Loading...
05/10/199022795 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 Jim Singley Council Members Thomas J Schwab City Manager FILE COPY May 10, 1990 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE Regular Meetings 2nd and 4th Thursdays — 6 00 p in Council Chambers Grand Terrace Civic Center 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324-5295 REVISED CITY OF GRAND TERRACE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS May 10, 1990 GRAND TERRACE CIVIC CENTER 6 00 P M 22795 Barton Road * Call to Order - Invocation - Roosevelt Jordan, Student, California Baptist College * Pledge of Allegiance - * Roll Call - l STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL ACTION CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1 Approval of 4/26/90 Minutes Approve 2. Approval of Check Register No CRA051090 Approve ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY -ANVENE CITY COUNCIL 1 Items to Delete 2 SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS A Proclamation - "Good Posture Month"/ "Chiropractic Wellness Week" 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 No. 051090 B Ratify 5/10/90 CRA Action C. Waive full reading of Ordinances on Agenda CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 26, 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 April 26, 1990, at 6 05 p.m. PRESENT Byron Matteson, Chairman Hugh J. Grant, Vice -Chairman Barbara Pfennighausen, Agency Member Jim Singley, Agency Member f Gene Carlstrom, Agency Member Thomas J. Schwab, Executive Director Randall Anstine, Assistant City Manager Juanita Brown, Secretary David Sawyer, Community Development Director John Harper, City Attorney ABSENT Joe Kicak, City Engineer APPROVAL OF APRIL 12, 1990 CRA MINUTES CRA-90-13 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY VICE-CHAIRMAN GRANT, CARRIED 5-0, to approve April 12, 1990 CRA Minutes. APPROVAL OF CHECK REGISTER NUMBERS CRA041290 AND CRA042690 CRA-90-14 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER CARLSTROM, CARRIED 5-0, to approve Check Register Numbers 041290 and 042690. Mayor 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, May 10, 1990 at 6 00 p.m. CHAIRMAN of the City of Grand Terrace SECRETARY of the City of Grand Terrace CRA AIGENOA I T E%11 NO ' rAi -TitV of 6f ra.. 1 jerrave t r 9 til Iva r I a 1 i� "GOOD POSTURE MONTH" MAY, 1990 "CHIROPRACTIC WELLNESS WEEK" May 13-20, 1990 WHEREAS, good physical health, proper posture, and a sense of wellness are essential elements of a productive and enjoyable life, and n WHEREAS, the chiropractic profession -has for several decades helped Californians achieve and maintain good health --through the use of the body',s of restorative 'power s;Yana, f r i•q "`ti l "t rs '+ mot, < )% WHEREAS, - chi ropracticissAFcar'e, has benefited millions of n"_`Califor nia's health care consumers, - F NOW THEREFORE, BE- IT RESOLVED, that" the City of Grand Terrace-,rtecognizes the devoted care`which,doctors of chiropractic have i y.\ rvi ded health care, consumers in this city, and " `-BE ITrFURTHER 'RESOLVED, tth`,at thei City Councl,l' of the City of Grandx Terrace; hereby,, proclaims the month" of =May, 1990 as "Good r5 ; P1ostune, 7 Monthy'� and, the week of May 5 '13-20, 1990-has "Chiropractic -=Wel l ness nt�eek' �7 nY` the City of Grand -,Terrace in =support of the t�- Cal i forni aL•"ega sl ature',s similar pr'ocl amati on !,n 1V `� h -of, o f the C4Tty,,o rand Terrace ti v -and of the City"'Council thereof This 10th day of May, 1990 y Y , i- 'V - 4?-"'••ram: �.-4�.y`- � ..�_.. ,. 4_ � � - ' tip,-. t�tF�`•,f.;y�` xhf�^r'c<.�,�� ?, ,l - � - y' _ ' 0 Wu r `t ^ {^i ce �9� V,- .. i�� U lb�' U, tt U' l� t u U, ' �Y� q Li' CITY OF I VD TERRACE "r-DOING CITY CO_ 'CIL APPROVAL DATE MAY 10, 1990 CHECK REGISTER NO 051090 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF MAY 10, 1990 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOIJNT P6663 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY P6664 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY P6665 HOME CLUB P6666 FRITZ'S LAWNMOWER SHOP P6667 SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH P6668 RICHARD ZOGLMANN P6669 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY P6670 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY P6671 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY P6673 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY P6675 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY P6676 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY P6677 POSTMASTER-COLTON P6678 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY P6683 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY 21573 CAL -WEST CONSULTANTS LZ 21574 LOMA LINDA RADIOLOGY 21575 LOMA LINDA MEDICAL CENTER 21576 P H H HOMEQUITY 21577 MELINDA MCNEELEY 21578 21579 DAVID BROOKS MICHAEL ROE 21580 AT&T INFORMATION CENTER �21581 ACE COMMUNICATIONS CASH PAYMENTS FOR 4/19/90 $ 83 43 CASH PAYMENTS FOR 4/19/90 128 36 SUPPLIES FOR MAINTENANCE 64 82 PARTS FOR LAWNMOWER 100 30 HULDA CROOK/APPEARANCE AT WALK AMERICA 100 00 PARTS FOR CITY TRUCK, REIMBURSEMENT 35 51 CASH PAYMENTS FOR 4/23/90 49 71 CASH PAYMENTS FOR 4/23/90 94 19 CASH PAYMENTS FOR 4/25/90 56 22 CASH PAYMENTS FOR 4/25/90 272 90 CASH PAYMENTS FOR 4/30/90 158 90 CASH PAYMENTS FOR 4/30/90 326 83 POSTAGE FOR METER 1,000 00 CASH PAYMENTS FOR 5/2/90 354 22 CASH PAYMENTS FOR 5/2/90 155 06 COMPACTION TEST ON MICHIGAN STREET PROJECT 1,509 00 TB TEST READING, CHILD CARE 24 00 TB X-RAY, CHILD CARE 63 00 REFUND, WASTE WATER DISPOSAL SERVICES 33 05 REFUND, WASTE WATER DISPOSAL SERVICES 17 00 REFUND, WASTE WATER DISPOSAL SERVICES 11 62 REFUND, WASTE WATER DISPOSAL SERVICES 13 88 RENT PHONE, EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER 4 38 PORTABLE SCANNER RADIO, EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER 199-00 1 CHECK NUMBER VENDOR 21582 RANDALL ANSTINE 21583 ARID IMAGE SYSTEMS 21584 AWARD COMPANY OF AMERICA 21585 B & G EQUIPMENT RENTAL 21586 BASTANCHURY BOTTLED WATER 21587 DANIEL BUCHANAN 21588 CONSTANCE CHAPMAN 21589 CHEM-LITE INDUSTRIES 21590 CITY OF COLTON 21591 EASTMAN KODAK CREDIT CORP 21592 EWING IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 21593 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 21594 W W GRAINGER, INC 21595 STANLEY HARGRAVE 21596 JERRY HAWKINSON 21597 HERMAN HILKEY 21598 HONEYWELL, INC 21599 HYDREX PEST CONTROL 21600 HYDRO-SCAPE PRODUCTS, INC 21601 INLAND BUSINESS FORMS 21602 INLAND EMPIRE STAGES LIMITED 21603 INTERNATIONAL MAILING SYSTEM 21604 C R JAESCHKE, INC CITY OF ND TERRACE DATE MAY 10, 1990 OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF DESCRIPTION CHECK REGISTER NO MAY 10, 1990 AUTO ALLOWANCE FOR MAY, 1990 REPAIRS AND SUPPLIES FOR PANASONIC COPIER PLAQUES, CITY CLERK RENT FORK LIFT, MAINTENANCE BOTTLED WATER FOR CIVIC CENTER AND CHILD CARE, 4/26/90 STIPENDS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 5/1/90 CLEAN REST ROOMS AT PARK, (9 DAYS) TRASH CAN LINERS, MAINTENANCE WASTE WATER DISPOSAL SERVICES FOR MAY, 1990 AND CONNECTIONS FOR APRIL, 1990 LEASE KODAK COPIER, MAY, 1990 IRRIGATION SUPPLIES FOR PARK EXPRESS MAIL KEY TAGS/CABINET FOR EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER STIPENDS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 5/1/90 STIPENDS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 5/1/90 STIPENDS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 5/1/90 MAINTENANCE ON HVAC UNIT, CIVIC CENTER, MAY, 1990 PEST CONTROL FOR CIVIC CENTER AND CITY BUILDINGS FOR APRIL, 1990 LANDSCAPE MATERIALS FOR PARK PRINT SEWER BILLS BUS FOR GARMENT DISTRICT EXCURSION, RECREATION RENT POSTAGE METER FOR MAY-JULY, 1990 PARTS FOR POWER LAWNMOWER 51090 AMOUNT 200 00 212 15 159 40 150 00 92 00 35 00 180 00 79 37 76,425 38 223 27 186 92 15 00 117 78 35 00 35 00 35 00 1,043 00 73 00 1,253 25 344 54 349 00 110 98 141 63 1 CITY OF ND TERRACE DATE MAY 10, 1990 0 CHECK REGISTER NO 051090 CHECK NUMBER VENDOR OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF MAY 10, 1990 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 21605 KICAK AND ASSOCIATES ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR 4/2-4/29/90 $ 20,938 00 21606 LAKESHORE CURRICULUM SUPPLIES FOR SUMMER FUN, RECREATION 642 38 21607 MINUTE MAN PRESS NEWLETTERS/FLYERS FOR SENIOR CITIZENS 99 53 21608 MARIA MUETT REIMBURSEMENT FOR PLANNING CLASS 366 16 21609 RAY MUNSON STIPENDS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 5/1/90 35 00 21610 JEAN MYERS CROSSING GUARD FOR 4/9-4/20/90 71 25 21611 OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY MAINTENANCE ON ELEVATOR FOR MAY, 1990 205 07 21612 P R PRINTING/LITHOGRAPHY PRINT SPECIFIC PLAN/HOUSING ELEMENT 217 50 21613 PACIFIC BELL PHONE FOR SENIOR CITIZENS, EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER, AND CIVIC CENTER 775 33 21614 PAGENET AIR TIME/MAINTENANCE ON PAGERS FOR MAY, 1990 33 00 21615 THE PETRA COMPANIES PRINT INSPECTION CARDS, ENGINEERING 78 85 21616 PERRY'S STATIONARY OFFICE SUPPLIES 250 00 21617 PETTY CASH GENERAL PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 315 28 21618 PETTY CASH GENERAL PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT 41 28 21619 QUALITY LIGHT MAINTENANCE REPAIRS, BALL PARK LIGHTS 177 17 21620 W RANKIN & ASSOCIATES PLAYSTRUCTURE, PARK 14,624 42 21621 RICHARD REYNOSA SCOREKEEPER FOR SLO-PITCH SOFTBALL, 3/15-4/19/90 210 00 21622 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PARCEL MAPS, PLANNING 275 75 21623 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO DUMPING CHARGES FOR 3/16-4/10/90 371 00 21624 DAVID SAWYER AUTO ALLOWANCE FOR MAY, 1990 200 00 21625 THOMAS SCHWAB AUTO ALLOWANCE FOR MAY, 1990 200 00 21626 JIM SIMS STIPENDS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 5/1/90 35 00 21627 J SMALLEY UNIFORMS, INC APRONS FOR CHILD CARE STAFF 249 79 21628 SMART & FINAL IRIS COMPANY SUPPLIES FOR TINY TOTS 39 36 3 CITY OF ND TERRACE DATE MAY 10, 1990 CHECK REGISTER NO 051090 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF MAY 10, 1990 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 21629 THE SUN 21630 UNICAL 21631 FRAN VAN GELDER 21632 WEST-COMPUTIL CORP 21633 WILLDAN & ASSOCIATES 21634 WMI SERVICES-PERRIS 21635 WORDPERFECT CORP NOTICE, PUBLIC HEARING FUEL FOR CITY TRUCKS, EQUIPMENT AND VAN STIPENDS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, 5/1/90 PROCESS PARKING CITATIONS FOR MARCH, 1990 PROGRESS PAYMENT, HOUSING ELEMENT STREET SWEEPING FOR APRIL, 1990 UPDATE, COMPUTER SOFTWARE PAYROLL FOR APRIL, 1990 TOTAL $ 58 27 279 31 35 00 16 25 1,429 50 2,349 00 93 41 67,079 16 $198,143 07 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 4 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 26, 1990 PENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL 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 April 26, 1990, at 6 00 p m PRESENT Byron Matteson, Mayor Hugh J. Grant, Mayor Pro Tem r Barbara Pfennighausen, Councilmember Jim Singley, Councilmember Gene Carlstrom, Councilmember Thomas J. Schwab, City Manager/Finance Director Randall Anstine, Assistant City Manager Juanita Brown, City Clerk David Sawyer, Community Development Director John Harper, City Attorney Virgil Barham, Engineering ABSENT Joe Kicak, City Engineer The meeting was opened with invocation by Pastor Salim Elias, Azure Hills Seventh-Day Adventist Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilmember Singley. Mayor Matteson convened City Council meeting at 6 00 p m. Mayor Matteson reconvened City Council meeting at 6 05 p m. ITEMS TO DELETE None SPECIAL PRESENTATION 2A. Councilmember Pfennighausen read a Proclamation proclaiming the month of May, 1990 as "Water Awareness Month." 2B. Councilmember Singley read a Proclamation titled "Williams for Sheriff" proclaiming extreme satisfaction with the services provided by the County of San Bernardino Sheriff's Department and endorsing Dick Williams for Sheriff of San Bernardino County. Mayor Pro Tem Grant, indicated that he is not in favor of this Proclamation stating that he feels that it is unappropriate for the Council to speak on behalf of a particular individual. He felt that a Resolution would be more appropriate than a Proclamation. Council Minutes - 4/26/90 Page 2 Councilmember Pfennighausen, concurred with Mayor Pro Tem Grant indicating that she personally supports Dick Williams but she does not support this Proclamation. Councilmember Carlstrom, also concurred. Councilmember Singley, indicated that he works as a Deputy Sheriff for the County of San Bernardino and has known Undersheriff Williams for a number of years and supports him. He saw no problem with Council taking a position on political issues, which affect the City. He stated that if we do feel strongly about endorsing a certain candidate or a certain Resolution then I think we should take action. Mayor Matteson, stated that he is a representative of the residents of Grand Terrace and indicated that he supports this Proclamation because he believes that Undersheriff Williams would do the best job for the residents. CONSENT CALENDAR CC-90-31 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CARLSTROM, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar with the removal of Item A, Check Register No. 041290. A. APPROVE CHECK REGISTER NO. 042690 B. RATIFY 4/26/90 CRA ACTION C. WAIVE FULL READING OF ORDINANCES ON AGENDA D. APPROVE 4/12/90 MINUTES E. NOTICE OF COMPLETION - ALL PRO CONSTRUCTION CO. F. NOTICE OF COMPLETION - JEG CONSTRUCTION INC. G. FINAL TRACT MAP 10292 - DEBERRY & WILLETT ITEM FOR DISCUSSION 3A. Approve Check Register No. 041290 Councilmember Pfennighausen, questioned check number 21462, maintenance on Kodak copier for the month of March. She felt that this is a large amount of money and asked if there is a Maintenance Agreement for the copier. City Manager Schwab, stated that the Kodak copier does have a maintenance agreement and the amount paid also included toner. He indicated that he would need to look into the exact terms of the Maintenance Agreement and report back to Council. Council Minutes - 4/26/90 Page 3 CC-90-32 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, CARRIED 5-0, to approve Check Register No. 041290. PUBLIC COMMENT Gene McMeans, Director of the Chamber of Commerce, gave a report on current Chamber events. Peggy Taylor, 22843 Vista Grande Way, Grand Terrace, stated that she is impressed with the Barton Road improvements and expressed concern about residents who are placing large trash containers on the grass, which will cause the grass not to grow. Mayor Matteson directed staff to check into it and see if there is anything that can be done to prevent this. Virginia 0 awa, 12556 Michigan, Grand Terrace, indicated that she is very un appy with the work JEG Construction has done at her residence while working for the City. She indicated that because of the work by JEG Construction, she now has dead landscaping in her yard and damage has been done to the exterior of her home. City Manager Schwab, indicated that the City Engineer is presently out of town and stated that he will meet with Mrs. Ogawa and report back to Council. CC-90-33 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, CARRIED 5-0, to rescind the approval of Item 3F, Notice of Completion - JEG Construction Inc. ORAL REPORTS 5A. Committee Reports 1. Historical & Cultural Committee CC-90-34 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, CARRIED 5-0, to accept the Historical & Cultural Committee Minutes of April 2, 1990. 