPhy c(-7t ) rc13 �— PROPERTY DESCRIPTION State «.. Zip - or K Site address --L44-7 Assessor's Book S Parcel(s) % 30 Number of parcels Sites-e (square feu) 6 S t X IRb (acres) General plan land use designation i. 9J =L4, Overla Zone Existing land n (s) 2 � +" 4.;;r Number of existing bindings —� III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed project'it"OL �'i4-IL �F4� 7- And y Proposed Use 40M n hrr Hogs of operation _eR I — (p Square footage proposed prol'c c'*�' Number of required parking spaces Parking provided Required setbacks: Front ILear Side Side Proposed subacks: Front Rear Sidc Side _ t ;o10 'Pr '79JIi�t.1979i�€ CASH 99�:65 IV RGQUIRGD CGTIFICATIONS/AFFIDAVITS Applicant's Certification I, � r" � M, the applicant, do hereby certify that the foregoingand following information is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief Date 6 — I ` (— �-j a Property Owner's Certification certify that I am bed in this application and that I am aware of currently the legal owner of the land dcscn and have authorized this application. Signature Date V_ SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A Application B 26 copies (one set completely colored for presentation purposes) of the following: Site Plan - a fully dimensioned drawing -showing - All buildings, property Imes and casements All parking spaces, driveways and drive aisles All landscaped areas Walls and fences Location of signs (existing and proposed) Public improvements to the street centerline Site address, assessor's parcel number and zoning Property owner name and address Applicant name and address Number of lots and their sizes North arrow, graphic and numeric scales Building Elevations (for new faCilities and exterior remodels) - Scaled and dimensioned drawings of each side of the buddmg. Specify colors and materials and dimension to the highest point. Grading Plan (for new facilities only) - A plan showing existing and proposed topography for the site and within 100 feet of the property limes- Shbw all trees with a trunk diameter greater than four inches. Landscape Plan -A conceptual plan, showing proposed plant material,, common and botanical names, quantities and sizes, paved areas and property lines. Material Board - Samples of exterior design elements such as roofing material, paintclups, brick, stone or other accentfeatures mounted oa a single 81/2" X 11' mounting board. Q Application Fee K & M RC ACCESSORIES p- qo —o Remote Control Cars • Sales • SeMCe ' (3-yy--\ ctL 22474 "A' BARTON ROAD GRAND TERRACE, CA 92324 TELEPHONE (714) 783-0899 bAj-,F� ulu)-A. �Yl �'lllJ C-c5n—,ry---%uk-ntcY- -60.r�Cl m� ry U�Y-, VZ11H,zJ _ (� � ehil�'non t�1'�� Cansfnu�lc��n, 67 6 �2 V)oU)tna, � -�aclio CC�r�(nvQ�eoL leahicPso� � �W�woQ Cv_dlerwenA olellAnt�o, a �coS2 �lo�, u, whielt,�e cu„ +s,0-L-,JAu-, and -eai `Na�.+n� ho)bu�- �Q tm ka�, cab km ,s _ 0 eA3 " K & M RC ACCES50R1 ES Remote Control Cars • Safes - Senr(ce 22474 "A" BARTON ROAD GRAND TERRACE, CA 92324 TELEPHONE (714) 783-0899 0 (!Ofr�I.u"l c , v� U t� e� Cc�es-nn iA � ��..t� (� 1�b�� sz tilbv, W14�- Cool uQ�, p ry Cs�nstal.c'tiu� h�ib�. o�,un�,t�uw�. �- ;� � o�o�ad {o' b-L ts�ack W�" q j r�In u, n , a) CtdunwtP�uls V tom- �hw (511k, 1"" �e c c�•e� raj �/��.� � � i ,rJ Use �v/� �/.9U� �J��c�� 112 I -P y L/s/�T �1,,Ce �/�' l�D• �i G-�-� �lOco O/^ T 1 -✓� A�•¢- T-ocA) ee- - sip - -7- - — --- �-� I U � a� r �acl u� _ �� ,�-R.c Q� _�c.zY�-- �-� �r � o •u Sri ---AfLG,'�-�`_'� On C�v.c-r�t --�0_-,CL?c9Jltl— i mi)Rom. . mtp-z �- ------ �2- PAS - K & M RC ACCESSORIES Remote Control Cars - Sales - SONIC0 22474 "A" BARTON ROAD GRAND TERRACE, CA 92324 TELEPHONE (714) 783-0899 7-10-90 City of Grand Terrace- Atten: Planning Dept; �I,Mike Blake, owner of K&M RC Accessories, would like to operate an existing Off Road Race track during the evening hours of 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM Friday evenings, with a grace period for computer error and clean-up of the facilities. ____ o ac_ I need to install two 1000 watt lights and ..poles to mount them to. I have been in operation for two years now with racing on Saturday mornings. With the extreme temperatures of summer, it is too hot for people to be com- fortable during late morning and early afternoon hours. Many enthusiasts would rather race during the cool evening hours, and do so at other neighboring tracks. The pubic address system would be operated at a level as to not bother any neighboring residents. There have been no complaints about noise level during Saturday racing as to this date. In the last two years of operation I have enjoyed great � success in this growing; and fun sport. It is fun for all, with enthusiasts from age 6 years to adult. The sport has a good atmosphere and is fun for the whole family. There is no alcohol or drugs permitted on premises. The sport keeps kids involved with something constructive,as there is always adult supervision for all. This sport gives younger children the working knowledge of a car, and how to repair and rebuild a smaller version of a car. It also teaches good sportsman- ship and discipline for times ahead in life. Racing also is a great place to see the young and old working and playing together. For added security, I would like to install a 6' chain link fence around the track, tower and pit area. Thank you for your time and consideration. Please keep in mind I am only asking for four nights a month. The lights would be greatly appreciated. Mike Blake Owner K&M RC Accessories • TCA• ' ' rLOT 3 r •N%-% `i 60( /.P orMW AO) '1 1 ' actggg . _ e ` + 1 1 , ' ..r1M�rrr.�r..•,r�rrr...— ++t..��r ,.. rr_..►.«. Tl L b 1 /t + 3.52AC. M/L .w 4 I25ABC `� 4ACWL r°,G f '1' Por.13'- P,or.1 ( m t � / Yl ^ 11�•�,' ', • . wfC' ` } • C { � 1 { q4107w,ACM/L O 76 i • f+ - •, �;} Ra , ; r 1 +fi h ,II f! , ; ,0 Vol � �05 AC - 18 1 IT doo 4to73 ri at 1�` i • . • • ;l 1 I • • 71r 'al 1 ' 2 32 A0 " 1 , ' , I.n e. �d • • e se�ltr p 21 �i' t$AR o�rr «�r(PA L�F6�1�' i7i-F to �RBor A-Bs.�- all too 0A s', S" + t' ' , ' i'i� A `lit .;} r Kt t ! ' '+ / 12 1 . 1 f�,.({. .1 4• ti + i 1 a5 a }� �1 '/CIy ) . it►, , 1 • I 11' r i I ti .1?L f��,i it • . I,.ti/ ,ii� , Ty'){L r yI P. i, . �� (No • " �iF• ,' 1�1'•''1 i�^T' i1'�i /;{1�f1.SCw �l.lt;� } a ' , MI'•h•�1 `{ r. t�;Y ��r� �ILyt,�_rkl M {,� fxro't1'•*:Ij1"�' 1� �t�o1�1`>'S! , 1 ♦. �1' 1n,t il; Z •1 R►+ *11 Sf �� I�i• 3,%x il ,�1Y1111�+ tt t't+� h,� 1. 1 J.'i`'•t �l• f/'» r tl(�A 1. 1 y a.�l�• \� l��„A h� �r` I �'" , M R1�, � �f"r 7(' •• , �Tr;'.\ r.I'1, a-,r �`•.4 inl P it?a��y�in�T�.l��i" f •�. +Ij!,! ' r ' 1 i • rt �',f�}a, lrw�,Y jf��'l Mirr ) `� ' 4 «� 1 1 � a ' 'i?/ ' ,• . t') A. l �,ll `A.1, L„t •ll w"1 �i 'r wl ' f 3�, •1 � 1 „1/�,` }. ► � �11'AfM^FD,� f/I�i}`jl,'��.-� e � � 4T^�, '. 1 ,r,l, r,},�, + � ..' + , � ,��l,• "'' ��1' kin„ 1 it, t� ' ' "'r 1 •1• ; t 1 �=} ,51�1) �? Y� , a �' 'L f�.y �{f 'N�{'�siy I�' ll v.'I t It tA`.'�r ' 1 h.••,+Ir �� • w,i� �!� t'F � r� r ib 1''+i`"I�ii1'1'iF�� i/l� �llll `5f ► .. .. •�' • .. •` . .. •: a a :•y.. • �w�..�••: `' ��:.� w,.�t':. w••^••a:r.�siti Mcwi:fi.>taaa� �.... .... .: • .. ,nc�• •.e 7ri.Y1l:..ali�r/�.� �t>•I�as�t°��y: �'•:'i•i .. � .� i � ... +•.^ . Id LS a ,may � _ �_- � �-'��-_--.._ „� ..a,w+i�y�:•+ ;.ice •.� .i.. • JJJJJJ a. .'r ,-I•.'� j- '7 ' Wit.. �. � �lr �i••:•'•�•:..':.�:�-i%:Y.I�_1i `j�\-;�:• :��i�•: me•µ: �•ti l.3 i'•� :1: 1 ::tea •.!. � ..v,: j • • �_� ', a_ ' 677 •+� �� Lbw •• � �' '! MYRsmrr'�•�. ~•• .+... .•r•�\. .. •wig .. •.• ti 4 i . y • � 'i t i e� •n GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 7, 1990 The regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, Cahforma, on August 7, 1990, at 7 00 p in by Vice -Chairman Dan Buchanan PRESENT. Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner Jim Sims, Commssioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner John Harper, City Attorney David R Sawyer, Community Development Director Maria C Muett, Assistant Planner Maggie Barder, Planning Secretary ABSENT Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman Herman Hrlkey, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner PLEDGE Jun Suns, Commissioner PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENED AT 7.10 P M PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None ITEM #1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - JULY 10, 1990 MOTION PCM-90-119 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - JULY A 1990 Commissioner Van Gelder made a motion to approve the July 10, 1990 minutes Commissioner Hargrave second 1 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-122 Cornnussioner Hargrave made a motion to continue TPM-90-02 to the August 21, 1990 Planning Commission Meeting Commissioner Sims second Motion carries 4-0-3-0 Chairman Hawkinson and Commissioners Hilkey and Munson absent ITEM #5 CUP-90-06, E-90-04 K & M RC ACCESSORIES 22474A BARTON ROAD G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF A RACE TRACK AND LIGHTING FOR REMOTE CONTROL CARS IN THE BRSP DISTRICT The Community Development Director presented the staff report Commissioner Hargrave asked if the applicant submitted a revised site plan yet, to which the Community Development Director responded in the (� negative PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7 30 P M MIKE BLAKE OWNER, K & M RC ACCESSORIES 22474A BARTON ROAD G.T. Mr Blake stated that regarding the 30 feet of right-of-way on Britton Way, this is not his property and he can't do anything about it He stated that a brick wall and coated, chain link fence is way too expensive and not really necessary for this type of business, and he requested 4-6' of regular, chain link fence He said that the existing parking lot seems to be up to par for the City of Grand Terrace He said that he would have the north end of the race track landscaped with sod and flowers and trees that the City requests, but curb and guttering is not necessary until Barton Road development comes into this area, as this is a temporary business He stated that he could put up bleachers for 25% of the people that would show up at the track. He said he would put in low volume speakers in the tower where the drivers are so they 4 could hear the announcer and in the pit area at low volume, so it would not affect any of the neighbors, and if any complaints were made, they would no longer use the speakers He stated that 7 00 to 10 00 would be appropriate hours, but if there was a power surge or computer breakdown, they may need a one hour grace period He stated that the lights need to be on after the race for the safety of the people packing up and leaving the parking lot and for clean up, so 1100 would be adequate for this He stated that 75 person occupancy is fine He stated that he submitted prints and all measurements are accurate and to code He said that his main concern was for the lights for night racing in the summer hours, as his business was turning out about 40 drivers, and the track and the store work hand in hand He said that it is too hot during the summer, so he was asking for Friday night lighting so the drivers could be comfortable and the kids could have a place to go on a Friday night He said he has lived here for 28 years, and there is nothing for the lads, and for the past year, he has not had one complaint He said he is running a clean business, with no drugs or alcohol allowed on the premises He said he is only allowed an 18 foot light pole, but he has a 24 foot pole, which is the same in the decorative areas in Grand Terrace, and it is high enough so that he can direct the light downward on the track for the lighting to be approximately 20 feet beyond his track and will not affect residents He stated that his parking lot lights will be halogen lights, which would allow the drivers to pit out of the back of their cars He stated that the noise will consist of the speakers and of people cheering on their friends, which will not be severe He stated that the lights will only shine directly on the track, and that the last 8 Friday nights, he put lights up to groom the track for racing for the following day, sometimes until approximately 2 00 or 3 00 am-, and he has not had one complaint He stated that the Planning Department recommends that all activities of the track be ceased until everything is done He stated that without the track, he would not survive, as the track and the store go hand in hand He said that the area used to be weeds, and the lads of Grand Terrace took rakes and shovels and proved that they want some place to go He stated that when the Barton Road development occurs, if his track does not meet development standards, he will close the doors Commissioner Van Gelder asked if he charges admission. Mr Blake stated that he charges $7 00 to race on Saturdays, but observers do not pay admission. Commissioner Van Gelder asked if the area for the seating would be dirt or asphalt. Mr Blake stated that the seating would be on sod, and at the entrance off of Britton Way, there would be a flower area. 5 Commissioner Van Gelder asked how he would control the number of people to a maximum of 75 Mr Blake stated that he controls this when they sign up Comrrussioner Van Gelder asked if they were talking about participants alone or participants and observers Mr Blake stated just participants Commissioner Van Gelder stated that this area doesn't seem large enough for this many people She asked if the difference of the amplified speaker system from what he uses now Mr Blake stated that he uses a bull horn now, but plans to get low volume speakers for the racers Commissioner Van Gelder asked if he planned to leave the structure the way it is now Mr Blake stated that he would paint the tower and put a roof on it Commissioner Sims asked if Mr Blake didn't agree with the requirement of dedicating the right-of-way for Britton Way Mr Blake stated that it is not his property to dedicate, as he leases it Commissioner Sims was concerned with the number of people that would be there, and he asked how many people he anticipated would be at the facility Mr Blake stated there is a maximum of 10 drivers per race, and his maximum turnout when it was cool was 35-40 drivers He said the spectators come and go Commissioner Sims asked if all participants come in a car or if some come on bikes Mr Blake stated that the majority come in on their bikes Commissioner Hargrave was concerned about Mr Blake's comment that he would leave as soon as development hits the area He informed Mr Blake that the development being presented tonight after his project is nght next door to him. He stated that bathroom facilities are required and are costly He asked if he would mind if they continued this to allow him to talk with rel staff about what is going on in the area Mr Blake stated that would be fine Vice -Chairman Buchanan was concerned that this use has been on -going without necessary approval He was concerned about adequate bike parking and dust control, but his biggest concern was that this is in the Barton Road Specific Plan area next to a critical intersection He asked about dust control r Mr Blake stated that he waters it by hand every day Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that his understanding of staffs recommendation for 75 maximum occupancy includes participants as well as observers at any time, and asked how this would be controlled Mr Blake stated that he has a race director who watches what goes on, but he really doesn't have control over who comes in Commissioner Sims asked if he was intending to sell food Mr Blake stated that this would include hot and cold sandwiches, sealed burritos, cokes, etc Commissioner Sims asked if this would include an operating kitchen Mr Blake stated no, that it would be more like a catering or "hot dog stand" situation Commissioner Sims asked where the restrooms are located Mr Blake stated that they are inside the shop Commissioner Sims asked if there was a drinking fountain outside Mr Blake stated that he would like to do that, but at this point he has bottled water inside Commissioner Van Gelder asked for the dimensions of the track. Mr Blake stated that it is 48' by 100', which is smaller than average, which would be 80' by 120'. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked for the people in support of the project to come to the microphone 7 QUENTIN SMITH PROPERTY OWNER 22607 TANAGER GT Mr Snuth stated that this property does not face Barton Road, as it is in the rear He said they rented it to Mr Blake in January of 1989, and told him if he ever wanted to rent the vacant lot as well, they would rent it at a nominal fee He stated that he is here to lend support to Mr Blake, as he has always been fair, kept his word and paid his rent on time He stated that to comply with all of the conditions, it would take $50,000 to put into the track He stated that they look forward to the development conung u-4 and they are ready to cooperate with the rest of their property of 2 1/3 acres He asked the Commission to consider this project favorably He stated that if he has to comply with the recommended conditions, he will .have to close up and take a terrific beating on his investment Commissioner Hargrave asked how long the lease if for Mr Smith stated that he is leasing to him on a month -to -month basis, but if Mr Blake gets what he needs out of this, he would like to go on a longer term, which Mr Smith thought would be 2-3 years He stated that none of their leases extend more than 2 years from now, and their policy will be 3 years at the very most, and they leave themselves an escape clause, that upon 90 days written notice, either party can cancel He stated that they would not cancel Commissioner Hargrave stated that what bothers him is that if someone offered him a fair deal on his property, he would probably take it, which would mean this applicant could be out of that position and out of the money even if he got the conditional use permit Mr Smith stated that they don't have to put the clause in Commissioner Hargrave stated that he made the testimony and he has to go by it, and it has swayed him Mr Smith stated that their property taxes on the whole property is in excess of $12,000 per year, and that money comes from people like Mr Blake, so he doesn't want another vacancy Commissioner Suns asked how he felt about the condition regarding providing 30 feet of right-of-way along Britton Way Mr Smith asked if this was a dedicated street The Community Development Director stated that this is a private street at this time, and the condition is for an offer of dedication to the City for street purposes Commissioner Sims asked if the intent is to provide access to the parking lot The Community Development Director stated that Britton Way will be a public street someday, and this would be required of any development He - ' stated that the condition is that the property identified in the General Plan requires a 30 foot half -street dedication for Britton Way, and that Mr Smith owns part of that dedication required to put the street in as a condition of improvement of the Conditional Use Permit He stated that they recognize that the improvements would be unnecessary at this time as the rest of Britton Way is not dedicated and improved, but at the time when the rest of Britton Way is dedicated and improved, they would inform the property owner that they accept the dedication and that it is time for improvements He stated that staff recommends that this item be continued so that a detailed, dimensioned site plan that identifies the Britton Way right-of-way can be submitted, and this is not the City's responsibility Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked if staff would require a bond or deferral agreement or if it is just a condition of the Conditional Use Permit The Community Development Director stated that they can handle it through a revocation of the Conditional Use Permit, but it would be a recorded offer for dedication that would be open to the City, who can accept it at anytime He stated that a bond can be considered for that Mr Blake stated that he would like to withdraw, with permission to stay open until the end of the month Vice -Chairman verified that Mr Blake is withdrawing his application for a Conditional Use Permit and Site and Architectural approval Mr Blake asked that they don't shut him down until he gets everytlung straightened out, as the way it is written up by the Community Development Director, he is shut down. The City Attorney stated that, speaking on behalf of staff, he doesn't perceive them as going out tomorrow morning and shutting him down. Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that he is not operating in legal conformance 0 right now, so that can't really tell him he can operate for a while, but what is being indicated is that if the situation is being resolved, then it is in nobody's interest to waste time trying to enforce something that is going to take care of itself He stated that they are only removing the items from the calendar, so the Commission will not be directing staff to go shut him down Vice - Chairman Buchanan stated that this item will be removed from the agenda for tonight's meeting 8 25 P M TO 8 40 P M- RECESS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8 40 P M SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED AT 8 40 P M ITEM #6 SA-90-17 K. & M RC ACCESSORIES 22474A BARTON ROAD G T. AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A RACE TRACK AND LIGHTING FOR REMOTE CONTROL CARS IN THE BRSP DISTRICT Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that this item was withdrawn by the applicant this evening ITEM #7 SA-89-07 THE ADVOCATE SCHOOL 11980 SOUTH MT. VERNON G.T. ALTERNATIVE FENCE DESIGN The Community Development Director presented the staff report Commissioner Van Gelder asked what color the wrought iron would be The Community Development Director stated that staff recommended black or creme, and the applicant leaned toward creme Commissioner Hargrave stated that he favored the lighter color to match the 10 Planning Department August 8, 1990 r � K&M RC Accessories Attention Mike Blake 22474A Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Quentin R Smith 402 Club House Avenue Newport Beach, CA 92663 Re CUP-90-06/SA-90-17 Remote Control Car Race Track Dear Mr Blake, This is to confirm that at the August 7, 1990, Planning Commission Meeting during the Public Hearing portion, you withdrew your application for a Conditional Use Permit requesting the use of a Remote Control Car Race Track located at 22474A Barton Road If you should have any questions, please contact the Planning Department at 714-824- 6621 Sincerely, Maria C Muett Assistant Planner 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 • (714) 824-6621 l� APPLICANT REQUESTED THAT ITEM BE RECONSIDERED AND WAS SCHEDULED FOR THE SEPTEMBER 4, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING THE AUGUST 7, 1990 STAFF REPORT WAS SUBMITTED IN THE SEPTEMBER 4, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION PACKET GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 4, 1990 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 September 4, 1990, at 7 00 p m by Chairman Jerry Hawkinson PRESENT Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner Herman Hdkey, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner David R Sawyer, Community Development Director Maria C Muett, Assistant Planner Maggie Barder, Planning Secretary ABSENT Jim Sims, Commissioner U PLEDGE Herman Hnikey, Commissioner PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6.30 P M. Information from staff to Planning Commissioners Information from Planning Commissioners to staff PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None ITEM #1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 7, 1990 MOTION PCM-90-132 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 7, 1990 MOTION VOTE - PCM-90-132 Commussioner Van Gelder made a motion to approve the August 7, 1990 minutes Vice -Chairman Buchanan second Motion died for lack of majority 3-0-1-3 Chairman Hawkinson and Commissioners Hilkey and Munson abstained Commissioner Sims absent ITEM #2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 21, 1990 MOTION PCM-90-133 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 21, 1990 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-133 Vice -Chairman Buchanan made a motion to approve the August 21, 1990 minutes Commissioner Hilkey second Chairman Hawkinson requested that the first paragraph on the first page be changed to read that Vice -Chairman Buchanan called the meeting to order Motion carves 5-0-1-1 Chairman Hawkinson abstained Commissioner Suns absent. ITEM #3 CUP-90-069 E-90-04 K & M RC ACCESSORIES 22474A BARTON ROAD G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF A RACE TRACK AND LIGHTING FOR REMOTE CONTROL CARS IN THE BRSP DISTRICT 2 The Community Development Director presented the staff report Commission Hargrave asked if anything was submitted by the applicant since the last meeting, to which the Community Development Director responded in the negative The Community Development Director stated that the applicant did present staff with something as he walked in this evening, but they did not have time to look at it MIKE BLAKE 22474A BARTON ROAD G T. Mr Blake stated that the property owner, Quentin Smith will handle things when the Barton Road plan comes around, but he brought in plans showing exactly what he wants to do, which includes grass and plants He stated that the parking lot is adequate and will stay as is, and the owner does not feel curb and gutter improvements are necessary until the Barton Road plan comes in Commissioner Hargrave asked if he was saying that Mr Quentin Smith was not going