Loading...
02/14/1985I CITY OF GRAND TERRACE - �� (�E&1,12 t2. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA TERRACF VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FEBRUARY 14, 1985 22731 Grand Terrace Road 5 30 P.M. * Call to Order * Invocation - * Pledge of Allegiance * Roll Call Staff ' CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Recommendations Council Action 1 Approval of Minutes (1/24/85) Approve 2. Approval of Check Register No CRA021485 Approve 3. Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee Report (Jim Rigley) ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONVENE CITY COUNCIL 1 Items to Add/Delete 2. Civic Center Construction Briefing 3 Approval of Minutes (1/24/85) Approve 4. 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. Approval of Check Register No. 021485 B. Ratify CRA Action Approve C. Authorize Execution by the City Engineer & Approve Filing of the "Order to Construct" Applica- tion with the PUC for the Vivienda Avenue Overhead Bridge Project A COUNCIL AGENDA J Staff _ 2/14/85 - Page 2 of 3 Recommendations Council Action D. Approve the Following Projects, Make the Approve Findings, Adopt the Negative Declarations & Instruct City Clerk to Issue Notices of Determination (1) Proposed Mini -warehouse at 21999 Van Buren (James L Harber) (SA 84-6) (2) Setback Variance for Project to Construct Industrial Buildings N/o Barton Rd. E/o So. Pacific RR (Jim Goode) (CUP 84-11) (3) Proposal to Construct 2-Story, 12,504 Sq Ft. Office Bldg. at 22545 Barton Rd. (Renee J. Jacober) (SA 85-1) 5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 6 ORAL REPORTS A. Planning Commission B. Parks & Recreation Committee C Historical & Cultural Activities Committee D Crime Prevention Committee (1) Accept Resignation of Gary Carnes (Term to Expire 6/30/86) (2) Consider Reappointing Larry Williams to Fill His Unexpired Tern to Expire 6/30/88 (3) Consider Appointing Dr Murray Taylor to Fill the Unexpired Term of John LeMay to Expire 6/30/86 E. Emergency Operations Committee F Police Chief G Fire Chief H. City Engineer I. City Attorney J. City Manager K. City Council 16 COUNCIL AGENDA 2/14/85 - Page 3 of 3 17. PUBLIC HEARING - 7 30 P.M. A. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENTS, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984, FROM R-R TO R-3, AREA 11 (ZC 85-01) (Second Reading) I8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Bid Award - Palm Ave Realignment B Fire Protection - Vivienda/Burns/Maple/ Walnut Area 9. NEW BUSINESS A "No Parking" Designation - Civic Center B. Bridge Replacement W/o Barton Road over Southern Pacific Railroad C. FAU Funding Exchange D. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, TRANSFERRING A PORTION OF THE PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND ALLOCATION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE 110. Closed Session (ADJOURN THE NEXT REGULAR CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WILL BE HELD THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 1985, AT 5 30 P.M AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS FOR THE 2/28/85 MEETING MUST IBE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BY 12 00 NOON ON 2/20/85 Staf f Recommendations (1) Public Hearing, (2) Motion to aprv. reading of Ord. by title only waiving full reading, (3) Motion to adopt Ord. by title only. Council Action ' :r; ae] CRA APPROVAL FEB 14 IL CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY cj�A GL, -,A `Tfirl� NO. r REGULAR MEETING - JANUARY 24, 1985 The regular meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency, City of Grand Terrace, was held in the Terrace View Elementary School, 22731 Grand Terrace Road, Grand Terrace, California, on January 24, 1985, at 5 35 p.m. PRESENT hugh J. Grant, Chairman Byron Matteson, Vice Chairman Tony Petta Barbara Pfennighausen Dennis L Evans Seth Armstead, Executive Director Thomas J. Schwab, Treasurer Ivan Hopkins, Attorney Myrna Erway, Secretary ABSENT None MINUTES (1/10/85) Mr. Evans stated the Economic Development Status Report, beginning on page one, does not reflect that the City Attorney questioned Mr Petta about a potential conflict of interest, requested amendment to reflect that portion. Mr Petta stated the Minutes should reflect he has no potential conflict of interest, since this matter relates to the entire City. Approval of the minutes was deferred pending amendment. CHECK REGISTER NO. CRA012485 Following clarification of Check Nos. P-4173 and PP-4179, Motion by Mrs. Pfennighausen, Second by Mr Evans, ALL AYES, to approve Check Register No CRA012485 as presented. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Chairman Grant advised correspondence was received from Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. recommending termination of the contractual relationship and the reasons for termination, materials were also provided showing their accomplishments. Treasurer Schwab stated the correspondence is self-explanatory and indicates agreement with contract termination, advised RSG representatives are present as a courtesy to the Agency and to answer any questions regarding this matter. Page 1 - CRA - 1/24/85 Chairman Grant expressed appreciation for RSG attending, asked if the Agency Members had questions of RSG. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CONTRACT (GTC84-03) THE FOLLOWING PORTION IS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT Mrs Pfennighausen "I have no questions, I have a statement, and I would like to thank these people for the package that they put together. In reviewing it, I had several comments on several pages, and I feel that I could best summarize this with this statement - that after reviewing the assembled material, I have concluded that a team was needed, but not implemented, why, I don't know, but implementation of the economic development team was necessary, it was key to the success, and I'm sorry that you weren't supplied with that." Mr Evans "Just one note in reference in your letter - on page two, you indicate that we assume that both documents have been approved by the Agency and reflect that desired direction for planned implementation, that is in reference to the Gobar Report and the Redevelopment Implementation Strategy Report. I am assuming from your literature that those were the two documents that you used, and I would have to say that, as far as Council not giving you direction, I think there was definite direction, and that's what you worked upon, and that came from those reports" Mr. Petta "Mr. Mayor, I want to point out that apparently Rosenow Company is just as anxious to terminate as we are, and they pointedly in their report tell us the reason, and the reason is that no consultant could do a job for this City unless the Council develops an attitude which, in fact, wants development They clearly point out what we need to do. This is all with perception that the City has returned to the stage of planning and re-evaluating its policies, they have no clear perception as to what they have to do. The Council is divided as we cannot make policy for the Agency, nor can we offer incentives to a developer for which we have no authority to offer. A developer isn't going to dust come to this City with a divided Council If we in fact want development, we must make it a policy and give incentives. All of the cities surrounding Grand Terrace are getting development, and if you look into their policy, you will find that they are giving plenty of incentives in the way of offsite improvements or whatever. But again, we appeared anxious to terminate the contract, but the consultants are dust as anxious because they have no direction and they are hitting a blank wall. This is why I want to say here that I appreciate the work that they have done, I think that with proper direction they could do the job But the termination is not because we find fault, I started that proceeding because I saw the confusion that you were involved in, I saw that you could not really proceed without direction from this Council. Without a unified Council, it would be difficult for you to do the job and to continue to proceed as you were doing would be a waste of money for this City and, as such, I suggested termination." Page 2 - CRA - 1/24/85 Mr Evans "I would take objection to the statement that the Council s divided I think, as far as commercial development in our community, we have two areas in which to develop - the choice of either Barton Road or the freeway. From the documentation I have read to date, I can't help but feel the consultants got direction from the onset that they were to concentrate their efforts in the freeway I-215 area. I don't know if you would be able to substantiate that, thus, they hit a deadend because there are a lot of complications. The question that I would have for the consultants would be 'do you think you could put together a package along the Barton Road area if you emphasized that area?'" Kathleen Rosenow "Kathleen Rosenow, the Rosenow Spevacek Group, Santa Ana, California. I think that we could assist with packaging a program along Barton Road, but I think the other key thing that we tried to bring out was that, in order to interest developers, there needs to be incentives normally, unless there are large pieces of vacant land that are currently held or undeveloped land that's held by someone who is already interested in moving ahead, and in that way the City could assist with that development by, for instance, with ensuring a swift and quick plan processing procedure, and the instances of public improvement, the City could act as an incentive by providing some sort of financing for those public improvements I'm not sure of the ability today in terms of the finances of the City to do that, that was one of things that we had outlined as part of the development committee to start looking at those items What I'm saying, I'm not trying to avoid the question, it would depend upon the scope of the development desired, and it would also depend upon the property owners who are already out there and what their attitude was." Mr Evans "What do you view as limitations specifically? That's on page two, about the middle of the page, . 'until certain issues are resolved and limitations removed, our ability to perform the implementation tasks outlined in the scope of our contract is significantly impaired.' The limitations - is that what you just expounded upon or are there others?" Kathleen Rosenow "I would say those are the primary ones, the ability to quickly process, the ability to bring a developer in and not spend months trying to decide whether the development was appropriate or not, that's an important item Also the financial items and, again, when you look at large developments, such as land assemblage needed, that can be very difficult, that could be a stumbling block." Mr Evans "During your initial research, you contacted property owners along Barton Road What was the general sentiment of those people of selling?" Kathleen Rosenow "Some were interested and some weren't. I think we d have to get into the particulars that - I suspect there were some Page 3 - CRA - 1/24/85 parcels that conceivably could be put together, but you really don't know those things until offers go out and you really start talking dollars to those people, but there were some interested fellows, but there were also people who were not interested in selling whatsoever." Chairman Grant "We could say then that, were you to have received the type of input that was essential in this area, that you could have concentrated on a number of alternatives, such as indicated by Mr. Evans on Barton Road, or you could have concentrated on the area he referred to adjacent to the freeway, or you could have concentrated on the City as a totality within the constraints set forth by zoning and that kind of thing. In other words, anyplace that was commercial, you could have - had you had the kind of guidelines I believe I see you asking for, you could have really done it anyway, is that right?" Kathleen Rosenow "I believe so - what we were really looking to the Committee for was to assist with - we would do the background information - to assist in identifing key sites, and we had initially begun looking at the key sites that were already identified in the Implementation Strategy, and that included all of the implementation strategy sites." Vice Chairman Matteson "You already seem to have the key sites figured out on arton oad, 215, but you aren't able to put any packages together on those?" Kathleen Rosenow "Well, those areas are very large, too, I think what we were looking for was specific corners, specific lots Just to bring a developer and say 'here's a corridor, you pick it out.' The developer is going to say 'well tell me about this property, who's interested in selling? What can we possibly put together? What does the City want to see here?' That is the kind of things that they look to us to give them front end, so they don't spend six months to a year discovering it for themselves " Vice Chairman Matteson "Then you weren't able to tell them what we re looking for or what to put up?" Kathleen Rosenow "Well, not information tnat we had. That Committee to begin doing." in particular now - not from the was what we were looking to the Vice Chairman Matteson. "Had you had any developers that you had brought out here and showed the sites to?" Kathleen Rosenow "We had talked to some, we had not specifically given an area because most of them respond with - yeah, they knew the market out here and they were interested, bring us some specifics." Mrs Pfennighausen "Do I understand that if you had had some more spec is guy a ines as to the possible kind of commercial development that we desired in this City, that it would have made your job much Page 4 - CRA - 1/24/85 easier, and that the Committee would have been giving you that input, hopefully." Kathleen Rosenow "Correct." Mrs Pfennighausen I go back to my statement intially, even in revievil ng the original, some of the original material, the Committee was key to, and they specified the elements that they preferred to have in this Committee. That Committee was never assembled ard, therefore, you're asking someone to do a job with no tools, and I'm sorry for that. I do feel that at this point, if we lose the consultants, the Economic Development Committee is going to be kind of floundering around because you have a Committee that can now do what they should have been doing in regard to working with the consultants - no consultants to make the contact, and I think that the Council needs to consider that and, unless Rosenow Spevacek Group specifically wants out of this right now, I think that its something we might reconsider." Vice Chairman Matteson "Well, the thing about it is that the reason we hired a consu :ant is because we don't know what to do I mean we are not going to hire you then tell you what to do, you're supposed to come in and tell us what we are supposed to do " Kathleen Rosenow "Let me address one of the major differences that I see coming out here, and one of the major reasons that I'm thinking this through after listening to the tape of the last meeting, we made the decision that we made to proceed with the request to go along with your feelings at the last meeting to cancel our contract. Our contract is specifically for implementation services, there's a scope of services attached to it that specifically talks about implementation that has a tentative schedule that is geared towaras implementation. I am afraid that if we were to continue under that scope of services, working here, that there would continue to be this misunderstanding of why haven't we gotten there yet In reality, I think where we were beginning to head was to get into some policy planning, which was not envisioned in our initial scope of services. So, I think we didn't want to get into presenting a whole new proposal at this time because we weren't requested to do that, but what I would recommend to you this evening is that you consider continuing with some form of consultant - whether it's us, or you wish to go out with an RFP again, to specifically deal with the policy planning Until there becomes a consensus on sites and on actual types of development that you wish to encourage." Jim Rigley Jim Rigley, 22605 Desoto. I must remind the Council of what I commented on the last time, and this is factual We sat here as a Council and we wanted to enhance and attract and effect the development in Grand Terrace, and we tried different ways of doing it, but we floundered around - we did not know what to do. We got a market analysis - $10 or $20 Thousand, then we get a feasibility study, and we acted like what we were - a bunch of amateurs. Then we Page 5 - CRA - 1/24/85 said to ourselves, we don't know what to do, but what we want to do is to get some kind a base to generate some revenue for the this City by attracting commercial ventures in the City. So we said, 'I know what we'll do, we will hire someone to do that for us, we will hire an economic development consultant, who will see what we've done so far, and they will grab this thing and they will run with it and they will attract development into Grand Terrace.' So we put out bids, and we got different proposals. One of the proposals which looked awfully good on paper was from this outfit Along with the proposal, they gave a rundown on what they were going to do, and it looked beautiful - it looked like just what we wanted So we said, 'fine, we'll give you this contract.' I think, roughly as I remember, around $30,000 for about a year, but based on - as you go deal So they grabbed it and, quite honestly, I couldn't see too much result from what they were doing. Even though we gave them a copy of the feasibility study, we gave them a copy of the market analysis, we gave them a copy of everything that we had done, and we never did ever say to them, 'now we're going to give you guidelines and tell you what to do.' We didn't do that, and we didn't say to them 'we have a committee, that will tell you what to do.' We didn't do that We said to them, 'we're hiring you for you to attract some commercial ventures into this City because we need it,' and we'regoina to need it more and more as we go, and they said, 'fine, that s what you're paying us for, that's what we're going to do.' So they fooled around and hummed and hawed around and, meeting after meeting, we would ask Tom, 'hey, what's the story, how are they coming ' Tom would say hey, hey, hey - this and this, they're sending out surveys and whatever, and we would say, 'Jesus, it looks like they're not doing too much ' But then, they come with this gimmick, 'Hey, we can't do anything, we haven't got any guidelines - you guys don't tell us what to do when you're divided and blah, blah, blah.' Now, that's a bunch of balony - let's call it like it is. They're not capable of doing what we've been paying them for, and they're proving they cannot, they cannot accomplish anything in the future because, could they accomplish something, they would have done it by now. So if you find yourself talking and talking and talking, and pretty soon say, 'well, gee, maybe let's give them another chance, let's keep them and see what they'll do You're going to end up by spending good money after bad, I think you ought to say to yourself, 'hey, we're lucky to get out from under here with only $10 or $12 Thousand down the tubes ' But don't throw more good money after bad." Mrs Pfennighausen "On February 13, 1984, a letter was sent out, and assume that t is was the RFP, regarding the RFP 84-03. Paragraph 3 of that letter says, 'The firm selected will be expected to meet with representatives from the Chamber of Commerce, the Agency members, the Staff during the conduct of this contract for guidance and direction on the objectives to be met for development activities.' Those were our ground rules, not their's." Jim Rigley "That's a fact, that was the RFP Once that was accepted, once they came back with their proposals, their proposals Page 6 - CRA - 1/24/85 reflected what they were going to do, and their proposal did not say now we'll wait for guidelines from the Chamber of Commerce and heh, heh, heh, it did not. Their proposal, and if you want to tale the time to get it out and look it up, it gives you time schedules, tells exactly what they were going to do, and they haven't done it. What you're talking about was in the RFP, but you're not talking about exactly what we contracted them for. We contracted them for that proposal that they came back with on that brochure." Barney Karger "Barney Karger, you know the address. I think we went about this the wrong way. We forgot that this is a capitalistic system, and if you want to have something done, you figure out how you can get somebody in there that's going to make money by doing it In this City you have Bob Keeney, who is into commercial developments, some of which aren't successful and some of which are very successful, and you have several other developers, builders, who are into commercial development They could have given you input as to how to get development on Barton Road I'm not going to talk aoout the other area because I don't know enough about that, but I can tell you about Barton Road because I am a joint owner on one parcel and probably going to be a ,joint owner on another parcel before the month is out. There are several reasons why builders and developers are not jumping in on Barton Road and building projects I will be the only one before - I will be going before the Planning Commission hopefully sometime in February. dumber 1, Barton Road is a problem, it has Edison lines overhead, poles in the way, and these are relatively expensive for the individual builder or developer to get out of the way, and even if he does develop his parcel, the rest of the lines are in the way The City of Grand Terrace, with the Edison Company, could work out a deal for them to put those underground and improve the beauty of the City, this would save me some money, and I would like