The URL can be used to link to this page

09/26/1985CITY OF GRAND TERRACE nrrin eQ rnifmrTl MFFTTNr- AGEFDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS GRAND TERRACE CIViC CENTER 22795 Barton Road n Call to Order * Invocation - Reverend Harold Lorimer, Retired * Pledge of Allegiance X Roll Call CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1 Approval of 9/12/85 Minutes 2 Approval of Check Register No CRA092685 ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETINGS SCHEDULEDREGULARLY OCTOBER 10 & 24, 1985 A T)-.--7RTN7E77L� TIN G WILL E HELD Q TOBER 17, 1985 CONVENE CITY COUNCIL 11 Items to Add/Delete 12 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 reouest removal of an item from the Consent Calendar !for discussion. Staff Recommendations Approve Approve A Approve Check Register No 092685 Approve B Ratify 9/26/85 CRA Actions Approve C Approve 09/12/85 Minutes Approve D A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY Adopt OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, SUPPORTING HR 3129, SEEKING CHANGES IN FEDERAL LEGISLATION NECESSARY FOR CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PROGRAM SEPTEMBER 26, 1985 5 30 P.M Council Action PLEASE DO NOT RE11OVE COUNTER COPY w "Y4r FROM INFORMATION COUNTER THANK YO`U 1 _` { COUNCIL AGENDA 9/26/85 - Page 2 of 4 E. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, RESCINDING RESOLUTION NOS 82-16, 82-32, 82-39, 82-49, & 82-38, & AMENDING THE RULES & REGULATIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF PERSONNEL MATTERS PURSUANT TO GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 2 24 090 F. Approve Issuance and Fee Waiver for Grand Terrace Chamber of Commerce Parade to be held 10/5/85 & Authorize San Bernardino County Sheriff's Dept to Block Streets (DeBerry from Park to Mt Vernon, Mt Vernon from DeBerry to Barton Rd., Barton Rd to Grand Terrace Elementary School) from 9 15 a m. to approx 10 15 a m Staff Recommendations Adopt Approve G Accept Bond No 2-509-218 in the amount of Approve $500 in lieu of cash bond for Sewer Lateral Permit - Mr Donald E Arnegard (Inland Empire Septic & Plumbing) H Accept Subdivision Improvement Bond Approve No. 913118S for Tract 9773 in the amount of $20,000.00 for Off -Site Storm Drain facilities - Griffin Development Co. I. Approve & authorize Mayor to Execute Supple- mental Agreement for Vivienda Bridge Design Contract (GTC 84-02) with Moffatt & Nichol Engineers for a total amount of $6,012 with the City's net cost of $1,202 to be appro- priated from City's Gas Tax Fund Balance J. Authorize release of following Bonds for Tract No 9482 - Griffin Development Co No. 100525 $ 7,000 - Improvements No. 100525A 3,500 - Labor & Material No 100526 19,000 - Maintenance No 100527 2,400 - Landscapte-Mtce. K Authorize release of Grading Bond No 908242 in amount of $150,000 for Tracts 9773, 9773-1 & 9773-2 - Griffin Development 3 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Approve Approve Approve Council Action COUNCIL AGENDA q/26/85 - Page 3 of 4 4 ORAL REPORTS A Planning Commission B Parks & Recreation Committee (1) Determine Gary Dishaw as resigned and authorize advertising a vacancy for an unexpired term to expire 6/30/86 C Historical & Cultural Activities Committee (1) City Anniversary Pot Luck Dinner (2) Storage Space for City artifacts (3) Resignation of Barbara Mathews D Crime Prevention Committee (1) Consider appointment of Ed O'Neal to fill the unexpired term of Joe Ramos to expire 6/30/86 E Emergency Operations Committee F Economic Development Adhoc Committee G Police Chief H. Fire Chief I City Engineer J City Attorney K. City Manager L. City Council 5 PUBLIC HEARING - 7 30 P.M Staff Recommendations Approve A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY Adopt by Title OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE Only Following AMENDMENT, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL Public Hearing PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984, FROM R-R TO R-3 (AREA 10) (Second Reading) 6 UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. School Impaction Fees B Planning Services C AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY Adopt 1st Reading OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, AMENDING THE CITY OF by Title Only GRAND TERRACE'S MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18 66, SECTION 18.66 050, DEALING WITH APPEALS TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISIONS RELATIVE TO USE PERMITS (First Readina) Council Action COUNCIL AGENDA Staff �/26/85 - Page 4 of 4 Recommendations Council Action D AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY Adopt 1st Reading OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, AMENDING THE CITY OF by Title Only GRAND TERRACE'S MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18 72, DEALING WITH SIGNS (First Reading) E AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY Adopt 1st Reading OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, DEALING WITH NOISE & by Title Only DECLARING THE EMISSION OF CERTAIN NOISES TO BE A NUISANCE. (First Reading) 17 NEW BUSINESS A Appeal of Planning Commission Decision - Sign Variance, La Tijera Barber Salon (David Rmirez) (ADJOURN THE CITY COUNCIL/CRA MEETINGS REGULARLY SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 10 & 24 HAVE BEEN CANCELLED THE NEXT REGULAR CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE HELD THURSDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1985, AT 5 30 P.M AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS FOR THE 10/17/85 MEETING MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BY 12 00 NOON ON 10/9/85 PENDING CRA APPROVAL t� SEP 2 6 1985 CAA AGE�1'OA 1 T UA NO, CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING - SEPTEMBER 12, 1985 The regular meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency, City of Grand Terrace, was held in the Council Chambers, Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on September 12, 1985, at 5 34 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 Ilene Dughman, Secretary ABSENT None APPROVAL OF MINUTES (8/22/85) CRA-85-46 Motion by Mrs. Pfennighausen, Second by Mr. Evans, ALL AYES, to approve the Minutes of 8/22/85, as presented. APPROVAL OF CHECK REGISTER NO. 091285 Following clarification relative to necessity of separate approval of Check Register by both CRA and Council and which items related to CRA, CRA-85-47 Motion by Vice Chairman Matteson, Second by Mr. Petta, ALL AYES, to approve Check Register No 091285, as presented. Adjourned at 5 39 p m. to an adjourned Joint Public Workshop Session with t e Emergency Operations Committee, September 19, 1985 at 7 00 p m The next regular meeting will be held September 26, 1985 at 5 30 p m. APPROVED Chairman Respectfully submitted, Secretary Page I - CRA - 9/12/85 s CHECK NUMBER PENDING CRA AP f ROVA� COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF GRAND TERRACE SEPT 26, 1985 SEP 2 6 1985 CRA AGENo,1 1 T EM N0j �- CHECK REGISTER NO CRA092685 OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF SEPT 26, 1985 (1) RA1541 HUGH GRANT AGENCY DIRECTORS' FRINGE, SEPT 1985 $150 00 (2) RA1542 BYRON MATTESON AGENCY DIRECTORS' FRINGE, SEPT 1985 150 00 (3) RA1543 BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN AGENCY DIRECTORS' FRINGE, SEPT 1985 150 00 (4) RA1544 ANTHONY PETTA AGENCY DIRECTORS' FRINGE, SEPT 1985 93 50 (5) RA1545 DEFERRED COMPENSATION FUND MEDICAL INSURANCE FOR PETTA 56 50 (6) RA1546 DENNIS EVANS AGENCY DIRECTORS' FRINGE, SEPT 1985 150 00 TOTAL $750 00 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 ea 0�CHPFGR • DATE 09/19/✓?5 VOUCHED/ WAFRANT NU P4405 ) , P4406 6 ] e 9 10 Ell Pi piI 4V RA1541 RA1542 FLNUIIV1. u1l 1 %wr Z 6 lyts5 G()UNG1. OVAL -tyc*� -.-�- - -- -Q CITY OF GRAND TERRACE VJ1JAt MEN15A'LTfia VOUCHER/WARPANT REGISTER VEr,DOR VENDOR ITEM ITEM :R NUMBER ` NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT a a SAN BERNARDINO,CITY OF BAL.DUE BURSTER 5.00 1210 SETH ARMSTEAD OVERPAY.SDI ARMSTEAD 36.56 2260 ,- EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. SOI P/R END.9/6/85 43.90 2950", -HUGH GRANT off_ GRANT,SEPT.1985 150.00 4658 BYRON MATTESON MATTESON,SEPT.1985 150.00 PAGE 1 htiRRA AMOUNT 36.56 43.90 150.00 RA1543 55 6 -,_ >, BARBARA,PFENNIGHAUSEN PFENNIGHAUSEN,SEPT.1985`,, 150.00 150.00 ,; RA1544 5565.,' % " ANTHONY PETTA PETTA,SEPT.198! 3 93 50 . 