5B. Council Reports Councilmember Pfennighausen, indicated that she is pleased with the upgrades on Barton Road, reported that the children are using the walkway installed on Michigan and they are safely out of traffic, she recommended that the City also look into installing a walkway between Van Buren and DeBerry, in light of the recent Proclamation for Earth Day, she felt that the City should conserve paper when possible, she indicated that she has been contacted by residents regarding hazardous waste and felt that the City needs to look into having the hazardous waste people come to our community at least once a month for the Council Minutes - 4/26/90 Page 4 residents to dispose of household items, she recommended that staff immediately start to put together a recycling program with BFI. Mayor Matteson, reported that San Bernardino County and the incorporated Cities are putting together a Solid Waste Task Force, which will by State mandate, reduce our garbage by 25% by 1991 Councilmember Carlstrom, asked why the berm on Michigan was taken up and put in another spot. City Manager Schwab, indicated that the berm was causing drainage problems and the residents were also complaining that they could no longer park in front of their homes. Mayor Pro Tem Grant, encouraged everyone to attend the Historical & Cultural Committee 5th annual art show on April 29th, asked if the parking restrictions are being enforced at City Hall, he agreed with Councilmember Pfennighausen that the Barton Road improvements look good stating that he hopes the grass will be taken care of, he felt that City Hall could be maintained better than it is, he asked City Attorney Harper for an update on the billboard case. City Manager Schwab, replied that the parking restrictions for the lot at City Hall are being enforced. City Attorney Harper, reported that the defendant has brought a motion to reconsider the judges decision that our Ordinance is Constitutional, and it will be heard next week. He indicated that he expects that we will be successful. Mayor Matteson, reported that the free dump -day and the dumpsters located in the City for spring clean-up were successful and indicated that he would like to see it continued on a more frequent basis in the City. PUBLIC HEARING 6A. Adoption of Coun (Vehicle Abatement :y of San Bernardino Ordinance No. 3349 Assistant City Manager Anstine, stated that since incorporation, the City has performed vehicle abatement through the City's nuisance Ordinance and indicated that the process tends to take several hours of staff time. He recommended that Council authorize entering into a contract with the San Bernardino County Environmental Health Department for vehicle abatement services. There is no charge for this service. The County will recover all costs for the program by way of ,junking Council Minutes - 4/26/90 Page 5 all unclaimed vehicles. The County would be enforcing not only the San Bernardino County Ordinance No. 3349, but also the City of Grand Terrace applicable Ordinances. Councilmember Carlstrom, asked if the Ordinance would apply to cars on private property. Assistant City Manager Anstine, indicated that it would. Mayor Matteson opened discussion to the public. Dick Rollins, 22700 DeBerry St., Grand Terrace, stated that he is in favor of the vehicle abatement program, however, he felt that the residents should be informed that it will take place. Mayor Matteson returned discussion to Council. Councilmember Pfennighausen, indicated that there is already a vehicle abatement program in the City, with this agreement the responsibility is just being reassigned. Mayor Matteson, expressed concern about officers having the authority to enter private property to inspect the vehicles. Assistant City Manager Anstine, indicated that we have that authority under the present Ordinance. City Attorney Harper, stated that if the vehicle is not in plain sight, you are obligated under the Search and Seizure Law to get an inspection warrant. Assistant City Manager Anstine, gave a slide presentation of vehicles that are currently in the abatement process within the City. CC-90-35 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, CARRIED 5-0, to authorize the adoption of the San Bernardino County Ordinance No. 3349, Sections 33.121-333.1289, Vehicle Abatement and Removal. Further, authorize entering into an agreement with San Bernardino County authorizing said County to conduct vehicle abatement and removal services. 6B. TTM-89-05 - An application for a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide a 3.4 acre parcel into six residential lots Burns Community Development Director Sawyer, indicated that the property is located at 11899 Roseda e Avenue and is owned by Ron and Bari Burns. The property contains approximately 3.4 acres and is presently developed with a single family residence. The tentative map proposes to subdivide the property into six individual lots. The existing single family residence will remain on Lot #6 and all other existing Council Minutes - 4/26/90 Page 6 structures not located on Lot #6 will be removed. The size of the lots range from 20,000 sq. ft. to 26,000 sq. ft. He recommended that Council adopt a Resolution approving TTM-89-05 and its associated Negative Declaration subject to the conditions of approval contained therein. Mayor Matteson opened discussion to the public, there being none, he returned discussion to Council. Councilmember Pfenni hausen, felt that some drainage plan needs to be required of the people subdividing this 3.4 acres of land. Mayor Matteson, asked Community Development Director Sawyer what his anticipation is of solving the drainage problem. Community Development Director Sawyer, indicated that a condition from the City Engineer's office is that they provide adequate drainage facilities. How that is going to be done is normally identified as a condition of the map, and therefore needs to be addressed prior to the recordation of the final map. Virgil Barham, City Engineer's Office, stated that they would address that at the time the grading plans were submitted for approval and hydrology studies would be done to confirm that these things are taking place. CC-90-36 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, CARRIED 4-1 (COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN VOTED NOE), to adopt a Resolution approving TTM-89-05 and its associated negative declaration subject to the conditions of approval contained therein. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7A. Second Reading - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, AMENDING CODES PERTAINING TO THE ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF THE 1988 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE AND UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS_ CC-90-37 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER CARLSTROM, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, CARRIED 5-0, to adopt the Ordinance amending codes pertaining to the adoption and amendment of the 1988 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code and Uniform Fire Code Standards. CLOSED SESSION Mayor Matteson reported that Council met in Closed Session to discuss personnel matters. Council Minutes - 4/26/90 Page 7 NEW BUSINESS 8A. Consideration by City Council of Merit Increase for City _Manager Mayor Matteson opened discussion to public input, there being none, he returned discussion to Council. Mayor Matteson, indicated that each Councilmember has been given the opportunity to prepare a personnel report on the City Manager. He gave a brief summary of the current benefits and salary for the City Manager. CC-90-38 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, to give the City Manager a 5% merit increase and ammend the salary Resolution to reflect the increase. Councilmember Pfennighausen, indicated that she chose not to participate in the evaluation process stating that she has conveyed her feelings to City Manager Schwab. She felt that merit increases should only be given for outstanding performance and stated that she is opposed to this increase. Mayor Matteson, indicated that City Manager Schwab has accomplished a great deal for the City holding the positions of City Manager and Finance Director. He stated that City Manager Schwab has greatly increased the Cities investment portfolio and the position that the City is in now compared to when he became City Manager is so much greater. MOTION CC-90-38 CARRIED 4-1 (COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN VOTED NOE) Councilmember Singley, indicated that he would like Council to consider a contract for the City Manager dealing with termination and directed staff to place this on the next agenda. ORDER OF ADJOURNMENT Mayor Matteson adjourned the City Council meeting at 8 15 p.m., until the next regular CRA/City Council meeting, which is scheduled to be held Thursday, May 10, 1990. CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace. MAYOR ot the City ot GrandTerrace. Date 5 3 90 STAFF REPORT C R A ITEM() COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE:5 10 90 SUBJECT: City Participation in the Summer Youth Employment Training Program (SYEP) RECOMMENDATION- Staff recommends that the City Council authorize participation in the San Bernardino County Summer Youth Employment Training Program (SYEP), for the summer of 1990 BACKGROUND INFORMATION During March 1990, the City of Grand Terrace submitted a grant application to the County of San Bernardino, Career Training and Development Department The application requested that the City be considered for funding for the SYEP On April 20, 1990, staff received notification that a grant was being awarded to the City, in the amount of $43,560 00 for a SYEP There are two main reasons for the SYEP First, it provides a means of summer employment for eligible youth, between the ages of 14 through 21. In -school, out -of -school and private school youth within the County are eligible for participation Second, and most important, it provides valuable academic, as well as on-the-job training, for the local youth. In addition to performing meaningful work, the youth will be required to participate in mandatory classroom study The grant as written, identified youth to be served within the Grand Terrace area, Loma Linda; parts of Colton Based upon the amount of the funding awarded, it is anticipated that approximately 15 youth will be served The program will employ the services of a State licensed teacher, who will act as the program coordinator The program will be administered by the Assistant City Manager Staff hopes to provide job opportunities within the City maintenance department, administration, child care, recreation In addition to the Chamber of Commerce, Loma Linda City Hall All participants must meet eligibility requirements and must be assessed for reading and mathematic deficiencies There is not cost to g ,cif-;"C ,0A NWIV tJ I�O � ;� v� � { FMBERt'►9 _.. PROJECT DESCRI7P'ITON Within the Grand Terrace catchment area, the need exists to (1) address the special employability needs of a specific population group, in the JTPA eligible youth population, (2) assess appropriate employability and basic skill levels, (3) provide a systematic and component based program that will pre- and post-test growth, (4) provide on -going in-service orientation and (5) provide counseling and educational remediation Various assessment tools will be used to determine the participant's needs, in planning provisions of training youth to assist them in achieving success These include, but are not limited to (1) pre -testing in Basic Skills, (2) administering the Nelson Reading and Bergance Math tests, (3) administering and evaluating the CAPS/COPS Inventory and Attitude, (4) obtaining, with written parental release, CTBS, high school proficiency and other cumulative folder information and scores, (5) utilizing the "Active Learning" self-esteem/confidence video exercise and (6) in the case of special education students (with written parental release), a copy of the IEP Assessment will occur after certified eligibility and prior to selection STATEMENT OF NEED I The City of Grand Terrace, recognizes that the Summer Youth Employment Training Program (SYETP) is a program designed to provide opportunities for young men and women (14-21), to acquire useful work skills, and to develop positive attitude toward work For some, SYETP will represent an opportunity to obtain skills and training as a prerequisite for regular employment The summer program was originated to assist the "high risk" youth, by encouraging them to maintain or resume their regular education and thereby, enhancing their employment potential In the past, the City of Colton has administered the SYETP for the youth of Colton, Grand Terrace and Bloomington, yet, last summer, the City of Grand Terrace was referred only one (1) SYETP participant This represents 008% of all allocated slots to the service area It is the contention of this proposal, that the City of Grand Terrace should be able to serve its own catchment area with (1) the youth of Grand Terrace, Colton, Bloomington and Loma Linda, and (2) provide job skills training, and if needed, Basic Skills remediation At this time, the City of Grand Terrace is committed to and has a firm commitment to place forty- five (45) youth The implementation of this proposal will serve to provide the City of Grand Terrace with youth employed in various areas of municipal government and in non-profit agencies Conversely, the City of Grand Terrace will administer, monitor and provide employment skills and Basic Skills instruction - 2 - II ASSESSMENT The assessment of all program participants will occur after he/she has been certified eligible This will include (1) test of Basic Skills, (2) administration of the Nelson and Bergance reading and math tests, (3) administering of the CAPS/COPS Inventory, (4) with written parental release, cumulative folder assess for all pertinent CTBS and proficiency score, and in the case of special education students, copy of the IEP, (5) video taping, "Active Learning" self-esteem/confidence exercise The assessment will provide for a detailed and comprehensive Employability Development Plan Role playing, learning packets, peer counseling and on- going counseling will augment a continuous assessing of the participants EMPLOYABDLIr1'Y PLAN DEVELOPMENT The Employability Development Plan will reflect the participant's needs resulting from his/her assessment The Employability Development Plan will detail (1) employability status, i e , need for education/vocational training, basic skills training, work experience and infusion into the world of work, (2) employability objectives, i e , resulting from his/her employability status, (3) assessment results, i e , test scores, stanines and types of remediation needed, (4) barrier to employment and educational