it, but it would also hasten development in the rest of the area Barton Road, from Canal Street down, has not been widened. I have talked to several people, they would be very glad to donate their property - the front 17 - 19 feet - for the widening parcels, which would improve Barton Road and make development come quicker. This would cost the City some money, but if they were just to do the engineering, it would cost a lot less to do the engineering on both sides of Barton Road than it would for the additional $20,000 you're gonna put out for one year and probably not get anything back. You could probably put in the engineering, the curb and gutter, and leave out sidewalks, and the street for that amount of money. The other thing is you have real estate people here, it is real estate people's ,lob to sell your properties, to find out how much the properties are selling for, to group them together and sell them, that's how they make their living You've got several real estate offices in Grand Terrace who are virtually very good at this, but they have problems bacause the Planning Commission, not the Planning Department - Joe is very good at helping out any way he can, but the Planning Commission has several rules. I have a building I'm going to build. One of the people in Grand Terrace has already said they would like to put a little sandwich stand in there. In order for them to move into that Page 7 - CRA - 1/24/85 building, which is on the north side of the street, the Professional side, they're going to have to put out over a Thousand Dollars to go before the Planning Commission to find out if they are going to have to move - if they,will be allowed to move. How many people want to throw a Thousand Dollar bet on the crap table all in one thing. Some of the prices that Planning Commission is asking that the City Council has set are really out of line. If you want more development, if you want more development, get with the people at Red Carpet - I think there is another real estate office in town someplace - and some of the people like that, and get with Bob Keeney and myself, and we'll tell you how to get development on Barton Road and how to -- you'll be getting it quickly. As a matter of fact, this year I expect to see over 13,000 square feet of development on Barton Road just as I'm going to do. Now, if you want to increase that quickly, I can't remember the name of the man that had the linoleum and carpet place here in Grand Terrace Darwin owns three parcels right there, get with Mr. Darwin - he wants to develop his property, but he's waiting to see what happens, whether or not the City is going to cooperate with him in doing things. I know he wants to because he's talked to me several times about it. Thank you." Vice Chairman Matteson "I think this letter of January 18th from Rose -now pretty we sums it all up On the second paragraph, 'Due to the existing circumstances, we feel it would be in the best interest of both the City and RSG to terminate contract services I think that really states it very well." Chairman Grant "What's the pleasure of the Agency? Did you want to say something, maam?" Kathleen Rosenow "I would like to clarify one thing for the record think that the one thing that Mr. Rigley overlooked in saying that we had not done our ,lob is the fact that included in that schedule that we attached to our proposal and included in our proposal - very clearly laid out was the need for the development committee. I just wanted to clarify that " Mrs. Pfennighausen "On the scope of services that Rosenow presented, Phase 1, No 1, was 'Community Input Into Key Site Selection and/or Developer Selection - Establish Development Committee.' That was the very first thing that was to be done. That seemed key, even at that time, to the success or failure of this program being a success with these people. No. I, the statement was made, 'The success of the redevelopment plan depends on the quantity and quality of development that occurs within the project area.' - which is our whole City - 'Upon identifying key development sites, the consultant team will provide a developer list and establish interviews with selected developers.' We proposed the committee, which I assume refers back to the combined committee of Chamber of Commerce and whatever, would conduct informal developer interviews to establish the level of developer interest. From the very beginning, there was supposed to be teamwork, and I call to your attention that if I have an acre of land Page 8 - CRA - 1/24/85 and I call a builder and I said, 'build me a house,' and I walk away. I don't have much assurance that the house will get there, No 1 - because he doesn't know what kind I want or where I want it, and, therefore, even though I contract with him and say, 'build me a house,' he's not going to go ahead until he gets some guidelines, and I do feel that the guidelines that were necessary were never given, I'm sorry this didn't work out, if this Company feels that they would like to be shed of us, then I would agree with that, if they would like to continue, I would like to continue to work with them at least for a couple of months to see if we have a viable committee, if we can get something rolling " Vice Chairman Matteson "If I was that contractor building your ouse, Barbara, I Tou d have contacted you and said, 'I need guidelines.'" Mrs. Pfenniahausen "They did repeatedly." Vice Chairman Matteson "I didn't see any letters in here that there was any request for it, so I think that they were neglect in coming forward and saying 'hey, we're not going to go anymore until you help us.' But the bills kept coming in every month, so they must have felt they had someplace to go." Mr Evans "To the consultants, you have been on about six months now. e primary goal was to seek commercial development Now we hear the term, 'the entire community.' Where do you feel viable, commercial development is going to occur in our community?" Kathleen Rosenow "You may have to define the word 'viable.' If you are going to talk about which can occur quickly consistent with patterns laid out so far, Barton Road is where it is going to happen, if you are talking about major type of development, as far as a major tax raiser for the City, it won't be on Barton Road because there is not enough room, what is left is the site we have known as 'adjacent to the freeway,' however, the problems associated with that site - access, easements, Edison and the other property owners - are very complex, it would take a long time to solve those problems and to come up with funds to help solve those problems " Mr Evans "Please, before you sit down, you indicated that development that's a major tax raiser for the City. During the early meetings with either staff or anyone else, did you have - did you understand we wanted a major tax base. Did you take that to assume the City wanted you to concentrate in the I-215 area, or did you just take that from the MSI report?" Kathleen Rosenow "That was primarily from the MSI report. The other thing that I was going to say, early on in our contract a developer contacted the City and asked for an interview specifically on that site and a shopping center for that site, so we did meet with them." Page 9- CRA - 1/24/85 Mr. Evans "I noticed in some of your reports that you filed, when you contacted owners in area B, one thing they pointed out was they felt that residential development was more financially feasible in that area. Anyway, did you at anytime offer Barton Road as an area for commercial development?" Kathleen Rosenow "We weren't offering land to anyone - didn't have any to offer. Mr. Evans "No, I understand that, but during the .. It Kathleen Rosenow "We discussed the land along Barton It Mr Evans "Not the owners of the property, when you met with the developers, did you discuss a development along Barton Road, or was the discussion just centered on I-2157" Kathleen Rosenow "The only developer that we discussed a specific site with was the specific developer who came in on that part who wanted to talk about a shopping center going there, at that time we even looked at the possibility of other sites. To be quite honest with you, I'll tell you one other site I would be considering, although I have no idea of the impact on the community, is the school site as a commercial site because of its location and access - because of one ownership and location." Mr Evans "The developer that did contact the City, what was the size of the development that they were discussing?" Kathleen Rosenow "They were interested in a shopping center." Mr Evans, "And who was that?" Kathleen Rosenow "Forest City Dillon It Mr Evans "What was the status after you were done talking with them?" Kathleen Rosenow "If the site were assembled and there was a solution to the access, they were interested." Mr. Petta "(question. The reason for wanting development - commercial, industrial development - is to be able to develop a tax base. We all understand that sooner or later the subvention revenue will decline, and we will be navigating on our own, and unless we provide for an adequate tax base, there will come a time when we will need the revenue, and we will be rushing out trying to get it, and you don't get a tax base when you want it, you have to prepare ahead of time. Now, the sales tax revenue from all of the commercial development in the City now as it exists, I understand is approximately $10,000 per year. That's the extent of our sales tax revenue. Now, assuming that everything went well and here comes a Page 10 - CRA - 1/24/85 developer who says, 'hey, I like Barton Road,' the property ovners are all in agreement and sell Barton Road, and here comes this developer and develops Barton Road From what you know of the area of the amount of land available and the amount of development that can go on Barton Road, would the sales tax revenue from that development be significant enough to do this City any good for what we're looking for." Kathleen Rosenow "Your major tax generators to the City would be a major shopping center, an auto dealership, a hotel - would have to be sizable for bed tax, whether any of - or a very strong industrial base that could be a point of sale - that type of industry, whether any of those could adequately locate on Barton Road - I would doubt if they could locate on Barton Road, I feel it would be difficult to assemble the amount of land that would be needed." Mr Petta "Right. In your professional opinion, if Barton Road was developed to its optimum right now, the tax base would be minimum, so that if this Council is thinking of a tax base to take care of services for this City from here on, we'd need necessarily to think in terms of more than just Barton Road. Would this be your professional opinion?" Kathleen Rosenow "Given what I know today, yes." Mr Petta "Therefore, if we narrow our sights to Barton Road, we will not, in fact, resolve the problem of gaining revenue for this City, so, what you're saying, and I'm going back to what you're saying in this letter, we need policy on the part of the Council, we need a united Council, the Council must understand that, if it wants a tax base, Barton Road is fine, Barton Road will develop in any case, but if it wants a tax base, it better go where the land is, and there is only one place where the land is - let's face it, the land available for a center that will bring a tax base to the City is along I-215, and nowhere else. So, if the Council does not want that, then we're spinning our wheels hiring consultants to tell consultants to bring development. You don't have the authority or power to say to a major developer I-215 is the place for you to go, we can assemble the land, when the Council is not going to be in your corner." Mrs. Pfennighausen "Mr. Mayor, it disturbs me anyway that Councilman Petta has spent a considerable amount of time discussing the development of an area in which he has an established potential conflict of interest. This happens over and over and over, and he doesn't stop. To get on with this issue at hand as to whether the contract is to be rescinded or to be continued, we need a motion to that effect. Too, I would like a legal opinion from our Attorney as to Mr. Petta's right to sit and discuss the potential development area along I-215 when he owns property that will benefit from a development in that area." Page 11 - CRA - 1/24/85 Attorney Hopkins "Mr Petta on many occasions has indicated that, whenever any decisions or actions of the Council involve that property along I-215, he has a potential conflict of interest and has declared such, and I'm assuming that there has not been a change in the ownership of that property, then that would continue to exist If the main gist of any decision is directed at that property along I-215, then Mr. Petta should declare a conflict of interest and abstain from participating in that decision or that action. If the gist involves the overall development of the community, Barton Road, obviously the consultants have just indicated, at this time, there are only two areas of development, commercial areas, and that's Barton Road and the I-215. If the major emphasis is directed to I-215, yes, I would agree that he has a potential, foreseeable conflict of interest and should abstain." Mr. Petta "In addition to that, Mr. Mayor, Councilwoman Pfennighausen must understand that I sit here as a Councilman who is duty bound to reflect my best opinion for the total economic health of this City. Now I own property on I-215, there's no secret about that. I'm pointing out basic economic philosophy. Now I also want to point out to Mrs. Pfennighausen that, at the last Council meting, I reflected on that position, and that I am willing for this Council to initiate action to remove the "C" zone from my property, revert it back to what it was initially, and I will develop that property to such an extent that it will not be available for commercial development, I am prepared to do that." Mrs. Pfennighausen "I believe at the that meeting the clarification was made that it would make no difference what the zoning on your property was, the very fact that it was in that area, and that was the area under consideration or under discussion, prohibited you from discussing it. I think, in order to clear this matter up once and for all, the time has come for this City to seek an actual opinion on this from the FPPC, and quit haggling over it, I'm tired of it Mr Petta has been, in the last week, given material that should have clarified this for him and, therefore, I would suggest that this City does, through our Attorney, seek advice from the FPPC as to Mr. Petta's continued participation and discussion of the area along I-215. He was not discussing the City as a whole, he was not discussing just Barton Road, he centered in to influence and discuss the development I-215 in which he owns property." Mr. Petta "Now I might point out, Mr Mayor, that Mrs Pfennighausen �dthat on her own a couple of years ago, wrote to all the agencies in the State, and these agencies refused to consider her proposal, and the one agency that did look into that situation came through with information which Mrs. Pfennighausen covered up. Now, I want that clear for the record." Chairman Grant "I think we're gradually leaving the area of concern, I think that's what you (the City Attorney) are going to say." Page 12 - CRA - 1/24/85 Attorney hopkins "Yes, we are getting aside from that, in addition, don't think that the Fair Political Practices Commission has ever been approached, and if that's what the Council wants, I, as the City Attorney, would be more than happy to request their opinion in regard to that subject. I might add that one of the problems of the past statement is that, if we try to direct the Council's attention to looking at the 215 and the freeway property as opposed to the Barton Road property, that we do get into participating in an action or decision, and so at that state, if we try to influence the Council, then, Mr. Petta, that should involve your property, and so you ought to consider that in any statements, I think the statement was really directed at your statement to the consultant right before she sat down With that, if the Council wishes to direct me to solicit the opinion of the Fair Political Practices Commission, I certainly will " Chairman Grant• "Mr. Hopkins, at this time, based on the content of the materia that's been presented to us by this consultant, and based on the statements by the consultants, and based upon what we are faced with tonight, are we or are we not talking about subjects about which in your opinion Mr Petta should or should not exclude himself from voting and discussion." Attorney Hopkins "Anytime we're talking about the freeway property, yes Fe should Chairman Grant "ado, based on what you've heard tonight and what this material contains and what the cover letter contains and what this lady has said, do you think, in your opinion, that he should refrain from being involved." Attorney Hopkins "I have not seen the cover letter but, yes, I think e s ou d rrom is action at this point in time, that's not meant an overall opinion that Mr. Petta should not participate in the economic development ." Chairman Grant "ado, I'm not asking about that - I'm asking about whether or not we retain the services of this firm tonight, and I think that's why we're here, and that is to make a decision whether or not we wish to retain their services, especially based on their letter indicating that they're ready to withdraw." Mrs Pfennighausen "I have a request at this time that - and I realize that this can be a really weighting matter, and I have to apologize to our City Clerk for what I'm going to ask, but I would ask that all conversation during this discussion, starting with the last presentation from the consultants, be recorded verbatim in the Minutes for obvious reasons." Chairman Grant "Any Council person is entitled to make that request, and City Clerk will do it in verbatim." Page 13 - CRA - 1/24/85 END OF VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT The contract with RSG remains cancelled, since no further action ��as taken by the Agency. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AD HOC COMMITTEE City Attorney Hopkins advised that if the major area of emphasis for development will be in the freeway area, Mr Petta and Mr. Armstead should disclose a potential conflict of interest and withdraw from participation. Mr. Evans questioned if the City Attorney had reviewed the FPPC letter dated July 17, 1984 relative to Advice No. A-84-128 and his opinion as to a potential conflict of interest for Mr. Petta relative to that advice Attorney Hopkins advised if the freeway is to be the major area of emphasis for development H r Petta would have a potential conflict of interest. Treasurer Schwab stated the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee will require advice on the functions to be performed, contacted the County relative to the level of service they could provide the City in enhancing or attracting economic development, their major area of emphasis is marketing for the entire area as well as providing financing tools for projects, such as industrial development bonds, the County no longer provides the service of locating and promoting sites, requested guidance for the Committee. Mrs. Pfennighausen recommended the Committee meet to discuss ideas such as the kind of development to consider and the kinds of incentives they feel could be offered, could survey available sites, there has been discussion on the amount of income needed to operate the City, but a projection has never been provided indicating the amount that will be needed in 5-10 years for the City to function at the level desired by the citizens, the citizens have never been asked what level of service they desire or the kinds of business desired in this community. Indicated she does not oppose development in any area of the City, recommended the Committee formulate guidelines then submit recommendations to the Agency. Chairman Grant felt the Committee should be given the opportunity to meet to discuss ideas which might stimulate the Agency to provide them with the needed input, felt citizen input is needed as to whether the citizens want the present level of service maintained or reduced, such as eliminating street sweeping, not advocating gigantic development, but feels the cost to provide what is needed by the City will require more business besides "Mom and Pop" type businesses, recommended looking at the entire community, determining what is wanted, then if a particular area is needed, proceed in that area, recommended discontinuing this matter as a political issue and grounds for a political campaign, desires objectivity on the Committee, hopes it will not become embroiled in pettiness with the Agency members. Page 14 - CRA - 1/24/85 Mr. Evans stated he is aware a tax base must be provided, is not convinced the type of development the community has been pursuing the last six years is needed, recommended, with Chairman Grant and Mrs. Pfennighausen concurring, that Jim Rigley assemble the Committee then provide a Committee status report the second meeting in February. Vice Chairman Matteson recommended that Mr. Rigley and Treasurer Schwab attend the Regional Economic Development Workshop on January 31. The official purpose of the Committee is to enhance commercial development within Grand Terrace and to provide advice to the Agency, Mr. Rigley, as interim chairman, will contact the members to establish a meeting date, the Committee will then report to the Agency. Recess was called at 6 45 p.m. and reconvened at 7 10 p m. with all mem ers present. Adjourn - The Regular meeting adjourned at 7 10 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held February 14, 1985 at 5 30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Secreta APPROVED Chairman Page 15 - CRA - 1/24/85 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF GRAND TERRACE FEB 14, 1985 PiiaG'I`s: CRA APPROVAL, w @RA AGENDA ITEM No, ;., CHECK REGISTER NO CRA021485 CHECK NO OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF FEB 14, 1985 (1) P4180 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ,,-) P4181 KICAK AND ASSOCIATES (3) P4182 MOFFATT & NICHOL, ENGINEERS (4) P4183 TRAFFIC SAFTEY ENGINEERS REIMBURSE CITY FOR AERIAL PRINTS (TRAFFIC SAFETY ENGINEERS) ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR VIVIENDA BRIDGE 12/24/84-1/20/85 VIVIENDA BRIDGE PROJECT PAYMENT #7 22 COLOR AERIAL PRINTS TOTAL $ 1 ,722 50 760 30 5,909 23 4,028 00 $12,420 03 I CERTIFY THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE AFORELISTED CHECKS FOR PAYMENT OF CRA LIABILITIES HAVE BEEN AUDITED BY ME AND ARE NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE OPERATION OF CRA THOMAS SCHWAB TREASURER ,/ `ARCHITECT'S O ERRCHIT]7 I FIELD REPORT CONSULTANT ❑ 1N'F0Ri 1 A T ,"0N 07 ILY coury AIA DOCUMENT G771 FIELD ❑ -IL, AGW�dLjA ,1"EA'1 v;!, ® PROJECT Grand Terrace Civic Center FIELD REPORT NO 49 CONTRACT ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO 81-110cc 52 DATE 1-23-85 TIME 8 30-10 00 am WEATHER partly sunny TEMP RANGE 60-65 EST % OF COMPLETION 91% CONFORMANCE WITH SCHEDULE (+, —) minus 8 weeks WORK IN PROGRESS PRESENT AT SITE 1 Finish carpentry 1. Councilwoman Barbara Pfenninghausen 2 aar�peti ng � 2. Tom Schwab, Finance Director TCg*ami c FTWr Pave y S, < Seth , City Manager 4 Finish Hardware 4 Betty Trimble, Secretary Electrical, ec anica Plumbing 5 Bob Stewart, Bldg Inspector 6 Larry Wolff, WI-C OBSERVATIONS 1 The AC paving has been installed complete with exception of the final seal coat and striping 2 The Architect and the Contractor shall provide suggestions to remedy the absence of 2 x 4 redwoodheaders at the easterly edge of the easterly driveway 3 Seth Armstead expressed concern that some telephone outlets were being covered LID b e course of construction lhe ArchiteEt indicated that this was not the case and that access would he prov, -+es! fn, all Doti e b5 RM Ic %iG prov"Icie ar, a dltldna, amount of concrete tIatworK aijacent tc tre area of the exterior w2'l mounted telephone e nrinsurp P� nr =x,= 8fter the meeting, the Architect and the Contractor verified the area to be concreted 5 The telephone enclosure at the exterior location should be wall mounted and not a free standing pedestal or booth type enclosure 6 The Architect shall schedule a meeting next week with Mr. Armstead to review the PrUjeLt slides for e Dedicatlon Ceremony. 