to comply with Condition #3 regarding dedication, which Mr Blake verified Commissioner Hargrave asked if he agreed to landscaping Mr Blake stated that he did, except for curb and guttering Commissioner Hargrave asked if he agreed to fencing, which Mr Blake agreed to Commissioner Hargrave asked if he felt the parking was adequate as is, which Mr Blake verified Commissioner Hargrave asked about the lighting Mr Blake stated that the lighting will not go into Mt Vernon or Britton Way or obstruct any surrounding homes Commissioner Hargrave asked if occupancy could be limited to 75 people, which Mr Blake agreed to Commissioner Hargrave asked if there would be seating for 25% of the 3 maximum occupancy, which Mr Blake agreed to Commissioner Hargrave asked if there would be an amplified speaker system Mr Blake stated that there would be one Commissioner Hargrave asked if the hours of operation would be from 10 a m to 5 p in Saturday and Sunday Mr Blake stated that he would like hours until 6 p in on Saturday and Sunday Commissioner Hargrave asked if track would be secured and locked when not in operation, which Mr Blake agreed to Commissioner Hargrave asked if he would keep the track clean and functional, which Mr Blake agreed to Mr Blake presented the drawings he brought Commissioner Van Gelder asked why lights are needed if they are through at 6pm Mr Blake stated that they are for Friday night racing, and the hours would be from 7 p m. to between 10 and 11 p m. The Community Development Director asked for clarification on Condition #5, and whether or not the applicant to agreed to completely fencing along the race track facility on the south, east and north perimeter lines and should be 5' high and constructed of a solid material, wood cap and rail or decorative block, and the remainder of the required fence to be vinyl -coated chain link matenal, 4' in height. Mr Blake stated that he did not agree on this The Community Development Director stated that Condition #7 states that lights shall be limited to parking lights in accordance with the Barton Road Specific Plan parking regulations, which includes a maximum allowable height of 18 feet and low level security lights Mr Blake stated that he did not agree to the height level 4 MOTION PCM-90-134 CUP-90-06, E-90-04 Commissioner Van Gelder stated that because the material was not given to staff or commissioners before this evening, she made a motion to continue this item until the next regular meeting so that it can be reviewed Chairman Hawkinson second for discussion Commissioner Hilkey asked if it is continued, if he would still be allowed to operate The Community Development Director stated that it is up to the commission. Commissioner Hilkey stated that the concerns seems to be discontinuing of racing at the time when the Barton Road Specific Plan grows into that area Mr Blake stated that it will be there as long as possible, until the Barton Road plan comes through the area and his landlord states that he must move The Community Development Director stated that there is nothing wrong with the project itself, but they feel there are better locations in town, and in the long run, this could be a detriment to the Barton Road Specific Plan, the pedestrian atmosphere and the retail atmosphere they are trying to create, but this is a matter of opinion He stated that they have recommended and conditioned this project with the feelings that if it is going to be approved, they should make it work with the specific plan He stated that staff does not recommend they approve anything on a temporary basis Commissioner Van Gelder stated she wants the project to be there or somewhere, as they need something for kids, but there are so many problems that need to be worked out, and they need time for staff to look at the new drawings and work something out She stated that she doesn't feel this is an inappropriate place, but it has to be done right Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that the concern with the conditions was that they were not economically feasible, but the problem is that they are proposing a use that may or may not be incompatible with the City's vision for that area. Mr. Blake stated that there is nothing in the area that is even half -way decent, and the area he is in is actually a dump. He said there is a chain link fence that goes all the way around the property and down to Barton Road Center, and there is nothing but weeds and fields there, and they are asking him to 5 put up a pretty wall He stated that when it comes down to it, they can insist that the property owner redevelop the property, and then he can do it, but now he cannot Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that from a planning standpoint is that someone has to be the first one Mr Blake stated that he is just a renter Vice -Chairman stated that he wants to see this use available J MOTION VOTE PCM-90-134 Mr Blake stated that he just wanted to show them the drawings he gave them to show what was on his mind, and he is not changing any plans He said they are the same plans with colors added, and the green is grass and the brown is dirt Chairman Hawkinson asked if the applicant, would prefer a motion of continuance to the next meeting Mr Blake stated that he prefers to proceed right now as he has people here to express their opinions Motion carves 4-2-1-0 Vice -Chairman Buchanan and Commissioner Hilkey voted no Commissioner Sims absent Chairman Hawkinson stated that this would then be continued to the October 2, 1990 meeting Mr Blake asked why they had to go to October 2 and if he could get a "yes" or "no" tonight Chairman Hawkinson stated that the problem is they just received the material this evening and no one has had a chance to digest it Mr Blake stated that it is just a video Chairman Hawkinson stated that they would have public discussion at the next meeting Commissioner Hilkey asked about other sites C Mr Blake stated that the owner of a track in Norco was present tonight Chairman Hawkinson gave her permission to speak CO-OWNER BRAKEAWAY RACEWAY 3179 HAMNER AVENUE NORCO The track owner stated that they have a store up front and a track out back, and they are quite a bit larger than Mr Blake's operation She said they run quite a few more racers, and over the weekend, they ran over 185 drivers Commissioner Hilkey asked how important Friday night races are The track owner stated that they have to have at least one weekend night, as the racers work during the day, and recreation is on Friday and Saturday nights She said they run Wednesday and Saturday nights, and they must especially have night racing with high temperatures She stated that there is also "Outlaw" race track at 5th and Webster in Highland, and also "The Ranch Pit Shop" in Pomona PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7.35 P.M SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED AT 7.35 P M. ITEM #4 SA-90-17 K & M RC ACCESSORIES 22474A BARTON ROAD G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A RACE TRACK AND LIGHTING FOR REMOTE CONTROL CARS IN THE BRSP DISTRICT MOTION PCM-90-135 SA-90-17 Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to continue SA 90-17 to the next regularly scheduled Site and Architectural meeting 7 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-135 Commissioner Hilkey asked if he would be able to continue his operation Commissioner Hargrave stated that he should be able to continue his business, and included this in his motion Commissioner Hilkey second Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that it is only fair to allow him to continue to operate since this continuance is not his request but the commission's action Motion carves 5-1-1-0 Vice -Chairman Buchanan voted no Commissioner Sins absent ITEM #5 SA-90-20 LARRY J VESELEY/MALPROP PARTNERS 22524 BARTON ROAD GT t - AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF RENOVATIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE IN THE BARTON ROAD SPECIFIC PLAN The Community Development Director presented the staff report 8.45 P M. TO 8:55 P.M. - RECESS Commissioner Van Gelder asked if it was going to be a market again. The Assistant Planner stated that under CEQA, it can be The Community Development Director stated that it is a little more broad, with the proposed use being classified as retail Commissioner Van Gelder asked if an alternate to the long ramp concept was discussed with the applicant. The Community Development Director stated that he gave the architect preliminary comments including the ramp issue i f Planninb tRac Department September 10, 1990 K&M Accessories Mike Blake 22474 A Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Re A Conditional Use Permit for an outdoor remote control car race track. (CUP-90-06 and SA-90-17) Dear Mr. Blake. This is to inform you that on September 4, 1990 the Planning Commission continued your project until the next Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for October 2, 1990 We encourage you to submit a revised site plan (15 copies) and said site plan shall 1) Be accurately dimensioned. 