objectives, i e , low reading level, physically or educationally handicapped, limited or non- English speaking, (5) training and supportive services plan, i e , Basic Skills instruction, work experience, "Active Learning" video, self-esteem and interpersonal skills training DEMONSTRATED EFFECTIVENESS The Grand Terrace project, will be monitored and supervised by the Assistant City Manager (ACM) The ACM has over fifteen years experience in municipal government This experience includes, but is not limited to, monitoring the old CETA program, safety programs, public works, parks, recreation, code enforcement The program coordinator (hired under the SYETP) will be required to have a background that will consist of experience in social services, mental health, teaching and/or counseling fields The remedial teacher (hired under the SYETP), will be a State of California credentialed teacher The total experience of all program staff will bring the participants methods used by men and women who have survived the hazards and pitfalls of the employment world Services will be administered to participants in a manner which respects the dignity of the individuals and fosters self-sufficiency and individual choice Overall, staff will be composed of imaginative people who care, who can organize amid ambiguity and respond to shifting priorities While this application for funding will not venture into a thicket of controversy by trying to define leadership qualities, it is essential to emphasize that this program does require effective leadership This is especially true in regards to cost control - 3 - This final aspect of the demonstrated effectiveness is crucial Fiscal control will provide the means by which the City of Grand Terrace is able to account to the County of San Bernardino and the Private Industry Council for the effectiveness of the program in carrying out the purpose for which it is funded EffLEMENTATION PLAN Participants who need Basic Skills instruction and remediation will be post -tested in those areas It is anticipated that 80% of all remediated participants, with the exception of those with IEP's and limited and non- English speaking students will have demonstrated measurable growth In the case of special education participants, growth will be deemed, if IEP objectives were met Realistically, limited and non-English speaking participants will demonstrate minimal growth in English, but math growth should be measurable In the case of "Active Learning" self- esteem/confidence video, 100% of all participants will demonstrate visual growth In the area of job performance, 60%-70% of all participants will receive favorable job reviews A post -Employability Development Plan will be filled out to compare with the initial one On or about April 12-13, local newspapers, Sun Telegram, El Chicano, public service announcements, flyers at Colton, Bloomington and Slover Mountain High Schools will be distributed, as well as at Advocate and Colton Adult Education Schools, community centers in Grand Terrace, Bloomington, Colton and Loma Linda will be utilized to disseminate information, Grand Terrace Sewer billing will also serve to advertise, outreach and recruit Outreach and recruitment will occur on a as needed basis throughout the program period Pre -applications will be available at the schools, various churches, community centers, Grand Terrace, Colton and Loma Linda City Halls, Grand Terrace, Colton and Loma Linda Chambers of Commerce and other agencies or businesses that support the program Pre -applications can either be returned to their place of origination, picked up by staff or submitted to the Grand Terrace City Hall The program coordinator will screen all pre -applications, and in the case of tentative eligibility, issue the formal application The application form should be filled out completely and include the requested and appropnate documentation The application will be reviewed by the program coordinator for completeness and for documents that verify qualification The applicant will then be notified, in writing, that he or she has been certified eligible An intake appointment will be scheduled At that time, the JTPA registration form will be completed The program coordinator will attempt to maintain a "bank" of eligible applicants through the duration of the program The program coordinator will maintain two participant files, one for the initial participants and the other for subsequent participants - 4 - In this manner, projections with those types of variable will not be affected It is anticipated that all forty-five (45) participants will be enrolled one week prior to the end of the school ,year Assessment of all participants and an Employability Development Plan will be completed by the end of the school year Selection will be made by the supervising agent at the job sites (criteria will be supplied) during the first week of summer In addition, the supervisor will receive a "supervisor's manual " The selected participant will be referred to the appropriate high school(s) and present to the work experience coordinator a Request for Work Permit and Statement of Intent to Employ Minor The necessary signatures will be secured, the participant will submit the form to the work experience coordinator, a work permit will then be issued In addition, if permitted, the participant will apply to participate in summer work experience The JTPA Client Action form will be filled out and the participant will be ready for work The City of Grand Terrace Finance Department will be notified upon the completion of the necessary forms Those participants who need Basic Skills instruction and remediation, will attend Monday -Thursday, 8-10 00 am All participants will attend every Friday 8-10 00 a m , for the purpose of receiving SYETP orientation, pre - vocational and interpersonal skills training, "Active Learning" video taping will start The participants will work approximately 35 hours per week (includes time for training and transportation) Participants will work approximately eight (12) weeks At the conclusion of the program, final job site evaluations will be given Post -Basic Skills tests will be given and a final assessment will be made The last days of the program will include one-to-one discussion of individual goals and objectives The group will observe each ones video, and engage in dialogue Termination papers will be filled out and the participants will return to school, additional training or both The participants needs will be taken into consideration in the Employability Development Plan As deemed appropriate, EDP's will be updated and upgraded to reflect growth Measure objectives will include such activities as on going training, dialogue with the site supervisors and the basic skills teacher Counseling will be interjected to address the particular employment or education needs of the participants Meeting the overall needs of the SDA will mean enrolling the target groups, "high risk youth", discouraging drop -outs and knowing that the participant has returned to school in the fall - 5 - Planning Department TO City Council FROM David Sawyer, Community Development Director DATE May 10, 1990 SUBJECT Appeal of CUP-89-07 APPLICANT Wing Choi (James Blaisdell) LOCATION 22400 Barton Road, Suite 200 REQUEST An appeal of Planning Commission Decision denying Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a "General Assembly Room" Background On February 6, 1990, the Planning Commission denied CUP-89-07, a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a "General Assembly Room", Staff recommended denial based on inadequate parking per Grand Terrace Municipal Parking Code (Section 18 60 030B) Subsequently, the applicant appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council At that time the applicant brought a revised project to the City Council which included additional parking which the Planning Commission had not reviewed As a result the City Council referred the project back to the Planning Commission for their review of the revised plans On April 17, the Planning Commission considered the revised plans and again denied the project based on inadequate parking Again, the applicant has appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council Included with this report is the staff report and recommendations regarding the revised plans (Attachment A), the Planning Commission's resolution (Attachment B) and the draft minutes from that meeting regarding this application (Attachment C) The applicant's current revised plans are also included with your packet (Attachment D) 22795 Barton Road 9 Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 • (714) 824-6621 Recommendation Staff feels that the facts regarding this application are the same as at the time of the Planning Commission's second consideration and therefor staffs recommendations remain as presented in the attached staff report Sincerely, David R Sawyer Community Development Director TO I FROM. DATE SUBJECT. APPLICANT LOCATION. REQUEST. Planning Department Planning Comnussion David Sawyer, Community Development Director 4-17-90 Staff Report, CUP-89-07 James Blaisdell 22400 Barton Road Suite 200 A Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a "General Assembly Room" ZONING AND LANDUSE: PropejU GP Zoning Subject Property GC C2 To the West MDR R3 To the East GC C2 To the North MDR R3 To the South GC C2 Land Use Office (vacant) Multi -family units Retail Multi -family units Office\Retail ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. This project is categorically exempt, per Class 1, of the California Environmental Quality Act 5-10-90 CC ATTACHMENT P 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 • (714) 824-6621 ITEM 3 DISCUSSION The applicant is proposing to operate a "general assembly room" for the purpose of providing banquet and meeting room facilities to the general public The facility will consist of two meeting rooms containing 2,227 square feet of area with the remaining 4,227 square feet consisting of office space, restrooms, storage and food preparation areas for a total of 6,454 square feet On January 12, 1990, the Planning Comaussnon denied this application based on inadequate parking The applicant subsequently appealed the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council at which time the applicant changed their submittal to include additional parking spaces provided on an adjacent lot As a result of this new information the City Council referred this item back to the Planning Commission for your consideration of the additional parking Parkin The parking requirements generated by the proposed use is a total of 110, 89 for the meeting room areas and 21 for the remainder of the space As currently unproved, the entire Town and Country Professional Center contains 133 parking spaces (23 spaces short of the required 165) As originally proposed this use would have increased this shortage by 78 spaces to a total of 101, spaces The revised parking facilities as proposed by the applicant adds 43 spaces (Area C) for a total of 55 spaces which can be identified for use by this use This is still 55 spaces short of the required 110 To help decrease this shortage the applicant is proposing a "shared parking" arrangement with the southerly portion of this center (Area D), however, the applicant has not submitted the necessary study to show this will work. Assuming however that the appropriate study is completed and it shows that a "shared parking" arrangement will work, only 209o' of the needed parking spaces can be provided through such an agreement, this translates into 22 shared parking spaces, which would bring the total number of spaces available up to 77, still 30% short of the required number Additionally, the proposed new parking lot does not meet the city's parking design standards Adjacent landuses The property directly to the north of the subject property is developed with multi -family residential units which are located within 75 feet of the proposed use As proposed, staff feels that this proximity is still of considerable concern due to potential conflicts between the residents and those attendmg events in the meeting rooms, particularly during evening and weekend hours when residents will be at home REVIEWING AGENCY COMMENTS The following responses have been received from the City's Reviewing Agencies ENGINEERING/BUILDING & SAFETY The Engineering/Buildmg & Safety Department's comments are included in their memorandum dated December 26, 1989 and attached as Attachment C PLANNING ISSUES 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 reflect the applicant's submittal as currently proposed and are as follows 1 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? This finding must be made in the negative. Yes Staff feels that because of the lack of adequate parking (per the Grand Terrace Municipal Code Section 18 60 030(B)) that the proposed use will be detrimental to the other businesses located in the center and to the adjacent residential units 2 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 General Commercial 3 Is the proposed use consistent with the City's Zoning Ordinance? This finding must be made in the positive. No The proposed use does not meet the requirements of Section 18 60 030 (B) of the Zoning Ordinance with regard to parking requirements 4 Are conditions necessary to secure the purpose of this section This finding may be made in either the positive or the negative. Staff recommends denial of this application based on inadequate parking, therefor, there are no conditions of approval RECOMMENDATION: In the analysis of this application, staff has considered three alternative scenarios A. The proposal as submitted (Attachment A) B The proposal as submitted with the following changes, 1) The new proposed parking lot (Area C) is to be developed in accordance with the City's parking ordinance and the Barton Road Specific Plan (see Attachment B) This will yield 30 spaces 2) The of number "shared parking" spaces (Area D) shall be no more than 15 spaces This provides a total of 74 spaces available for this application 3) The total square feet of assembly room area is to be reduced to 1,200 square feet This will match the number of available parking spaces under this scenario C The proposal as submitted with the following changes, 1) The new proposed parking lot (Area C) is to be developed in accordance with the City's parking ordinance and the Barton Road Specific Plan (see Attachment B) This will yield 30 spaces 2) "Shared parking" is not included This will result in a total of 59 spaces available for this application 3) The total square feet of assembly room area is to be reduced to 750 square feet This will match the number of available parking spaces under this scenario The following are the Planning Department's recommendations regarding the above listed scenarios A. Staff recommends denial based on the findings included in this staff report relating to inadequate parking and potential adverse impacts on adjacent properties B Staff recommends denial based on potential adverse impacts on adjacent properties (including the proposed use of "shared parking" spaces located in Area D which