93 50 PA1545 1972 DEFERRED COMPENSATION FUND PETTA,MED.INS. 56.50 56.50 RA1546 2270,' DENNIS L., EVANS' �!', EVANS,SEPT.1985 ` ~ = 150.00, r 150.00, m Y •. .t ,i' f5 zTfy 'l �SUSAN hEFNOR°,";#�r,`<- ~ % W.W:D:`REFUND EFNOR x" ?•�41 4 x }> 3.50` 3.50 15058 t5� ,,'`� , 15059 1190 APPLEONE STENO CLERK 24 HRS. 251.04 251 04 15060 360 > ?`f "Ss<' ASTANCHURT OTTLED" WATER WATER C/C,9/18 a "5.; a` ;<n59.50 59.50 h_BOTTLEO� 15061 1781 CONSOLIDATED ELECTRICAL DIST. REFLECT0R,LIGHTS"` w 28.62 28.62 15062 1798 GERALD COLE COLE SEPT.1985 25.00 25.00 TS66-31876- PY LINECORPI. -REE T, DH OPIER 168.59 168.59 ,�nAa 7n7A ' rn�iNFv CAFFTV oRRhli(T¢. FTRF=,FXTTNCIITCHFR =, 19.80„ y FIRE EXTINGUISHER 19.80 39.60 15065 1963 6ILLIAM DE BENEDET DEBENEDET SEPT 1985 25.00 25.00 15066 3155, JERRY HAWKINSOtV= x HAWKINS,SEPT.1985f,TS 25.00 25•.00 I5TU 7- 3495 1PSE V CES INCORPORATED STREET SWEEP.8/6/85 432 64 STREET SWEEP.8/13/85 459 68 STREET SWEEP.8/20/85 486 72 STREET W EP.8/27/85 486.72 1,865.76 15068 4655 �' r JOHN MCOOWELL MCDOWELL,SEPT.1985" 25.00 25.00 15069 4700 RAY MUNSON MUNSON SEPT.1985 25.00 25.00 150-70 4703 MONROE,SYSTEMS MAINT.CALC.7/85-7/86 38.00 38.00 15071 5528 PHILIP M. PAGE PARK CLEAN-UP AUG.85 128.00 128.00 15072 5529 PACIFIC FELL COMP.PHONE 7.82 COMP PHONE 7.83 __ %'-fCh � FGP TE C 1F 5 eyOUCF ER/ VENOOF WAPPANT t'UMBER NUMBER ] 15072 5529 s b ] e a � tt 12 ] i 1 fe IN 539, 11 CITY OF GRAD TERRACE P.,GE Z VOUCHEk/kARkANT kEC1STER ENCOR ITEM ITEM hAR,RAN___ NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT AMOUNT BELL PAY PHONE 25t73 PAY PHONE 31.99 73.37 15073 5670 PRESS ENTERPRISE COMPANY AD FUR RECREATION j`i 17 3Y.17 15074 6144 Y. ,`T.ECO REFRIGERATION EOUIP.CO. REPAIR/SERVICE A.C. 53.00 53.00 15075 6315 S E W PLASTICS CHAIR'MATS 596 78 596.78 15076 66P2 SOUTH COAST RUBBER STAMPS RUBBER STAMP / ENG. 16.03 16.03 15077 6720 SO.CA.EDISON COMPANY ELEC.SIGNALS (4) 401.21 ELEC.LIGHTS,PARK (2) 24.79 CT_I7rHTC.7/1—A/'A1/AR 4.7n2_59 ST.LIGHTS,7/79-2/85 CR 2,085.49— 3,043.10 15078, 6730�y] SO.CA.GA5 COMPANY' GAS,CITY BLDGS.(3)' 37,10 " 3 „ ' Y GAS,CIVIC CENTER' ;"SSE a 468.56 505,66 > 15079 7880 WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY CAL.CODE UPDATE 21.73 21.73 1 n A ia., au i tik4i y xxyy .r ri ri y3 l �' 3k TOTAL CHECKS': S' ' w a; i` r `Y/ r F.3 r J.c ' i x 9 � k') r 3 ' , s' n .r', • r K ., ^' 7,891.89 1 W f 34n "'dx 'r .t+<'Ii�l ; iF ,3�! n',✓, L'' .✓ K•+' E ,C r<3 S hinf 4 f • „ > ) rF k�S ,r 3nrt> ,:.�'. H i� in ti�) f >aSq x ' w i)x�f S .. '{ n 't t f I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE GOODS AND OR SERVICES CHARGED ON THE ABOVE CHECKS ' HAVE BEEN FURNISHED TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE', I FURTHER CERTIFY THE CLAIMS ABOVE TO BE VALID AND CORRECT �. 3..+^�`�`t" ) J t rr GHi )� „ S ,i e r - ^ �k t ^^ iR s3 �.. s �. . r S,•F z v i THOMAS SCHWAB, N FINANCE DIRECTOR ) r r•+r; t r n '' : � ` 3 t �x . ;; ;.' S L € � " f` s '', ! �� ' , / � ,' , ) ry z S .. •F � 3 � i car } � y s t .t f q a n SFr N a t t � t>•Y .^ 1.+. t "�` 1 ' k � y. ' w.F C f a _ CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - SEPTEMBER 12, 1985 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order in the Council Chambers, Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on September 12, 1985, at 5 40 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 John Shone, Acting City Engineer/Planning Director Ilene Dughman, City Clerk ABSENT Joe Kicak, City Engineer/Planning Director The meeting was opened with invocation by Pastor Phil Goodge, Azure Hills Seventh Day Adventist Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, led by Captain Bradford. ITEMS DELETED FROM AGENDA - 7B - Resol-Ution dealing with Personnel Rules and Regulations. CONSENT CALENDAR - All items removed from the Consent Calendar with the exception o Item C (Approval of 8/22/85 Minutes). CC-85-266 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, ALL AYES, to approve Item C - Approval of 8/22/85 Minutes - on the Consent Calendar. CHECK REGISTER NO. 091285 - Following clarification by Finance Director Schwab o janitorial service costs, landscaping/maintenance costs, registration fees for League of California Cities Conference, and Steno Clerk wages, Warrants 415002, #15051, #P4395, and #15044, CC-85-267 respectively, Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to approve Check Register No. 091285, as presented Page 1- 9/12/85 RATIFY 9/12/85 CRA ACTION - In response to discussion on the necessity of ratifying CRA actions, City Attorney Hopkins advised that only certain actions need approval by Council Finance Director Schwab explained that since the CRA sits as a legislative arm of the City, the procedure has been to ratify all actions of the Agency CC-85-268 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to ratify 9/12/85 CRA action RESOLUTION NO 85-18 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND PPORTING SENATE BILL 719 (ALQUIST) PERTAINING TO RAIL SAFETY Councilman Evans questioned who requested the Resolutions be placed on the Consent Calendar and the insight as to why - voiced opposition to arbitrarily placing resolutions on Agenda without knowing originator or supporting background. Councilwoman Pfennighausen suggested that, when an item is requested to be placed on the Agenda, the specific Councilmember be designated, and City Manager Armstead assured all future requests for Agenda items would be signed. CC-85-269 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Mayor Grant, ALL AYES, to adopt Resolution No. 85-18, supporting SB 719 (Alquist) pertaining to rail safety. RESOLUTION NO. 85-19 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RAND TERRACE, CA, UPPORTING SB 75 (FORAN) & PROPOSING LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES INITIATE A STATEWIDE BALLOT INITIATIVE REGARDING JOINT & SEVERAL LIABILITY CC-85-270 Motion by Councilman Evans, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to adopt Resolution No 85-19 regarding joint and several liability. In response to clarification requested by Councilman Evans, City Attorney Hopkins stated that this Resolution pertains to the actual costs of an injured person such as medical costs versus the typical pain and suffering. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, SUPPORTING SB 300 (FORAN) PERTAINING TO TRANSPORTATION FINANCING Council discussion regarded redistribution of transportation financing monies and questions relative to tax increases Councilman Petta, with Mayor Pro Tem Matteson in concurrence, supported redistributing funds for City streets and roads. Mayor Grant, with Councilmembers Pfennighausen and Evans concurring, felt additional information was necessary Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Petta, to adopt a Resolution supporting SS 300 (FORAN) pertaining to transportation financing. Motion failed, 2-3, with Mayor Pro Tem Matteson and Councilman Petta voting AYE. RESOLUTION NO 85-20 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, SUPPORTING ASSEMBLY CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT 32 (MC CLINTOCK) DEALING WITH PUBLIC EMPLOYEE STRIKES Page 2- 9/12/85 Councilman Evans abstained from action in this matter due to a potential conflict of interest. Councilwoman Pfennighausen advised that Supreme Court had ruled on issue, therefore, opposed adoption. CC-85-271 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Petta, to adopt Resolution No. 85-20 dealing with public employee strikes, carried, 3-1-1, with Councilwoman Pfennighausen voting NOE and Councilman Evans abstaining. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS - CITY -COUNTY DELEGATE AGENCY AGREEMENT MC85-21) Discussion entailed questions and clarification of the purpose of the Agreement and that the project is for waterline improvements at Burns, Maple, Vivienda, and Walnut. CC-85-272 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to authorize Mayor to execute the City -County Delegate Agency Agreement (GTC 85-21) with the County of San Bernardino for Community Development Block Grant Funds for Fiscal Years 1985-86, 1986-87, 1987-88. PURCHASE OF MICROPHONES - COUNCIL CHAMBERS CC-85-273 Following clarification of costs, Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Mayor Grant, ALL AYES, to approve appropriating $1,776.06 from the General Fund Balance to cover installation and purchase of three additional microphones (including $200.00 credit allowance for lavalier microphone) to accomodate three additional stations at the Council Chamber -Staff Table. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION - Jim Rigley, 22605 DeSoto, commented on ounce s August 22 action eliminating Ordinance 63, stating the only means to have an effective street sweeping program is by issuing citations, felt this should not interfere with code enforcement in other areas. Mayor Grant concurred and Mayor Pro Tem Matteson suggested staking out particular problems in other areas and review findings in a couple of months. PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE REPORT - Dick Rollins, Chairman, reported the following ommunity air to be held in October, (2) Chili Cook -off, Saturday, September 21, 1985, (3) Committee's discussions with SCE regarding park site location on the southwest portion of the City Discussion by Councilman Evans and Councilwoman Pfennighausen relative to considering potential school site near park site, both felt an ideal combination Councilman Evans invited to attend next Parks and Recreation Committee meeting Mayor Grant also indicated interest in attending Meeting to be arranged with Mr Rollins, Staff, and SCE representative to discuss park sites Page 3- 9/12/85 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS COMMITTEE REPORT - It was noted that City Council meeting will adjourn to Emergency Operations Committee Joint Session Workshop, September 19 at 7 00 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADHOC COMMITTEE REPORT - Minutes of August 6, 1985 meeting were proviaed by Jim Rig-T-e-y—,-Thairman, who also reported the following (1) Meeting held on September 3rd, at which Tom Lenny, representing Hopkins Development Co. of Newport Beach, voiced interest in developing a shopping center adjacent to Barton Road, thanked Councilwoman Pfennighausen for being instrumental in initiating his appearance at their meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson advised that Westar Development is also interested in developing a shopping center in Grand Terrace CITY ENGINEER REPORT - Acting City Engineer Shone stated that the the Vivienda Bri ge project is anticipated to go out for bid the first part of October. CITY MANAGER REPORT - Accent on Youth - Finance Director Schwab related istory of -Accent on out and and reported the following. (1) On November 15, 1979, a motion was approved to donate $1,000 to Accent on Youth, funds to be coordinated by Volunteer Services Committee and used for City Christmas decorations and youth activities. (2) No disbursements have been made out of the funds for the last three years, excepting the $500 in question for the purchase of children's books. Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Mayor Grant, to accept Finance Director Schwab's report as presented and to take no further action. Councilwoman Pfennighausen noted the Accent on Youth Committee was never given a grant of $1,000, the Committee agreed to investigate types of Christmas decorations for the City. Purchases of decorations were paid by the City and no City money remained in the Accent on Youth Fund - all funds expended by the Committee were donated funds. Understands the initial $300 was derived from $150 donations from Hugh Grant and Tony Petta, the Volunteer Services Committee undertook soliciting funds from the community feeling the Accent on Youth project worthwhile, noted she also donated to the funds, felt Council did not intend to control these funds Responding to statements at the previous meeting that the funds were given to the Friends of the Library anonymously, advised funds were actually drawn from the Security Pacific Bank in Grand Terrace where a money order was purchased and signed by Ken Rinderhagen, Director of the Accent on Youth fund. Further noted there had been no utilization of the funds for a long period of time and, when it was realized there was a lack of children's books for a summer reading program, the Accent on Youth funds came to mind, felt the purchase of children's books a worthy and valid expenditure, falling within guidelines of enhancement of youth in the community, as intended by initial contributors to the fund. Councilman Petta felt need for further clarification and cited two g major problems (1) The procedure that was followed in withdrawing 9�9/85 the S500, (2) The change -rom the original purpose of this fund. Stated that Council established Accent on Youth for the specific purpose of helping disadvantaged youths, with the intent of insuring that at no time would a youth be unable to participate in a community program due to lack of money, felt the integrity of charitable funds should be preserved and contributions used for the purposes designed. Felt we must not lose sight of the original intent of the program - if custodians of a charitable fund have the power to divert funds donated for a specific purpose, however worthy, the charitable institution is at stake, it will have the effect of destroying the integrity of all donations - that trust must be preserved and protected. Commented that expenditures from this fund were to be based on requests by a youth organization, a Community leader, or a City sponsored program where a fee is involved. Felt the lack of fund requests was due to lack of adequately publicizing the program. In response to Councilman Petta's question regarding the status of the account, City Attorney Hopkins advised that it appeared the money was given to Accent on Youth, an independent organization, to be used for a specific purpose at the discretion of that organization and, accordingly, has losts its status of having direction by the City. Relative to disbursements of funds, Councilwoman Pfennighausen, felt she met the criteria, stated she encouraged greater publicity of the existence of the fund and referred potential applicants to Bob Yates or Ken Rinderhagen to no avail. Further stated that all funds have not been expended and nothing is preventing donations at this time; does not believe integrity of fund has been compromised. Recessed at 7 39, reconvened at 8 52, with all members present. Accent on Youth (Cont'd) Mayor Pro Tem Matteson called for the question. CC-85-274 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Councilman Evans, to overrule the call for the question, carried 4-1, with Mayor Grant voting NOE. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, with concurrence of Mayor Grant, withdrew original Motion to accept Finance Director Schwab's report as presented. (for the purpose of opening the Public Hearing) Dick Rollins, 22700 DeBerry Street, spoke on lack of community response with regard to Accent on Youth fund. Cited example where family refused money offered from fund to buy a soccer uniform for child. Felt in Grand Terrace, where average income is in excess of $30,000, few children are disadvantaged and families that may be are not receptive to taking charity (Continued on page 8) Page 5- 9/12/85 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 13050/SPECIFIC PLAN 85-10 RESOLUTION NO. 85-21 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND A , APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT 13050/SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 85-10 AND MAKING OTHER DETERMINATIONS Acting Planning Director Shone advised proposed project was in conformance and the Planning Commission recommends Council's approval following Public Hearing. Mayor Grant opened Public Hearing. Leon Humphrey, 22665 Thrush, questioned what impact the development would have on current water pressure. Acting City Engineer Shone stated that since developer was required to relocate and replace lines, water pressure should not be affected. Ernie Zam ese, 11963 Honey Hill Drive, felt that the overall pressure should improve due to the expansion of present water lines. Bill Storm, representing T J. Austyn, concurred with above statements. Mayor Grant closed Public Hearing. Councilman Evans questioned and Mr Shone responded this development should have no effect on water pressure of the people across town. CC-85-275 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to adopt Resolution No. 85-21, approving Tentative Tract 13050/Specific Plan No. 85-10 and making other determinations. Relative to school impaction, Councilman Evans questioned number of students per household anticipated to generate from development project. Mr Storm projected an estimated 1.5 children per household. Dan Carrasco, representing Colton Joint Unified School District, using a 59 student generation factor for 176 track homes, calculates 104 students will be generated by development project, however, felt Mr. Storm's estimation