7 The Architect shall clarify the requirements for the 30 day weed control reouirerlent by the EandSLapt A?ChIteCL 8 At the planter soffits at all second level areas, all vertical surfaces from the top 6") shall be painted with a flat brown Pdint to insure that ITEMS TO VERIFY Ac nntpd aboyp INFORMATION OR ACTION REQUIRED As noted above 1012,11985 dmk ATTACH EN none REPO, BY AIA OCUMEN Tu wuwlrewl CITY OF • ARCHVEZS FIELD REPORT • OCTOBER 1972 EDITION • AIA® • © 1972 ITC nr cr��5�iITFrTC 171C NFW VnQV ♦VF NW WACNINr:T('1N n r 7nOn. naPPG Grand Terrace Civic Center Field Report No 49 Job No 81-110cc 52 the surfaces are not seen after installation of the potted plants and redwood bark 9 The elevator doors and frames shall be painted 263A "Dublin Green", the same color as all other interior door frames. 10. The next regularly scheduled job meeting is 8 30 a m , Wednesday, January 30, 1985 ARCHITECT'S OWNER D;�,��,� G;vLY ARCHITEC' - 1 FIELD REPORT CONSULTANT ❑ COUNCIL AGEN AIA DOCUMENT G711 FIELD ❑ ®A ITEM�. PROJECT Grand Terrace Civic Center FIELD REPORT NO 50 CONTRACT ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO 81-11OCC 52 DATE 1-30-85 TIME 2 00-4 00 p m WEATHER partly sunny TEMP RANGE 60-65_ degrees EST % OF COMPLETION 92% CONFORMANCE WITH SCHEDULE (+ -) - 8 weeks WORK IN PROGRESS PRESENT AT SITE 1 Carpeting Councilwoman Barbara Pfennighausen finishes2 interior unPetta 3. Casework Seth Armstead, City Manager Betty Trimble, Secretary Roy Taylor, Haveric Construction OBSERVATIONS Larry Wolff, WLC 1 The Architect verified that the paving area adjacent to the easterly driveway edge snail De sawcut ana z x 4 reawooa neaaers snail De installe 2 The Architect and the Contractor indicated that they were trying to find a grommet which would finish off e holes necessary to be drilled into coun er ops Tor telephone access 3 The interchangeable doot placques which have dirivedat the -job need tube revised for the new council merubers and the new secretarial staff added after the last election 4. C-harige Order '21 and a complete updated histermy ef the tetal eenstruetlem eest break down was submitted and reviewed 6 PdC]f]C Bell has rescheduled e transfer of the telephone dial tone to Friday, February 15. 1985 8 Councilwoman Barbara Pfennighausen is going to give the phone number for the Girl Scout Representative ran- that the Arr---hit-P-G-t GaR Gall and GE)erdinate the tree planting program with the Landscape Architect ITEMS TO VERIFY As noted above RECEIVED INFORMATION OR ACTION REQUIRED TnpotRd ahov� 1°85 ATTACH None REPORT B ; ` LA Y WOL AIA AIA DOCU�ENT G' 1 ARCHI C S FIELD REPORT • OCTOBER 1972 EDITION AIA®• © 1972 —.._ ..._.. r.-.....r�r �r n rr rn_�T ,� �In ,'OCT BE 972 1� ITIOlt.l Grand Terrace Field Report #50 Page 2 Observations continued 9 The next regularly scheduled job meeting is at 8 30 a m Wednesdya, February 5, 1985 a FEB 14 1985 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - JANUARY 24, 1985 PENDINGCITY COUNCIL APPROVAL CO'UNCIff AGENDA ITEM Z3 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order at the Terrace View Elementary School, 22731 Grand Terrace Road, Grand Terrace, California, on January 24, 1985, at 7 10 p.m PRESENT Hugh J Grant, Mayor Byron Matteson, Mayor Pro Tempore Tony Petta, Councilman Barbara Pfennighausen, Councilwoman Dennis L Evans, Councilman Seth Armstead, City Manager Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney Joe Kicak, City Engineer Myrna Erway, City Clerk ABSENT None The meeting was opened with invocation by Pastor Suk Woo Chung, Loma Linda Korean Church of Seventh Day Adventist, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, led by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson. CIVIC CENTER CONSTRUCTION Architect Field Report Nos 47 and 48 were provided Councilwoman Pfennighausen advised Item 6 on page 2 of Field Report No 48 was not discussed during the meeting Mayor Grant recommended that items discussed after the meetings be reflected as an addendum so that the reports will accurately indicate the items discussed during the meetings. City Manager Armstead reported the following (1) Paving has been completed except the seal coat and striping, (2) The parking lot, fence and sidewalk at the Palm Avenue entrance are presently being eliminated, (3) The telephone outlets which were covered up during the course of construction are being corrected, concrete is being added beneath the exterior telephone enclosure at no cost to the City, (4) Project slides for the dedication ceremony will be available at the next construction meeting, (5) The walk-through is presently scheduled for February 7. Councilwoman Pfennighausen questioned and was advised the largest available wall -hung enclosure will be provided for the exterior telephone, since that location is not covered. Mayor Grant voiced concern that there is no redwood adjacent to the pavement on the eastern boundary of the driveway. Councilwoman Pfennighausen advised that matter was discussed at the construction meeting and will be taken care of. Page 1 - 1/24/85 MINUTES (1/10/85) Councilman Evans requested the following amendments to the January 10, 1985 Minutes (1) Page 3, Historical & Cultural Activities Committee, Item (4), presently states, "Expressed regret that Certificates of Appreciation are given to individuals who do not follows rules and regulations," requested including Mrs. Mathews' entire statement, (2) Page 7, next to last paragraph, states, "Councilman Evans felt including Item 8D will only prolong the necessary abatement for two years and will place undue responsibility on the Planning Commission during that period," indicated he did not make that statement, felt it was made by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, (3) Page 10, Teleprompter of Grand Terrace Foundation, second paragraph, states, "Mayor Grant directed staff to advertise the openings on this Board in the Chamber Newsletter and local news media," stated he suggested advertising the openings and felt the Minutes should accurately reflect the sequence of events, (4) Page 11, second paragraph, indicates, "that Mayor Grant and Councilman Evans indicated opposition," requested the Minutes reflect that he opposed the alcohol use due to potential problems it would create. Councilman Evans stated he realizes formulating the minutes and paraphrasing them into a few pages is a difficult task, considering the length of the meetings, felt care should be taken to accurately reflect in the Minutes what transpired, and that they should not be as general as they have been. Mayor Grant stated the Minutes have to accurately indicate as detailed a synopsis as possible, concurred that due to the length of the meetings, can't go into so much detail, the length of the meetings will continue because it has been his policy to let people talk. Directed the City Clerk to carefully examine the comments made by Councilman Evans, correct any inaccuracies, and to add items to the Minutes as requested by Councilman Evans, advised if a Councilmember wants additional information added to the synopsis of the Minutes, it should be included as long as it is an accurate synopsis Noted Council had requested that the Minutes be more brief, feels the City Clerk has done a good job, stated each Councilmember is entitled to have items included which they desire. Councilman Evans felt the Minutes should be more specific, felt giving a synopsis is fine, but may not be apparent, noted that if someone were to go back and try to digest the Minutes and the sentiments and views of individuals, would be unable to draw from the generalizations in the Minutes. Approval of the January 10, 1985 Minutes was deferred pending amendments. CONSENT CALENDAR Item 4B - Five -Year Lien Agreement, GTC 85-02, to construct sidewalk at 21516 Main Street, and Item 4C - Authorizing attendance of the Page 2 - 1/24/85 Annual California Parks & Recreation Society Conference in Sacramento, were removed for discussion CC-85-16 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Councilman Evans, ALL AYES, to approve the following Consent Calendar items A - Approval of Check Register No 012485, D - Accept FY 1983-84 Annual Financial Report. LIEN AGREEMENT GTC85-02 - AFCOM MANUFACTURING COMPANY BUILDING PROJECT Mayor Grant advised that Item 4B, the five-year lien agreement to construct sidewalks at 21516 Main Street, would be combined with Item 9A and will be considered at this time. Planning Director Kicak advised AFCOM has been attempting to construct an addition on Main Street, is required to install a sidewalk as a condition of acquiring a building permit, requested that in lieu of constructing a sidewalk at this time, he be permitted to sign an agreement similar to those signed by other properties within the City whereby, if within a five-year period the City requests installation of the sidewalks, that agreement will go into force, recommended approval of the requested five-year agreement to construct sidewalks at 21516 Main Street. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson questioned what happens after five years if the City doesn't request sidewalks. Mr. Kicak stated it would either be the responsibility of the City or any future development of that property. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson questioned and Mr Kicak confirmed that a variance would be given if no action is taken in five years. Councilwoman Pfennighausen felt the rationale for not installing sidewalks at this location is consistent with previous similar requests, since the facility is located in a manufacturing area where other sidewalks do not exist, felt the area has been landscaped beautifully and will be an asset to the community, will provide sales tax revenue to the City, since it is a point of origin CC-85-17 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to approve and authorize execution by the Mayor of a five-year lien agreement, GTC 85-02, to construct sidewalks at 21516 Main Street (Robert Wessels, AFCOM Manufacturing Company). Mr. L J. Dawson, President, Afcom Manufacturing Company, advised he requested placement on this Agenda in the event the lien agreement was not resolved, has been working on getting a building permit for two months, the landscaping as promised to the Planning Commission at the December 17 meeting has been completed, the required fire hydrant is in service and the letter requested from the property owner has been provided to the Planning Director. Page 3 - 1/24/85 AFCOM builds mobilehomes for AFCOM Development Company which develops mobilehome parks, and does not sell to dealers, estimated the City will receive $250 sales tax revenue for every mobilehome constructed, for an estimated $1,000 per day, the firm's payroll will be approximately $1,000,000, stated he wants the record to reflect that he and Mr. Kicak are not enemies, stated Councilwoman Pfennighausen is responsible for his firm remaining in Grand Terrace, thanked Councilman Evans for his assistance in resolving problems. Stated he was unable to build the proposed addition which would have allowed producing 10-12 mobilehomes per day, due to the zoning ordinance, the overall plan and being unable to meet the fire department's requirment for sprinklers in the building, since the 6-inch line would not provide sufficient power, recommended the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee take matters such as this into consideration ANNUAL CALIFORNIA PARKS & RECREATION SOCIETY CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE Mayor Pro Tem Matteson requested additional input since four people are requesting attendance. Community Services Director Anstine advised the conference is structured to provide approximately 50 different seminars and workshops, which are divided into different categories, each attendee is assigned a particular area to attend in an effort to cover all seminars to gain information for City implementation. CC-85-18 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Councilman Evans, ALL AYES, to authorize three members of the Parks & Recreation Committee and the Community Services Director to attend the Annual California Parks & Recreation Society Conference in Sacramento on March 1-4, 1985. CRIME PREVENTION GRANT Captain Phil Schuyler advised the City was awarded the Crime Prevention Law Enforcement Grant. It is being proposed that the County provide all services provided within the grant and will act as the City's agent under the ongoing Law Enforcement Contract. The original cost for the City's match was $30,796, the County of San Bernardino is prepared to offer full services of the grant as required for a cost to the City of $12,872, which is $1,000 cheaper for the City. Advised the remaining action needed at this time is adoption of a resolution authorizing submittal of the grant application and execution of the grant award and execution of the environmental impact study. CC-85-19 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Councilman Evans, to approve the following items (1) RESOLUTION NO 85-01 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE -C-ITY OF GRAND STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF GRANT APPLICATION AND EXECUTION OF GRANT AWARD, Page 4 - 1/24/85 (2) Approve and authorize execution by the Mayor of the amendment to the Law Enforcement Contract (GTC83-33-2) with the County of San Bernardino for the Crime Prevention Program, (3) Authorize execution of the Grant Award Community Crime Resistance Program document and the Negative Declaration. Councilman Petta questioned what happens after the grant term expires and whether the City would be obligated to $40,000 per year after the first year Captain Schuyler advised application will be made for second year funding should it become available, the intent of the grant program is to assist cities in implementing programs which are to be continued, with the cities assuming the cost at the conclusion of the grant program, if the program is successful, noted the City of San Francisco was denied a grant award this year because it did not live up to its original intent and discontinued its grant program after the first year Councilwoman Pfennighausen stated she assumes the City's intent, in applying for the grant, was to maintain an ongoing program if it is successful, unless the services can no longer be afforded, felt application would not have made if the program wasn't needed. Mayor Grant stated the grant provides seed money to do that which a city would not normally be able to afford to do, any grant is an experiment in which the odds are that you will succeed in achieving the goal, feels it would be difficult to force a community into continuing to expend funds if a program is unsuccessful Mayor Pro Tem Matteson questioned if any of the surrounding communities have been granted a similar award and the results. Captain Schuyler stated the San Bernardino County has been exceeding its expectations by 35% Councilman Petta stated a year from now the City could determine that it would be more beneficial to use the $40,000 to provide two officers around the clock rather than for prevention, questioned if the City would have that option. Capt Schuyler stated the ultimate decision is up to Council at the conclusion of the grant period, the County will provide whatever services the City requests, however, the State's intent, in awarding the grant funding, is based on the premise the City will continue a successful program. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson felt additional enforcement may not be required if the City has a prevention officer Following discussion, Motion No. CC-85-19 carried, ALL AYES. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION - BUFFER ZONE VARIANCE Planning Director Kicak advised that on December 3, 1984 the Planning Commission considered a variance to allow construction of an industrial building on the northerly property line of a project site Page 5 - 1/24/85 located adjacent to the Southern Pacific Railroad on the northerly side of Barton Road. The Zoning Ordinance requires a 25-foot buffer zone between any residential and industrial building development. The Planning Commission denied the variance due to opposition from adjacent property owners during the public hearing. Mayor Grant opened Public Hearing. James Goode, 5970 East Marshall Circle, Anaheim, the property owner, advised he has a business in the City, is interested in building warehouses on a 2-1/4 acre site located on the north side of Barton Road, east of the Stater Bros. Warehouse, requested a variance from the required 25-foot buffer zone on the north side of the site Exhibited maps and plans of the proposed project, stated the building will be set back three feet from the property line to allow planting Italian Cypress trees on the north side of the site to buffer noise from the warehouse, indicated Mr. Liles, adjacent property owner east of the site, and Mr. Reynolds, adjacent property owner north of the site, opposed the variance at the Planning Commission meeting, are present at this meeting, and no longer oppose the variance. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson questioned the types of businesses proposed and the amount of noise. Mr. Goode stated the property is zoned M-R, noted that all proposed businesses would be required to get a Conditional Use Permit, which would be reviewed through the Planning Commission, his business is wholesale auto parts. The use of the proposed project is for warehouses, with business hours of approximately 8 00 a.m. to 5 30 p.m., felt the businesses would not involve noise. Councilman Evans questioned and Planning Director Kicak confirmed the only item being considered at this time is a variance from the 25-foot buffer zone as required by ordinance, the project will require Planning Commission review, and if approved, any business planning to locate at that site will be required to obtain a permit. Mr Kicak stated this project will be submitted back to the Planning Commission for processing, and the architectural review requirements will be enforced. Mr. Liles, 21840 Grand Terrace Road, stated when the property was rezoned Mrs. Farmer requested it be approved with the condition there would be no night work. Ben Reynolds, 21850 Grand Terrace Road, property owner on the north side of the project, stated he has agreed in principle for the structure to be located within 3-4 feet of the boundary line, since Mr. Good has indicated he will plant Italian Cypress along that boundary for a buffer zone, voiced concern for the noise factor, since his residence is adjacent to the site. City Attorney Hopkins advised Council may approve or deny the appeal, if approval of the appeal is granted, Council must make certain Page 6 - 1/24/85 findings pursuant to Section 18 75.040 of the Municipal Code, cited that Section of the Code Councilman Evans, referencing Para. A of Section 18.75.040 of the Municipal Code, stated he understands there have been four or five other variances of this type granted within the last two years and sees no evidence of special treatment, stated if a variance is to be granted to the 25-foot buffer zone, consideration should be given to amend the ordinance to provide for a choice of several types of buffers Mayor Pro Tem Matteson felt a buffer zone is a safeguard to protect the residents from surrounding commercial property, felt the requirements of the buffer zone should remain as written. CC-85-20 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Evans, to approve the appeal of the Planning Commission decision for a buffer zone variance (CUP 84-11) and making findings as outlined in Section 18.75.040 of the Municipal Code Councilman Petta advised he was the selling agent of this property to Mr. Goode two years ago, noted that was the extent of his activity and there has been no further involvement with the property, declared a potential conflict of interest and withdrew from participation on this matter, pursuant to City Attorney Hopkins' recommendation. Motion No. CC-85-20 carried 4-0-1, with Councilman Petta abstaining. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18 72, DEALING WITH SIGNS (Second Reading). City Attorney Hopkins advised the present Sign Ordinance includes an amortization schedule for non -conforming signs, which expired December, 1984. Council approved a 90-day moratorium for the enforcement pursuant to the Sign Ordinance. The subject ordinance has been reviewed by the Planning Commission, reviewed the proposed amendments to the Ordinance. The Community Services Director has indicated that, with the proposed amendments, there will be approximately 15 non -conforming signs within the City. Mayor Grant opened Public Hearing. Supporting Testimony David Terbest, 22365 Barton Road, stated the Chamber went on record supporting the Sign Ordinance for the entire community, which still stands, prior to publication of the January 22 memorandum listing those signs which will continue to be non -conforming or illegal after ordinance adoption, represented to the Board of Directors that this amended ordinance would resolve most of the business problems, this is the first time this information has been provided and raises concern Page 7 - 1/24/85 and questions as to whether or not implementing this ordinance at this time would be in the best interests of the business community and whether the Chamber will still support adoption, felt more time should be allowed to consider this matter, based on the recent information provided. Opposing Testimony Gene Carlstrom, Red Carpet Real Estate, stated he has a non -conforming sign, is not opposed to the Sign Ordinance, feels the City should have a uniform sign program, requested an exception be made on his sign because it would be unsuitable in its present location and would be ineffective if modified and lowered pursuant to the Ordinance, the sign is well -maintained, costs money to alter and creates a hardship on the business, recommended further consideration, questioned and was advised a variance application costs $50.00, indicated no opposition to the fee amount. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson questioned and was advised that a business with an illegal sign can apply for a variance. Tom Tillinghast, 22667 Brentwood, stated he was on the City Council when some members went to Scottsdale, Arizona to review that City's signage and subsequently adopted a similar sign ordinance, feels it was an excellent ordinance but at times ordinances require review for possible modification to meet existing conditions, recommended delaying final action for further review of the list and specific examples now that they are identified, recommended allowing time for abatement of non -conforming signs following adoption, but objected to allowing a two-year continuance, new businesses coming into the community have not been allowed to put up certain signs while existing signs are allowed to remain illegal and non -conforming. Mayor Grant closed Public Hearing. Mayor Grant, with Councilwoman Pfennighausen concurring, disagreed with requiring removal of the Terrace Hills Junior High wall signs, felt final action on this matter should be delayed Councilman Evans stated he researched this matter, in 1979 Council passed what it felt was going to be a model sign ordinance which indicated that the eventual elimination of signs not in conformity with the provisions of the chapter to be as important as new signs which would violate these regulations, recognizing some signs would be non -conforming, a timetable was provided, Mayor Grant and Councilman Petta voted for the 1979 Ordinance, however, Councilman Petta now declares a potential conflict of interest and Mayor Grant now indicates he doesn't want to abide by that ordinance, stated he reviewed the current January 22 list to see which businesses would incur substantial expense if the Ordinance were adopted, noted only six or seven at the most would have problems. Stated either eliminate 8D and get on with the various proceedings or leave 8D in, strike the Page 8 - 1/24/85 two-year time period and allow anything in non-conformance at that time to remain, stated he has been unable to find indication of direction in the minutes to include 8D, would like to see where direction for that item was provided. Councilman Petta declared a potential conflict of interest and withdrew from participation in this matter, noted the information Councilman Evans is requesting occurred at the last meeting of the previous Council and was primarily Mr. Nix's comments. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson stated he was concerned, when reviewing the list, that approximately nine signs would involve a significant amount of money to change, stated the signs were in compliance when established, then the City changed the rules, signs are expensive, recommended a grandfather clause for some of the signs. Councilwoman Pfennighausen stated if Red Carpet Realty is required to bring its sign into conformance, approximately nine parking spaces would have to be eliminated, the corrider would become unsafe to travel through and vandalism could occur since the sign would be so low, cited the sign at Terrace Hills Junior High School and the flags at Northcliff and Honey Ridge as examples of "nit-picking," noted the flags draw attention to help sell property and will not remain forever. Recommended tabling the matter until a later meeting until the Chamber has had an opportunity to reconsider the Ordinance and that Council reconsider the Ordinance on a date other than February 14. CC-84-21 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Mayor Grant, that the Public Hearing and second reading of the Ordinance amending Chapter 18.72 of the Municipal Code be continued to February 28, 1985. The Motion carried 4-0-1, with Councilman Petta abstaining. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984, FROM R-1 TO A-1, AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY NINE ACRES FRONTING ON BLUE MOUTAIN COURT (ZC 85-02) (Second Reading). City Attorney Hopkins read the title of the Ordinance. Planning Director Kicak advised the first reading of this Ordinance changing the zoning of the subject area from R-1 to A-1 was approved on January 10, described the subject area as that property fronting on Blue Mountain Court, with the exception of one parcel on the southeast corner of Blue Mountain Court and Pico. Recommended adoption of the Ordinance. Mayor Grant opened Public Hearing. Page 9 - 1/24/85 Supporting Testimony Ray Farmer, 835 No Sycamore, Rialto, indicating he has an interest in one of the parcels on Blue Mountain Court, favored the zone change, stated there are just a few remaining undeveloped parcels in that area' unfortunately one of the parcels was split prior to consideration of this zone change. The other parcels consist of at least one acre, and livestock are allowed, is one of the few remaining areas which has parcels of that size and consistency in the City, felt the zone change would protect the property owners from further division properties in that area into half -acre or smaller parcels. There being no opposing testimony, Mayor Grant closed Public Hearing Councilman Evans questioned if the General Plan designated all of the area on Blue Mountain as single family residential, if this was one of the areas zoned R-1 in the mass zone change, if the residents living in that area are requesting the zone change to A-1, and whether they had to pay an application fee to initiate the zone change. Mr. Kicak stated this area has always been zoned R-1. The residents favor A-1 zoning to permit them to keep animals, which is not allowed in R-1 zoning, the residents were not required to pay an application fee, stated a request for consideration of this zone change was presented to Council during a Public Hearing. CC-85-22 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to adopt Ordinance No 85 by title only, waiving full reading of the Ordinance. Recess was called at 8 55 p.m and reconvened at 9 13 p m. with all members present. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Phil Wagner, 12160 Sandburg, a resident adjacent to Wilden Pump & Engineering Company, stated approval of an expansion project for Wilden Pump included conditions to provide a wall and a barrier of Italian Cypress trees, noted many problems exist with lights, excessive noise from fork lifts, helicopter landings, the garage doors being open most of the time, and work taking place in the parking lot around the clock much of the time. Received a letter from Wilden Pump indicating there are 160 feet of common border shared by him and Wilden Pump and offering to give him either 16 one -gallon trees or $72.00 cash to satisfy the requirement, letters were also mailed to property owners on Michigan, and they accepted the cash, presented his letter and photographs of the subject area. Mr. Wagner indicated Wilden Pump was required to plant the trees 10 foot on center, was advised by a nursery the trees should be planted four foot on center for proper screening and that Norco and Corona require a minimum of 15-gallon trees for screening purposes, was required to plant 15-gallon trees when he built his house, advised Page 10 - 1/24/85 he is trying to sell his house, presented a letter he received from his realtor indicating his property value has decreased, felt one -gallon trees planted 10 foot on center is unsatisfactory. City Attorney Hopkins advised Wilden Pump & Engineering is not complying with the requirement by offering money to the residents, the condition was to provide adequate screening, felt Wilden Pump & Engineering has not complied with the conditions, advised the City may enforce the conditions. Noted that if Mr Wagner were to take the $72.00 and sell his house, there still would be no screening and, therefore, would not be complying with the City's requirement to provide adequate screening. Planning Director Kicak stated Mr. Wagner contacted him sometime ago requesting action be taken on this matter, discussed the matter with Mr. Allen Tuck of Wilden Pump & Engineering, Mr Tuck wrote a letter in November to each of the five property owners involved, of the five involved, four accepted the settlement offered by Wilden Pump & Engineering. Mr. Kicak stated he advised Mr. Tuck, in view of the fact that the building was being completed and ready to occupy, would allow Wilden Pump to occupy the premises because of the delay that could be caused by this problem. Allowed Wilden Pump & Engineering to occupy the premises since four of the five property owners had accepted the offer of Wilden Pump and issued an occupancy permit pending resolution of this problem Mayor Pro Tem Matteson questioned and City Attorney Hopkins confirmed that Wilden Pump is still liable for complying with the screening requirement, even though the occupancy permit has been issued, Mayor Pro Tem Matteson recommended the Planning Director contact Wilden Pump & Engineering in an effort to resolve the problem. Mr. Wagner stated he had sent a certified letter to Wilden Pump & Engineering indicating the offer was unacceptable. Mr. Kicak stated the size of the trees was not specified in the requirement, questioned what Mr. Wagner would consider as acceptable. Mayor Grant felt the one -gallon trees would not be satisfactory in accomplishing the intended purpose. Councilman Petta recommended that the Planning Director prepare a sketch indicating the intent of the Planning Commission in requiring the screening of the two properties, showing the size of the trees and the distance in between, and request Wilden Pump & Engineering to comply. Mayor Grant questioned what Mr. Wagner felt would be adequate, Mr. Wagner stated he felt 15-gallon trees, his requirement when he built his house, placed four foot on center, as recommended by the nursery, would be fair. Mayor Grant questioned whether Council concurred with Councilman Petta's recommendation and whether Mr. Wagner's statement should be included in the recommendation to Wilden Pump & Engineering through the Planning Director. Council indicated concurrence, Mayor Grant advised Staff has its direction. Page 11 - 1/24/85 MISS GRAND TERRACE PAGEANT Debbie Norris, P.O. Box 11168, Colton, a member of the Colton/Grand Terrace JayCees, advised she is anticipating approval of a "Miss Grand Terrace Pageant" to be held in May in the City. Mayor Grant indicated he felt this was an excellent idea. DRAINAGE - TERRACE HILLS JUNIOR HIGH BASEBALL FIELD A Commission & Committee Report dated January 17 requesting action on this item was provided. Council requested confirmation of whether Engineering plans exist to build a drainage system, questioned the cost and whether this falls under the agreement of taking corrective action, since this on school property. City Engineer Kicak advised the corrective action required would be grading and directing the water off the field into the street, would not exceed $1,000, could be accomplished in conjunction with other work proposed for that area. Community Director Anstine advised the School District is not anxious to correct the problem and has no problem with the City taking corrective action, Grand Terrace residents and City leagues would derive the greater benefit, since the junior high school uses the ballfield very little. CC-85-23 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to authorize the City Engineer to proceed with the correction of the drainage problem at Terrace Hills Junior High ballfield. HISTORICAL & CULTURAL ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE Councilwoman Pfennighausen requested that the Minutes of January 7, 1985 be corrected to indicate Mr. Fletcher's first name as "Ron" rather than "Warren," noted the first two paragraphs of the minutes were not legible, indicated the minutes reflect exciting things are happening on the Committee. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT Councilman Evans stated he was furnished an excellent manual when he attended the New Mayors and Councilmembers Conference which contains a section dealing with personal liability of councilmembers and cites a United States Supreme Court decision in which a councilmember, through offical action, deprived a certain individual of certain rights, and thus may be liable for damages of civil rights. Questioned whether Council, if it voted down a zone change which would bring zoning into conformance with the General Plan, could be sued individually. City Attorney Hopkins advised he did not see how denying a zone change, even without reason, could be construed to be a violation of the Civil Rights Act, action could be brought against the City for failure to comply with the General Plan, but didn't feel any personal liability would be involved. Page 12 - 1/24/85 Mayor Pro Tem Matteson questioned and City Attorney Hopkins confirmed that Council has liability insurance. City Attorney Hopkins requested that the City obtain a copy of the manual referenced by Councilman Evans. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilman Evans reported the following. (1) Stated has noticed that many communities have lapel pins, recommended considering this for Council and staff members. Mayor Grant and Councilwoman Pfennighausen indicated concurrence with the recommendation, (2) Stated he received a letter from the Wunners regarding their position on the proposed zoning for Area 11, they also contacted him regarding their property at the corner of Grand Terrace Road and Vista Grande Way consisting of R-1 zoning on 3-1/2 acres, they were advised that if they were to sell their property, the new owners would not be permitted to keep livestock or horses. They currently have horses on their property, which would be a selling factor. Most of their land is unavailable for further development due to the Feather River Aqueduct and highlines cutting through the property. Questioned if consideration could be given to taking action on this property similar to that being taken in the Blue Mountain area due to the size of the lots and the potential for development whereby horses could remain if the property were sold or consider an amendment to permit horses in R-1 zoning on lots of a particular size. City Attorney Hopkins stated the property would become non -conforming in use if sold. Councilwoman Pfennighausen stated she also discussed this matter with the Wunners and discussed possible alternatives with the Planning Director and Community Services Director, estimated approximately half of that parcel is unavailable for development due to the high tension lines and the aqueduct, recommended considering a zone change which would allow the continued use of the land as presently being used in the event the land were to be sold, disagreed with amending the R-1 standards. Planning Director Kicak stated he believes most of the parcels in the area of Vista Grande are generally one acre or -larger. The Edison easement through there is approximately 300 feet wide, rendering the back portion of those lots unusable. Stated he would need to discuss this matter with the City Attorney, felt problems could be created if the City were to permit animals on any lot that has a minimum lot size. Based on the recommendation of Councilwoman Pfennighausen and Council consensus, the Planning Director will prepare a map identifying the parcels of one acre or larger showing the impact of the Edison easement and the aqueduct and will indicate those parcels which have animals for the area dicussed. City Attorney Hopkins cited Section 18.63.01 which provides that the lawful use of land existing at the time of the adoption of the Page 13 - 1/24/85 Ordinance may continue even though it does not conform to the regulation until such time that use ceases. In that event, the subsequent use of the land must conform to the regulations. Councilman Petta advised there is an area of approximately six feet on the south side of Palm, east of Dos Rios, where the Foxboro project begins, which has no sidewalk, posing a safety hazard, recommended the matter be investigated. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson reported the following. (1) Felt the New mayors an ounce ImemFers Conference he and Councilman Evans attended was excellent and very educational, enjoyed meeting councilmembers from the surrounding cities, felt establishing these contacts will provide the City with a good source of information, discovered the City's problems are not unique, (2) Requested that the Community Services Director provide the Code number for each violation cited on the January 22, 1985 Memorandum relating to sign code violations. Mayor Grant reported the following (1) Is aware the final decision is up to t-Tie City Manager, but would like to see the staff members wear their name badges when they are outside of City Hall representing the City, (2) Represented the cities at the LAFC meeting on January 16, (3) The newly -formed Board of Directors of Theatre On The Terrace held its first meeting, felt it was a good meeting and they are well on their way to resolving problems, wished them the best, (4) Encouraged all Councilmembers to attend the Economic Redevelopment Workshop on January 31, (5) Felt Council should avoid placing staff members in an awkward position by requesting that Staff take any action which would have even a minor bearing on the functions of the City, noted this doesn't include requests for data and information to assist a Councilmember in doing a better job, cited, as an example, Councilman Evans presenting his recommendation for lapel pins to the Council, felt that was the proper method for action to be taken. Recommended against Councilmembers politicizing those people who are volunteers and on the payroll. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson stated one of the items stressed at the New Mayors and Councilmembers Conference was the chain of command and the fact that too many chiefs cause confusion. It was stressed that everything should be directed to the City Manager. (5) Referenced a second letter from Mr. Teorey indicating continued concern with the parking problems in the alley between Mt. Vernon and Holly, questioned if staff had investigated this matter as requested by Council. City Manager Armstead advised the code enforcement staff member and the Sheriff investigated the matter. The deputies are patrolling the alley more often, and any violations will be cited. City Attorney Hopkins advised the City has never accepted the alley for maintenance, but it has been dedicated. Councilman Evans questioned and City Attorney Hopkins advised parking in the alley can be enforced since it is a public right-of-way. The Community Page 14 - 1/24/85 Services Director advised a resident in that area is very knowledgeable of the City's parking limitations and rotates his vehicles prior to the expiration of the 72 hours. Councilwoman Pfennighausen advised a similar situation exists on Willet. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson stated he requested investigation of diesel trucks parking over eight hours on Michigan, and whether it is prohibited. City Attorney read Section 10.16.020 of the Municipal Code indicating an eight -hour parking limitation for commercial vehicles or trucks having a load capacity of more than one ton in a residential zone. Councilman Evans felt there is a question as to whether that area of Michigan is commercial or residential. (6) Acknowedged receipt of a proposal from the Bear Security Patrol Services for a supplemental guard system of public buildings. BID AWARD - ANNUAL CIVIC CENTER/LIBRARY JANITORIAL SERVICES Community Services Director Anstine advised that on January 17 the City Clerk received and publicly read proposals received from nine firms to provide janitorial services to the Civic Center Complex as listed in the Staff Report on this matter, with the low bid being $1,066.00 a month, which includesd $155.00 for the Library, from the firm of Accurate Janitorial Services, Inc.. A background check was conducted on Accurate Janitorial Services, Inc., they currently are working for the City of Riverside, Southern California Gas Company, and Security Pacific Bank, all giving high recommendations. Recommended awarding the janitorial services contract to Accurate Janitorial Services, Inc., with the contract to be effective the first day of occupancy of the Civic Center. Councilwoman Pfennighausen questioned whether the City will be paying the maintenance cost for the Library and whether the utility costs have been negotiated with the County. The Community Services Director advised he is presently preparing a lease agreement between the City and the County, will try to determine what they think 3,500 square feet of the building will consume energywise. Stated if Council wants the maintenance cost included in the lease agreement for payment by the County for maintenance services, recommended it be stipulated the County pay the City for our custodian to do the services, rather than the County having a separate maintenance service. Councilwoman Pfennighausen recommended, with Council concurring, that the maintenance cost be included in the lease with the County. CC-85-24 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, ALL AYES, to award the janitorial services contract to Accurate Janitorial Services, Inc. for the amount of $1,066.00 a month, which includes $155.00 a month for the maintenance of the Library, with the contract to become on the first day of occupancy of the Civic Center. Page 15 - 1/24/85 COMMUNITY ROOM POLICY/FEE SCHEDULE Community Services Director Anstine advised a proposed Civic Center Use Policy and Fee Schedule has been presented for Council consideration, requested specific guidance regarding this policy. Councilman Evans opposed charging for the use of the facilities, since this is a community facility, feels the residents are incurring that cost in the taxes coming into the community, recommended considering a future review for a possible fee schedule if it becomes apparent excessive costs are being incurred. Voiced opposition to the section regarding alcohol, stated he knows from experience anytime you have alcohol on the premises, it has the potential of creating problems; would oppose the use of alcohol on the premises of a public building, recommended elimination of that section. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson felt the proposed policy was well written, recommended accepting the policy as written and amending at a later date if needed. Concurred with the fee schedule as proposed, since staff will be required to be present. Felt light alcohol beverages should be permitted. Has attended many functions and has seen no problems occur. CC-85-25 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Petta, to approve the Policy and Fee Schedule for the Civic Center as written. Councilman Petta questioned if a refundable deposit will be required to ensure proper maintenance of the facilities, felt if one is required more effort will be made to leave the premises in their original condition. Community Services Director Anstine advised procedures for deposits will be established and maintained through the Finance Department. Motion No. CC-85-25 carried 3-2, with Mayor Grant and Councilman Evans voting NOE. Closed Session - Council recessed to a Closed Session at 10 29 p.m., with ty Attorney Hopkins in attendance and City Manager Armstead in attendance at a later period. Reconvene - The regular meeting reconvened at 11 52 p.m. with all members present. Mayor Grant announced that Council met in Closed Session to discuss a personnel matter and to confer with the City Attorney on matters of potential litigation dealing with contractual liability. No decisions were made relative to the issues of litigation. City Attorney Hopkins advised that, in the Closed Session, Council gave direction to the Mayor regarding personnel matters that were discussed in Closed Session regarding the performance of an employee of the City and also gave direction to the City Attorney to gather certain material for review of personnel matters at the next Council meeting. Page 16 - 1/24/85 Adjourn - The regular meeting adjourned at 11 55 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held February 14, 1985, at 5 30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, City C1 APPROVED Mayor Page 17 - 1/24/85 GRAND TERRACE PENDING CITY rr �Ai�1el "PPROVAL COUNCIL; AGENDA PWe0 f� CHI REGISTER NO 021485 PAGE NO DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO 85-081 DATE 02/14/85 OCHER PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN NO DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG D INV NO AMOUNT NO AMOUNT CCENT PRINT & DESIGN CITY STATIONARY 10-4190-210 4354 264.39 PRINT ROUTE SLIPS 0-4190-210 4411 33.34 2851 297.73 ALLSTATE Ir'STANT PRINTING RECREATION FLIERS 10-4430-230 28786 42.70 1285-C 42.70 kROWHEAD UNITED AAY EMP.CONTRI6UTION,P/R 1/1110-2172-000 19.00 P4196 19.00 EMP.CONTRIbUTION P/R 1/2510-2172-000 19.00 D4211 19.00 AT&T INFORMATION SYSTEMS PHONE RENT,C/H 1/85 10-4190-235 284.59 12853 284.59 ASTANCHURY BOTTLED WATER BOTTLED AATER,FIN. 10-4190-238 b4916 28.50 BOTTLED RATER, C/M 10-4190-238 34918 28.50 BOTTLED AATER,C/C&EOC. 10-4190-238 84917 37.40 12854 91J.40 tCKLEY-CARDY CO. RECREATION SUPPLIES 10-4430-220 b400 11.33 12855 11.33 CALIFORNIA JOURNAL "CA.JOURNAL"SUBSCRIPTION 10-4140-210 22.00 12856 22.00 ALIF. PARKS & RECREATION MEMBERSHIP,CPRS,1985 10-4807-265 50.00 P4201 50.00 ALIF. PARKS s RECREATION SO I2EG.CPRS CONF.P&R COMPITT10-4807-270 225.00 P4208 225.00 REG.CPRS CONF.ANSTINE 10-4180-270 75.00 P4210 75.00 1 I I GrtA JD TERRACE PAGE NO DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO 85-081 DATE 02/14/85 UCHER NO PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG D INV NO AMOUNT NO AMOUNT OMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGEN LOAN #2 F/Y 84/R5 0-4200-800 125000.00 12857 125000.00 U►'Y LINE CORP. RENT COPIER 1/85 C/N 0-4190-240 L776 566.62 RENT COPIER,1/85 FIN. U-4190-240 1541 199.42 2858 766.04 ANIEL'S LANDSCAPING SERVICE MAINT.PArRK/PALM TRANGLE 1 0-4430-245 1075.00 12859 1075.00 aNIEL'S LANDSCAPING SERVICE REPLACE PARTITION,R/R PAR 0-4180-245 800.00 D4194 800.00 ATAPOINT CORP. I FAINT. ON CON.P. 3/85 10-4140-246 323038 93.00 MAINT. ON COMP. 3/85 1-4572-246 523038 93.00 12860 186.00 DEFERRED CDMPENSATION PLAN DEF.COMP.P/R END.1/11/85 10-2164-000 439.00 DEF.COMP.P/R EI14D.1/11/85 10-2170-000 65.05 DEF.COMP.P/R END.1/11/85 10-4120-139 338.79 DEF.COMP.P/R END.1/11/85 10-4125-139 416.91 DEF.COMP.P/R EIND.1/11/85 10-4140-139 611.70 DEF.COMP.P/R END.1/11/65 10-4180-139 460.62 DEF.COr4P.P/R EUD.1/11/85 1-4572-139 121.81 P4197 2503.88 DEF.COMP.P/R END.1/25/85 10-2164-000 439.00 DEF.COIAP.P/P END.1/25/85 10-4120-139 388.79 DEF.COMP.P/R END.1/25/85 10-4125-139 416.91 DEF.COMP.P/R END.1/25/85 10-4140-139 611.69 DEF.COMP.P/R END.1/25/85 10-4180-139 460.62 DEF.COI`AP.P/R EIND.1/25/85 1-4572-139 121.81 P4212 2438.82 _ASTERDAY SUPPLY COMPANY TRASH CAN LINERS 1U-4180-2u5 142523 53.23 12861 53.23 GRAND TERRACE PAGE NO DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO 85-081 DATE 02/14/85 UCHER NO PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG D INV NO AMOUNT NO AMOUNT EDERAL EXPRESS CORP. DELIVERY,MAPS TO STATE 10-4180-210 8264 14.00 12862 14.00 _viPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. STATE P.I.T. JAN.1985 10-2162-000 383.29 STATE S.D.I.JAN.1985 10-2163-000 132.36 34202 515.65 S.U.I.4TH OUARTER,1934 10-4120-141 67.49 S.U.I.4TH OUARTER,1984 10-4140-141 112.56 P4205 180.05 YRNA ERWAY CC MEET.1/18/85 ERWAY 10-4125-270 43.00 LOCAL MILEAGE,ERAAY 10-4125-271 10.00 12863 53.00 ALEXANDER GRAFT & COMPANY UPS CHARGE,COMP.PRINTOUTS1�-4140-210 11024 13.02 PAYROLL 1/85 10-4140-210 11024 50.00 COMP.SVCS.1/85 10-4140-255 11024 1140.00 LABELS 12/84 10-4190-210 U1181 544.90 UPS CHARGE,COMP.PRINTOUTS 1-4572-210 11024 13.02 COMP.SVCS.1/85 1-4572-255 11024 240.00 12864 200C.94 ARBER COMPANY PAVE.OVERLAY,VARIOUS LOCA16-4900-255 2851 275.00 1286E 275.00 INLAND EMPIRE DIVISION REG.GEN,ASSEMB.MATTESON 10-4110-270 15.00 P4200 15.00 IPS SERVICES INCORPORATED STREET SejEEP 1/8/85 16-4008-255 858 860.30 STREET SHEEP. 1/15/85 18-4908-255 859 344.12 STREET Se4EEP. 1/22/85 18-4g08-255 860 442.44 1286E 1646.86 INTERNATIONAL CITY MANAGEMEN "LOCAL GOV."PUBLICATION 10-4120-210 120588 57.25 12867 57.25 GRAND TERRACE PAGE NO DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO 85-081 DATE 02/14/85 iUCHER NO PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG D INV NO AMOUNT NO AMOUNT MART #4432 TWELVE FRAMES 0-4110-210 571226 33.45 2868 33.45 VAGUE OF CALIF. CITIES "NEW MAYOR/COUNCIL" PUB. 0-4120-210 10.60 "LEG.BULLETIN" PUBLICATIO 0-4125-210 35.00 "LEG.tULLETIN" PUBLICATIO 0-4190-210 35.00 12869 80.60 IRGIL LIVELY CROSS.GUARD 1/14-1/25/85 7-4910-250 143.14 12870 143.10 ICHAEL LUNA LOCAL MILEAGE,LUNA 0-4180-271 73.80 12871 73.80 YRON MATTESON L.C.C.MEET.1/15,MATTESON 0-4110-270 35.50 12872 35.50 AZAREK,HARPERrHOPKINS & LEGAL SERVICES DEC. 1984 10-4160-250 2526.90 12873 2526.90 HILIP M. PAGE PARK CLEAN-UP 1/1-1/27/8510-4430-245 226.00 12874 226.00 ACIFIC BELL PHONE,12/84 C/H 10-4190-235 433.22 COMP.PHONE 12/84 10-4190-235 23.79 PHONE,12/84 E.O.C. 10-4190-235 28.76 PHONE,12/84 RFC.SCVS 10-4190-235 94.37 COMP.PHONE 12/84 1-4572-235 23.79 12875 603.93 AINE WEBBER CASH FUND RETIRE,P/R END.1/11/85 10-2167-000 34.10 RETIRE,P/R ENO.1/11/85 10-4120-140 266.35 GRAND TERRACE PAGE NO DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO 85-081 DATE 02/14/85 UCHER NO PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG D INV NO AMOUNT NO AMOUNT RETIRE,P/R END.1/11/85 0-4125-140 285.62 RETIRE,P/R END.1/11/85 10-4140-140 419.06 RETIRE,P/R END.1/11/85 10-4180-140 315.57 RETIRE,P/R END.1/11/85 1-4572-140 83.45 34198 1404.15 RETIRE.F/R END.1/25/85 10-2167-000 34.10 RETIRE.P/R EiID.1/25/85 1U-4120-140 266.35 RETIRE.F/R EAD.1/25/85 10-4125-140 285.62 RETIRE.P/R END.1/25/85 10-4140-140 419.06 RETIRE.P/R END.1/25/85 10-4180-140 315.57 RETIRE.P/R END.1/25/85 1-4572-140 83.45 P4213 1404.15 tOPLE HELPERS INC REC.SVCS 1/1-1/14/85 10-4430-250 1295.61 REC.SVCS 1/15-1/31/85 10-4430-250 1339.32 1287E 261-4.93 ITIJEY BONES RENT POST.METER 3/1-5/31/10-4190-246 910459 31.41 RENT POST.METER 3/1-5/31/ 1-4572-246 910459 31.40 12877 62.81 qN BDNO CO CENTRAL CR UNION EMP.DEDUCTIONS,P/R 1/11/810-2165-000 1321.22 P4199 1321.22 EMP.DEDUCTION,P/R 1/25/8510-2165-000 1321.22 P4214 1321.22 HERIFF FLOYD TIDnELL OVERTIME,OCT,NOV,DEC.198410-4410-256 748.51 12878 748.51 AN BERNARDINO, COUNTY OF DUMP CHARGES,12/19/84-1/116-4900-253 842 7.20 DUMP CHARGES,12/19/84-1/118-4908-253 842 117.10 12879 124.30 hONAS J. SCH,,AB MEET.L.A.12/17&12/20,SCHA,10-4140-270 74.86 CMTA MEET. 1/11/85,SCHV4AB10-4140-270 25.50 GRAND TERRACE PAGE NO DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO 85-081 DATE 02/14/85 UCHER NO PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG D INV NO AMOUNT NO AMOUNT LOCAL MILEAGE,SCHWA6 0-4140-271 37.25 D4195 137.61 ECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BA FED.P/R DEPOSIT JAN.1985 0-2161-000 2464.36 34204 2464.36 I1,10NIS MORELAND ACCOUNTANTS FINAL PAY. 83/84 AUDIT 0-4140-250 599.92 2880 599.92 0. CALIF. EDISON COMPANY ELEC.C/H 12/84 0-4190-238 161.90 LIGHS/PARK (2) 12/84 0-4430-238 24.89 ELEC.SPRINKLERS,PARK,12/8 0-4430-238 12.70 B/P LIGHTS,PARK 12/84 0-4430-238 91.94 ST.LIGHTS 11/1-12/31/84 6-4510-238 4236.14 SIGNALS (4) 12/84 6-4510-238 419.88 ELEC.BART/PALM 12/84 6-4510-238 9.86 12881 4957.31 0. CALIF. GAS COMPANY GAS C/H 12/84 0-4190-238 250.12 GAS CIVIC CENTER 12/84 0-4190-238 141.21 12882 391.33 TATE COMPENSATION INS. CO. YiORK.COMP.INS.1/1-1/31/85 0-4120-260 500.95 P4207 500.95 HER-N-BACK TRAVEL AIR-FAIR,CSMFO NEET.SCH',tiA10-4140-270 138.00 12883 138.00 THEATRE ON THE TERRACE APPROVED 84/85 BUDGET 10-4803-220 2000.00 12884 2000.00 TRAFFIC SAFETY ENGINEERS AERIAL PRINTS (8LACK&hHI710-4180-600 1722.50 P4203 1722.50 EGGY TROTTIER LOCAL P4ILEAGE,TROTTIER 10-4140-271 7.25 GkAND TERRACE PAGE NO DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO 8 5 - 0 81 DATE 0 2 / 14 / 8 5 JCHER NO PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG D INV NO AMOUNT NO AMOUNT LOCAL MILEAGE,TROTTIER 1-4572-271 8.40 12885 15.65 ERTICAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS PROCESS PARK CITES.12/84 10-4412-255 35001 32.55 12886 32.55 NATTENBARGERS OFFICE SUPPLY ROLODEX,PENS,GLUE STICK 10-4120-210 4333 18.97 PEIdS,CLTPS,TAPE 10-4120-210 48U 45.80 ROLODEX,PENS,GLUE STICK 10-4125-210 4333 18.97 PENS,CLIPS,TAPE 10-4125-210 480 45.80 PENCIL LEAD 10-4140-210 4333 .69 TAPE DISPEINSER,FILE CARDSIO-4140-210 480 1.81 FOLDERS,FILE GUARDS 10-4140-210 4730 17.01 FOLDERS 10-4180-210 4730 9.04 12887 158.09 NESTERN EXTERMINATORS PEST CONTROL C/H 1/85 10-4180-245 227601 48.00 12888 48.00 R.DRECHSLER N.V'.D.REFUND,DRECHSLER 1-3114-000 14.00 12889 14.00 PAYROLL PAYROLL ENDING 1/11/85 10-2161-000 1258.12- PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 10-2161-000 1258.12- PAYROLL ENDING 1/11/85 10-2162-000 200.90- PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 10-2162-000 200.90- PAYROLL ENDING 1/11/85 10-2163-000 66.31- PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 10-2163-000 66.31- PAYROLL ENDING 1/11/85 10-2164-000 439.00- PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 10-2164-000 439.00- PAYROLL ENDING 1/11/85 10-2165-000 1321.22- PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 10-2165-000 1321.22- PAYROLL ENDING 1/11/85 10-2167-000 34.10- PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 10-2167-000 34.10- PAYROLL ENDIiNG 1/11/85 10-2170-000 65.05- PAYROLL ENDING 1/11/85 10-2172-000 19.00- PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 10-2172-000 19.00- PAYROLL ENDIING 1/11/65 10-4110-120 750.00 GRArID TERRACE PAGE NO DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO 85-081 DATE 02/14/85 UCHER NO PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG D INV NO AMOUNT NO AMOUNT PAYROLL ENDING 1/11/85 0-4120-110 2148.00 PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 0-4120-110 2148.00 PAYROLL ENDING 1/11/85 0-4125-110 2303.40 PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 0-4125-110 2303.40 PAYROLL ENDING 1/11/85 0-4140-110 3379.57 PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 0-4140-110 3379.57 PAYROLL ENDIII"G 1/11/85 0-4180-110 2544.85 PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 0-4160-110 2544.85 PAYROLL ENDIivG 1/11/85 1-4572-110 672.99 PAYROLL ENDING 1/25/85 I-4572-110 672.99 D 16105.27 GRAND TERRACE DEMANDIWARRANT REGISTER NO 85-081 PAGE NO DATE 02/14/85 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK UCHER NO DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG D INV NO AMOUNT NO AMOUNT RITTEN 147528.75 REPAID 33222.83 CCRUED .00 TOTAL 180751.58 RECAP BY FU`!D RE -PAID %RITTEN FUND 10 31466.33 140250.00 FUND 16 .00 4948.08 FUND 17 .00 143.10 FUND 18 .00 1763.96 FUND 21 1756.50 423.61 I CERTIFY THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, 1HE AFORELISTED CHECKS FOR P YMENT OF CITY LIABILITIES HAVE BEEN AUDITED BY ME AND ARE NECESS RY AND APPROPRIATE EX ENDIT RES FOR THE OPERATION OF THE CITY =a� 41/ THOMAS SCHWAB FINANCE DIRECTOR D ` S ST, F REHUH I 12 52A 40 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) FETING DATE: February 14, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4C, SUBJECT: Vivienda Avenue Overhead Bridge - Public Utilities Commission Application for Order to Construct FUNDING REQJI01ED ti0 rUNDI%G REQUIRED xx In order for the City of Grand Terrace to proceed with the construction of the new Vivienda Avenue Overhead Bridge, the City must make an application to the Public Utilities Commission for an Order to Construct. This order will authorize the City to replace a separation structure over the branch track of the Southern Pacific Transportation Company Attached for your information is a copy of this application to the Public Utilities Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL 1 AUTHORIZE THE FILING OF THIS "ORDER TO CONSTRUCT" APPLICATION WITH THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 2 AUTHORIZE THE CITY ENGINEER TO EXECUTE THIS APPLICATION JK/lh BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Application of the City of Grand Terrace ) California, for an order authorizing ) replacement of a separation structure ) over the branch track of the Southern ) No. Pacific Transportation Company for ) Vivienda Avenue in the City of Grand ) Terrace, California. ) A P P L I C A T I O N The petition of the City of Grand Terrace, California respectfully shows that• 1. The City of Grand Terrace, California, herein sometimes referred to as "Applicant" or "City" is, and at all times herein mentioned, a municipal corporation of the State of California. 2. All correspondence, communications, notices, orders and other papers relative to this application should be addressed to City of Grand Terrace, attention of Joseph Kicak, City Engineer, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, 92324 which is the address of applicant. 3. This application and the relief sought herein is under Public Utilities Commission Code, Chapter 6, Sections 1201 to 1205 inclusive. 4. The Southern Pacific Transportation Company is a corporation doing business as a common carrier operating a standard gauge railroad system in the State of California and said corporation owns and operates a railroad track at the location of the project herein proposed to be constructed. 5. The City of Grand Terrace proposes to upgrade Vivienda Avenue overhead, PUC Crossing No. BJ-540.9-A, by constructing a new structure over the branch track of Southern Pacific Transportation Company, as shown on Exhibits A and B attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. 6. The legal description of the proposed grade separation within the City of GRAND TERRACE, County of San Bernardino, State of California, is as follows: Commencing at a point on the Northwesterly prolongation of the centerline of Vivienda Avenue, which bears N 59°00'0" W 120.21 feet from the centerline intersection of Grand Avenue with said Vivienda Avenue as shown on the Record of Survey recorded in Book 1 of Records of Survey, page 33, records of said County; thence N 78°40'47" W 250 07 feet to the True Point of Beginning, said point being in the Easterly right of way of the Southern Pacific Railroad, thence N 17°06'36" E along said Easterly right of way 70.16 feet; thence N 68°59'41" W 80.19 feet to a point in the Westerly right of way of the Southern Pacific Railroad; S thence S 17°06'36" W along said Idesterly right of way 70.16 feet; thence S 68059'41" E 80.19 feet to the true point of beginning. 7. The nearest adjacent Crossing to the north is PUC No. BJ 539-6 at Congress Street and to the south is PUC No. BJ 541.1-A at Barton Road. 8. Plans and Specifications for the proposed project have been prepared in cooperation with the railroad, applicant and railroad are in agreement with respect to the necessity for said construction; said project will be constructed using Highway and Bridge Replacement Program grant and local matching funds. The estimated cost of the proposed project is . Vivienda Avenue will be closed during construction and a detour for vehicular traffic at Vivienda Avenue will not be required. Railroad traffic will not be effected during construction and shoofly will not be required for the railroad track. 9. Said project is programmed for immediate construction and it is anticipated that the work herein proposed will be completed within two years. 