is currently under -parked) C Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions, 1) Areas B and C shall be unproved to the current standards of the City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance and the Barton Road Specific Plan. 2) An annual lease shall be entered into by the applicant and the owner of Area C which shall provide the applicant with exclusive use of Area C for parking purposes 3) This CUP shall expire one year from the date of its approval It may be renewed on an annual basis by the Planning Commission upon submittal for such renewal prior to its expiration. Any such renewal shall consider among other issues, the renewal of the required lease of Area C 4) The owners of Areas B and C shall sign an agreement for reciprocal parking and access between Areas B and C 5) The square footage available for "assembly room" use shall be limited to 750 square feet The remainder of the building shall be developed as office space 6) All activities associated with the "assembly room" use shall be contained within Suite 200, no related activities shall be conducted in any outdoor area 7) The hours of operation for the "assembly room" use shall be as follows Monday - Thursday Time Max Occupancy Breakfast 6 OOam to 9 OOam 50 Luncheon 11 OOam to 1 OOpm 50 Evenings 6 OOpm to 10 OOpm 50 Friday Breakfast 6 OOam to 9 OOam 50 Luncheon 11 OOam to 1 OOpm 50 Evenings 6 OOpm to 12 OOam 50 Saturday 6 OOam to 12 OOam 50 Sunday 6 OOam to 10 OOpm 50 8) All alcoholic beverages shall remain within suite 200 and no alcoholic beverages shall be served within one hour of the required end of operation 9) All persons and\or groups who use this facility shall be given a copy of these conditions and a copy of the Grand Terrace Noise ordinance and shall sign an affidavit acknowledging the receipt and compliance of same 10) Special holiday activities and hours may be approved by the Planning Director upon prior written request Respectfully submitted by David Sawyer, Community Development Director A Q ffiG - 51JI1 E 200 - 6454 5 F O r m - CV ° _ r 60° � 144 0 5 C_ 36 0 16 STALLS 0, 1-0' 0 t-1]—t Q Q80L' x Q4 UITE'5UITE' 5UIT'L 'SUITE' SUITE 75FF SUITE 16 11 �2 13 14 rl 15 725 Sf 1SrSF- i i SUITE 1c} ATTACHMENT A MR Q LLJ Q r � ,r u� v = n o v s _ m H Z pA 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace Califorma 92324-5295 Civic Center (714) 824-6621 Byron R Matteson Mayor Hugh J Grant Mayor Pro Tempore 3arbara Pfennighausen Jun Smgley Gene Carlstrom Council Members Thomas J Schwab City Manager W 0 12-8 5128 M E M O R A N D U M TO David R Sawyer, Community Development Director FROM Joseph Kicak, City Engineer DATE December 26, 1989 SUBJECT CUP 89-7 - Assembly Room Following recommendations should be considered as conditions of approval for subject project 1 Submit plans, showing the proposed remodeling, to meet the requirements of U B C for the proposed occupancy 2 Obtain necessary permits and pay all applicable fees for plan check and inspection. 3 All parking spaces shall be re -striped throughout the complex prior to final inspection AT�CNME/JT C RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, DENYING CUP-89-07 A REQUEST TO OPERATE A "GENERAL ASSEMBLY ROOM" AT 22400 BARTON ROAD IN A C-2 ZONE WHEREAS, the Apphcant, Mr James Blaisdell, applied for a conditional use permit to allow operation of a "general assembly room" within the C-2 zone located at 22400 Barton Road, and WHEREAS, the proposed use is a permitted use in the C-2 zone with a conditional use permit, and WHEREAS, this project is categorically (IA.) exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act, and WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held before this body on February 6, 1990, and 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 use will be detrimental to the general health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or workmg in the neighborhood of the proposed use or within the City Based on the lack of adequate parking (per the Grand Terrace Municipal Code Section 18 60 030(B)) that the proposed use will be detrimental to the other businesses located in the center and to the adjacent residential units 2 The proposed use is consistent with the latest adopted General Plan. The current General Plan land use designation for this property is General Commercial 3 The proposed use is not consistent with the City's Zoning Ordinance The proposed use does not meet the requirements of Section 18 60 030 (B) of the 5-10-90 CC ATTACHMENT B Zoning Ordinance with regard to parking requirements BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the proposed project is hereby denied by the Grand Terrace Planning Commission based on the above listed findings PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace, California, at a regular meeting held on the 17th day of April, 1990 AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN Jerry Hawkinson, Chairperson Planning Commission ATTEST Deputy City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM John Harper, City Attorney 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 Hawkinson PRESENT. Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner Herman Hilkey, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner David R Sawyer, Community Development Director Maria C Muett, Assistant Planner Maggie Barder, Secretary John Harper, City Attorney ABSENT. Dan Buchanan, Vice -Chairman Jim Suns, 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 Commissioners Institute PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7 00 P M 1 5-10-90 CC ATTACHMENT C Chairman Hawkinson declared a ten minute recess ITEM #3 CUP-89-07 JAMES A. BLAISDELL 22400 BARTON ROAD, #18 GT AN APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF AN "ASSEMBLY ROOM" The Community Development Director presented the staff report Commissioner Van Gelder asked if anything was included from the section designated A in the calculations of parking, to which the Community Development Director responded in the negative Commissioner Van Gelder asked if the number of square feet is reduced to 750, how many persons would they be talking about that would attend any given meeting The Community Development Director stated that the applicant would have to answer that, but staff is looking at 50 people as a maximum occupancy Chairman Hawkinson called up the applicant GABRIEL ADAME LARRY VESELEY ARCHITECT Mr Adame stated that they would like to comply with Condition B with one modification, being the retaining of 1,200 square feet of assembly room area, and the 15 spaces of shared parking in Area D He stated that he understands they cannot do this under Item C under the times located here, but they would like to propose that another study be conducted for weekend or evening use, since the study conducted by staff did not include any parking established after dusk Commissioner Hargrave asked how many more spaces his client was looking for based upon that scenario, or what is the objective Mr Adame stated that the objective is to get the maximum amount of occupancy, to increase it from 50 Commissioner Hargrave asked what he was proposing for maximum occupancy rya Mr Adame stated that with 15 extra spaces under Item D, they calculate that they can get from 50 to 80 people maximum occupancy in the assembly area at a 1,200 square foot room size Commissioner Hargrave stated, assuming that this works out, how would he propose that they coordinate this with the operating hours as proposed by the staff Mr Adame stated that the only thing that would change with the operating hours would be the maximum occupancy at the time of Saturday and Sunday and also during the evenings from 6 00 p m to 12 00 a m Commissioner Hargrave asked how they would control the following scenario Assuming there was an event scheduled for 8 00 a m, which would be for 75 people, thereby parking would be needed out or Area D Mr Adame stated that they are not proposing to change the morning hours or afternoon hours - just the evening hours He stated that they would retain the maximum occupancy of 50 during the morning and afternoon hours Commssioner Hargrave stated then, that evenings, Saturdays and Sundays would go to 75, which Mr Adame verified Chairman Hawkinson asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak, then brought it back to Commission for action. Commissioner Hargrave asked for the Community Development Director's comments The Community Development Director stated that if the applicant's suggestion is to limit the number of attendees to an event to 50, which would represent the parking spaces that Area B and C can handle during weekday, working hours, and allow the development of the area in the building to be 1,200 square feet and only utilized to its fullest when the shared parkmg would be available i a the adjacent Area D, then in order to do this, the applicant would have to show a parking study that would indicate that this would not be a hindrance to the existing and potential tenants in Area D He stated that this would settle the parking issue if that works out, but staff still feels that the number of people that would be generated from the 1,200 square foot space would be a potential conflict with the residential units only 75 feet away with no barriers at all between them He stated that they felt this was an issue from the very beginning and feel it is still an issue Mr Adame stated that the barriers would be the fact that nothing would be 23 conducted outdoors, but rather on the interior The Community Development Director stated that this is a good point, but his concern is the people that will not want to park in Area D and walk to the building, and would rather park along Britton Way or in some way adjacent to the parking areas of the apartment building He stated that he is speaking not only of activities, but of after -hour activities He said that one thing that hasn't been clarified is the type of use that they will be looking at in this assembly room He asked if they would be talking about weddings, as_ this was one of the things staff had a problem with, and not weddings per se, but the celebrations that go along with them that close to a residential use He stated that if this is a use that is not willing to cater to weddings or uses where alcohol or other things will be served late in the evening, that might lessen some of the concern regarding the proximity of the residential uses Chairman Hawkinson stated that it sounds like the project ought to be continued until some of these other issues are resolved Mr Adame stated that they understand that at the last board meeting, a petition was submitted and presented to the board, which indicated signatures from the residences to the north of this property He stated that the apartment complex does not currently have a meeting or assembly room of any type, and they would be much in favor of having something like this in close proximity for their assembly uses, whether they be for recreational or administrative uses Chairman Hawkinson stated that he was not aware of such a petition. The Community Development Director stated that there was a petition submitted to the City Clerk at the time of the City Council Meeting, and it did contain signatures of residents of the apartment project, stating that they were in favor of the proposed project Chairman Hawkinson stated there has been no presentation to this body yet Commissioner Van Gelder stated that she assumes that at least part of the time, the people who will be coming to use this facility will not be familiar with a location, and it is not the easiest place to find if you are not familiar with the complex, and she believes that people being as lazy as they are, they are going to pick the first spot they come to for parking, and if they happen to come in on Britton Way, they are going to park in the area designated as A. She asked how they are supposed to know that they are not supposed to park there She stated she is also concerned about #S, 9 and 10 on the recommendations, as they've been through this before with the other facility 24 in Grand Terrace She asked the Community Development Director how he proposed to control these items, being the use of the alcohol and people being given a notice and they have to sign it She stated that it doesn't mean anything - you can't enforce it The Community Development Director stated that they can enforce it if it becomes a problem, and unfortunately they often times have to wart until it becomes a significant problem in order to spend the man hours to go out and deal with it, particularly in these types of hours they are talking about He stated that Item A is certainly a self-imposed regulation, Item 10 is a self - unposed regulation until it becomes a problem, as is #9 He stated that he thinks all three of these reflects on the quality of the applicant, and whether or not they are willing to live by their word, and they cannot judge that ahead of time Commissioner Van Gelder stated that there is no way they can be assured of that ahead of time The Community Development Director stated that this is correct, so if it does become a problem in the future, they can deal with it, particularly on an annual CUP basis He stated that if it becomes a health and safety factor, they would address it immediately, if it was one little incident after another that individually don't amount to much, then they are not going to throw a block wall in front of them in order to stop them, but when it does come up for review, they would certainly make note of those incidences to the Planning Commission for their review He stated that a lot of it depends upon the seventy of the violation and whether or not they think they are going to get away with something immediately or if they will answer for it after being in business for a year Commissioner Hargrave asked if Britton Way allows parking, to which the Community Development Director responded in the negative Commissioner Hargrave stated that people park on Britton Way, and he thought in the conditions, they said there would be no parking on Britton Way, but every time he has been there, there is plenty of parking The Community Development Director stated that Britton Way is a private road Commissioner Hargrave stated that there are semi -trucks that park there now, and obviously live in that residence, and they park on both sides, and there is barely enough room for a car to get through once they park on both sides, so the private roadway issue is something that is out of the City's control 25 Commissioner Hilkey stated that the applicant has Parking Lot C, and there are 43 spaces, and his the Community Development Director's has 30 He asked if there orientation is totally unacceptable The Community Development Director stated that it is within the parking code, but the problem with their design is that the stalls are 16 feet in depth rather than 19 feet in depth, which is necessary in order to get the two double bays that they have in there He stated that unfortunately, there is just not enough land in order to get the appropriate dimensions for a parking lot within the code Commissioner Hilkey stated that he thinks the City