2) Show the ultimate Bntton Way right-of-way line 3) Show all proposed structures (location and size accurately dimensioned) 4) Show parking lot improvements per code. 5) Show location of required seating area. 6) Show location and type of all fencing 7) Show location of restrooms. The revised site plans should be submitted by September 21, 1990 to the Planning Department in preparation for the meeting. If you should have any questions or the Planning Department staff can be of any further assistance, please contact this department Sincerely, Maria C. Muet , Assistant Planner 22795 Barton Road * Grand Terrace, California 92324-529��*14 $24-6621�� `}�'"""ATTACHMENTy A -"1 Planning Department TO Planning Commission FROM: David Sawyer, Community Development Director DATE- October 02, 1990 SUBJECT: Staff Report, CUP-90-06 & SA 90-17 APPLICANT: K & M Accessories LOCATION: 22474 A Barton Road REQUEST: A Conditional Use Permit for an outdoor remote control car race track DISCUSSION: This item was continued from the September 04th,1990 Planning Commission meeting At that meeting the applicant submitted a set of revised plans to the Planning Commission, as a result, the Planning Commission continued the item so that staff could review the plans and make a recommendation to the Commission. After the meeting, staff mailed the attached letter (Attachment A) to the applicant requesting additional copies of the plans for review and distribution to the Planning Commission. After receiving no response from the applicant by the date listed in the letter, staff contacted the applicant on Monday, September 24th, 1990, at which time he indicated that he would not submit anything else and that he would be there to talk about his plans at the meeting Consequently, staff does not know what the applicant is now proposing and therefor staffs recommendation remains as previously stated in your prior staff report (Attachment B) Respectfully submitted by David Sawyer, IV Community Development Director ITEM 3 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, Cahforma 92324-5295 •_ (714) 82"621- = r jw = - _ --= ,, ITEM r GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 2, 1990 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 October 2, 1990 at 7 00 p m by Chairman Jerry Hawkinson PRESENT Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner Herman Hilkey, Commussioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Jim Suns, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner David R Sawyer, Community Development Director Mana C Muett, Assistant Planner Maggie Barder, Planning Secretary ABSENT: None PLEDGE. Jim Sims, Commissioner PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP CONVENED AT 6:30 P.M. Information from staff to Planning Commissioners Information from Planning Commissioners to staff PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CONVENED AT 7:10 P.M. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: None 1 ITEM #1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 7, 1990 MOTION PCM-90-146 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 7, 1990 s MOTION VOTE PCM-90-146 Vice -Chairman Buchanan made a motion to approve the August 7, 1990 minutes Commissioner Hargrave second Motion carves 4-0-0-3 Chairman Hawkinson and Commissioners H-dkey and Munson abstained ITEM #2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 4, 1990 MOTION PCM-90-147 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 4, 1990 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-147 Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to approve the September 4, 1990 minutes Commissioner Van Gelder second Motion carries 6-0-0-1 Commissioner Sims abstained ITEM #3 CUP-90-06, E-90-04 K & M RC ACCESSORIES 22474A BARTON ROAD G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF A RACE TRACK AND LIGHTING FOR REMOTE CONTROL CARS IN THE BRSP DISTRICT 2 The Community Development Director presented the staff report WILLIAM BLAKE' 22474A BARTON ROAD GT Chairman Hawkinson asked about the project and the light tower Mr Blake stated that he has a hobby shop which sells remote control cars and S accessories, and he has an off -road track for young adults and lads He stated -' that he called the City and left a message that he was going to put up the lights, as after the 9-4-90 meeting, running the night program was a means of strictly surviving, as the heat of the summer caused business to go downhill, and the lighting substantially helped the business Chairman Hawkinson asked if he had made any new submittals to the City Mr Blake stated that what he has in the plan he submitted is what he is asking for Chairman Hawkinson stated that there were several items the City asked for that he was having difficulty complying with Mr Blake stated that he talked to the property owner, and he has agreed ,-' upon the right-of-way improvements but only if it won't be required that it be done tomorrow, and when the Barton Road development comes through the area, they will be met He said that the street has not been dedicated to the City yet, and he will dedicate 30 feet of right-of-way in the near future when the requirements are to be met He said that he can make quite a bit of the parking lot improvements, but he will need time Commissioner Sims asked for clarification of staffs recommendation. The Community Development Director stated that the intent of the staff report is that they would recommend approval of this project as they understand it, with the recommended conditions, however, until staff received an accurately dimensioned site plan which shows what the apphcant is asking for, they don't know what they are approving Chairman Hawkinson stated that he is bothered that the hghts went up. Commissioner Sims stated that he has never seen the plans m his packet other than the 8 1'2" X 11" sketches which were not good enough 3 Mr Blake stated that an architect came out, measured and made all the dimensions and stated that this was all he would need Commissioner Sims asked if the architect came in and talked to the Community Development Director The Community Development Director stated that he did come in a couple of times He said that the drawing doesn't reflect current parking code requirements, and they require a drawing which shows what he wants to do Mr Blake said that when he brought the plans in, he was asked to draw plans of what he wanted to put there, and then the commission would tell him what he would need, but he gave them what he wanted to put up there He said that he does not know what the City wants He said he will put trees, plants and sod around the track, but he doesn't know how to draw it in. He said that he was told he needed dimensions of the property, tower and track, and when he brought it back he was told it needed curb and guttering, but that is not what he wants, and what he has submitted is what he is asking for He stated that it has been a confusion from the beginning Commissioner Sims stated that the confusion he may have is that he is looking for the commission or the Planning Director to prepare the plan for him Mr Blake stated that he is only asking for suggestions Commissioner Sims said that he is asking for approval, and he didn't feel he had anything to do that with The Community Development Director stated that they have been trying to get a drawing from the beginning of what the applicant is asking for as well as coming close to meeting code requirements He said that they have indicated what the drawing needs to be to the applicant, which includes being accurately dimensioned, the Britton Way nght-of-way line, seating area, fencing, restrooms, the proposed structures and parking lot improvements per code He said they sent a letter after the last meeting which included the requirements for the drawing, and the applicant stated he would go with the drawings he has He recommended the Planning Commission take an action on the plans before them, and the applicant has the opportunity to appeal Commissioner Suns stated that he hasn't even received