of 1.5 children per household seemed more realistic Councilman Evans questioned 554 total student figure for Grand Terrace Elementary School and requested an updated impaction report including findings whether figures are representative exclusively of Grand Terrace residents. Councilman Evans voiced concern with respect to fluctuations in student/classroom ratios throughout the 5-10 year period and asked what method of projection would be used. Mr Carrasco advised an analysis would be taken from prior developments to determine a student generation factor for projecting number of classrooms needed per grade PLANNING SERVICES - Finance Director Schwab reported costs for Contract P anning Services reflected in 6 RFP's submitted. The following options were discussed (1) If staff is directed to negotiate for an outside consultant, cost and appropriation action will be considered with the award of the contract (2) If staff is directed to secure an in-house planning department, staff will require Page 6- 9/12/85 Council to (a) Create City Planner Position Salary Range 73, (b) Create Planning Secretary Position Salary Range 51, (c) Appropriate an additional S11,261 to Department 370 Planning from General Fund Balance to increase the department to $76,093 as reflected in Table 1 (3) After reviewing the costs for an in-house Planning Department and/or costs of a new contract for City Planner, staff feels that another important option and recommendation is to reevaluate and renegotiate our present planning contract. Councilwoman Pfennighausen, voicing support for Option No. 2, felt Council had made their interest clear for either full-time or part-time in-house planning services, felt Staff, in spite of that direction, pursued other alternatives Noted Mr. Kicak's letter advising lack of interest in providing this service. Felt the present planning services reactive rather than innovative in coming forth with suggestions, the next 3-5 year period will be crucial for the City, and a planner with Urban Development education and experience is needed at City Hall to work with developers for the best utilization of land available. Felt full-time planner not justified, suggested possibility of sharing a planner with another City - one that could assist with two master plans for areas remaining to be developed. Requested clarification of Staff Report figures for Option No. 2. Councilman Evans concurred with Councilwoman Pfennighausen, however, felt full-time planner justified, requiring an individual energetic, innovative, creative, and youthful enough to take upon the task. , Mr Schwab, responding to Councilwoman Pfennighausen, advised he was not aware the planner would be part-time, anticipated hiring at Step "C" level considering current market for professional planners, allowance was also made for necessary office equipment. Advised Option No. 3 was provided to possibly save City money, it was indicated to him that Mr. Kicak may have initially undertaken the additional planning services as a favor to the City, and his rates and budget may not have allowed for a level of service for which he could recoup costs. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson supported renegotiating with Mr. Kicak in order to maintain continuity as well as save the City money Councilman Petta commended Staff for the Staff Report providing the three options. Felt it apparent Mr Kicak had been losing money, supported Option No 3 Motion by Councilman Evans, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, to approve Option #2, failed, 2-3, with Councilmembers Evans and Pfennighausen voting AYE Mayor Pro Tem Matteson felt it premature to approve Option #2 until Option =3 is researched Page 7- 9/12/85 CC-85-276 'Aotion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Petta, to approve Option #3, carried, 3-2, with Councilmembers Evans and Pfennighausen voting NOE Motion by Councilman Evans, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, to allow two weeks for renegotiation or re-evaluation of contract with Kicak and Associates and, if proposal rejected by Council, approve Option #2 Motion failed, 2-3, with Councilmembers Evans and Pfennighausen voting AYE. CC-85-277 Motion by Councilman Evans, Second by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, ALL AYES, to require the re-evaluation or renegotiation with Kicak and Associates and submit proposal within two weeks Accent on Youth (Cont'd) CC-85-278 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Mayor Grant, to accept report on Accent on Youth as presented and take no further action. Ken Rinderhagen, 12738 Wilmac, felt money used to purchase children's books was a worthwhile expense, especially since there were no books available for the children's summer reading program, further stated that, out of seven requests for funds, four were funded, two withdrawn, and one denied - reported amount of fund at its peak was approximately $1,000.00 Mayor Grant felt the purchase of children's books was a viable use of the Accent on Youth fund and was within the intent of the original contributors. Motion No. CC-85-278 carried 4-1, with Councilman Petta voting NOE. SCHOOL IMPACTION FEES - Community Services Director Anstine reported that staff is investigating feasibility of the development of school impaction fees, requested matter be continued until September 26, 1985 and imposed stipulations previously approved by Council be carried over until September 27. CC-85-279 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Councilman Matteson, ALL AYES, to approve continuation of School Impaction Fee issue to September 26, 1985 and previously imposed stipulations be carried over until September 27. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENT, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984, FROM R-R TO R-3 (AREA 10) (FIRST READING) City Attorney Hopkins read the title of Ordinance. Acting Planning Director Shone stated Ordinance would enact the amendment approving the zone change on Area 10 from R-R to R-3 to comply with the General Plan Page 8- 9/12/85 Following clarification of area in question oy Councilwoman CC-85-280 'Ifennighausen, Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Detta, ALL AYES, to waive full reading and adopt first reading of the Ordinance by title only. NUISANCE ABATEMENT - 22149 Van Buren - Acting City Engineer Shone requested authorization to board property to preclude further vandalism and remove weeds which are creating a potential fire hazard. Following discussion pertaining to several citizen complaints and CC-85-281 necessity to abate the nuisance, Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Mayor Grant, ALL AYES, to approve the following recommendations (1) Direct staff to take corrective action to abate the nuisance at 22149 Van Buren Street, and (2) Appropriate $1500 to Dept. 190, Non -Departmental, for nuisance abatement from General Fund Balance. COUNCIL REPORTS (CONT'D) - Councilman Petta invited Mr. DeBenedet to speak on his recent trip to Italy. i e enedet reported on his trip to Palazzolo Dello Stella, our Sister City, related Mayor Braida's continued interest in maintaining friendship and exchanging cultures with Grand Terrace - sends greetings to Mayor Grant, Council, and all residents of Grand Terrace. Mayor Grant thanked Mr. DeBenedet for effecting communications with our Sister City, Palazzolo Dello Stella, Council discussion relative to reciprocal delivery of material to them Councilman Petta advised that Bill DeBenedet volunteered to personally deliver items to Mayor Braida when he returns to Italy at the end of this month. CC-85-282 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Mayor Grant, ALL AYES, to approve the preparation of the following items for delivery to Palazzolo Dello Stella, Italy City Flag, California Flag, and City plaque Mayor Pro Tem Matteson reported the following (1) Requested a brief session at the anning Commission Training Session scheduled for September 28 regarding Robert's Rules of Order, (2) Commended excellent Chamber of Commerce newsletter. Councilwoman Pfennighausen questioned when the new lock on the door providing access to t e atrium will be installed, requested correction in two weeks Mayor Grant reported the following (1) Minutes were provided from the August 6, T985 meeting of the Economic Development Adhoc Committee, (2) Three members of Council as well as staff will be attending the League of California Cities Conference, (3) Estimated population of