needs something like this, but the parking is a real problem, and until they mitigate the problem, it is going to fall back on the apartments to absorb the extra parking He asked if it was possible to install gates on the edge of the property, so that the people coming off of Barton Road can't get back into the apartments, which would force them to park in the D section. The Community Development Director stated that they would still have pedestrian access in there, and they would have to fence off the whole building in essence, or at least pedestrian access to it Commissioner Hilkey stated that then they are talking about crowd control, as it is not laid out for use on a regular basis, as they are talking about weekends and evenings He stated that there is simply not enough parking The Community Development Director stated that as far as gatmg it off, they would have to have the crash gates for fire access and all of that, and he thinks they may be breaking new ground doing that in a commercial development Commissioner Hilkey asked, with existing parking, what the largest square footage and number of people is that they could accommodate The Community Development Director stated, with his recommendation, 750 square feet, without shared parking and with Area C He stated that Area B has 32 spaces in it, and the square footage in Suite 200, which takes up the entire building in the back, requires under the current parking code for office space or retail space 1 space for every 200 square feet of area He stated that this building requires 32 parking spaces, so if that building was to rent out for an office space or retail space, anything that goes under the 1 per 200 parking requirement, they would not have to provide additional parking He stated that they need the additional parking because of the assembly room He stated that if they were to do that whole building with office space they would 26 be fine, and if they were to do any use that would require a Conditional Use Permit or for any reason need Site and Architectural Review, staff would recommend that the parking areas involved with that be brought up to the parking code requirements, which would basically be just improving the landscaping and restriping it differently than what it is He stated that this would be a minor change that wouldn't affect the use of the building, it is when they increase the parking need that they have the problem, and this is what the assembly room does Commissioner Hilkey asked how many people 750 square feet would accommodate 4 The Community Development Director stated that with Area B and C, this would accommodate 50 people Commissioner Hilkey stated that it was then up to the applicant if they wanted to proceed that way The Community Development Director stated that the applicant has indicated that they would like to have the 1,200 square foot room and try to get the shared parking in Area D for at least the off hours, and they would only use the 1,200 square foot space for 50 people, even though it would generate maybe 30 more people Commissioner Munson asked if he heard that the applicant wished to continue this for two weeks so he could study D Mr Adame stated that they would rather not continue this for two weeks He stated that under personal testimony, and also from testimony from other proprietors in the complex, there are no more than a dozen cars in the parking lot on the weekend at any given time, and they are assured that any study that would be conducted would indicate this Chairman Hawkinson stated that personal testimony is not doing this body any good because they would need this substantiated Mr Adame stated that he is explaining how this would be substantiated The Community Development Director stated that staff has made a during the week study, and they feel that the area cannot handle He stated that they are suggesting another study be done, which would have to be done under the shared parking requirements anyway Chairman Hawkinson asked who would do the study and who would pay for 27 MOTION PCM-90-34 CUP-89-07 it The Community Development Director stated that is up to them He stated that the parking code requires that the applicant put together the study and show that it will work He stated that if they would like to direct staff to conduct its own study, they will do that, but either way, staff has worked with this project many hours now, and he would prefer that any final decision regarding whether or not the area in parking lot D can be shared or not be brought back to them, as they have made their recommendations Chairman Hawkinson stated that they have gone a step beyond in coming up with some proposals that would make it work, but it just looks to him like they are trying to put a square peg in a round hole, it's just not there with the parking Commissioner Munson made the motion, based on staffs recommendation and that the applicant does not desire to continue this, that the project be denied Commissioner Hargrave second for discussion Commissioner Hilkey stated that he would like to give them an option that makes sense under the calculations that staff has come up with, and if they don't like it then they can appeal it Commissioner Munson stated that staff has given them the option, but they don't particularly want that option. Mr Adame stated that they will consider taking Option C if the board is leaning toward denial of this case Chairman Hawkinson stated that he would have to refrain from discussion as there is a motion before them JAMES BLAISDELL 22400 BARTON ROAD G.T. Mr Blaisdell stated that he is the applicant Chairman Hawkinson stated that he should have come up at the time they asked if there was any input Mr Blaisdell stated that he is trying to address questions that are being asked now The Community Development Director stated that at this point of the meeting, after the Planning Commission has closed the public hearing, it is for discussion by the Planning Commission He stated that if they want to open it up and ask any questions, they can do that again, but that would be up to the Planning Chairman Commissioner Hargrave asked if he would allow Mr Blaisdell to make his comments if he so deem this to be acceptable Chairman Hawkinson accepted this Mr Blaisdell stated that he would like to address the parking situation on weekends He stated that he runs a business himself at 22400 Barton Road, and he is there seven days a week and is open seven days a week from 6 30 a m. to normally 10 00 p m. He stated that on weekends, if there are 12 to 14 cars in the whole parking lot on a Saturday, it is very, very rare He stated that on Sundays, if there are more than three cars in the parking lot, it is rare He stated that the only cars there on Sundays are from people coming to his own place of business which is may four on hour on an average He stated that on Saturdays, there are maybe 20 to 25 cars occasionally at Gmna's, but it starts drifting off by 3 00 to 4 00 p m , and in the evening time, it is basically empty He stated that he was more than happy to go along with the suggestions of the Planning Director as far as the 50 people on Monday through Friday, and that all he is asking is for the 75 to 80 people on the weekends He stated that as far as parking goes in Area C, it could be fenced off and used as valet parking, where he could double the number of cars that go into Area C He stated that he feels the parking is there if people are willing to let him do it The Community Development Director stated that the parking code doesn't provide for valet parking, and if the area is to be used for parking, staff would recommend that it be developed in accordance with the parking code and the Barton Road Specific Plan parking requirements He stated that staff would be opposed to valet parking without some real justification that it would work He stated that part of the problem is that they are approving parking improvements that are going to be there, and they are trying to look forward, and this is why the reciprocal parking is up there and why the landscaping is going to be required He stated that when La Tijera sells that property or develops it, that parking back there will be incorporated with their project He stated that it could be all torn out completely and done completely differently, but more than likely it will be incorporated into that project, and 29 this is why they have the access across the top of it to have access from both properties on each side He stated that the landscaping areas meet the parking code requirements, and valet parking could work on a temporary basis, but there is no provision for it in the parking code Commissioner Hilkey stated that on the map there are two entrances into Parking Lot C He asked if they could eliminate the driveway along the top and put gates up there The Community Development Director stated that they could eliminate the access up there at this time and work something along that line He stated that in closing off any of those access points, they would have to run it by the fire department to make sure they don't have any problems with it from fire - access point of view He stated that with the access points that they have, he doesn't feel the fire department would have any concerns at all, as it has plenty of access He stated that the access point onto Britton Way is really thinking of the future in servicing that as an independent drive access for people that would be turning into whatever development would be from La Tijera He stated that they wouldn't want more than the one space in order to keep the driveway spaces apart He stated that the fewer driveways, the better as far as they are concerned Commissioner Hilkey stated that there are three alternatives, A is theirs, B is 1,200 square feet and C is 750 square feet He asked if both are acceptable to staff The Community Development Director said no, that they feel B is still large enough to create potential problems with the apartments He stated that they are more than valhng to look at another parking study, and if a study would show that the parking spaces are available in Area D on a limited time basis, and the use of that area is restricted to that limited time area, then staff would be satisfied with the parking issue He stated that this is very difficult to enforce, but it would just become an enforcement issue He stated that staff still feels that this is quite an intense use that close to the apartment units Commissioner Hilkey asked if staff felt comfortable with the 750 square foot room The Community Development Director stated yes, as it reduces the size of the assembly room enough to where the number of people attending the use will have adequate problem and it will not be substantial enough to cause any real, potential problems with the residential units 01 Commissioner Hilkey asked if this would be roughly 50 participants The Community Development Director stated that it would be 59 parking spaces linuted to 50 people Commssioner Hilkey asked if he would be receptive to opening up the 1,200 square feet on weekends or evenings The Commrumty Development Director stated that staff still feels there is a potential problem with the residential units being as close as they are, and it may be ill-founded, but they don't know Chairman Hawkinson asked if they had any more questions of Mr Blaisdell Commissioner Hargrave asked if it came down to 750 square feet or nothing, would it make sense for him to do this Mr Blaisdell stated that economically, no Commissioner Hilkey asked how many parking spaces were needed for 1,200 square feet The Community Development Director stated that 74 would be needed Commissioner H-dkey asked how many they have The Community Development Director stated, with Area B and C, as staff has proposed it, they have 59 He stated that the additional 15 spaces represent 20%, which is how much the code allows shared parking to provide, which would have to come out of Area D He stated that they haven't talked about Area A because basically, it is already a shared parking area between the shopping center and the residential units Commissioner Hilkey asked if shared parking required some agreements, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative Commissioner Hilkey asked if the owner of B was the same a the owner of D, to which the Community Development Director responded in the affirmative The Community Development Director stated that basically, they are separate lots, and they would need reciprocal parking agreements Commissioner Flilkey asked if there was any way to enforce the parking into 31 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-34 D at off hours or weekends and protect the apartments, with gates, fences, temporary partitions or guards The Community Development Director stated that he doesn't think they would want to see gates strung up blocking areas off, and he doesn't know how they would do temporary barriers He stated that one of the requirements for the similar project down in Terrace Gateway was that any time they have 50 people or more, they have to have a security guard, and if they have 75 people they hake to have two guards He stated that there is no requirement for such here because the maximum number is limited to 50 people, and if they were to go to a higher number, they would want to bring that recommendation in He stated that perhaps one of the duties of the security officer would be to prevent parking in any area other than identified parking areas for the use He stated that this would be self -enforcing until they get complaints Commissioner Van Gelder asked how many parking spaces there are in Section D The Community Development Director stated that they have identified 133 parking spaces, but some of those would not currently be allowed under the current parking code, so this would be reduced a certain number in order to get landscape islands into the certain areas He stated that there are certain parking areas that are located back in the drive aisle between Area B and D, which may not be utilized He stated that they may be able to get anywhere from 125 to 133 spaces, probably close to 130 Commissioner Van Gelder asked how many businesses are not open on Saturday or Sunday The Community Development Director stated that he does not, and this should be included in any study that would reflect that, but this type of issue is great for what is there now Motion carries 5-0-2-0 Commissioners Buchanan and Sims absent Chairman Hawkinson informed the applicant that there is an appeal process that could be explained by the Community Development Department The Community Development Director stated that there is a ten day appeal 32 period ITEM #4 CUP-87-07R1 ROBERT KEENEY 21900 BARTON ROAD GT AN APPLICATION TO REVISE CONDITION #6 (PERIMETER WALL REQUIREMENT) OF CUP-87-07, RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARK AND RETAIL SHOPS FACILITY TO BE LOCATED IN THE C-2 ZONE MOTION PCM-90-35 CUP-87-07R1 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-35 Chairman Hawkinson stated that at the last recess, the applicant had requested that this item be continued Chairman Hargrave made the motion to continue CUP-87-07R1 