this drawing The Community Development Director stated that they requested 15 copies of revised plans from the applicant and they didn't receive them- 4 Mr Blake stated that he gave him twenty -some copies of it The Community Development Director stated that this was at the very beginning of the application, and he believes the commissioners received that in August, but there are changes to that plan, and they do not know what he means by the colorings on the plan Commissioner Hilkey stated that it appears this will go City Council, and they ought to make it presentable enough so that it is not a can of worms when handed to council He said that he is confused as to what the applicant has agreed to and has not agreed to He asked if the applicant was still speaking with the person who did the drawing Mr Blake stated that he told him what he needed and he came out and made the dimensions He stated that he asked where all the numbers were, and the response was that it was done by scale Commissioner Sims asked his name The Community Development Director stated that it was Larry Vesely and Associates Commissioner Hilkey asked if he could take the list to lion to revise the plans Mr Blake said that he will charge him, as he has charged $100 every time he has gone back, and that Mr Vesely said that the drawing was sufficient The Community Development Director suggested allowing the public hearing and going through the recommendations for approval, and then taking action based on items that are necessary per code and that the drawings be redone reflecting all conditions required within a certain time period, and if the applicant disagrees with any conditions, he can appeal to council Mr. Blake stated that whatever he puts on the plans, they will expect him to Put m. The Community Development Director stated that if it is approved with the conditions as well as the condition that the applicant submit revised drawings to the Planning Department which reflect all of the conditions of approval in a certain time period, and if he does not, the Conditional Use Permit would expire, pending submittal of drawings He said that he can then go to council if he does not want to do these things Mr Blake stated that he was told that if he put the curb and guttering on the 5 plans, then this is what they will think he wants there There was discussion as to whether he would have the plans reflect a chain link fence or a brick wall The Community Development Director stated that if they want the drawing to reflect the recommended conditions, then he would draw them as stated in the conditions, which would be brick or wood He said that another alternative would be to act on the drawing submitted by the applicant, and staff would recommend demal, as it is not per code He said that another �- alternative is to get it approved per code Commissioner Munson asked Mr Blake if he received a copy of the letter September 10, stating that it said very legibly what they asked for, and he ignored it Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that this is an excruciating process for all involved, and he perceives the problem to be that he has certain economic realities he is dealing with regarding this project, and the income doesn't justify the expenses He felt they all generally favor this activity for the community, but the location happens to be where they have worked very hard to bring some high -end development to 7 48 P M - PUBLIC HEARING OPENED KURT NORRIS 1251 SOUTH MEADOW LANE COLTON Mr Norris stated that he has raced a few times at the track and he does not know what improvements he has to make to be up to code, but he has a good time, and there are kids from 12 to 18 playing with their cars, and he has seen Inds at that age that are doing what they shouldn't, and he thinks this is a good thing He said that some of the commissioners seem to be opposed pretty adamantly and he is not sure why, but he thinks they should make a go of it if at all possible DENNIS AVANTS 22606 KENTFIELD G.T. Mr. Avants stated that he has lived in Grand Terrace for 1 1/2 years and discovered the track 1 1/2 months ago. He said that his nephew races all over Southern California, and he as well as his 14 year old daughter have R been coning to the track, and it is a good thing He said that he works for a general contractor, and he is willing to help him bring things up to code and help the commission understand what he is trying to do He said that it is a good project and he hopes it stays, as it gets families out there working together RHONDA ZESK 835 CLARK STREET RIVERSIDE Ms Zesk stated that her son has been racing at the track for quite some time, and Mr Blake is a super guy, and he keeps the kids off the street, and everybody works together 7.53 P M - PUBLIC FEARING CLOSED Chairman Hawkinson asked the applicant back up Mr Blake apologized for the small number of people, but explained it was difficult for them to keep returning He asked the cominnission how many places they can go where there is a large amount of kids and young adults and not here foul language or see drinking or smoking He said that the good kids need a place to go, and even the rough kids seem to behave themselves at the track Commissioner Van Gelder stated that no one is against the project She suggested going through the conditions Chairman Hawkinson stated that they do have safety concerns, as there will be traffic, and they will need some assurance that he will not create an environment that could create problems that haven't occurred to him He stated that they should go down conditions of approval one by one Chairman Hawkinson stated that the first condition consists of all the condition recommended by the City Engineer in his memorandum dated July 31 The Community Development Director read the conditions as follows 1) Identify assessor's parcel where the proposed project is to be constructed, 2) Provide structural design to required occupancy loading (viewing stand); 3) provide ramp for handicapped with hand rail 1:12 slope, 4) provide restroom facilities, and 5) all improvements shall be designed by owner's civil engineer and shall meet requirements of the City. 7 Chairman Hawkinson asked if Mr Blake had a problem with any of these 5 issues, to which Mr Blake responded in the negative Commissioner Sims asked if he realized he had to hire a registered civil engineer to do the work Mr Blake stated that he understood and agreed to condition of approval #1 Commissioner Hilkey asked who built the existing structure Mr Blake stated that they designed it themselves, as his father is an engineer Commissioner Hilkey asked if he was a registered civil engineer, to which Mr Blake responded in the negative Commissioner Hilkey was concerned as to whether or not it was structurally safe Mr Blake stated that it was designed to hold 20,000 lbs Commissioner Munson asked how much time would be required to provide the restrooms Mr Blake stated about 4 months to build restrooms on He said that he has two restrooms inside the hobby shop that are adequate and he would take one and make it into a handicapped restroom. The Community Development Director stated that he would assume the requirement would be for one men's and one women's restroom Chairman Hawkinson stated that #2 is the memorandum from the fire warden's department The Community Development Director stated that the most important item is #F-11, which refers to fire hydrants and pavement markers being required He said that one fire hydrant is required Mr Blake stated that he would have difficulty with this Chairman Hawkinson stated that #3 states that 30 feet of right-of-way south of Britton Way center line shall be offered for dedication to the City, and such dedication and associated street, curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements for the Britton Way right-of-way shall be completed upon request of the City Mr Blake asked for an approximate time for when they would want it done, and asked about the rest of the street, as the City doesn't own the street yet He said that the property owner said that when the City is ready to take over and maintain the road, he will be ready to donate the 30 feet The Community Development Director stated that the standard procedure is an Offer of Dedication, which the City does not accept until they are ready to accept the street, and the offer is good forever until the City takes the title to it and it would be conditioned that the street improvements be put in at that time He said that a deferment agreement would be required and no time periods would