Grand Terrace has increased to over 10,000, (4) Relative to Omnitrans and SANBAG meetings, Mr Leonard, member of the Transportation Committee, and Lieutenant Governor McCarthy voiced concern about allocation of funds to San Bernardino County, Mayor Grant concurred, stating it appears San Bernardino County is not being allocated a fair Page 9- 9/12/85 • r share of the funds, perhaps due to the proximity of Orange and Los Angeles Counties COUNCIL MEETING DATES - OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER Councilwoman Pfennighausen advised of the conflicts for Council meeting dates for October, November, and December. CC-85-283 Following discussion, Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to reschedule October, November, and December meetings as follows October - the regularly scheduled meetings for October 10 and 24 are cancelled and one meeting will be held on October 17, November - the regularly scheduled meetings for November 14 and 28 are cancelled and meetings will be held November 7 and 21, December - the regularly scheduled meeting for December 26 is cancelled and only one meeting will be held on December 12. COMMEMORATIVE PLAQUE FOR MYRNA ERWAY - Motion by Councilman Petta, Second y Mayor Grant, to approve purchase of commemorative plaque for Myrna Erway. Following discussion relative to setting precedent and costs, the Motion was withdrawn, with concurrence of its Second, until such time staff submits estimated price of plaque. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (CONT'D) - Mr. Frank Tetley, 23146 Vista Grande Way, representing Grand Terr ace Community Soccer Club and concerned parents, commented on recurring safety problem at baseball field. Council discussed urgency of providing a safe environment for the children and the necessity to act on problem immediately. CC-85-284 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Mayor Grant, ALL AYES, to direct Community Services Director Anstine to look into matter including contacting City Attorney Hopkins. ADJOURNED at 10 09 to an Adjourned Joint Public Workshop Session with the Emergency Operations Committee, September 19, 1985 at 7 00 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held September 26, 1985 at 5 30 p.m. APPROVED Mayor Respectfully submitted, City Clerk Page 10- 9/12/85 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (XX) MEETING DATE: 9/26/85 AGENDA ITEM NO. ,2 ,& SUBJECT: Resolution Supporting HR3129 FUNDING IS REQUIRED NO FUNDING IS REQUIRED l XX This Item was requested to be placed on the Agenda by Mayor Grant ID Date- 9/19/85 t PEND;,uC MY COUNCIL APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 85- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING FIR 3129, SEEKING CHANGES IN FEDERAL LEGISLATION NECESSARY FOR CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PROGRAM. WHEREAS, FIR 3129, Legislation introduced by Glenn Anderson, Congressman, 32nd District, would retain Federal Aid Urban (FAU) funding at existing dollar levels, and WHEREAS, FIR 3129 would retain Interstate Rehabilitation and Federal Aid Primary Funding at current levels with increased spending authority for future improvements such as I-215, and WHEREAS, FIR 3129 would retain existing public transit operating subsidies, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace does hereby support FIR 3129 and encourages Congress and California legislators to become more attentive to the fiscal crisis confronting transportation funding in California. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that appropriate copies of this Resolution be sent to Congressman George Brown, Jr., Congressman Jerry Lewis, Senator Alan Cranston, Senator Pete Wilson, the California Transportation Commission, and Wes McDaniel of SANBAG. ADOPTED this 26th day of September, 1985. ATTEST City Clerk of the City of Grand Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace Terrace and of the City Council and of the City Council thereof. thereof. I, ILENE DUGHMAN, 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 Approved as to form City Clerk ity Attorney BRUCE NE:TANDE Chairman JOE LEVY Vice Chairman RICHARD AZEVEDO WILLIAM BAGLEY JOE DUFFEL 1 T (TOM) HAWTHORNE JUDITH L HOPKINSON WILLIAM LEONARD RICHARD ROMERO ROBERT S NIELSEN Exec Director 1NFORNIA ,.,V COPY STATE OF CALIFORNIA FURNISHED T0: CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1120 N STREET PO BOX 1139 SACRAMENTO 95805 (916) 445 1690 September 3, 1985 Seth Armstead City Manager 22795 Barton Rd. Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Dear Mr. Armstead: RECEIVED GEORGE DEUKMEJIAI GOVERNOR \C �_r 't�5 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE The purpose of this letter is to request your support as the California Transportation Commission seeks changes in federal legislation necessary for continued development of the State's highway program. During the past several months, the Commission has highlighted problems associated with the 1985 five-year State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). It has become clear that the 1985 STIP contains $650 million in federal funds that, under current law, may not be available. To understand how this situation developed, it is necessary to consider two key aspects of highway funding. These are: 1) apportionment, and 2) obligational authority. Apportionment is an assignment of funds for a specific Federal -Aid highway program to individual states, based on a formula established by law. Obligational authority is the more important figure in that it represents the total amount of Federal -Aid highway funds a state can actually spend (obligate) in a given year. Thus, the apportionment is a planning amount and the obligational authority is precisely what is allocated. The obligational authority can be less than the apportionment. The past administration's attitude towards road development, plus the 1970's energy crisis, a building moratorium, and numerous delays regarding construction of the Century Freeway, caused California to leave dollars on the table in Washington, in that during those years we did not spend our apportionments to the extent possible. If you do not spend as much apportionment as possible, you lose the opportunity to apply for other federal funds, i.e , Interstate Discretionary funds. Obviously, the theory is if you do not spend what was granted, why should you be in a position to be granted additional discretionary dollars It is these unspent dollars that we are attempting to carry in as part of the California five-year STIP. Seth Armstead Page 2 September 3, 1985 The federal policy places California in a most disadvantageous situation. It was a past administration which did not spend its obligational authority. Because those dollars were not utilized, then we cannot secure supplemental funds today, i.e., Interstate Discretionary funds which could be applied to California pro3- ects. Thus, at this point, the federal government will not permit us to secure previously unspent federal apportionments, and because they were not spent, we cannot apply for other funds either. The lack of equity with such a policy is very clear. We would be foolish not to vigorously pursue equity for the $650 million previously not spent, but which now precludes us from going after other funds. Thus, we are presently petitioning Congress for an equitable resolution of the problem by simply authorizing California to retain what was previously committed and funds which Caltrans has applied to specific projects. The Commission has adopted a five -point program (enclosure 1) to achieve the equity we feel due California. It's ambitious, but it's fair. We will petition Congress and the National Administra- tion to support our efforts. In addition, we seek the support of the Deukmejian Administration and the California State Legislature in this effort. Our objective will be to work through our federal legislators to achieve the goals of the Commission. Thus far, we have achieved a significant breakthrough. In conversations I had with Congressman Anderson, I (representing the Commission) agreed to vigorously support his bill, HR 3129, which contains provisions that will satisfy a major portion of the federal shortfall ($650 million), and he, in turn, agreed to vigorously pursue our objectives (enclosures 2 and 3). The four -point provisions presently contained in his ambitious transportation bill are the very bottom line for California. An analysis of the importance of each of the four