to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission Meeting Commissioner Van Gelder second Motion carries 5-0-2-0 Commissioners Buchanan and Suns absent ITEM #5 CUP-88-14R2 DOMTAR GYPSUM, INC 21516 MAIN STREET G.T. AN APPLICATION FOR A REVISION OF CONDITION #4 (HOURS OF OPERATION) OF CUP-88-14, A STORAGE AND DISTRIBUTION FACILITY FOR GYPSUM CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS The Assistant Planner presented the staff report Chairman Hawkinson asked if there have been any complaints in the course of the last year regarding noise from the operation 33 Planning Department TO City Council FROM David Sawyer, Community Development Director DATE May 10, 1990 SUBJECT Appeal of sa-90-03 APPLICANT James and Jeanette Genel LOCATION 22720 Raven Way REQUEST. An appeal of Planning Commission Decision denying Site and Architectural Review of a patio cover and overhead deck Background On April 17, 1990, the Site and Architectural Review Board denied SA-90-03 based on the finding that the proposed patio and deck is inconsistent with the general character of the existing neighborhood and that it is intrusive on adjacent properties Subsequently, the applicant has appealed the Site and Architectural Review Board's decision and is before the City Council at this time Included with this report is the staff report and recommendations regarding the revised plans (Attachment A), the draft minutes from that meeting regarding this application (Attachment B) and the applicant's plans (Attachment C) Recommendation. Staff feels that although the facts regarding this application are the same as at the time of the Site and Architectural Review Board's decision, in consideration of the Site and Architectural Review Board's concerns over the size of the overhead deck area, staff 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 9 (714) 824-662g11 �n W1qi �L �kp KP4 "%A �Y e) recommends the City Council consider approving a smaller version of the overhead deck which will allow for casual observation of the area's vistas, but not be large enough to be a play are party area Therefor the Planrung Department recommends the overhead deck portion of the application be reduced to not greater than 150 square feet Sincerely, David R Sawyer Community Development Director TO. FROM DATE SUBJECT. Planning Department Site and Architectural Review Board Mama C Muett, Assistant Planner March 15, 1990 Staff Report File No SA-90-03 Request- An application for Site and Architectural Review Approval for a patio cover and overhead deck on a single family dwelling in a R-1/7 2 District APPLICANT: Outdoor Designs Property Owner - James and Jeanette Genel ADDRESS 22720 Raven Way ZONING AND LAND USE- PropgM GP Zonin Subject Property LDR R-1/7 2 To the West LDR R-1/7 2 To the East LDR R-1/7 2 To the North LDR R-1/7 2 To the South LDR R-1/7.2 5-10-90 CC Land Use Single Family Residence Single Family Residence Single Family Residence Single Family Residence Single Family Residence ATTACHMENT A 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 • (714) 824-6641 ATTACHMENT B BACKGROUND Pursuant to GTMC, Residential Ordinance, Section 18 12 040, in the R-1/7 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 in height " On February 23, 1990, the applicant submitted an application for Site and Architectural Review of an outdoor deck and patio cover for a single family dwelling located on 22720 Raven Way (Attachment A) The total height of the patio and deck is approximately 15 feet The proposed deck will have 171 square feet and the patio will have 183 square feet Total square footage of the project is 254 square feet. The applicant proposes to construct a spiral staircase attached to the ease side of the residence Pursuant to GTMC, Residential Ordinance, Section 18 57130, structures such as outside stairways may project no closer than four feet to any side lot line The spiral staircase (as indicated on the plans) will measure approximately 13' height and 5' in diameter This will provide an allowance of at least 9 feet to the side lot property line The project meets all required front, rear and side yard setbacks for accessory structures in the R-1/7 2 District A_RCHITECI'URAL DESIGN The applicant is proposing to construct the patio cover and outside deck with douglas fir of #2 grade or better. The spiral staircase will consist of aluminum materials REVIEWING AGENCY COMMENTS The following responses have been received from the City's Reviewing Agencies En ngi eenng/Building and Safety - Refer to memorandum from Engineering/Building and Safety dated March 15, 1990, to the Planning Department (Attachment B) Forestry and Fire Warden Department No Fire Department requirements for this project. Refer to comments dated February 28, 1990 (Attachment C) PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: The Planning Department recommends approval of SA 90-03 subject to the following conditions The proposed project shall be constructed in accordance with the Site and Architectural design as approved by the Site and Architectural Review Board on March 20, 1990, attached as Attachment A, and minor changes or clarification may be made by the Planning Department_ 2 The applicant shall obtain the appropriate building pernuts pulled for the construction of the patio, outside deck, and staircase 3 All recommendations listed in the City Engineer's memorandum to the City dated March 15, 1990 (Attachment B) 4 All aspects of the proposed project includipg building maintenance shall be maintained in a clean and functional manner in accordance with this approval and the overall goals and objectives of the City of Grand Terrace Respectfully Submitted, -A-� - Z=�- Mana C Muett, Assistant Planner M 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace alifornia 92324-5295 Civic Center (714) 824-6621 Byron R Matteson Mayor Hugh J Grant Mayor Pro Tempore irbara Pfennighausen Jim Singley ne Carlstrom -ounctl Members Thomas J Schwab City Manager W 0 12-8 5134 M E M O R A N D U M TO David Sawyer, Community Development Director FROM Joseph Kicak, City Engineer cL DATE March 15, 1990 SUBJECT SA-90-3 1. Please be advised that drainage of the rear -yard should be taken into consideration if this addition is permitted 2 All construction shall conform to the requirements of U B C. -3-Zo-yo PC ATTACHMENT B f{tL U IVIAJ�-" " IUUU c�'-) i `Of � Planning qND TFRRACE Department February 2-3, 1990 F 1 LE NO SA-90-3 APPLICANT Outdoor Designs/Genel LOCAMON 22720 Raven Way, Grand Terrace PROJECT An application for Site and Architectural Review of a balcony and lattice cover for a single family dwelling Dear Reviewing Agency The above referenced application is on file with the Grand Terrace Planning Department Please submit any comments your agency may have regarding this application to the attention of David R Sawyer, Community Development Director, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, 92324 Any such replies must be received in this office no later than Tuesday, March 13, 1990 UTILITY COMPANIES No input is necessary unless you have existing rights of ways or easements YOUR RESPONSES CANNOT BE INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT IF YOU DO NOT MEET THE DEADLINE Sincerely, i lQ �G�P N 22795 Barton Road a ATTACHMENT C • Grand Terrace, California 92324-5295 • (714) 824-6621 GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING APR.IL 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 in by Chairman Jerry Hawkinson PRESENT Jerry Hawkinson, Chairman Stanley Hargrave, Commissioner Herman H ikey, Commissioner Ray Munson, Commissioner Fran Van Gelder, Commissioner David R Sawyer, Community Development Director Mama C Muett, Assistant Planner Maggie Barder, Secretary John Harper, City Attorney ABSENT Dan Buchanan, Vice-Chauman 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 Cahforma Cities Planning Commissioners Institute PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP ADJOURNED AT 7.00 P.M 1 5-10-90 CC ATTACHMENT B MOTION PCM-90-37 SA-87-14R1 MOTION VOTE PCM-90-37 Commissioner Hargrave made the motion that SA-87-14R1 be continued to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission Meeting Commissioner Munson second Motion carves 5-0-2-0 Commissioners Buchanan and Sims absent ITEM #7 SA-90-03 OUTDOOR DESIGNS/JAMES AND JEANETTE GENEL 22720 RAVEN WAY GT AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A PATIO COVER AND OVERHEAD DECK ON A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN A R1-7.2 DISTRICT The Assistant Planner presented the staff report Chairman Hawkinson asked if the Planning Department had received any comments as a by-product of some of the letters that went out The Assistant Planner stated that they had not received any comments as of the tune of the meeting Commissioner Hargrave asked if staff still recommended approval The Assistant Planner agreed Commissioner Hargrave asked if they had thought about the potential of this application coming before them from another residence or residences for some comparable type of deck and what effect this would have The Community Development Director stated that he doesn't know if it has any domino effect or anything, but this is why they have Site and Architectural Review He stated that they are to be looking at it on an independent basis, and if they feel there are conditions regarding this application that would tend to have them make a determination one way or the other, then they would 36 base this determination on those concerns, and an additional one would be based on its own independent concerns Commissioner Hargrave stated that he went out to Mr and Mrs Genel's house and he was kind enough to show him what they wanted to do, and he can understand why they want to do this as they want to have a more picturesque view of Blue Mountain, which is in their backyard He stated that he would have a problem architecturally if a lot of people on that block decided to do it as he feels it would detract from the previous ones that are done, as the new ones may block the view of the older ones, and ;t may get to be a little bit obtrusive JAMES THOMAS 386 NORTHFIElLD A.NA.HEIM Mr Thomas stated that he represents the contractor, Outdoor Designs Commissioner Hargrave asked, when they put on the deckings, if they certify the property owner that their house is structurally sound enough to support this construction Mr Thomas stated that yes, they ledger into the room Joyce on the second story per building codes depending upon the city or county Commissioner Hargrave asked if his firm was a licensed contractor, to which Mr 'Thomas responded in the affirmative Chairman Hawkinson asked if their were any comments from the audience then brought it back to Commission Commissioner Hargrave asked if the wood was to be painted or treated in any manner other than just the natural color of the wood Mr Thomas stated that they use Oak Hill Quaker Stain, and it will be stained to match the trim of the home Commissioner Hargrave asked Mr Genel what color his trim is Mr Genel stated that it is beige Commissioner Hilkey stated that he thinks it is an eyesore He stated that if he had an opportunity to stop his neighbor from doing this, he certainly would speak up, but the Commission has done everything that it could, it continued 37 it and sent letters to the neighbors and they don't seemed to be concerned about it, so if they aren't concerned enough about it to raise their hand, then he doesn't think they should be concerned about it Commissioner Munson stated that he concurs He stated that his backyard used to private but it is not anymore, and consequently, he is going to vote against it He stated that were it a roof and not an observation deck, he could vote for it, but because it is an observation deck, he is going to vote against it Commissioner Hilkey asked staff why the other owners didn't speak up The Community Development Director stated that they notified the property owners by mail and did not receive any response from them, so he can't say why they didn't respond Commussioner Hargrave stated that he asked Mr Genel if any of his neighbors said anything to him about it, and he said that his immediate neighbors said it was fine and had no objections, and in fact the neighbor to the east is going to try to build a similar structure JIM GENEL 22720 RAVEN GT Mr Genel stated that all of the lots are terraced and every single home is a two story house He stated that in reference to privacy, everybody that goes into the bedrooms, which are all located on the back of the homes, can look into the lot on the west and east side He stated that privacy -wise, you are not going to spend all of your time looking at the neighbors' backyards He stated that the reasons they don't object to his having a sun deck up there is because he is just going to use it when the weather is nice and comfortable to go up there He stated that they have been invited once it has been completed to come up and see, and they still don't object to it He stated that he has an empty lot m the backyard which overlooks a church, and if on a summer night he wants to go out and look at the lights in Colton, Rialto or the hillside in the back, that is all he is going to be using it for He stated that all of his neighbors are in the process of applying for permits to put deckings on their backyards, so the way they vote now will affect them., because they have already submitted plans to them Commission Hargrave asked if he and his wife consider down -sizing this a little bit, for example, going to a smaller square footage of decking area Mr Genel stated that he only has a very small amount of usable decking, and all the rest of it is lattice He stated that his patio does not go from one end of the house to the other Commissioner Hargrave stated that the proposed deck is 171 square feet Mr Genel stated that it will be completed from one side to the other Commissioner Hargrave stated that he would be able to stand or sit above the actual patio also, according to the plans He stated that there are 119 feet off of the bedroom, and there are another 12 feet on the west side, so they have 19 feet as far as length goes from their bedroom right now, and there is a 7 foot area before you get into the patio area of 12 feet in length He stated that the balcony area for viewing is just the 19 feet, which Mr Genel verified Commissioner Hargrave stated that he was thinking they could leave the patio area alone, but go over to where they have the 19 feet, and downsize that a little bit Mr Genel stated that they are going to install the French doors right up in there which would throw it off Commissioner Hargrave stated that if they brought it in from both sides, an equal distance, then the French doors would still be in the center Mr Thomas stated that they could downsize it from the nght-hand side almost up to the door, which would be about 8 feet, but the balcony is still at the same height, and aesthetically, it would not look right Commissioner Hargrave asked if they could go 4 feet from both sides of the 19 feet Mr Thomas stated that there are a multitude of ways they could lay it out, but they would still have the same height of the balcony, and