10. Horizontal and vertical clearances shall conform to the requirements of California Public Utilities Commission General Order No. 26-D during and after construction. WHEREFORE, Applicant requests that 1. The Public Utilities Commission of the State of California issue its order authorizing the construction of the crossing at separated grades pursuant to the provisions under Sections 1201-1205 incl. of the Public Utilities Code. 2. Such order shall authorize said project upon the terms and conditions and division of costs and expenses as are or may be provided for in an agreement to be entered into between applicant and said railroad, or in the event the parties fail to agree, that such costs be determined as provided by law. 3. Such order shall provide three years from date of any such order within which to complete the project herein proposed. A copy of this application has been served by mail to the Southern Pacific Transportation Office. Southern Pacific Transportation Co. 610 Main Street Los Angeles, CALIF 90014 Attn. Mr. Donald J. Skaff Assistant Regional Engineer DATED at Grand Terrace, California, this day of 1985 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE BY Joseph Kicak City Engineer EXHIBITS (ATTACHED) "A" - Location & Vicinity Maps "B" - Plan & Profile STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) Joseph Kicak, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: That he is City Engineer for the City of Grand Terrace, California, applicant in the proceedings entitled as above, that he has read the foregoing application and knows the contents thereof, and that the same is true of his own knowledge, except as to matter which are therein stated on information or belief, and that as to those matters he believes it to be true. Joseph Kicak Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 1985 SEAL Notary Public in and for the County of San Bernardino, State of California. y STP`F R-EPUP 1 12-8 5019 12-8 502424 ` = 12-8 5015 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) METING DATE: February 14, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. I�- D SUBJECT: Negative Declarations for consideration and approval FUNQA.J REQJIR=D NO F LINDING QEQJIRED xx Attached for the City Council's approval are the Negative Declarations, which have been approved by the Planning Commission in the recent past These include the following- 1 A proposed Mini -warehouse located in an Industrial Area at 21999 Van Buren Street adjacent to Wilden Pump A proposal submitted by James L Harber 2 A proposal for the construction of four (4) light industrial buildings located on the northerly side of Barton Road, just easterly of Southern Pacific Railroad. This project was before the City Council for a setback variance at their regular meeting of January 28, 1985 The applicant is Mr Jim Goode 3 A proposal to construct a two (2) story, 12,504 square feet office building located at 22545 Barton Road The Applicant is Renee J Jacober The item was considered by the Planning Commission at their last regular meeting of February 4, 1985 Attached you will find the Staff Reports as they were presented to the Planning Commission, for your review Staff recommends that Council MOTION TO APPROVE THE PROJECTS, MAKE THE FINDINGS, ADOPT THE NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS, AND INSTRUCT THE CITY CLERK TO ISSUE THE NOTICES OF DETERMINATION FOR THE THREE PROJECTS OUTLINED ABOVE JK 1 h i, ' �-BRUARY 14, 1985 )uncil Agenda Item # 6B CITY OF GRAND TERRACE PARKS & RECREATION CGIvIMITTEE MEETING MONDAY► JANUARY 7, 1985 NIP= The Grand Terrace Parks & Recreation Committee's regular meeting of January 7, 1985 was called to order at 7:40 P.M. in the offices of the Community Services Department, Building #4 of the City Hall Grand Terrace, California by Chairman Dick Rollins IE14BERS PRESENT: Dick Rollins, Chairman Ken Rinderhagen, Vice Chairman Louie Galvez Gary Dishaw Rhoda Saterfield PrLEMBERS ABSENT: CITY STAFF: Lenore Frost Chuck Percy Randall Anstine Jayne Ainsworth RECE', �1L GUESTS: None CITY OF GRAU TERPACE There having been no prior meeting during the holiday season in the month of December there were no minutes to approve. ITEM ml Randy Anstine requested that the Committee should select members to attend this years Conference in Sacramento of the California Parks and Recreation Society. Members volunteering were Lenore Frost, Gary Dishaw and Luie Galvez. Mr Anstine will make the neccessary applications available to the selected members, with the Reservation forms. ITEM 7#? Considerable discussion was made in regard to the existing condition of the baseball diamond at Terrace Hills Junior High School. Problems of the drainage and earth work to be done were discussed. Randy Anstine stated that the Engineering Department had made a study and had a plan for drainage of run-off water and irrigation water that has been con- sistantly eroding the infield portion of the area. Louie Galvez made the motion that the City Council approve funding, based upon the Engineering Report, of the baseball diamond at Terrace Hills Junior High School property for the construction of a drainage system at the grass -line of the infield area to prevent erosion of the new infield dirt which has already been allocated to re -furbish the area. The motion was seconded by Gary Dishaw and it carried unanimously. Louie Galvez will prepare the Action Item form to present to the City Clerk for the next regular meeting of the City Council, January 24, 1985 N ITEM #3 The members present discussed the possibility of moving the time of the Committee's meetings to an earlier time in the evening. It was unanimously agreed upon that the time of the meetings will now be held at 7100 P.M. on the same first and third Mondays of the month rather than 7130 P.M. ITEM ,#4 A brief discussion on the Winter Recreation Program prepared by the Recreation Staff, headed by Jayne Ainsworth was enthusiastically accepted9endorsed by the Committee members. A� There being no further business to be discussed the meeting was adjourned at 9130 P.M. Respectfully sub ted, Dick Rollins, Recording Secretary COMM19SION COMMITT"E COUNCIL MEETING DATE February 14, 1985 COMMISSION/COMMITTEE - istoric, 1 ° Cultural moo---,ittee SUBJECT PROBLEM Facts Vonthly ireetirg February 14, 1985 Council Agenda Item r 6C DATE 3/8/85 As of t`e l\fiarc,� 4, 1985, ttre ='istoricsl Cultural 1omr-ittee will gold its r-ontnly meeting - t Clity Hall ALTERNATIVES SOLUTION None REQUESTED ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY COUNCIL AND/OR STAFF 1�Tone RECEIVED CITY OF GRAND TERRACE FLBKUAKY 14, IMb uncil Agenda Item No 6C Historic -Al & Cultural Co',mittee Minutes of February 'L, 1� 5 i i- 't_n; The Fleet! ng /a3 c ill3d to order at ? A L n the Lion's Den at the uom,-quniLy uInter by uha.irman 1:saroara nat ie,ls. iaosa Jresent ',ere vioia aratson, 11,1 �':t��, _3troirl iiitaels, i .iaari uaist3rf �"liZ30eth lraarte, and 3aroar-i ,J t i r 3-rie .iason eras at none 'ritn the nu. ine oecretarfls report for vanuary ,as read ana corrected as Ioliows. .Lne na.e ,arren vietcner in the btn paragra?h vas corrected to Eon rietzher. there was no treasurer, s report. mr. Eobert Eoach, V,no is retired ic.J1z the q-_v3rzi10 .,ounty health vepartment as a health educator, ;ave a 2re3eat'icion on coliecting ,,hlcn ne ifou-Ld tixe to start nere in the elementary and Jr. n- ,,n scnooi. He is as:,in;, Lrie uinmittee 10r cnelr 3el )r, ie goes in ,-ltn cnis prodecz. Old nasiaess: rilzaueth ^iaaa a motion for a ieLter so be aritten to the Vommunity >ervicas virector and nis craw for tn3ir n3iD pith the Country Fair. This motion was seconded oy Barbara Ba-yus ana j)a3sed 3y the cJ-iilttee. k i a-ni i oa letter 'sill 'ae arltten. Old ne �spape-s have been sent to Oico Riv3ra to be wound, covered oy a parchise order. They should be read. about Aril 1. Cost ,ill be about > t')O. A revi?'I of the co iaittee goals ias :ode. Some deletions ana seve^_l wait 013 33 t� :d ,a, "il sarlt,:d. 3��iq-3z3 El:; )eta riade a motion to accept 'ir. '�J;acli S CJilecti_1�, 2r3' it. ti- an this p -od act. Aria seconded the motion, all acre in favor. activities for 193.�): Tne co s_qitt ee rot 3d 4 to 2 in favor of _lot holding the C.)antry Fair tits_ „T ;r aat tO pursue 3?1e of oar ogler goals Irlich have had to oe put off Seca toe �f the t,,ie t ���3 L I yut 0'1 t'i- f 11r . I2_11 , 3- Our historical mgta_lals in -)^d ar, woris on the am hithe itsr, 3tc. roc ri made a motion to ad;ou^n the ' eet! rg it 3 10 PI, seconded oy Elizaoeth. ill e _e Lt ieet-_ ig liil 3 'tarc.l 4, 1935 at the Community Center. Res_ ectJjfally su a pitted, Hannah Laister, ev Secretary FEB 14 1985 INFORMIATION ONLY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # " D TO. Grand Terrace City Council FROM: Crime Prevention Committee DATE: January 7, 1985 The meeting was called to order at 6.19 P 11. Members Present. Susan Cratgzord Joe Ramos John LeMay Guests - Dr Hu -ray Td yl or The orPv i ous meeting's minute=_ t.,tFre read and approved The committee discussed th.: po_sibilit/ o; awarding certificates of merit to the deputies involved in the high—speed chase and apprehension of a burglary suspect on Dec. 34, 1584 A difference of opinion arose as to whether or not a police officer should be given this aitard It was pointed out that these officers would possibly be commr-riced by the Sheriff's Office The issue wds framed as to whether the original intent behind the award was to award citizens who go 'above and beyond the call of duty" or if l ail enforcement officers al ready performing their duty should also be commended Chairman Crat,lord said she would obtain rricre inzormation or, the incident frcrn the SherifT s Office and report bacV to the committee for further discussion. Burglary prevention and the local crime situation were discussed briefly How information about the local crime situation could be diseminated was broached but chairman Crawford advised that the Sheriff s Office has stated they will be submitting a regular column to the Chamber's Newsletter concerning the local crime situation The committee agr-ed to distribute "WE TIP" posters to local business establishments. The next meeting is scheduled for Jan. 21, 1535. The meeting was adjourned at 7:03 P.M. R =_pectP ly subrnt tted, U-iz tecretary e Ramos h�(;EMEJ C N, VS �?��r1is7 i [will 4 A-i COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM A to D (,1) COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE REPORTS CCiUtdCIL t1EETING DATE FEB 14 fy85 DHTE° 1/2z,E5 COMHI EEION/COWITT EE Crime Prevention =DEJECT. Adverti=ino of vacwf Goo-ition on Crime Prevention Committee PPOSLEM. Pacts: Hr. Derr Qrne=_ has tendered his resignation ALTERHAT I "0 OL UTIOW Mr. Qrne_ position must be fi l led PEOUE;TED ACTIOhl TO EE TAVEH BY CC UHCIL AHQ/OP ^TAFF If is recommended that the Cif/ Council accept Mr. CBrne& resignytion, and direct the vacant committee seat be publicly ad"ertised. RECEIVED JAN301985 CITY OF GRA14D TERRACE January 21, 1985 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CRIME PREVENTION COMMITTEE This letter is to advise that the undersigned due to increased __ pepsonal obligations cam no longer function as a member of the -Crime Prevention Committee. GARY N CARNES u DUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 3 COUNCIL MEETING DATE FEB 14 1985 DPTE • 029,E5 COMMIBSIOH/COHMITTEE. Grime Prevention SUBJECT Application +or committee membership submitted ny Mr. Larr; Wi!l,3m= PPCIELEH To fill an en i =t i ng uacancw on the Crime Fre"ent i on Committee LDcts• The comm, ttre has re"iewed Mr. William e apPl (cation and ;greed that he "ould be an asset to the committee. AL T ERNAT I' 'E ECILUTIOW RecclTmend acceptance by Cif/ Council PEQUESTED ACTIOH TO BE TAKEN P1 COUHCIL FEND `OR STAFF. The Crime Frevention Committee respectfully recommend= that the City Council approve Mr William s application, and appoint him as a member of the Grime Pre"ention Committee. RECEIVED JAN301985 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE r C I 1 Y OF GRAND T E R R A L— APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN SERVICE COMPLETE AND SUBMIT TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AS A MEMBER OF NAME ADDRESS HOME PHONE r / -2 ZLZ:,� OCCUPATION BUSINESS PHONE qG;2 ` 14R4' EDUCATION. (List highest year completed and all degrees) - (-567v t-- Are there any workday evenings you could not meet? Yes ( ) No (%C If so, please list. Why are you interested in this position What do you consider to be your major qualifications? � V/c'S d� i'77 /�1 ' O Si. Ate, &m rz-6 cAt4c:; RFFFRFNCFS: 1. 2. 3 FA i1 -X/i - l 26. lo/�/z� Please attach a written statement containing any additional information you feel would be useful to the City Council JA N 2 -) 1985 rnUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # (7) C3) C. ECi, 10" I '_c=: z 10" jn4" E> C t M r-1 I T T 1= 1= FR Q FA C FA T COUICIL HEETING DATE. FEB 14 1985 DHTE. 1 2?r65 COHHIE=IiN/COHHITTEE Crime Fre"ention SUE?ECT• Appl i cat on for committee membership submitted b} Cyr Hurray Ta, 1 or FFOELEH To fill ?n w i = t i ng -ac Bnc, on the Crime Fr e"en c I on Committee. F?cts• The committee ha= re"iewed Cyr Ta dor _ Brpl icQion and Dweed that he "oul d be _n Baset to the committee HLTEFnHTI"EE EOL►_ITI O" Fecommend of cep r Bnce b Cif, unc 1 l PEQUEETED ACTION TO BE TAVEN Ei COUt1CIL Q 1D, OP STAFF The Crime Frewention Committee respectfully recommends that the City Council approve Dr. Ta,lor s applic0 ion, and appoint him as a member of the Crime Prevention Committee 7 RECEIVED JAN301985 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE AS A MEMBER OF. C I Y OF GRAND TERRA i APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN SERVICE COMPLETE AND SUBMIT TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE NAME V� ( a L O� ADDRESS I .L 3 ZO hOME PHONE P� OCCUPATION FroxJ;,. BUSINESS PHONE EDUCATION! (List highest year completed and all degrees) �c r RECEIVED J A CITY OF GRAND TERRACE Ara There any worvday e-renings you could not meet? Yes No ( ) If so, -lea:e l,'St' \1 v- iu �v Wpy are you In,te'-sted in tnis position �-- f Wrat do you consider to be your major qualifications? .i n , V 1 -1 n M r- �0 e4-)YO^ 9 V\C-Itry REFEREr10ES V � Mto k^,� X- i1 C � f I 2.- 3 Please attach a written statement containing any additional information you feel would be useful to the City Council ' S "' BERNARDINO COUNTY FORESTRY FEB 14 1985 �,D FIRE WARDEN DEPARTMENT COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # 4�*6 FIRE STATION MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT NAME Grand T©rrnaa MONTH 17momber NUMBER 23 YEAR 1964 LT,fL'D(�L'T.T l�Y TVr4TT1T'TTTQ TYPE THIS MONTH LAST MONTH THIS YEAR TO DATE LAST YEAR TO DATE STRUCTURE FIRE 5 $ 51 39 VEGETATION FIRE 2 57 4' VEHICLE FIRE 1 4 38 4+ IMPROVEMENT FIRE 0 1 4 3 REFUSE FIRE 2 1 21 6 MEDICAL AID 26 21 UP. 225 TRAFFIC COLLISION 9 13 79 67 RESCUE 0 1 7 2 FIRE MENACE STANDBY 0 O 13 33 WATER SALVAGE 2 O 17 36 MISCELLANEOUS 6 4 �c 40 FALSE -'ALARM 0 0 32 ZA TOTAL INCIDENTS 53 55 629 573 TRATWTVn MAW UnTTDQ PERSONNEL CATEGORY THIS MONTH LAST MONTH THIS SDATER LASTYEAR 1 TTMR 233 '(y)- 4546 4653 PAID CALL 470 325 251,.E 16✓2 TOTALS W3 1 631 7%17j 6331 FIRE PREVENTION ACTIVITIES TYPE THIS MONTH LAST MONTH THIS YEAR TO DATE LAST YEAR TO DATE HAZARD INSPECTIONS 2 3 20 31 INVESTIGATIONS 10 20 44 131 COMPLAINTS HANDLED 0 0 u+ 12 PERMITS ISSUED 2 5 31 17 0014PANY INSPECTIONS 2 3 25 HYDRANT INSPECTIONS 0 ® 328 FIRST AID CLASSES 0` U d ® 3 G Q 3 29 0 0 99 ,. OTHER PROGRAMS' 9 lb1 a 17b ice AVED ' --1985 AND TERRA( REPORT PREPARED BY 'John SoChap= TITLE FF 11 a .... -. I FEB 14 1985 BERNARDINO COUNTY FORESTRY EudD FIRE WARDEN DEPARTMENT COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM JF 6 � FIRE STATION MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT NAME - GMod t°rraCQ MONTH 1%ecamber NUMBER 23 YEAR 1934 r.+aRnnnr.+rr rev TTTn TTITlTTmcl TYPE THIS MONTHv� LAST MONTH THIS YEAR LAST YEAR STRUCTURE FIRE 9 5 60 43 VEGETATION FIRE 0 2 57 49 VEHICLE FIRE 3 it ? L-1 1+6 IMPROVEMENT FIRE ) 0 5 7 REFUSE FIRE 3 2 M 6 MEDICAL AID 0- 26 2 69 243 TRAFFIC COLLISION 9 9 71 RESCUE 0 0 7 3 FIRE MENACE STANDBY 1 0 14 20 WATER SALVAGE 2 2 39 37 MISCELLANEOUS 7 6 65 43 FALSE -'ALARM 4 0 36 50 TOTAL INCIDENTS 66 53 695 rPD A TrTTTT!• M A V VlVTr)O PERSONNEL CATEGORY THIS MONTH LAST MONTH THIS YEAR TO DATE LAST YEAR TO D T TT F 230 233 4776 56,45 ' PAID CALL 4:01, 470 2'71;p 3,b 56 TOTALS 434 703 7 7501 FIRE PREVENTION ACTIVITIES TYPE THIS MONTH LAST MONTH THIS YEAR TO DATE LAST YEAR TO DATE HAZARD INSPECTIONS 2 20 33 INVESTIGATIONS , 6 10 EA 143 COMPLAINTS HANDLED 1 0 15 15 PERMITS ISSUED 3 2 34 20 COMPANY INSPECTIONS 2 2 27 HYDRANT INSPECTIONS 0 0 3 HYDRANT FLOWS 0 0 FIRST AID CLASSES 0 0 0 0 12 A c " 2s 6 177 1 2O 9 161 101 116 OTHER PROGRA145 ECEIVED GRAND TE REPORT PREPARED BY �.ah TITLE / FF 11 •-,-. *ajivrun iviri i ivit viva. i FEB 14 1g�� S BERNARDINO COUNTY FORESTRY anD FIRE WARDEN DEPARTMENT COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM (p FIRE STATION MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT NAME -- GrandTerrace MONTH January NUMBER 23 YEAR 19B5 r.nTrTr.Tr TT,Tn7T1TTTTT CI TYPE lJl'llll l.\ALlI Vl. THIS MONTH LAST MONTH THIS YEAR LAST YEAR STRUCTURE FIRE 2 9 2 VEGETATION FIRE 1 0 1 1 VEHICLE FIRE 9 9 2 IMPROVEMENT FIRE 0 0 0 REFUSE FIRE 1 MEDICAL AID 24 27 24 20 TRAFFIC COLLISION 2 9 2 2 RESCUE 0 0 0 0 FIRE MENACE STANDBY 2 1 2 1 WATER SALVAGE 1 2 1 0 14IS CELBANEOUS 1 7 1 2 FALSE ,ALARM 8 4 8 3 TOTAL INCIDENTS 51 66 51 42 TRATNTMa MAM UnTTAC PERSONNEL CATEGORY THIS MONTH LAST MONTH THIS SDATER LAST D TR TTMF ISO 230 180 496 PAID CALL 170 204 170 135 TOTALS 350' 434 350 531 FIRE PREVENTION ArTIVITIFS TYPE THIS MONTH LAST MONTH THIS YEAR TO DATE LAST YEAR TO DATE HAZARD INSPECTIONS i 0 1 �•.••.•.• INVESTIGATIONS 1 16 13 .. 14 COMPLAINTS HANDLED I 1 1 1 PERMITS ISSUED 5 # 3 5 5 COMPANY INSPECTIONS' HYDRANT INSPECTIONS 0 ( 0 0 ��150ItHYDRANT 'FLOWS 0 0 1 U-- I :j FIRST AID CLASSES 0 0 i Q 0 0 ,. 4 32 2 26 4 ----- OTHER PROGRAMS 2 40 8 177 2 ---�- RECEIVED E87-198 F GRAND TE REPORT PREPARED BY Johrf S.Chanmen TITLE FF II STP'-F REHUH ! 2_08 8002 -` C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) FEE ETING DATE: February 14, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. % SUBJECT: Zone Change Ordinance Area 11 FUNDING RE4JIR-cD NO FUNDI%G REQUIRED xx City Council, at their regular meeting of January 24, 1985 approved the first reading of an Ordinance in the Area 11, property located northerly of Britton Way, west of Mt Vernon Avenue, and east of Canal Street This Area is designated on the General Plan as Medium Density Residential. Under our present Zoning Ordinance, this is defined as R-3, where up to nine units per acre would be permitted through a review process by Architectural Review Committee, if the Zone Change Ordinance is adopted The proposed Ordinance will in no way change the above conditions for development of that property The General Plan allows up to a maximum of 20 units per acre. This in no way pre-empts the requirements of our present Zoning Ordinance Any development of more than nine units per acre density will still be required to apply for a conditional use permit, (CUP) Even if our new General Plan did not specify the 20 units per acre, there was nothing in our previous General Plan that would prevent the developer from applying for a project with density of 20 units per acre or even greater densities The current General Plan, (VI-8), in addition to imposing the maximum density of 20 units per acre (HP-24), requires that a Specific Plan must be submitted for any development of 16 or more residential units The 16 units referred to in the General Plan pertains to any project regardless of density In summary, the City Council should recognize the following 1 That the adoption of the Amended General Plan in April of 1984, is more restrictive by allowing the maximum of 20 units per acre than the previous General Plan, which did not specify the maximum density It must be recognized that densities in excess of 20 units per acre (27 units per acre - Terrace Mesa) were developed under the old General Plan 2 That zoning of Area 11 R-3 will in no way take the control of densities from the City, for the following reasons (a) Zoning Ordinance requires a CUP for density of more than 9 units per acre STAFF REPORT February 5, 1985 12-08 8002 3 That the City is the agency responsible to have the General Plan and zoning conform in any area prior to approval of the project in that area STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE COUNCIL 1 CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2 APPROVE SECOND READING OF ZONE CHANGE ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY, WAIVING THE FULL READING 3 ADOPT THE ZONE CHANGE ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY JK dlk ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984, FROM R-R to R-33 AREA 11. (ZC 85-01) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace approved a General Plan Update on April 26, 1984, and WHEREAS, said General Plan Update resulted in various zoning within the City of Grand Terrace not being in compliance with said General Plan Update as required by law, and WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace to study and to bring said zoning into compliance with the City's General Plan, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on this matter on August 6, 1984, in the time and manner required by law at which all evidence and testimony was duly heard and considered, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended zoning amendments as described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein, and WHEREAS, the recommended zoning amendments are consistent and conform with the General Plan of the City of Grand Terrace as updated on April 26, 1984, and WHEREAS, the zoning amendments have been reviewed and analyzed as to environmental impact, and a Negative Declaration has been duly issued in the time, form, and manner prescribed by law, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS SECTION 1. That the real properties as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein are hereby rezoned and the zoning amended as shown on said Exhibit. SECTION 2. Effective Date - This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12 01 a.m. on the st ay after its adoption. SECTION 3. Posting - The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) plc places designated for such purpose by the City Council. SECTION 4. First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on the loth day of January, 1985, and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the day , 1985. EXHIB11 "A" ORDINANCE NO. LEGAL DESCRIPTION PR:?=OSED ZONE C:LZNGE AREA NO 11 All that portion of Parcels 1, 2 and 13, Block "E" of the {;r�md Terrace Tract as per <lap on file in Book 11, of :taps, Page 4 and that portion of Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block "E" of the Resubdivision of Grand Terrace Tract, as per Sap on file in Book 1, of Record of surveys, Page 33, all Records of the Recorder of San Bernardino County, California, being :core particularly descriced as follows Beginnirg at the Northwest corner of Lot 5 of Tract No 10586 as per "am on file in Bock 147 of daps, Pages 91 and 92, Records of said Reccrcer of San Bernardino C ou^ty, California, being a point on the Easterly Rigrt of Way lire of t1,e Gage Canal, T--ENCE Mort -westerly and Northeasterly along said Easterly r gnt of �,ay line to the -,lost -northerly corner of that certain parcel conveyed to -er^a^ Fs `icBroom and Patricia a ".:Broom, nuscand and Wife as Joint Tenants ey Qu-t C_aim Deed recorded Ju^e 1, 1979 in Boox 9698, Page 1639, Official Records of San Ber-ardino County, Cali_or-ia, TJENCE Sc:.t',erly along t^e Easterly line of said %IcBroom parcel to a pout -n a li-e parallel vith and distant 258 feet Nortierly of, measured at: rfg^t a :files to tie soutrerly line of said Lot 4, Block "E", T'-i=NCE Easterly along said parallel to the intersection of said parallel line hitn t-e gesterly right of ,ay line of Mt Varnon Avenue, =-tENCE Southerly along said Westerly right of way line to _re _-_ersection of said Westerly line with the Northerly line of that certain par=el shown as "Not a mart" on said Map of Tract Yo 10586, 4E� NCE Westerly along t-e `.ortherly line of said "Not a Far-" _ lrcel a,d along the Nor`ner-y li-e of Lots 7, 6 and said Lot 5 of said Tra:= 0 10586, to tie Point of Beginning .