points is contained in enclosure 4. It is critical that we jointly engage in vigorous lobbying in support of those provisions for California contained in HR 3129. The first hearing is scheduled for September 11, 1985 before the House Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, chaired by Congressman Glenn Anderson. Assembly Joint Resolution 66 (Lancaster) memorializes Congress to retain and pass the provisions currently in HR 3129. The Commission will have Commissioners and staff in Washington, D.C., during that week to encourage members to support the bill. I have been assured that the Deukmejian Administration will add its support as well. It would be most helpful if your organiza- tion would add its support by personal discussions or through phone calls and letters to appropriate congressmen. A list of California congressmen is provided as enclosure 5. - I Seth Armstead Page 3 September 3, 1985 In conclusion, if we are to continue in a timely manner on an ambitious transportation rehabilitation and capital expansion program in California, we simply need additional funds. At this point, the STIP has a deficiency of federal funds --funds to which we have a strong claim. Jointly, I believe we have an opportunity to be successful in obtaining a significant portion of those federal dollars previously committed to California. You can rest assured that the Commission will continue to promote a very aggressive transportation improvement program in California. A great deal of slippage occurred in the system under the past Caltrans Director, which necessitates going beyond what normally ought to occur when possible. Your assistance would be appreciated in this effort. You can contact key congressmen and your congressman in behalf of support- ing the key components of HR 3129 outlined in this letter. In addition, encourage members of Congress to vigorously support federal transportation policies favorable to California in recog- nition of the fact that a great deal of competition exists for federal dollars. Also encourage California legislators to become more attentive to the fiscal crisis confronting transportation funding in California. If there are any questions with respect to this matter, or on other issues before the Commission, please feel free to call me. Thank you for your consideration of cooperation and assistance regarding this particular matter. Sincerely, BRUCE NESTANDE, Chairman California Transportation Commission Enclosures (5) cc: Governor George Deukme3ian David Ackerman, BT&H Leo Trombatore, Caltrans Members of the Commission CALIFORNIA L7ANS?ORTATTON COMMISSION'S FZvz-POINT POLICY FOR THE 1986 REAATHORIZATION OF THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY PROGRAM Enclosure 1 Federal Legislative Solutions to the Problem: Cartain changes to federal law, particularly, in new highway authorization legislation now under consideration in the Howe of Rapreseatatives. eaa alloy the California Transportation Commission to minimize project delays and eoatiaue to address serious problems on the cash poor nonlnterstata system. At a m{nj""m, the following provisions should be included in any highway aur!,oriaatioa legislation: 1. Extend the Interstate Completion Program deadline beyond 1990: Presently, the Interstate Completion program is set to and in October 1990. Annua,. Interstate apportionments are set at levels that will permit this to occur. Because California's Interstate system will cost about $2.6 billion to complete. Interstate apportionments will be high between now and 1990. As a result, Interstate projects will require a disproportionate share of obligational authority, leaving many nenlnterstate projects without obligational authority. However, if Interstate apportionments can be spread over two additional years, many nonlnterstate projects can be delivered closer to their original schedule. 2. Extend the "852 Minimum" Program Beyond 1986• Starting with the 1982 Surface Transportation Assistance Act, each state is to receive from'the Federal Highway Trust Fund apportionments totalling at least 85Z of their contributions. If they, do not, the state is to receive the difference in additional allocations. In California, if the "85Z mini;=Z" provision, scheduled to sunset in 1986, is not estendrd, then some $550 milllou in nonlnterrtata projects contained in the 1M STIP cannot be funded. 3. Increase obligational authority closer to full -apportionment levels: At present, only 93 percent of California's apportionments may be spent because of federally imposed spending limits, or "obligational authority" limits. As A result, projects programmed with the remaining 7 percent of apportionmants must be delayed until the following year's obligational authority is avail- able, in turn, projects in the following year must be delayed. Unless obligational authority is provided for all of California's apportionments, hundreds of millions of dollars ir. projects will have to be delayed. lare- over. because of the 1990 Interstate Caraplation deadline, choices may be made between delaying Interstate projects and nonIntarstate projects. 6. Permit u" Dent apportionments from prior years to ce spent vzzuvuz competing for new obligational authority. Some $650 million in apportion- ZQnts have not been spent in the year they were apportioned to California. However, because of federal spending limits discussad above, not all of these apportio=eats may be obligated. As a result, unless additional obligational authority is provided for the $630 million of "carry -in" apportionments, a series of project delays will occur totalling $2.0 billion during the 1985 STIP . 5. Assign nev obligational authority to remaining Interstate Completion proj ects• The Federal Goveramenc s emphasis on completing the Interstate System has directed most of California's highway expenditures to the Inter- state system. This discrepancy betvaea expenditures and priorities can be removed if additional spending authority is provided for Interstate Completion projects, leaving nonlnterstate projects free to use the existing spending authority without competing against Interstate jobs. K �+oe.:1�•�' a&U a CAUMI a. V. visa cl"W. i YG�lT FILL N.t►Wf110M�t ' % a .OAONSON LICO"AD "W#AC10 CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION L MR59K EaK Ors III* M lT = Pa. toe t 1" ssara�Nto +scot MN �Li.IMO August 13, 1995 Enclosure 2 Honorable Glenn Anderson Congressman, 32nd District 300 Long Beach Blvd. Long Beach, CA 90801 Dear Glenn: On behalf of Jot Levy and myself. I wish to thank you for the opportunity to discuss with you last Tuesday some items of great concern to California which we feel ought to be incorporated into your highway authorization bLill. Your cooperative attitude and assistance to California's surface transportation network is appreciated. I have received your August 9th letter and am very encouraged by your incorporating the four provisions irr your MR 312g, which will be very banefieial to California if enacted and signed into law. The four points to which you refer in your letter are most crucial to the continued stability, balance. and equity of California's State Transportation Improvement Program. We appreciate the fact that these are now in your legislation, MR 315. You can rest assured that I, personally, and the entire membership of the California Transportation Commission, will work in great earnestness to achieve the success of your bill as presently drafted. In addition, I'm sure the Deukmejian Administration and members of the California Legislature will work equally hard to secure passage and the President's signature on this important highway financing bill for California. In reality we are not seeking new money. The federal funds we are seeking belong to California as a result of previous apportionments which were not spent, and we now desire to program those unused funds for needed highway projects. Unfortunately, this money was not used by the past administration in a timely manner, but the need for highway projects did not disappear. Therefore, we approach this as an equity issue for California and seek release of the identified funds'by the appropriate authorities. The fact that you have incorporated these components into MR 3129 at this early stage will cause me to recommend to the Commission at the August U. 1985 meeting that we secure the Department of Transportation's concurrence in dedicating sufficient personnel to begin the development work an the north and south segments