the applicant would not want to do this Commissioner Hilkey stated that if he had a project like this and has put a lot of work into it and he has a contractor, he wouldn't like people hacking it up either He stated that he hopes he understand what their concern is - not with the balcony or the quality, but simply other residents in the future He stated that on the back side, there is a vacant lot that will be developed some day, and what will they say He stated that it is a nice looking balcony and good materials, but how will it affect the neighborhood in five or ten years Commissioner Van Gelder stated that staff recommended adopting this 39 proposal She asked if his neighbor up the street, next door, comes in next week with a proposal, will they recommend adoption of it also The Community Development Director stated that staff takes every application on its own and will look at it independently and he will give them a recommendation on it when it comes in Commissioner Van Gelder asked if he wouldn't mind having a whole row of houses that have this same type of deck on it The Community Development Director stated they will look at each one independently, and he can't say more than that He stated that the code allows this to be built as long as it is not over 20 feet, and if it is over 8 feet, it needs Site and Architectural Review He stated that if there are neighbors that are coming in and giving substantial reasons to deny it, if the design is not in a manner that they feel is appropriate for that particular location, then they can deny it He stated that they can make modifications on it He said that they can approve this one if they don't feel there is anything wrong with it He stated that each case is independent, and it does not create a precedence on additional cases Commissioner Munson stated that privacy has nothing to do with this, if it is structurally sound, they approve it or disapprove it He asked the City Attorney if this was correct The City Attorney stated that if he is asking whether or not the Planning Commission can consider approving or denying the project as it affects adjacent residents, which includes privacy, then yes, they can consider that, if they feel it will be intrusive on neighbors He stated that it is not simply a matter of being structurally sound Chairman Hawkinson stated that Commissioner Hilkey expressed it as well as they could He stated that no one seems enthusiastic about this project, but no one has responded to say they are opposed to it He stated that nobody seems to be bothered by it, so he really sees no reason that they don't just say go ahead and do it Commissioner Munson stated that he heard the applicant make a statement that his neighbors are considering a similar project for their houses, so now they are going to look at them up the street Chairman Hawkinson stated that now they are into some dangerous ground because they are talking about projects that have not been proposed He stated that they need to look lust at this issue tonight MOTION PCM-90-38 SA-90-03 Comzrussioner Munson stated that he thinks they are opening a can of worms they would rather not open Chairman Hawkinson stated they have to look at this project on its own ment Commissioner Munson made the motion that they deny SA-90-03 Commissioner Hargrave second for discussion. The Community Development Director stated that they need to have some findings to base denial on He stated that he assumes he is basing it on the issue of lack of privacy on adjoining properties as a result of proposed project Commissioner Munson said this is part of it He stated that they have an eight foot limit and this is nine foot top, and he doesn't see any reason for this project He asked if his motion was out of order, stating that all he is trying to do is get the Commission to make a decision The Community Development Director stated that his motion is not out of order at all, they just need to back it up with findings The City Attorney stated that he supposed that the finding is that the patio is inconsistent with the general character of the existing neighborhood, and that it is intrusive on adjacent properties Comnussmoner Hargrave stated that he is going to vote with Commissioner Munson on this motion to deny, but he would really like to see the Genels come back and give them another proposal on this with a downscale model in keeping with what their theme is Chairman Hawkinson stated that he has a problem with that, as downscalmng this is not going to change it Commissioner Hilkey stated he doesn't want to redesign the project as this is a very sensitive thing, but the supports are nine feet away from the house, so it will stick out a foot or two beyond that He stated that they are really talking about a 19 by 10 foot observation deck, which is very large He stated that on the west side, there is no problem, because there is only the patio cover He stated that on the east side, there isn't too much of a problem because the house is higher than theirs He stated that there is no one on the north side yet, which seems to be the only place they have concerns He 41 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 Commissioner 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 ` AN APPLICATION FOR SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A SATELLITE DISH IN A RI-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 level The Assistant Planner stated that either that or any other location as long as it meets setback requirements 42 , 6 i(/orE - Z, 3 rc,, tic' g4lcT Fix' I Z"-pSrae i �/oTC � �I.EY E,06c5 .oN UJOPD� A6 i — I I + I 23 o'i p/ I 'll'Im 1 z /7/uy,e� 5� 2- 5 5-10-90 CC 4,V2. ATTACHMENT C A PPS p --�ENeI� Lv7- 3 /%cT /dos=/ tc rz, I \y L, I.W 7n�.�,5lErrc CNEL APR 2 0 1990 07Zo ANL T 47-3Zq MTG 5:y&;-90 to It 5706675 G' /5- Pismo/ n lele-F_ + e SECTION' TABLE "A', DECK JOIST SPAN SIZE SPACING SPAN 2 x 6 12" O.C. 10'-6" 16' O.0 9'-2" 24" O.0 7'-6" 2 x 8 12" 0 C 14'-0" 16" O.C. 12'-0" 24" O.0 9'-8" 2 x 10 16" O.C. 15'-5" 24" O.C. 12'-6" 2 x 121 24" O.0 15'-4" 4 x 6 12" 0 C. 16'-0" 16" O.C. 14'-0" 24" O.C. 11'-5" 4 x 8 24" 0 C 15'-0" "--ELEVATION' TABLE "B", JOIST SPAN HEADER FOOTING SIZE 18"sq x 18"deep SPAN SIZE TO 16 6' 4 x 8 OR ?-? x 10 TO 8' 8' 4 x 2-2 8 x OR 10 It to TO 16' 8' 4 10 At to TO 8' 10' 4 x 2-2 10 x OR 12 so" TO 14' 10' 4 x 12 " of TO 10' 19' 6 x 10 24"sa x 18"deep TO 10' 14' 6 x 12 to to TABLE " C' ( SEE NOTE #2 ) LEDGER BOLTS -(3/8" x 5"long) STAGGERED JOIST SPAN SPACING 8' 00 4;; (' 12' 0 C 14' S" O c 16" 1,411 0 C NOTES. 1- ALL LUMBER SHALL BE DOUG FIR 02 GRADE OR BETTER 2- ALL BOLTS SHALL HAVE PRE -DRILLED HOLES (Y4laf) i 3- ALL LEDGERS S11AL:. BE A MIN OF 2 x 10 j1+EI.Tl.l,vG: P{_YWGYa W/ 4G,0� iil if - --/ OQ.. I�J.Y T 1 Gi SC_ OW C /-lK rC i-r M 114 � 'TSTK.►.P U► SIDr< 14pd w.1 L s, T�Ypiu.L� ::xL J LA V 1ST bl�f.� u f.4 rI pv.CD 4 !`[S • p.a KAu - . y ..►rSiO,/iD REAFZ ELEVA.TIO►J TA 5 L E Ay FAF-TE-'FZ SPAN5($?tfv) S1ZE 5P�G1lJG. SQyA>`J II I 1Gs !1 `�-3y 3 I' l G'' it 7r--9�--' C:1L__� 1 G 11 l6'- 2' 2 4' 1, x l ,cam I I 12' - t>• 11 I 1 32' 11 iL-2� 4 ,c (o Z e y .4e 1 I t s- X 2.4' ,1 20 - t 1 -3e 41 ,a' Tia1S -�PAZIINA& 4 SP'ht�l l�orz. L wTTI G� :O &Ljr-J nI 4-Q n l ICY -s6lC 7-oLt �1 H 0.17E GL SPAS, T ,�lzr - }vI U.l., f� � JJ Ar 1 >r TABLE "8' H EADE, 1=ZAFrTER LJEADE�Z !1' 4rc12 1 Z' 7-0 ZO' 10, 4 >< 10 12' -i x 12 14' 4 x 14 D /ti GA�1G S LEIS C ROSS 51-G710�- LEDGER OE?"al L ?GOOF � J�,t 1yT� �lJ JO►ST ui.,.K.rtL GO►.ITl+�iuol.ls L1�06G7G� S:.}'11�' IZ.t /•.1 AA�FTI<F,�, w1Tr+ 3/a" 0 x S" �.A� GoL.T -57'uo (1G" O.G.) wi-4 w-" FLI.JaTzFr- SPAN 1:n, G.KL'J."r ;:ti os, EQua.L. To 14-o' usrY I/2''47 X 5" LA -do 1>OI-T. INVERTED HEADER DESIGN OPTION -r,j, %a_" eb T"Ku BONS PE• AS, r, Wow" Two 2XME.KZ iv.Y 6 E SuBSTiTUT � PO K ONF (11=F TAp�t` A � a FO i SPAN L U-1 l Prices shown are effective at time of Effective January 1, 1990 PRICE LIST printing and are subject to change The Leading Manufacturer of Spiral Stair Kits Main Plant and Showroom Other Showroom/ Warehouse Locations (You can call collect when placing an order at one of these locations) IM PENNSYLVANIA CALIFORNIA FLORIDA TEXAS ILLINOIS CONNECTICUT 3683 Pomona Blvd 6556 Superior Ave 8718 Wesipark Drive 886 Cambridge Drive Stamford Executive Park P O Box 547 400 Reed Road Pomona CA 91768 Sarasota FL 34231 Houston TX 77063 Regent Business Center 500 West Avenue Tel (713) 789 0648 Elk Grove IL 60007 CT 66 Broomall PA 19008 Telmford Tel (714) 598 5766 Tel (813) 923 1479 Tel (708) 512age Fax (813) 923 6176 9010 (203) 325 8 Tel (215) 544 7100 Fax (714) 598 6648 Fax (708) 952 0496 Fax (203) 967 4677 - Fax (215) 544 7297 Outside PA Call Tull Frame 1 800 j13 la' Spiral Stair Kits up at our plant in Brooms ll PA Sales Tax will be added If you are picking up order,, All prices shown are for orders that are picked Warr'hou,,r Dr,,,llnallon Chrlrye ((jlu,, I ,tc ,,.11r ,, lax) Plcase sr r pagr 5 from one of our br,ln(,he,, th(,r( i,, an additional Fits floor tU floor Kit Size h( IOht,, Iriurl I ,Is Iloor to floor Pnc, Kit `,fir h, i(jhI% fr(,rri I'r"' Standard Spirals 3 6 Diam 11 Riser / 6 81 S 425 12 Riser 81 8 9 i S 475 13-Riser 8 10 96 $ 525 4 0 Diam 11 Riser 16 8 1 $ 515 12 Riser 8 1 h 1) S 5/0 13 Riser 8 10 90 S 625 4 6 Dian, 11-Riser 76 81 $ 570 12 Riser 8 1 / 89 $ 630 13 Riser 8 10 11 (, $ 690 5 0 Diam 81 O 6 S 725 5 6 Diam 8 1/ 96 $ 180 6 0 Diam 8 1/ 96 $ 835 6 6 Diam 8 1/ 96 $1475 + 7 0" Diam 8 1/ 96 $1575 t Price for kit with 13 Riser(, If you should require fewer than 13 Risers your kit price will be reduced Please call with your height specifications to confirm the number of risers needed t Includes aluminum handrail 2 in between spindles per tread and closed end tread,, 1/2 Turn Stair w, u,r,u u,r, o„ r,,, n, ld, ,,,. % "t 1) 12 Riser 8 1 89 S/ to Combination Stair wuuu or llakeuodrd Iredd (overu,r, requuL Jior sare,� 11 Riser 16 80 S 750 12 Riser 81 88 S 815 13 Riser 89 95 S 880 UBC Spirals (Soo not(I b( low) O D,anl 11 Riser /4 £3 1 S V,'( r riO 81W 101L _ 13 Riser 88 9 6 / S1 100 5 6 Diam I I I il,,(_f / 4 8 1 '> 1 1's(, 12 Riser 80 89/ S1290 I Ris(-r 88 96/ Sligo 6 0 Diam 11 Riser 74 81 S1240 12 Riser 80 8 9%, S1345 13 Riser 88 9 6'/ S 1450 Closed tr('a(J ( nd,, in( lud( d Note UBC Spiral Stair Kits haVL .30" Treads 600 Landings (see page 15 of our brochure for layout of H 1 or 42 landings) an Aluminum Handrail 2 in between Spindles per tread and are designed to meet the dimensional rcqu,remenis of the Uniform Budding Code (U B C ) and the B O C A National Buildinq Code of 1987 (L A City Fabricator 1 u a I i `,0 SI inrf ird I'I in If I I I ) Check your local code require ments Special Order Kits Stairs for Non Standard floor to fluor 11(.igh15 as well as Multi Story and Custom Diarnetu( ur (,usluin Ldyuur are dvdddL)IL 1 01 iddilwnal information and price quotallnn ( 1111 u,, Intl ir( (' '11 800 523 7427 In Ponn,,ylvan, , only ( III u,, ( 0110( 1 II 21 5 544 7100 33 121 Chapter 12 HEALTH, SANITATION AND ANIMAL REGULATIONS VEHICLE ABATEMENT AND REMOVAL PROGRAM Sections 33 121 3 122 33 123 33 124 33 125 33 126 33 127 33 128 33 129 33 1210 331211 33 1212 33 1213 33 1214 33 1215 33 1216 33 1217 33 1218 Authority Definitions Public Nuisances Exceptions Chapter Supplement to Existing Law Prohibited Uses Duty to Abate Emergency Abatement and Other Services Abatement Procedures for Vehicles Which are a Public Nuisance Payment for Abatement Appeals of Abatement Appeals of Charges Cancellation of Charges Procedure for Refund of Payments Disposal of Vehicles Authorization to Enforce Vehicle Code and County Code Provisions Determination of Estimated Value of Vehicles Criminal Penalties 33121 Authority (a) Pursuant to the authority cited in this Code, California Vehicle Code § 22660, California Government Code § 25845, and the authority granted by the State and California Constitution Art XI, § 7, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors authorizes the Director of the Department of Environmental Health Services (DEHS) of the County of San Bernardino to enforce the provisions of this Chapter within the unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County and to enforce provisions of City ordinances relating to abatement and removal of vehicles provided such cities contract to have such service performed by the Department of Environmental Health Services This authority includes the right to enter private or public property for the purposes specified in this chapter, to examine a vehicle or parts thereof, to obtain information as to the identity of a vehicle and remove or cause the removal of a vehicle or part thereof declared to be a nuisance (b) Any person interfering with or refusing entry to property to any county or contracted service employee performing duties under this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor 1121311881 3 — 244 VEHICLE ABATEMENT AND REMOVAL PROGRAM 33 122 — 33 123 33122 Definitions For the purposes of this chapter, unless otherwise apparent from the conte\t, phrases used in this chapter are defined as follows (a) "Abandoned Vehicle" shall be a vehicle which is located on public or private property which the owner has or apparently has relinquished control, concern or interest therewith, and which has been situated unattended at one place for a period of seventy-two (72) hours or longer (b) "Administrative Board" shall be a body appointed by the director to hear appeals under this chapter and shall consist of three (3) persons (c) "DEHS" shall be the Department of Environmental Health Services of the County of San Bernardino (d) "Director" shall be the Director of the Department of Environmental Health Services of the County of San Bernardino (e) "Fee" shall be any amount of money charged, fined, or paid to DEHS relating to the administrative and/or enforcement costs incurred for the purpose of enforcing this chapter (f) "Lien sale" shall mean a sale of a vehicle to obtain legal ownership of a vehicle under title or requiring registration, under the California Vehicle Code (g) "Owner" shall be any person or entity having legal or rightful title in any personal property or real property subject to the provisions of this chapter (h) "Owner of the vehicle" shall be the last registered owner and legal owner of record (i) "Person" includes a natural person, firm, copartnership, association, or corporation 0) "Private property" shall be property owned by a person other than a public entity (k) "Public property" shall be property owned by a public entity (1) "Licensed Dismantler's Yard" shall be premises used for dismantling or wrecking of vehicles, where there is buying, selling or dealing in such vehicles, their integral parts, or component materials thereof, and the sale of dismantled, partially dismantled, wrecked or inoperative vehicles (m) "Unattended vehicle" shall be a vehicle for which the licensed driver responsible for the same is not within an audible distance and immediately available for moving said vehicle (n) "Vehicle" shall be any device by which persons or property may be propelled, moved, or drawn upon a highway, and shall include all types of motor vehicles, but shall exclude devices moved exclusively by human power or used exclusively upon