� STP`�F REPORT February 6 C R A ITEM ( } COUNCIL ITEM (xx) MEETING DATE: February 14, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. F� SUBJECT: Award of construction contract for the Palm Avenue Realignment Project (GTB 85-01) FUNDING REQUIRED xx NO FU11DI%U- REQUIRED On October 25, 1984, the City Council authorized the Bid Advertisement for the construction of the Palm Avenue Realignment and expenditure of $17,500 00 for the construction, staking, and inspection of this project. - Also-ancluded in the - Bid Specifications was Alternate "A" addendum, which included 6 tons of A C Paving on Palm Avenue along the frontage of the new Civic Center On January 31, 1985, the bids were opened and the results were as follows NAME OF CONTRACTOR DeRoy Joseph Avila Construction Co P 0 Box 6291, San Bernardino, CA 92412 DeArmond Construction 10545 Ring Avenue, Alta Loma, CA 91701 Redlands Paving, Inc P 0 Box 871, Redlands, CA 92373 Vance Corporation 3940 Pyrite Street, Riverside, CA 92509 BID AMOUNT ALTERNATE "A" ADDENDUM $14,446 00 No Bid $18,136 00 No Bid $21,900 00 $750 00 $24,062 00 $408 00 The lowest bidder was DeRoy Joseph Avila Construction Company, however he was unable to secure the necessary bonding The next lowest bidder was DeArmond Construction for an amount of $18,136 00 The Engineer's Construction Estimate was $13,000 00 and $4,500 00 for staking and inspection for a total of $17,500 00. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL 1 AUTHORIZE THE TRANSFER OF $5,500.00 FROM GAS TAX FUND 16 TO PALM AVENUE REALIGNMENT. 2 AWARD THE PALM AVENUE REALIGNMENT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO DEARMOND CONSTRUCTION FOR AN AMOUNT OF $18,136 00 AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO NEGOTIATE THE ALTERNATE "A" ADDENDUM JK/lh Z _, HUGH J GRANT Mayor BYRON MATTESON Mayor Pro Tern Council Members TONY PETTA DENNIS L EVANS BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN SETH ARMSTEAD Oty Manager 12 286 February 4, 1985 Mr Jim DeArmond DeArmond Construction 10545 Ring Avenue Alta Loma, Ca 91701 Re Palm Avenue Realignment Dear Mr DeArmond On February 14, 1985 we will be recommending that the City Council award the contract for construction of the Palm Avenue Realignment Project to your company Unfortunately, you did not receive a copy of the attached Plan and Bid Addendum Alternate "A", which includes 6 tons of A C Paving in the rear of the new Civic Center Please call in bid amount to Mr Alex Estrada at (714) 825-7503 and submit the attached bid schedule as soon as possible so that we can include it in the contract Thank you for your cooperation Very truly yours, 1 SEP KICAK J dlk Attachment cc Seth Armstead, City Manager Myrna Erway;,City Clerk 22795 BARTON ROAD Civic Center — (714) 824 6621 GRAND TERRACE, CA 92324-5295 Planning — Engineering — (714) 825-3825 DATE: CONTRACTOR W.O. NO. 12 286 BID NO. GTB 85-01 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SHEET 1 OF 1 NAME OF PROJECT PALM AVENUE REALIGNMENT EASTERLY OF BARTON ROAD ADDENDA #1 BMDDING SCHEDULE ALTERNATE "A" ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED QUANITY UNITS UNIT PRICE IN WORDS UNIT PRICE ITEM PRICE 1 A C PAVING OVERLAY 6 Ton DOLLARS AND CENTS DOLLARS AND CENTS DOLLARS AND CENTS DOLLARS AND CENTS DOLLARS AND CENTS DOLLARS AND CENTS DOLLARS AND CENTS TOTAL. •••• $ rw N3o►JA, VW ;Y�lv�, �l o�-9 7 •yi om k- 0 1 hFi M,E i V rN U C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx ) AGENDA ITEM NO. MEETING DATE:- February 14, 1985 SUBJECT: Fire Protection in the Vicinity of Vivienda Avenue, Burns, Maple and Walnut Avenue. FUNDING REQUIRED xx NO FUNDING REQUIRED The City Council directed Staff to determine the possibility and the associated costs for the installation of the fire protection system for the area between Southern Pacific Railroad and AT.& SF Railroad, generally south of Vivienda Avenue Several meetings were held with Riverside Highland Water Co. regarding this matter It has been determined that the fire protection is possible in that area by extension of the water system specifically an 8" diameter line in Maple and Vivienda and tying the proposed 8" line into an existing 4" system in Burns Avenue and Walnut Avenue Attached for your information is a map of the system showing the proposed location of the new line as well as the location of 4 fire hydrants, which in our opinion should provide adequate protection in the area. It should be pointed out that in conjunction with the construction of Vivienda Bridge, Riverside Highland Water Cc will be installing an 8" line in the new structure. They have also agreed to extend that 8" line to tie into the existing 30" line at the intersection of Vivienda and Grand Terrace Road and to extend westerly to tie into the existing and/or proposed water system that would be constructed by the City The estimated costs for the City's portion of the project is $52,000 00 This is a very preliminary estimate and should be considered as such. Recognizing that at the present time there are 26 parcels in the area, the average estimated costs for the parcel to provide additional fire protection and greatly improve the water delivery system is approximately $2,000 00 per parcel. The major problem then becomes the vehicle for funding It has been discussed that an Assessment District be considered for that purpose. If the City Council wishes to consider that method of funding it would be desirable to determine from the property owners if they will want to pay their proportionate share of the costs for these improvements such determination could be made by a mailincr,_advi-,I" the property owners of the proposed protect and the estimated costs and r_sxuest hem to respond to the auestionnair The second possibility is to consider requesting Supervisor, Barbara Riordan, to utilize some of her discretionary funding for this project This area of the City of Grand Terrace is a targetted area and therefore, eligible for the use of HCD Funds. %- T 19 STAFF REPORT February 14, 1985 City Council 12 316 Page 2 The third possible alternative is to consider the use of City's entitlement from the HCD Funding It is estimated that the City's portion of the entitlement for the next 3 years will be approximately $30,000 00 per year for a total of $90,000 00 The office of Community Development in the San Bernardino County has indicated that they would have no objection in utilizing the 3 years' allocation in a single year for a specific project in a targetted area I should point out that another project should be considered by the City Council, specifically the replacement of West Barton Road Bridge over Southern Pacific Railroad This matter is presented to the City Council under another agenda item STAFF RECOMMENDS:THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADVISE THE STAFF HOW TO PROCEED FROM THIS POINT JK/lh STt FF REPorT 51-11 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE February 14, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO 9 SUBJECT DESIGNATION OF NO PARKING AREA FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED X Staff is seeking Council authorization to designate a "no parking" area immediately adjacent to the Civic Center Complex The area of concern, as denoted on the map, is the Barton Road south side curb When vehicles park along this curb, it presents a high traffic risk to vehicles attempting to exit City Hall via Barton Road It is nearly impossible to clearly see east and westbound traffic Staff is proposing to paint the curb red, and install R-26 "No Parking Any Time" signs Staff Recommends that the Council DESIGNATE A "NO PARKING" ZONE ON BARTON ROAD SOUTHSIDE CURB, IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE CIVIC CENTER COMPLEX. RLAI ri ' February 5, 1985 STf--xFF REPOF-,T 12 310 4j .` C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (XX) MEETING DATE: February 14, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. /3 SUBJECT' Bridge Replacement West Barton Road over Southern Pacific Railroad FUNDING REQUIRED XX NO FUNDING REQUIRED The surveys that are normally performed by CalTrans personnel in evaluating the bridges was completed several years ago and the two (2) bridges within the City of Grand Terrace, based on a survey by CalTrans, which indicated their replacement, are Vivienda across Southern Pacific and West Barton Road across the same Southern Pacific Railroad Currently, the City is in the process of replacing Vivienda Avenue Bridge CalTrans personnel advises that West Barton Road Bridge is now also a priority for replacement under the same program as Vivienda Avenue, if the City so desires As you will recall, the funding under the Bridge Replacement Program is 20% local and 80% Federal funds The total estimated costs for a 2-lane bridge with a walkway is approximately $900,000 00 This is exclusive of any right-of-way problems The Barton Road Bridge is approximately 50% within the City of Grand Terrace and 50% within the City of Colton We have discussed this problem with the personnel from the City of Colton, they have indicated a desire to participate in the replacement program provided that HCD Funding can be used for the local share Since this area of Colton is not a targetted area for HCD Funding, they state that they would investigate the possibility of using these funds It is however a targetted area within the City of Grand Terrace and the City's allocation of the HCD Funding could be used for that purpose Estimated local share for each of the agencies is approximately $90,000 00, with a balance being funded from the Bridge Replacement Program (Federal Funding) As stated in a report regarding the water system .improvements on the northwest side of the City, both pro3ects are in the targetted area of Grand Terrace and therefore, eligible for utilization of the HCD Funds If the City could receive the discretionary funding for the water system improvements, the Staff would make recommendation to the City Council to utilize the entitlement funds for this pro3ect At this point the Staff is seeking direction from the City Council with respect to their desires on pursuing the Bridge Replacement Program pro3ect on West Barton Road over Southern Pacific STAFF RECOMMENDS. THAT CITY COUNCIL ADVISE STAFF ON HOW TO PROCEED JK/lh February 6, 1985 ST,"FF st 12 10.1018 C R A ITEM { ) COUNCIL ITEM ( Xx) MEETING DATE: February 14, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 C, SUBJECT: Exchange of Federal Aid Urban Dollars FUNDING REQUIRED xx NO FUNDING REQUIRED There is presently a great concern from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and CalTrans regarding the large unobligated balances of Federal Aid Urban (FAU) Funds in California and throughout the nation This large balance of unobligated funds could result in reducing ok even eliminating this vital Federal -Aid Program Some agencies, for a variety of reasons, are having difficulty spending their FAU Dollars, while other agencies are able to spend more than their allocation In these situations, it is possible for an agency to "Sell -Exchange" it's FAU dollars to another agency for other funds such as general funds, gas tax dollars, etc The advantage of this is that the agency having difficulty obligating it's FAU Funds can then use the exchanged dollars for projects without meeting Federal requirements In this particular case, the City of Rialto is considering selling $100,000 00 of it's FAU Dollars to the City in exchange for $85,000 00 of Gas Tax monies, which comes out to an exchange rate of 85� to the dollar The City would gain an additional $15,000 00 that would be added to the Barton Road Reconstruction Project STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL 1 AUTHORIZE THE STAFF TO INITIATE NEGOTIATIONS WITH CITY OF RIALTO FOR THE EXCHANGE OF $85,000 00 OF GAS TAX FUNDS (CITY OF GRAND TERRACE) FOR THE CITY OF RIALTO $100,000 00 IN FAU FUNDS, AND IF AGREEMENT IS REACHED, 2 AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN EXCHANGE OF FAU DOLLARS AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF RIALTO 3. AUTHORIZE THE EXCHANGE OF $85,000 00 FROM GAS TAX FUNDING AND TRANSFER THE RIALTO FAU DOLLARS IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000.00 INTO THE CITY'S FAU BUDGET ACCOUNT NO. 20-4930-255, INCREASING THE BALANCE TO $450,000 00 JK/lh A- s ST-AI-I- REFUL-0\1 I CRAITEM ( ) AGENDA ITEM NO. COUNCIL ITEM ( X X) all MEETING DATE: Feb 14, 1985 SUBJECT: _a_9 8 4 =IL_4T F _LC.LLILLLY R n N n A i 1 n C A T T n N FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED XX The County of San Bernardino and various cities including Grand Terrace are planning a Waste -to -Energy facility for the valley Financing of the facility will require the issuance of approximately $200-$250 million of Private Activity Bonds through the CALIFORNIA POLLUTION CONTROL FINANCING AUTHORITY (CPCFA) This facility will be a vital part of the region's long-term Waste Management Plan The County of San Bernardino is requesting Grand Terrace to help with this project by transferring to the State and CPCFA our 1984 allocation for $502,000 for the purpose to file for the 1984 carryforward allocation until February 26, 1985 The procedure required is for the City Council to adopt a resolution transferring a stated dollar amount to the State with the direction to the State that the allocation is to be applied to the CPCFA for a carry - forward to benefit the project This resolution needs to be adopted at the first meeting in February This action by Grand Terrace would not in any way commit the Council to approve any future actions regarding the Waste -to -Energy Project Please see the attached letter dated February 4, 1985 and received on February 7, 1985 Also note that a certified copy of the resolution must be sent to the State and received no later than February 19, 1985 to California Debt Limit Allocation Committee 915 Capitol Mall, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 STAFF RECOMMENDS • THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE RESOLUTION FOR LOAN of GRAND TERRACE'S 1984 ALLOCATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF BENEFITING THE COUNTY WASTE -TO -ENERGY PROJECT 6044 SA t PENDING CITY r'n4 APPr)1nv,61 RESOLUTION NO. 85- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, TRANSFERRING A PORTION OF THE PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND ALLOCATION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE. WHEREAS, pursuant to the Tax Reform Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-369) and the Governor's Proclamation of July 19, 1984, implementing said Act, the City of Grand Terrace ("City") has received a private activity bond allocation in the amount of $502,000 for the calendar year 1984, and WHEREAS, the Act permits unused private activity bond allocation in any calendar year to be carried forward to future years with respect to certain designated types of projects, and WHEREAS, the City and the County of San Bernardino and other cities in the Valley portion of San Bernardino County plan to contract for construction of a waste -to -energy resource recovery facility (the "Project"), in the County's West Valley area, and it is contemplated that part or all of the cost of such facilities will be financed with tax-exempt bonds which will require a private activity bond allocation when issued, and WHEREAS, County staff has advised the City that it is most likely that the bonds for the Project will be issued by the California Pollution Control Authority, and WHEREAS, the City desires to assist the Project by making part of its unused 1984 private activity bond allocation available to the California Pollution Control Financing Authority in order for the Authority to make a carryforward election with respect to the Project, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace as follows Section 1. The City of Grand Terrace hereby transfers to the State of California the aggregate amount of the City's unused 1984 private activity bond allocation under the Act and the Governor's Proclamation. Such transfer is made under the express condition that the State may only utilize such transfer for the purpose of making a carryforward election pursuant to Section 1203(n)(9) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1964 with respect to the Project. Section 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a copy of this Resolution to the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee and to file with said Committee the notice required by the Governor's Proclamation. The City Clerk is further directed to retain a copy of this Resolution in its records until any bonds issued to finance the Project are retired. Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. ADOPTED this 14th day of February, 1985 ATTEST ity Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof. Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof I, Myrna Erway, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held on the day of , 1985, by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN. City Clerk Approved as to form City Attorney �cJ CPU'VTY C® T, V—,'w QF SAN BERI RDIN® � s ROBERT B RIGNEY Administrative Officer COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE No 1 Arrowhead Plaza 385 North Arrowhead Avenue San Bernardino CA 92415 0120 (714) 383 2018 February 4, 1985 Mr Seth Armstead City Manager City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 RE: 1984 PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND ALLOCATION Dear Mr Ar ad BOARD OF SUPERVISORS John Joyner First District Cal McElwain Second District Barbara Cram Riordan Thud District Robert O Townsend Chairman Fourth District Robert L Hammock Fifth District RECEiVP FEB7 I,d,, CITY or GPAnc TERRACE In response to the passage of the Federal Tax Reform Act of 1984, Governor Deukmejian issued a Proclamation on July 19, 1984 governing the allocation, use, and transfer of private activity bonds in California Based on a formula in the Governor's Proclamation, each City and the County of San Bernardino received a funding allocation for 1984 The Grand Terrace allocation was for $502,000. The Governor's Proclamation allows any city to transfer any unused portion of its allocation to any other local government or state agency You probably recall receiving a mailing from the League of California Cities in December suggesting that your city turn over its unused 1984 allocation to the State. As you know, the County of San Bernardino and various cities, including Grand Terrace, are planning a waste -to -energy facility for the Valley Financing of the facility will require the issuance of approximately $200-$250 million of private activity bonds through the California Pollution Control Financing Authority (CPCFA) This facility will be a vital part of the region's long-term waste management plan In order to assist the CPCFA accumulate the allocation which will be needed to finance this project, the County in December transferred $35 million of unused 1984 allocation to the State, and this money will be used by the CPCFA to make a carryforward election with respect to the Waste -to -Energy Project (The carryforward election makes this money available for bonds to be issued anytime through 1988 ) The Internal Revenue Service recently extended the deadline for issuers (including CPCFA) to file the 1984 carryforward election until February 26, 1985 We are requesting Grand Terrace help with this project by transferring to the State for the benefit of this project any of your 1984 private activity bond allocation which has not been used. The procedure required is for the City Council to adopt a 1984 PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND ALLOCATION February 4, 1985 Page 2 resolution transferring a state dollar amount to the State with the direction to the State that the allocation is to be applied to the CPCFA for a carryforward to benefit the Project We have attached a draft resolution which could be used by your City. The resolution needs to be adopted at your first meeting in February This action by your City would not in any way commit your Council to approve any future actions regarding the XVaste-to-Energy Project. A certified copy of the resolution must be sent to the State and received no later than February 19, 1985. The resolution should be sent by Federal Express or other rapid delivery to. California Debt Limit Allocation Committee 915 Capitol Mall, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Tim Kelly, Project Manager, is available to discuss any aspect of this request (telephone 714-383-1380) You may also contact Mary Jane Jagodzinski, Executive Secretary of CDLAC in Sacramento at 916-324-0310 We appreciate your consideration of this request and will assist your staff with the details of the resolution and carryforward process Sincerely, RUB B. RIGNEY County Administrative Officer RBR va Attachment cc Board of Supervisors (DER) 12-27-84 J - 6 (No 249) TAXATION AND ACCOUNTING Eaa-nple Taxpa,,er A. for taxable year 1984, has a $10,OMi tax riotnated underpayment and a $2,000 addi- tion to pa meat of tax,total iheiw-illtstilof lhaxe a $10 000 tax 12,000 If A Makes a 55 o0oti,a pal r-,otitiated underpayment but will not have only 57.000 0 unpaid tax ion, therefore, aeLto A-9 of this would apply to the t$7,000 of unpaid the 120 percent r tax There is need for Immediate guidance with respect to the p-o%isions contained in this Treasun decision be impractical to issue it underh hthe notice, ot ce�andit �co-rdment procedure provided ini5st (Note The r g 1 84 ) [4830-01] [Final draft of 12/21/841 DI\TERNAL RE OF ENLE SERTHE A� ICE (26 CFR PA.RT 11 [LR-304-84] C-,RR% FORN� -%RD ELECTIONS AND ELECTION TO ALLO OCALSFLRNISHING OF ILING ELECTRICITY O FACILITIES FOR NOTICE OF PROPOSED RLLEMAKING AGE\C'� Internal Revenue Senice, Treasury ACTIO% Notice of proposed rulemaking by cross reference to temporary regulations