be placed on it Mr Blake stated that he has no problem with this item Chairman Hawkinson stated that #4 states that the area located in the Britton Way right-of-way shall be landscaped Mr Blake stated that he agreed to this item Chairman Hawkinson stated that #5 states that the race track facility shall be completely fenced Along the south, east and north perimeter lines of the track facility, the fence shall be 5 feet high and constructed of a solid material (wood cap and rail of decorative block), and the remainder of the fence shall be vinyl -coated, chain link material, 4 feet in height The Community Development Director indicated this on the plans He stated that on the north property line, they would anticipate the fence to be 6 feet high Mr Blake agreed to chain link fencing, but had problems with the type that the City is recommending Chairman Hawkinson stated that #6 states that the existing parking lot shall be improved to meet the standards of the BRSP parking regulations Mr Blake disagreed Chairman Hawkinson stated that #7 states that the lights shall be hunted to parking lights in accordance with the BRSP parking regulations, which is a maximum allowable height of 18' and low level security lights Mr. Blake disagreed Chairman Hawkinson stated that #8 states that the occupancy of the race 9 track facility shall be limited to 75 persons Mr Blake disagreed Chairman Hawkinson stated that #9 states that adequate seating area for 25% of the maximum occupancy shall be provided Mr Blake agreed Chairman Hawkinson stated that #10 states that there shall be no amplified speaker system Mr Blake disagreed Chairman Hawkinson stated that #11 states that the hours of operation shall be limited to Saturdays, 10 a.m. to 5 p m. and Sundays, 10 a m_ to 5 p m. Mr Blake disagreed Chairman Hawkinson stated that #12 states that when the track is not in operation, access to the track shall be secured and locked Mr Blake agreed and stated that he would like to have that done right away ( if possible Chairman Hawkinson stated that #13 states that a detailed planting and irrigation plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department Commissioner Sims asked if they had to be prepared by a landscape architect. The Community Development Director strongly recommended this Mr Blake disagreed Chairman Hawkinson state that #14 states that the proposed project shall be constructed in accordance with the plans approved by the Site and Architectural Review, Board He stated that if he agreed to #1, then #14 would resolve itself The Community Development Director stated that it would resolve itself depending upon the action. Mr. Blake stated that he is running on a tight budget, and he put the lights up because he was on his last leg, and he asked what would happen if he could 10 not come up with the plans Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that he would not have pernuts to operate and he would have to shut down Mr Blake stated that the drawing presented tonight is what he really wants to do Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that the only reason everyone is hanging in with this is because it is a desirable project Mr Blake stated that when the Barton Road development comes 114 then he can put a lot of money into it to bring it up to code or move to another spot Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that if they approve it, they will do so subject to certain conditions, and unless he satisfies each condition, he is not operating legally He said that he would recommend certain time constraints, and staff recommends that the comnssion tells him he can't operate until everything has been complied with The Community Development Director suggested that they asked the applicant what type of time frame he is looking at in order to achieve the conditions he has accepted Commissioner Sims asked if he would be allowed to continue to operate during this time frame The Community Development Director stated that this is up to the commission 8 42 P.M TO 8:56 P.M. - RECESS Chairman Hawkinson called up the applicant and asked if he had a problem with #14, to which the applicant responded in the negative Chapman Hawkinson stated that #15 states that the proposed project be maintained in a clean and functional manner Mr Blake agreed He asked if� vath regard to condition #5, a cedar fence would be allowable as opposed to a bnck wall. The Community Development Director stated as long as it had cap and rail. Mr Blake agreed 11 Chairman Hawkinson asked if there was anything the applicant would like to add Mr Blake stated that he would like to be able to continue the operation until all of these matters are taken care of Chairman Hawkinson asked if he would have a problem if they put a condition on the project that he not make any further improvements in any way Mr Blake said that he would not, but asked if he could put a tarp over the tower Chairman Hawlanson felt this would look tacky Mr Blake stated that he is tired of looking at it the way it is and would like to get the roof up Chairman Hawkinson asked if he would have a problem if they put some time constraints on it Mr Blake stated that regarding the plans, he would have to disagree if it would be any more than $3,000 Chairman Hawkinson stated that.they have an obligation to make certain that what he puts up is not unsafe Commissioner Hargrave asked if they were allowing him to continue mght racing with the lighting Mr Blake stated that the lights are permanent, and he would like to continue night racing Commissioner Hargrave stated that at the last meeting, the applicant stated that he couldn't do some of the things he has agreed to this evening Mr Blake stated that this was through the summer time Commissioner Hargrave asked if he felt he had enough capital to take care of these provisions in a reasonable time period, perhaps $5,000 to $10,000, at maybe 6 months maximum. Mr. Blake stated he did not. 12 Chairman Hawkinson asked what hours were ideal for him Mr Blake stated that he has already tried out his ideal hours and they worked out very well, there were no complaints from the sheriffs department or neighbors to his knowledge, and quite a few neighbors came over to watch the activities He said that he would need lights to be on at 4 00 p in on Friday since it gets dark early, and until 1100 p in He said that when he tried them out, the lights went out at 10 34 p in He said that Saturdays, he would like the track open during business hours, but no race activities He said that on Sunday morning, racing will be at 12 00 p in and would end around 4 00 p m He said that on Fridays at 10 00 p m , they announce that the noise be kept down. The Community Development Director clarified that the hours for Saturday and Sunday would be 10 00 a in to 5 00 p m, and that he wanted the track open at that time He stated that other than the operation hours, the track is to be locked and secured He asked if he wanted the track to operate at any tune other than that Mr Blake stated that he would like it to be unlocked Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, from 100 p m to 6 00 p m , but there would be no racing activities He said that he would only need lights one time per week t ` Chairman Hawkinson brought it back to commission for action, and suggested '-J going down each item separately MOTION PCM-90-148 CUP-90-06, E-90-04 Commissioner Sims made a motion to deny CUP-90-06 and E-90-04 and be given back to the applicant for further work as previously described by the Planning Director so that the commission can address the issues of the development properly Commissioner Hargrave second Chairman Hawkinson stated that unless they put conditions on this project and it goes to the City Council, it is conceivable that it get approved at that level without conditions, and he preferred they approve it or deny it with conditions Commissioner Sims said that he is not sure there shouldn't be more conditions on it, but he has nothing to look at to do so Commissioner Van Gelder stated that there are so many things that should 13 come before this in order to answer appropriately Commissioner Hargrave was concerned that Mr Blake has financial constraints, and U B C and safety requirements are not something this body can waive Vice -Chairman Buchanan stated that with any other project, this would be a quick decision, but he feels this is out of place He said that he is not sure he wants to see it in the middle of the BRSP forever, but a possible comprormse is limiting the conditional use permit to a relatively short