of the Harbor Transitway. As I understand it, an estimated 17-20 personnel years during the 1985-86 fiscal year will be needed. Congressman Glenn Ande :n August 13, 1985 Page 2 I believe that enactment of the four points you mention in your letter will allow the Commission to immediataly program the entire Harbor Transitway interstate completion project. If the four points are modified, we will have to sit down at the end of next year and determine what the financial picture is at that point and decide the timing and deliverability of the entire Harbor Transitway project. The Commission will continue to develop a statewide programming effort in which all areas are served equitably. Since you made mention of L.A., it is of interest to note that Los Angeles County continues to receive a generous share of total funding. In spite of delays to the Century Freeway, Los Angeles County has consistently exceeded its statutory share during the past twenty years. Again, thank you very much, Glenn, for your time and for your continucus cooperation in your efforts on behalf of California, its total infrastructure and, perhaps most importantly. its highways and its Interstate System. I repeat that I look forward to working diligently with you on behalf of HR 3129 and its provisions outlined in your letter,.'and will encourage the California Transportation Comission to adopt the policy with respect to the Harbor Transitway as outlined in this letter. Sinctr;?y, V BRUCE NESTANOE Chairman EN:kc �cc: Members, California Transportation Commission ?ss Ah"W= "WM owv boars � rywsroatanar�w.eorom n of thenit� �t • F am Lane Slam fsaUe of r�rntsti�t�c MOMM•M* U~ AM r a on so.w P"Nom �..�..� a,e s•..a», at�ij{nom WC. 20515 � � AMOlt fTU • rt �SAWWWAIC71C4iAft? W m August 9, 1985 • C#Awaum CCW9MffK lWIP NOMEW PLZAN AWWU Wear TO MW • WONK Co.GReero " war a wAs►rraroN OPP= a Lola "A" arcs • �••••. ao"assaou.� •.ra RECEIVED ...,.�. BRUCENESTANOE "'""'�"° CAUC%M'"'�"' . •M.K me det�or atuo+ �aww�o•o AUG 131585 Honorable Bruce Nestande r,n = County Supervisor Tv - is 10 Civic Center Plaza M& Enclosure 3 Santa Ana, CA 927/tda: Dear Supervi9 As you know, I have introduced legislation ER 3129, which: 1. Retains the 854 minimum apportionment program. 2. Makes the Harbor Freeway eligible for funding under the Interstate Discretionary program. 3. Provides an additional year of authorization for the Interstate Construction Program at 04 billion. 4. Provides for increased obligational authority nationwide, and increases the share California will receive of the larger amount. Of course, the formula for distributing the August reapportionment of obligational authority has already been modified, at my behest, to bring California additional authority. while recognizing that the Administration and the United States Senate are expected to vigorously oppose some or all of the above four points, I look forward to working ,with you bn securing enactment of HR 3129. Additionally, Bruce, it is my hope that sufficient personnel will be secured to begin the development work of the entire Harbor Freeway as a single project, about 20 personnel -years. This is certainly reasonable given that --MORE-- THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS Honorable Bruce Dies de August 91 1985 Page 2 California has, over the years, received $367 million in Interstate apportionments, and a proportionate amount of obligational authority, much of which has been used outside of Los Angeles County. Again, I look forward to working with you toward com- pletion of the Harbor freeway Transitway. cexp;y p GLZNN M AJANWSON Member of q naress GMA/lc TOTAL. P. 02 Enclosure 4 PROVISIONS IN HR 3129 (ANDERSON) ESSENTIAL TO CALIFORNIA'S HIGHWAY PROGRAM HR 3129 by Congressman Glenn Anderson contains four provisions that are essential to reducing project delays in California's 1985 State Trans— portation Improvement Program and preventing further delays from occur— ring. 1. 2. 3. EXTEND THE "85 PERCENT MINIMUM" PROVISION BEYOND 1986 Background/summary: Under current law, each state must receive at least 85 percent of its percentage share of contributions to the Federal Highway Trust fund. HR 3129 would extend this requirement beyond its current 1986 "suaset" date. Benefits if this provision is successful: This will increase California's annual apportionments from the Federal Highway Trust Fund by more than $100 million per year. , Problems if this provision is nonsuccessful: The 1985 STIP in- eludes $550 million in 85 percent minimum funds for projects beyond the current 1986 deadline. If this provision is not re— newed, or if it is redefined, California would have to delay these projects until sometime after 1991. These funds represent nearly half of the nonInterstate program in the last four years of the 1985 STIP. EXTEND THE INTERSTATE COMPLETION DEADLINE BEYOND 1990 Background/summary: Under current law, the deadline for completing the Interstate system is September, 1990. HR 3129 would extend this deadline by one year to 1991. , Benefits if this provision is successful: This would permit California to spread its remaining Interstate Completion projects out over a longer period of time so that more nonInterstate proj— ects could be completed as scheduled. Problems if this provision is not successful: California is faced with delaying approximately $400 million in nonInterstate Com— pletion projects beyond the 1985 STIP period into 1990-91. If the Interstate Completion deadline is not extended, Interstate Com— pletion funding may actually increase before 1990, therefore requiring additional nonInterstate projects to be delayed until after 1990, due to federal spending limits. INCREASE OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY TO ALLOW MORE OF CALIFORNIA'S ANNUAL APPORTIONMENTS TO BE SPENT -2- Background/summary: Under current law, California can only spend or obligate 93 percent of the federal ,funds apportioned to the State, due to federal spending limits, known as "obligational authority"; ER 3129 would make it easier for California to qualify for additional funding over and above the fixed spending limit. Benefits if this provision is successful: Additional funding would reduce the competition between Interstate and nonlnterstate projects for available spending authority, and therefore reduce the number of projects that would otherwise be delayed. Problems if this provision is not successful: If California continues to be limited to only 93 percent of our annual apportion- ments, another $300 - $400 million of projects would have to be delayed beyond the five years of the 1985 STIP. 4. MARE THE HARBOR TRANSITWAY (LOS ANGELES I-110) ELIGIBLE FOR INTERSTATE DISCRETIONARY FUNDS Background/Summary: Under current law, California is not now eligible for Interstate Discretionary funds because not all of our Interstate apportionment from prior years has been spent. HR 3129 would make the $700 million Harbor Transitway project in Los Angeles County eligible for Interstate Discretionary funds, over and above California's federal apportionments and obligational authority limits. Benefits if this provision is successful: California would be able to fund the $700 million Harbor Transitway, leaving more of our federal apportionments and obligational authority available for the other Interstate and nonInterstate projects that are currently threatened with delay. Problems if this provision is not successful: Many of the $650 million in projects being delayed into 1990-91 would face further delay, along with many of the remaining Interstate Completion projects that have not yet been programmed in the STIP. -aclosure 5 0 CALIFORNIA'S CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION Senator Party Alan Cranston D Pete Wilson R Representatives Party Glenn Anderson D Robert Badham R Jim Bates D Anthony Beilenson D Howard Berman D Douglas Bosco D Barbara Boxer D George Brown D Sala Burton D Eugene Chappie R Tony Coelho D William Dannemeyer R Ronald Dellums D Julian Dixon D Robert Dornan R David Dreier R Mervyn Dymally D Don Edwards D Vic Fazio D Bobbi Fiedler R Augustus Hawkins D Duncan Hunter R Robert Lagomarsino R Tom Lantos D Richard Lehman D Mel Levine D Jerry Lewis R Bill Lowery R Dan Lungren R Matthew Martinez D Robert Matsui D Al McCandless R George Miller D Norman Mineta D Carlos Moorhead R Ron Packard R Leon Panetta D Charles Pashayan R Edward Roybal D Norman Shumway R Fortney Stark D William Thomas R Esteban Torres D Henry Waxman D Ed Zschau R SU 2 CID,UNCIl: 'AGENg/�Y F Grand Terrace Chamber of Commerce Sept. 16, 1985 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CITY COUNCIL 22795 Barton Rd Grand Terrace, CA 92324 RE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE PARADE OCT. 5, 1985 The Grand Terrace Area Chamber of Commerce is planning a parade on Oct. 5, 1985. The parade will begin at 9 30 AM at Terrace Hills Park on DeBerry and conclude at th Community Center on Barton Road THE CHAMBER REQUESTS THAT COUNCIL 1 GIVE CHAMBER PERMISSION FOR THE PARADE ` 2 ISSUE A PARADE PERMIT AND WAIVE FEES FOR PERMIT. 