SLMMAR� In the Rules and Regulations portion of this issue of the FEDERAL REGISTER, the Internal Rev- enue Service taeoian canfor+ard elections temporary election to allocate State ceiling to facilities for local furnishing of electricity The text of those temporary regulations also serves as the comment document for this proposed rulemaking DATES Written comments and requests for a public hearing must be delivered by Feb 26, 1985 The amend - mews are proposed to be effective generally with respect to obligations issued after December 31, 19B3 ADDRESS Send comments and requests for a public hearing to Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Attention CC LR T (LR-304-84), Washington, D C 20224 FOR FLRTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Mitch- ell H Rapaport of the Legislation and Regulations Divi- sion, Office of Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service, Avenue, ton, D C 20224 (Attention CCLR T 202-566-3740j SLPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION BACKGROUND The temporary regulations in the Rules and Regula- tions portion of this issue of the FEDERAL REGISTER amend Part I of Title 26 These f the Code Federal Regula- tions amendmentschange the rulesrelattin to L' S C 553(b) or subject to the effective date limitation of 5 U S C 553(d) This Treasury decision is issued under the author- ity contained in sections 6621(d) and 7805 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (98 Stat 682, 26 L S C 6621(d), 68A Stat 917, 26 U S C 7805) (signed) Roscoe L Egger, Jr Commissioner of Internal Revenue Approved Dec 24, 1984 (signed) Ronald A Pearlman Acting Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (End of Text) -0- PROPOSED AND TEMPORARY (T D 8001) IRS REGULATIONS ON CARRYFORWARD ELECTIONS AND ELECTION TO ALLOCATE STATE CEILING TO FACILITIES FOR LOCAL FURNISHING OF(ELECTRICITY, FILED DEC 26 1984 TEXTe ulations are scheduled to be published In the Federal Register of Dec 28, carryfon%ard elections under section 103 (n) of the Inter- nal Revenue Code of 1954, as added bN section 621 of the ReformTax Act ent also pro ide 9les69, 98 Stat elating to the Theseamend election to allocate State ceiling to facilities for local furnishing of electricity under section 644 (b) of the Tax Reform Act of 1994 (Pub L 98-369, 98 Stat 940) For the text of the temporary regulations, see (T D 8001, published in the Rules and Regulations portion of this is- sue of the FEDERAL REGISTER The preamble to the temporary regulations pro -.ides a discussion of the rules The final regulations, which this document proposes to base on those temporary regulations, would amend Part 1 of Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations Those fi- nal sued under the thoritgcontained ulations rin sections 103 (n)e proposed to be sand 780 of the au - Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (98 Stat 915, 26 Li S C (b) of the Tax Reform �Act of 1984 (98 Stat section 644 at940) NON -APPLICABILITY OF EXECL'Tn'E ORDER 12291 The Commissioner of Internal Revenue has deter - not a or rule as mined that this Exec t pe Ordroposeed- 12291rule isand that ajregulator}de- impact analysis therefore is not required REGLLATORY FLEXIBILITY ACT Although this document is a notice of proposed rule - making that solicits public comment, the Internal Rev- enue Service has concluded that the regulations proposed herein are interpretative and that the notice and public procedure requirements of 5 L S C 553 do not apply Accordingl, , these proposed regulations do not constitute regulations subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U S C Chapter 6) DRAFTING INFORMATION The principal author of these proposed regulations is Mitchell H Rapaport of the Legislation and Regula- tions Division of the Office of Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Senice HoN ver, personnel from other offices of the Internal Revenue Service and Treasury Department participated in developing the regulations, on matters of both substance and style Published by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS INC Washington D C 20037 y, ���,, +.�i pki �..� � �y fi� X �a f W Lr� '� lS..:' a��.�'.Y •��FY.- L..lt �. ��' ti`. _ - _ r 12-27-84 (DER) TAXATION AND ACCOUNTING COMME` TS AND REQL ESTS FOR A PUBLIC HEARING Befo-e the adoption of these proposed regulations, consideration x%III be gi% en to any written comments that are sLb- fitted (preferabl) seen copies) to the Commis- sioner of Internal Revenue All comments will be avail- able fo- public inspection and copying A public hearing . ill be held upon x%ritten request to the Commissioner by am pe-son v ho has submitted x, ritten comments if a public hearing is held, notice of the time and place will be p-blished in the FEDERAL REGISTER /s/Roscoe L Egger, Jr Cc-n -assioner of Internal Revenue [4830-01) [Final draft of 12-21-84] TITLE 26 — I\TER\AL RE\ EtiLE C}'APTER I — I\TER\AL RE\ EtiLE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASLR'� SLBCHAPTER A — INCOME TAX (T D 8001) PART 1 — INCOME TAX, TAXABLE SEARS BEGINNINC AFTER DECEMBER 31, 1953 Ca-rNfo-raid elections and election to allocate State ceiling to facilities for local furnishing of electricity AGE%M Internal Revenue Service, Treasury ACTIO\ Te—por ary regulations SLNIM-%R1 This document contains temporary in- co^e tax regulations relating to carr}foruard elections and the election to allocate State ceiling to certain facili- ties for local ILrnishing of electricity This action is necessar% because of changes to the applicable tax lan r-ade bN the Tax Reform Act of 1984 These regulations affect all purchasers and go.ernmental issuers of tax exe—pt private activity bonds In addition, the text con- tained in the te—porary regulations set forth in this docu- r--ent ser%es as the text of the notice of proposed rule^-aking cross-referenced in the notice of proposed rule--aking in the Proposed Rules section of this issue of the FEDERAL REGISTER DATE These temporary regulations are effective in general for go%ernmental obligations issued after De- ce-rbe- 31, 1983 FOR FLRTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Mitch- ell H Rapaport of the Legislation and Regulations Di. i- sion, Office of the Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Ser%ice, 1111 Constitution Avenue, N R' , Washington, D C 20224 (Attention CC LR T) (202-566-3740) SL PPLEMENTARI INFORMATION BACKGROUND This document contains amendments to the tempo- rart regulations relating to the limitation on the aggre- gate amount of private acts.iry bonds that may be issued b% a go%ernmental unit under section 103 (n) of the Inter- nal Re. enue Code of 1954 as amended by section 621 of the Tay Reform Act of 1984 ("the Act") (Pub L 98-369, 96 Stat 915) This document amends A-2 of §1 103 (n)- 4T and adds a nev 11 103 (n)-7T to Part 1 of Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations The temporary regLla- tions pro%ided b% this document will remain in effect until superseded b% final regulations on this subject (No 249) J - 7 EXPLANATION OF PROVISIONS Section 103 (n) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 pro% ides that a private acti.it) bond issued as part of an issue shall not be treated as an obligation described in section 103 (a) if the aggregate amount of private activin bonds issued by the issuing authority during the calendar year exceeds such authorin Is private acti.it� bond limit for the calendar year Section 103 (n), in effect, pro. ides a ceiling on the aggregate amount of private activity bonds that mat be issued within a State during a single calendar year This documents amends A-2 of E1 103 (n)-4T to permit carryfor.\ard elections to be made, in certain circumstances, specifying more than one prospecti.e ad- dress for the project and more than one prospectsx a ini- tial ox%mer, operator, or manager Section 644 (b) of the Act permits the State of Ne.\ 1 ork to elect to use in 1984 up to one-half of its State ceiling for 1985, 1986, and 1987 in order to issue obliga- tions to pro.ide facilities described in section 644 (a) of the Act The temporar) regulations pro\ ide rules on the time and manner in.%hich the election may be made NON-APPLICABILITI OF EXECLTI\ E ORDER 12291 The Commissioner of Internal Revenue has deter- mined that this temporary rule is not a major rule as de- fined in ExecutiNe Order 12291 and that a regulators impact analysis is not required REGLLATORI FLEXIBILITI ACT A general notice of proposed rulemaking is not re- quired by 5 L S C 553 for te-nporar) regulations Ac- cordingly , the temporary regulations do not constitute regulations subject to the Regulatory Flexibility act (5 L S C Chapter 6) DRAFTING INFORM,%TIO', The principal autho- of these to—pora-} regulations is Mitchell H Rapaport of the Legislation and Regula- tions Division of the Office of Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Ser.ice Hove.er, personnel from other offices of the Internal Revenue Ser.ice and Treasu-y Depart^ent participated in de-, eloping the regulations, on matters of both substance and sale LIST OF SLBJECTS I\ 26 CFR 1 61-1 through 1 281-4 Income taxes, Taxable income, Deductions, Exemptions Amendments to the regulations For the reasons set out to the preamble, Part 1 of Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follo.%s Paragraph 1 A-2 of §1 103 (n)-4T is amended to read as foUo%%s §1 103 (n)-4T Elective ca-ryfor-, and of unused private acts. ity bond limit A-2 (I) An issuing authorin may make the election by means of a statement, signed by an authorized public official responsible for making allocations of such issuing authorit)'s private activity bond limit, that the issuing authority elects to carry fon%ard its unused private ac- ti% it) bond limit The statement shall be filed with the In- ternal Revenue Service Center, Philadelphia, Pennsyl. aria 19255 Except with respect to elections to carry fora%ard ant unused private acti.in bond limit for calendar year 1984, the election must be filed prior to the end of the calendar year with respect to %%hich the issuing 0 H IIK.A K. TNC PI IQ CAI I nC NATInPJAI •CCAID q wr Wach.mmmn D C 20037 j - g (No 249) TAXATION AND ACCOUNTING - (DER) 12-27-84 a_ he-1t% has the unused prit ate actl%1ty bond limit, elec- t,on= • itr-espect to unused p-i%ate acts%it) bond limit fc calendar %ear 1964 must be filed prior to February 26 1j5: The statement is to be titled "Carryforward election _nde- section 103 (n) " (n) The state—ent required b) (i) of this A-2 shall contain the follow ins information (k) The na*-e, address, and TIN of the issuing a.itho-it% , (6) Thr- issuing authorM's pri%ate acti%it) bond 11-1t fc - the calendar )ear, (C) The ageregate a-^ount of pri%ate acti%it) bonds icsLed 1•% he issuing authorit) during the calendar ear fo- � hich the election is being made, (D) The unused pri%ate acts it) bond limit of the is- s-i-ic a-thorit%, and (E) Fo each carr%fo-%%ard project — (1) a descrip*ion of the project, including its ad- d-css (b% its street address or, if none, b) a general de- sc-iption desi_Lned to indicate its specific location) and the ge^e-al rvpa of facilit% (e g , ar airport described in section 103 (b) (4) (D)), (2) The na-^e, address, and TIN of the initial oum- e. , ope ator, or -Tanager, and (3) The a-^o, nt to be carried forward for the project (iii) For purposes of (ii) (E) of this A-2, in the case of a car-%fo- and p-oject for %%hich the initial oumer, op- erato, , or ^-a^aver is to be selected pursuant to a com- petiti. c riddinc pi -mess, the election ma% include up to 3 pi uspecti. c add else_ for the project and the narie, ad- d-ecs, and Tl\ of —ore than one prospecti%e initial own- er, ope-ato--, o- ^-anage-, if prior to the end of the calendar %ea- for v hich the election is made — (-,) Ir the case of elections for calendar years other than 1a64, th-_ i=_s.iirg a.,tho-it) has taken preliminary official action app--ming the undertaking of the carry- fc- a d F oject, (6) -.11 pe cons included as prospecti%e ovmers, op- e-ators, of rraraee-s ha%e rnet all applicable condi- tions (if an% ) to sub —it proposals to pro%ide the p-oject, and (C) Th, 15s_ing a,-thorin has expended (or has en- te-ed intc binding contracts to expend) in connection v ith the planning and construction of the carryforward project the lesser of $500,000 or 2 1/2 percent of the ca--%fo-%%a-d a^ount (i%) Fo-- purposes of (11) of this A-2, in the case of a carr%for% and election for the purpose of issuing student loan bonds, the statement need not include the address of a facilit% o- the na-^e, address, and TIN of an initial of-ie- ope-ator, o- ,anager of a project but shall state that the cairtfo-v and election is for the purpose of issu- ing student loan bonds Par 2 tie%% E1 103 (n)- 7T is added following §1 103 (n)-6T to read as follo%%s E1 103 (n)-7T Election to allocate State ceiling to certain facilities for local furnishing of electricity (a) Election — (1) In general The issuing authori- ties of the State of Ne%% 1 ork ("Ne%% ) ork") may elect to use in 1964 up to one-half of the amount that %%ould have been Nev. lork's State ceiling (as defined in section 103 (n) (4) and A-1 of §1 103 (n)-3T) for calendar years 1985, 1986. and 1987 for the purpose of issuing obligations to pro%ide facilities for the local furnishing of electric en - erg% described in section 644 (a) of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 (the "Act") For purposes of this paragraph, New% 1 ork's State ceiling for calendar years 1985, 1986, and 1987 is considered equal to the State ceiling for 1984 (without taking into account any increase in the State ceil- ing for 1984 as a result of an election under section 644 (b) and this section) (2) Procedure The election shall be made b) filing the statement described in this paragraph (a) (2) with the Internal Revenue Service Center, Philadelphia. Pennsyl- vania, on or before December 31, 1984 The statement shall be titled "Allocation election under section 644 of the Tax Reform Act of 1984," shall be signed by the Gov- ernor of Nev,'York or his authorized representative, and shall contain the follo%%mg information (i) The name, address, and TIN of the issuing au- thorit) (or authorities) that is expected to issue the obli- gations for the facilities described in section 644 (a) of the Act pursuant to the election described in section 644 (b) of the Act and this section, and (ii) The amount of the State ceiling for each of cal- endar years 1985, 1986, and 1987,with respect to which the election is made (b) Effect of election — (1) In 1984 The amount of the State ceiling for calendar years 1985, 1986, and 1987 with respect to %%hich the election is made will be consid- ered part of Ne%% '� ork's State ceiling for calendar year 1984 For purposes of section 644 (b) of the Act. such amount -will be considered used in 1984 onl) to the extent that obligations are issued in 1984 to pro%ide facilities for the local furnishing of electric energ% described in section 644 (a) of the Act, or to the extent that a proper election is made on or before December 31, 1984, (and is not re-. oked or amended bet%%een the time it is made and the end of 1984) pursuant to section 103 (n) (10) and 11 103 (n)-4T to carry for-.%ard all or part of such amount to pro- vide such facilities during the carryforuard period appli- cable to calendar year 1984 State ceiling (2) In 1985, 1986, and 1987 An election under sec- tion 644 (b) of the Act and this section to use in calendar year 1984 an amount of Ne%% 7iork's State ceiling for a subsequent calendar year reduces the State ceiling for such subsequent calendar year b) the amount with respect to %%hich the election is made, whether or not such amount is considered used in 1984 pursuant to this paragraph (b) Thus, no obligations ma) be issued pursuant to the elec- tion described in section 644 (b) of the Act and this sec- tion to pro-,ide a facilit) other than the facilities for the furnishing of electric energy described in section 644 (a) of the Act (3) Other effects An election or the failure to make an election under section 644 (b) of the Act and this sec- tion shall not affect an) otherwise applicable rule that permits an issuing authorit} , for any calendar year, to — (i) Allocate a portion of its private activity bond limit. (ii) issue obligations within its pri%ate activity bond limit, or (iii) Elect under section 103 (n) (10) and 11 103 (n)- 4T to carry forward any portion of its private activity bond limit, in order to issue obligations to provide a facility de- scribed in section 644 (a) of the Act (c) Rei ocation of election An election made under section 644 (b) of the Act and this section may not be re- voked or amended An insubstantial deviation from a - specification contained in an election under section 644 (b) of the Act and this section shall not prevent obligations from being issued pursuant to such election There is a need for immediate guidance with re- spect to the pro%asions contained m this Treasury deci- sion For this reason it is found impracticable to issue it with notice and public procedure under subsection (b) of section 553 of Title 5 of the United States Code or subject to the effective date limitation of subsection (d) of that section Pubhshed by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS INC Washington D C 20037 12-27-84 (DER) TAXATION AND ACCOUNTING (No. 249) 1-9 This Treas--% decision is issued under the author - it contained in :ection 644 (b) of the Tax Reform Act of 1954 (98 S,at 940) and in sections 103 (n) and 7805 of the lnte-nal Re,,enje Code of 1954 (98 Stat 915, 26 L S C 103 (n), 65y Stat 917, 26 L S C 7805) (signed) Roscoe L Egger, Jr Co--nissioner of Internal Re,.enue Approved Dec 24, 1984 (End of Text) -0- (signed) Ronald A Pearlman Acting Assistant Secretary of the Treasur) PROPOSED IRS REGULATIONS ON TAX TREATMENT OF CAFETERIA PLANS FILED DEC 26 1984 (Note The proposal is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register of Dec 31, 1984 ) 14830-011 lFinal Draft of 8/31/84) INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 126 CFR Part 11 1:E-16-791 TAX TREATMENT OF CAFETERIA PLANS (TRANSITION RULES) NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE14AKING AC;EVCY Internal Revenue Service, Treasury AC104 Amendment of notice of proposed rulemaking b'MMARY This document contains proposed amendments to a notice of proposed rulemaking which was published in the Federal Register on May 7, 1984 (49 F R 193211 That notice contained proposed regulations relating to the tax treatment of cafeteria plans Changes to the applicable tax law necessitating the proposed amendments were made by section 531(b)(5) of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 -he proposed amendments relate to general and special transition relief under the proposed regulations and provide the public with the guidance needed to comply with that Act D..TES Written comments and requests for a public hearing must be deli.ered or mailed b) Jan 30. 1985 The proposed regulations are generall% to be effective for plan )ears beginning after December 31, 1978, bit are subject to the general and special transition rules ADDRESS Send comments and requests for a public hearing tot Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Attention CCtLR T (EE-16-79), Washington. D.C. 20224 Published by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS INC Washington D C 20037 STAFF KEHU� I s4f, C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM Q ) MEETING DATE: 2-14-85 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9E - ADDED AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT:- ORDINANCE AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE CHANGING COUNCIL P'EETING PLACE FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED _- Since it appears the Council Meeting of February 28, 1985 will be held in the new Council Chambers, adoption of an urgency ordinance is required to amend the Municipal Code, Section 2.04.010, citing where meetings are held. An Urgency Ordinance requires only one reading and becomes effective immediately upon adoption. A minimum of four affirmative votes are required to adopt an urgency ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT COUNCIL. ADOPT THE URGENCY ORDINANCE, BY TITLE ONLY, AMENDING SECTION 2.04 010 OF THE GRAND TERRACE VUNICIPAL CODE CHANGING THE MEETING PLACE OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM THE TERRACE VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TO THE CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 22795 BARTON ROAD. ME f FMANG UITY, ORDINANCE NO. C( JC1L APPROVAL AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 2.04.010 OF THE GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE DEALING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING PLACE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THE FOLLOWING Section 1. Section 2.04 010 Meeting Place. is hereby amended to read as follows "Until further notice, effective February 28, 1985, all meetings of the City Council shall be held in the Grand Terrace Civic Center Council Chambers, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California." Section 2. Urgency - This Ordinance is enacted pursuant to Section 36937(b) of the Cali ornia Government Code as an urgency measure and pursuant to the City of Grand Terrace Police Power for the immediate protection and preservation of the public peace, safety, health, and welfare of persons and property within the City of Grand Terrace. Section 3. Effective Date - This Ordinance shall become effective upon it adoption. Section 4. Posting - The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) public places designated for such purpose by the City Council. ADOPTED this 14th day of February, 1985. ATTEST City Clerk of the City of Gran7Mayor of City of Grand Terrace Terrace and of the City Council and of the City Council thereof. thereof. I, Myrna Erway, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held on the day of , 1985, by the following vote AYES NOES ABSENT ABSTAIN Approved as to form City Clerk City Attorney