period of time, but he is not willing to let it operate as proposed by Mr Blake Commissioner Hilkey asked if he would be able to operate if it was denied The Community Development Director stated that the commission's direction at the last meeting be that he be able to operate until the issue was concluded by the commission, and their denial would be the conclusion Commissioner Hmlkey asked if they could accept it based on a lengthy list of contingencies which he could take to the City Council for variances Commissioner Sims said he could still take the denial to City Council The Community Development Director stated that if it is denied, he would 1 direct him to cease operations tomorrow with a letter, and once he appeals, that may technically allow him to operate until the appeal is heard He stated that he has 10 days to appeal and it costs $133 00 Commissioner Sims stated that the project is not supposed to be here right now, as it has not been planned Chairman Hawkinson asked if they deny it, would they be starting from square one as far as any conditions go The Community Development Director stated that if they deny it, he will give them the original staff report with the conditions, and he would make a recommendation similar to what he made to the commission, which would be that the drawings be submitted and brought back to the Planning Commission. Chairman Hawkinson stated that if it goes to City Council, it is feasible that it will never come back to commission agamn. Commissioner Van Gelder asked what will have been gained if they just pick it up and move it over to City Council 14 Commissioner Hargrave called for the question Chairman Hawkinson verified that the motion was for denial The Community Development Director verified that this was based on inadequate information presented to the Planning Commission regarding the project Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked if they deny the project so that the applicant can put together adequate information, does this modify the requirements of substantial changes or waiting one year and does that apply to a conditional use permit The Community Development Director stated that it does, and he would recommend that the motion be that they deny it based on the information provided on the drawings submitted indicate inadequate parking per the Grand Terrace Municipal Code, and the drawings are insufficient with regard to other information Commissioner Sims concurred Commissioner Hargrave asked if he was saying that this is a way to condition this if Mr Blake wants to come back without the one year waiting period The Community Development Director stated that he would have to come back with drawings providing that information, and he wouldn't have to wait one year, but he would have to refile the fees Commissioners Suns and Hargrave concurred Chairman Hawkinson stated that if they deny it, as of tomorrow morning he would be operating illegally with respect to the race track. The Community Development Director stated that he would clarify this with the City Attorney before Friday night comes about. He said that if they deny, it, he will give them an order to cease and desist tomorrow on a follow-up letter from the commission's decision tonight. Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked that the motion be restated Commissioner Sins stated that the motion was to recommend denial directing it back to the applicant to provide the information requested by the Planning Director 15 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-148 The Community Development Director paraphrased the motion based on the finding that the drawings do not contain the adequate information, and the information they do contain does not meet the current parking code requirements Comnussioner Hargrave added that it doesn't meet the safety and health and U B C requirements Motion carries 6-1-0-0 Vice -Chairman Buchanan voted no The Community Development Director stated that there is a 10 day appeal period ITEM #4 CUP-90-04R1 TAYLOR LUMBER CO, INC /THOMPSON EQUITIES 21800 MAIN STREET GT AN APPLICATION FOR REVISION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A WHOLESALE AND CONTRACTOR LUMBER SALES OFFICE The Community Development Director presented the staff report Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked about the barbed wire extension The Commumty Development Director stated that this came up from a staff design concept He said that staff was pleased with the wall erected and the landscaping in front He said that the landscaping was done prior to submitting any plans and none have been submitted yet, but they did put barbed wire fencing along the top of the perimeter wall and staff has required that this be removed, but the applicant has indicated that there have been some security problems, so they want to keep the barbed wire He stated that staff feels it detracts from the environment that has been created Vice -Chairman Buchanan asked if the use of barbed wire was restricted by ordinance or building code requirements, and asked if the City prohibits its use The Community Development Director stated not that he is aware of. 16 MOTION VOTE CUP-90-04R1 that applying for a variance would be a waste of time and money as there are no findings that could be made Motion carries 7-0-0-0 The Community Development Director stated that there is a 10 day appeal period PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10.53 P M. SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CONVENED AT 10 53 P.M ITEM #5 SA-90-17 K & M RC ACCESSORIES 22474A BARTON ROAD GT AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A RACE TRACK AND LIGHTING FOR REMOTE CONTROL CARS IN THE BRSP DISTRICT MOTION PCM-90-150 SA-90-17 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-150 Commissioner Hargrave made a motion to deny SA-90-17 Commissioner Suns second Motion carves 6-1-0-0 Vice -Chairman Buchanan voted no ILI \%��APPLICANT'S ACCEPTANCE OF 1 no 2 no 3 yes 4 yes 5 yes 6 no 7 no 8 no 9 yes 10 no 11 no Applicant requests the following hours of operation for the racetrack Friday 4 00 p m- 1100 p m (lights) Saturday 10 00 am - 5 00 p in Sunday 10 00 a.m, - 5 00 p m Tuesday 1100 a m, - 6 00 p m Wednesday 1100 a m. - 6 00 p m Thursday 1100 a.m. - 6 00 p m. 12 yes 13 no 14 no 15 yes 22795 Barton Road Grand Teirace Cal as 92324-5295 Civic Canter (714) 824-6621 Planning Dep irtment October 3, 1990 K&M Accessories Mike Blake 22474 A Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Re A Conditional Use Permit for an outdoor remote control car race track and lighting (CUP-90-06 and SA-90-17) Dear Mr Blake, This is to inform you that on October 2, 1990 the City of Grand Terrace Planning Commission denied your project based on inadequate and insufficient information reflected in the submitted plans and inadequate compliance with the Parking Code according to the Grand Terrace Municipal Code Therefore, you are hereby ordered to cease and desist the operation of your remote control car track immediately All improvements that have been done on the site in relation to the remote control car race track (outdoor improvements) are to be removed and the site returned to its original condition This order in no manner restricts the operation of your Hobby Store There is a ten day appeal period which expires at 5 00 p m on Friday, October 12, 1990 During this period you may appeal the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council If you wish to appeal this decision, please contact the City Clerk's Office for the appropriate application (Appeal fee is $133 dollars) Sincerely, -122 - - 6e=1 David R Sawyer Community Development Director Code Enforcement Officer APPLZCAUON FOR APPEAL APPELLANT NAME ADDRESS CITY PHONE NO SUBJECT PROPERTY ADDRESS � j �42 APPEAL This application is for the purpose of appealing the following _x A Planning Commission Decision A Site and Architectural Review Board Decision Other File or Permit number 6&1,� (°' o e,14 Please specify what portions of the Planning Commission's or Site and Architectural Review Board's decision you are appealing Please state any facts regarding this case which you feel are in dispute Please explain why you feel the Planning Commission's or Site and Architectural Review Board's decision should be changed by the City Council Be specific and include any evidence which supports your position STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION I verify that the information I have providtd in this application is true and correct Ap ant _ \PLANNING\CE\APLAPPL D to 96 I i i