stationary rails or tracks 33 123 Public Nuisances Pursuant to the determination made, and the authority granted by the state under Section 22660 of the California Vehicle Code to abate and remove dismantled, wrecked, junked, abandoned, inoperative, and unused vehicles, or parts thereof as public nuisances, and in accordance with the County's constitutional police power authority, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors makes the following findings and declaration 3 — 244-1 /izi1i18�1 HEALTH, SANITATION 33 124 — 33 127 AND ANIMAL REGULATIONS The accumulation and storage of dismantled, wrecked, inoperative, junked, abandoned or unused vehicles or parts thereof, on private or public property (other -,i streets and highways which are regulated by the Vehicle Code) is found to create mdition tending to reduce the value of private and public property, to promote blight and deterioration, invite plundering, to create fire hazards, to constitute an attractive nuisance creating a hazard to the health and safety of minors, to create a harborage for rodents and insects and to be injurious to the health, safety and general welfare of the public Therefore, the presence of inoperative, dismantled, wrecked, junked, abandoned or unused vehicles or parts thereof on private or public property (other than on streets and highways) in the unincorporated area of San Bernardino County except as expressly permitted in this chapter, is declared to constitute a public nuisance which may be abated as such in accordance with the provisions of this chapter 33124 Exceptions This chapter shall not apply to any vehicle (or parts thereof) which is completely enclosed within a structure consisting of four (4) walls and roof in a lawful manner, where such vehicle is not visible from the street or other public or private property -- a vehicle which is stored or parked in a lawful manner on property used in nection with the business of a licensed dismantler, garage, vehicle dealer or junkyard 33 125 Chapter Supplement to Existing Law This chapter is not the exclusive regulation of dismantled, wrecked, junked, abandoned, inoperative or unused vehicles or parts thereof, or public nuisances within the County It shall supplement and be in addition to the other regulatory codes, statutes and ordinances heretofore or hereafter enacted by the County, the State, or any other legal entity or agency having jurisdiction 33 126 Prohibited Uses Any dismantled, wrecked, junked, abandoned, inoperative or unused vehicles or parts thereof, or fully or partially disassembled vehicle (including vehicles without hood, fenders, engines, body panels, headlights, trunk lid, wheels, windows or windshields) when placed or kept for more than seventy-two (72) hours in residential, commercial or industrial sites (except licensed vehicle impound storage yards, garages, vehicle dealers, junkyards and/or dismantling yards), and visible from outside the parcel of land upon which such is or are kept, is prohibited a,,d constitutes a violation of this chapter 33 127 Duty to Abate No person shall cause, permit, maintain, conduct or otherwise allow a dismantled, wrecked, junked, abandoned, inoperative or unused vehicle or parts thereof to be openly stored, within the unincorporated area of San Bernardino County It shall be the duty of every owner, and/or occupant, in control of any land located within the unincorporated area of San Bernardino County to remove, abate, and prevent the recurrence of open storage of such a vehicle 112131/48/ 3 — 244-2 s f VEHICLE ABATEMENT AND REMOVAL PROGRAM 33 128 — 33 129 33 128 Emergency Abatement and Other Services (a) Emergency abatement When a vehicle defined by this chapter as a public nuisance constitutes an immediate hazard or threat of harm and the situation calls for abatement sooner than the abatement procedures herein allow, DEHS, the Director of Transportation, or Sheriff's Department may take or cause emergency abatement of such nuisance with such notice to parties concerned, or without notice, as the particular circumstances reasonably allow (b) Request for Service If an} member of the public, except self storage operators, requests DEHS in writing to remove junked, wrecked, abandoned, dismantled, inoperative, or unused vehicles or parts thereof, DEHS is authorized to provide processing and removal for a fee which covers all DEHS costs The removed junked, wrecked, abandoned, inoperative, dismantled, or unused vehicles or parts thereof, through transfer of title or lien sale process shall become the property of San Bernardino County and such will be the responsibility of the County to dispose of according to law (c) Complaints DEHS will investigate anonymous complaints associated with junked, wrecked, abandoned, inoperative, dismantled, or unused vehicles or parts thereof The complaint may be phoned in or be in writing and must have situs address and/or assessor parcel number with a description of the violation The process referring to "Notice to Abate" will be utilized for abatement if such is determined to be appropriate 33 129 Abatement Procedures for Vehicles Which are a Public Nuisance A ten-day "Notice to Abate" shall be given to the property owner to remove the vehicle or vehicles or parts thereof, as a public nuisance Notification shall be given either by personal delivery, posting the property or by registered or certified mail addressed to the owner at his/her last known business or residence address as the same appears in the public records of the last equalized assessment roll or other records pertaining to the matter to which the notice is directed If such a vehicle is in such condition that identification numbers are not available to determine ownership, notice need not be given to the last registered and legal owner of the vehicle or parts thereof The notice shall be substantially as follows "You are hereby notified to abate this public nuisance by removal of the vehicle(s) or parts thereof within ten (10) days from the date of mailing of this notice If you fail to do so, the public nuisance and such dismantled, wrecked, junked, inoperative, abandoned or unused vehicles or parts thereof, will be abated and removed by San Bernardino County DEHS and/or contract services and all the costs for abatement and removal, together with administrative costs, may be assessed to the legal owner of the land on which the public nuisance and such dismantled, junked, abandoned, inoperative or unused vehicle or parts thereof are located " The notice shall also set forth the procedures and time period for filing an appeal If the nuisance is not abated within the time period given in the notice, DEHS is authorized to abate the nuisance No abandoned vehicle which has been abated or removed as a public nuisance shall thereafter be reconstructed or made operable unless it is a vehicle which qualifies for either a horseless carriage license plate or historical vehicle license plate 3 — 244 3 1121311881 HEALTH, SANITATION 33 1210 — 33 1213 AND ANIMAL REGULATIONS 33 1210 Payment for Abatement Procedure for payment Whe*i abatement has been completed, the director of DEHS shall render to the San Bernardino County Auditor -Controller an itemized ement covering work necessary for the abatement The Auditor -Controller shall pay the same from the funds of the agency causing said work to be done, and the director shall present to the owner a demand for payment by mail If payment is not made on behalf of the owner within sixty (60) days after mailing of such bill, the director shall file a Notice of Pendency and certify to the Auditor -Controller the remaining unpaid cost The Auditor Controller shall cause the amount of the same to be entered upon the next succeeding secured tax roll Thereafter, the amounts of the assessment shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as County taxes are collected, and are subject to the same penalties and the same procedure and sale in case of delinquency as provided for ordinary County taxes, except that if any real property to which such lien would attach has been transferred or conveyed to a bona fide purchaser for value, or if a lien of a bona fide encumbrancer for value has been created and attached thereon, prior to the date on which the first installment of such taxes would become delinquent, then the lien which would otherwise be imposed by this section shall not attach to such real property and the costs of abatement, as confirmed, relating to such property shall be transferred to the ecured roll for collection from the person who was the property owner at the time bi the abatement 33 1211 Appeal of Abatement Upon written request by the legal owner of the vehicle under title or requiring registration under the California Vehicle Code, received by the DEHS within ten (10) days after mailing of the Notice to Abate or from the owner of the land, claiming nonresponsibility for the vehicle(s), a hearing shall be held by the Administrative Board on the abatement and removal of such vehicle(s) and nuisance The Administrative Board shall hear and act on appeals within sixty (60) days of filing and its determination shall be conclusive Except as provided herein, the provisions of Section 33 029 (Administrative Hearing Procedures) of Chapter 2 of this Code are incorporated here by reference 33 1212 Appeals of Charges Any appeal from charges for the cost of removal and abatement must be filed within sixty (60) days from the date of billing or marling of a tax bill which shows abatement charges The appeal procedure shall be the same as Section 33 039 of Chapter 2 of this Code, and the Administrative Board's decision shall be conclusive 33 1213 Cancellation of Charges All or any portion of any such special assessment, penalty, or costs heretofore entered, shall on order of the Administrative Board, be cancelled by the Auditor - Controller if uncollected, or, except in the case provided for in subdivision (5) hereof, refunded by the County Treasurer if collected, if it or they were entered, charged, or paid (1) more than once, (2) through clerical error, (3) through the error or mistake of the Administrative Board, the Director, or the person designated by them to give 1111311881 3 — 244-4 VEHICLE ABATEMENT ` AND REMOVAL, PROGRAM 33 1214 — 33 1217 nonce to abate regarding any material fact relevant to the determination of a charge; (4) illegally, (5) the owner of the land was not responsible for the vehicle(s), (6) on property acquired after the lien date by the state or by any county, city, school distnct or other political subdivision and because of this public ownership, not subject to sale for delinquent taxes 33 1214 Procedure for Refund of Payment No order for a refund under the foregoing section shall be made except on a claim (1) verified by the person who paid the special assessment, their guardian executor, or administrator, (2) filed within three (3) years after making the payment sought to be refunded 33 1215 Disposal of Vehicles If a vehicle is of a value of three hundred dollars ($300 00) or less, it may be disposed of at a dismantler, scrap yard or other suitable site determined by DEHS without conducting a lien sale After proper notification is given to property and vehicle owner(s) and the abatement and removal process has occurred, a lien sale will be conducted on etier) removed dismantled, wrecked, junked, inoperative, abandoned or unused vehicle with a value of over three hundred dollars ($300 00) and such sale will be earned out if all fees and costs for the removal, abatement, storage and enforcement ha%e not been paid by the legal owner Once legal ownership has been transferred to the County by lien sale, the vehicle(s) or parts thereof will be sold on a regular scheduled date by an auction or other authorized, legal method permitted for the County 33 1216 Authorization to Enforce County Code and Vehicle Code Provisions The Director of DEHS and his designated employees are authorized to remo%e abandoned and unattended vehicles pursuant to the provisions of Vehicle Code Section 22669 and County Code Section 53 036 In exercising this authority they shall follow all procedural and legal requirements applicable to -said sections 33 1217 Determination of Estimated Value of Vehicles For lien sale purposes, DEHS shall determine the estimated value of vehicles and maintain proper documentation and give notifications as required by the California Vehicle Code with respect to vehicles which are abated and removed under this chapter DEHS shall determine whether the value of a vehicle is three hundred dollars ($300 00) or less, or over three hundred dollars ($300 00) but less than one thousand dollars ($1,000 00), or over one thousand dollars ($1,000 00) All regularl) employed and salaried employees of DEHS (including contract employees) are authorized to make appraisals to determine the value of vehicles abated or removed under this ordinance 3 — 244-5 [t? 31 "1 HEALTH, SANITATION 311218 AND ANIMAL REGULATIONS 33 1218 Criminal Penalties Any person or entity who violates any provision of this chapter, other than the provisions of Section 33 121(b), shall be guilty of an infraction and, upon conviction , of, shall be punished by a fine of not less than twenty-five dollars ($25 00) but not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100 00) for a first violation, a fine not exceeding two hundred dollars ($200 00) for a second conviction within one (1) year, and a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500 00) for the third conviction within one (1) year The fourth and additional convictions within one (1) year shall be punishable as misdemeanors and shall be punished by a fine not less than two hundred fifty dollars ($250 00) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000 00), or by imprisonment in the County jail for a term not exceeding six (6) months, or both, and such convicted person or entity may, in the discretion of the court, be adjudged, in addition to the above penalties, to be liable to DEHS for all necessary costs incurred in investigation, discovery, analysis, inspection, clean-up, and other actual costs incurred by DEHS or its agents pertaining to the violation Each day or portion thereof in violation shall be considered a separate and distinct offense 1121311881 3 — 244-6 DATE May 9, 1990 S T A F F R E P O R T CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) MEETING DATE May 10, 1990 SUBJECT DESIGNATION OF MAYOR PRO TEM HUGH GRANT AS VOTING MEMBER OF THE COUNTY AB 939 TASK FORCE FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED X Council recently appointed the Mayor as the primary member to the AB 939 Task Force and the City Manager as the alternate. As Council is aware, Mayor Pro Tem Grant is acting on behalf of the Mayor for approximately the next month, and needs to be designated by the Council as our voting primary member so that he may attend and represent the City on the Task Force STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT COUNCIL APPOINT MAYOR PRO TEM HUGH GRANT AS THE PRIMARY VOTING MEMBER TO THE AB 939 TASK FORCE FOR A PERIOD OF THIRTY DAYS, AT WHICH POINT IT WOULD REVERT TO THE COUNCIL'S ORIGINAL DESIGNATION TS bt