3. REQUEST THAT THE SAN BERNARDINO SHERIFF BLOCK STREETS AT 9 15 AM ON THE DAY OF THE PARADE. THE PARADE WILL LAST APPROXIMATELY ONE HOUR. THE ROUTE OF THE PARADE IS ENCLOSED ~ THANK YOU, BARBARA BAYUS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 22795 Barton Road, Bldg 3 . Grand Terrace, California 92324 . (714) 783-3581 6 V Q' W ti = 2 i / � J d U w V1 w � ry W 17RR�Y GRANDE i21,00 I / %na P� ol"01 0O� CARHARTAVE y I l-- " �►' 0NgCl MC CLARREN ST , Q` P� SCE CA g SCHOOLBARTN c J ON RD PALM AVER AND TERRACE 4�ofSfs � �' ' LA PaIX�sT � AfNCF( o W 1 f z I DE BERRY ST N Lu FULMAR PL a f l i I Jd`MAVIS ST ' MAVIS ST h a a ICARDINAL W t 0 01 Qf W _ VAN BUREN ST t ? i u, c 3'— _. i 122100 ! Z r d KENTFIELD ST Q f O 1 o. Qi �i' ST a !KENTFIELD ST o I t LARK ST ' r %`LARK S % o c�a W Q 2 Z w ►- I ¢ p Z Y t 1 t W f � at zt 1 W 77jj a cv Lu ca d W J Y d U Y s TANAGER ST I SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY rn I Q 3 z o. d cca: 6=d � FflANKLIN ST I GP 22500 = FIRE STATION J U i 1 VJ O V W LA PAIX ST z c} /' H / m' DE SOTO ST . � [A n Y ST x 31 to 0 �j �1 TERRACE HILLS 2280Cp Y it JUNIOR HIGH Qar c WREN ST J 3 FINCH S CARDINAL ST I THRUSH ST ! a —o — VAN B 22600 22800 a KENTFIELD ST Wl a LARK ST 3 Y Y , z c+ J S ci U Y O d 2 ty co FRANKLIN ST GP W FLAMINGO ST c FLAMINGO ST W '- = FLAMINGO ST d O �r c TANAGER ST W 114 ` o Q TANAGER ST_ TANAGER STuj 3 WY NgpgCT a Lu a c c RAVEN WY 3 -- c RAVEN WY �NAYEN ; ��o '� Lu �• SLAus DERA ST! LADERA ST L o- LADERA ST F ¢; ROBIN WY f o i T� C 3 o f MI Y zl N O cF s Zf cz tj ZI �y m 1 Wt f t uaLe: a ' F S T Ar R E P 0 Pxzsr-T September 18, 1985 12-9.1052 V5* C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (XX) MEETING DATE: September 26, 1985 AuEND A ITEM NO. A 6- SUBJECT: Public Works Permit - Sewer Lateral FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED xx A connection to the sewer system was made at 21480 Palm Avenue. Pursuant to Ordinance, a cash deposit of $500.00 was made to the City guaranteeing the street repairs. At this time, the Contractor, Mr Donald E. Arnegard doing business as Inland Empire Septic & Plumbing, is requesting that a bond be accepted in lieu of a cash bond. STAFF RECOMMENDS ACCEPTANCE OF THE BOND NO. 2-509-218 IN THE AMOUNT OF $500.00, IN LIEU OF CASH BOND FOR SEWER LATERAL PERMIT FOR INLAND EMPIRE SEPTIC & PLUMBING (DONALD E. ARNEGARD) JK/JS/lh Attachment. Bond No 509-218 Premium $25 00 Per Year BOND }OR IMPROVEMENT OF SUBDIVISION (ROAD) KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: Donald E. Arneyard & Lance D. Arneyard, THAT WE DBA INLAND EMPIRE SEPTIC & PLUMBING (Owners) P 0. Box 332, Redlands, Cal'ifornia 92373 As principal, and THE OHIO CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY 2420 East Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, Ca1NPA199 Company) organized and existing under the laws of the State of UHi0 ' and authorized to act as Surety in the State of California, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the CITY OF GRAND TERRACE , State of Cali forn a the ju9t and full sum of FIVE HUNDRED AND --------------------------- NO�lOO�S Dollars ($ 500 00 ), lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which, well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, administrators executors, successor* and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly and by these presents. The condition of the foregoing obligation is such that whereas said Principal he S entered into or is about to enter into the annexed agreement with the My ofi' Grand Terrace , pursuant to the authority of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, for the improvement of the streets and ease- ments offered for dedication on the final map of Subdivision Tract No. or to be improved in connection with said subdivision and whereas this bond is required by said City in connection with the execution of said agreement. NOW THEREFORE, if the said principal shall and rely do and perform all of the covenants and obligations of said agreement on part to be done and performed at the time and in the manner ispeciN ad rh•r•in.its ' than tho above obligation shall be void and of no effect, otherewise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. Date September 18, 1985 STAFF REPOR12-1.1045 4500 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) MEETING DATE: September 26, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. a� SUBJECT: Tract 9773, SubDivision Improvement Bond FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED xx Tract 9773 is located south of DeBerry, and includes Observation Drive to it's present end. Griffin Development Company has been required by the City Engineer's office that a bond be provided as a surety for required off -site storm drain facilities Said Bond is in the amount of $20,000.00. Staff Recommends Council. ACCEPT SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT BOND NO. 913118S FOR TRACT 9773 IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000.00 FOR OFF -SITE STORM DRAIN FACILITIES FOR GRIFFIN DEVELOPMENT CO. JK/1h 1411onalPeo The Group DID 9 BOND NO INITIAL PREMIUM _t200. 00 SUBJECT TO RENEWAL SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS PERFORMANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS That we and DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation organized and doing business under and by virtue of the lawsaof the 5 a of California and duly licensed to conduct a general surety business in the State of California as Surety, are held and firmly bound uni CITY OF GRAND TERRACE as Obligee in the sum of (S ) Dollars, for which payment well and truly to be made we bind ourselves our heirs, executors an successors jointly and severally firmly by these presents � 1 THE CONDITION OF THE OBLIGATION IS SUCH THAT (( WHEREAS, the above named Principal as a condition of the filing of the final subdivision map of (Tract/ Parcel) Map No ria � 9779 entered into an agreement or agreements with said Obligee to complete the improvements specified in said agreement or agreements *COnstructlon Of drainage facilities ortlons of tract 9773. on Southerl OW THEREFORE the condition of this obligation is such that if the above Principal shall well and trulyY reements during the original term thereof or of any extension of said term that may be granted by the Obligee with or without no the Surety, this obligation shall be void, otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect perform said agreement or notice N WITNESS WHEREOF, the seal and signature of said Principal is hereto affixed and the corporate seal and the V name of the said urety is hereto affixed and attested by its duly authorized Attorney -in -Fact at ANAHE M ?California this 22nd day of Jul 19 35—_ 'PRINCIPAL' GRIFFIN HOMES Donald N Trotter EYecut iz= e Vice President -------------------------------- ! FOOnRL�M ID113 REV 9184 "SURETY" DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY BY David C. Banfer Att ornev-i n- Fact 333 Wilshire Ave Anaheim, CA 92801 (714)999-1471 ate* September 18, 1985 R 1 12.52A STAI F REPO . R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) McETING DATE: September 26, 1985 50 AGENDA ITEM NO. oZ OBJECT: Amendment No. 1 to Engineering Design Agreement with Moffatt & Nichol Engineers for Vivienda Bridge Design JNOING REQJIRED xx FUNIDI',G REQUIRED During the design process of the Vivienda Bridge, it was necessary for the Consultant, Moffatt & Nichol Engineers, to do some work that was not ' anticipated at the time the original contract was approved and an order to secure Federal funds for the additional work, we are required to amend our agreement with the Consultant. The total amount if $6,012, of which the City will pay 20% or $1,202, from the City Gas Tax allocation. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL. AUTHORIZE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR VIVIENDA BRIDGE DESIGN CONTRACT (GTC84-02) WITH MOFFATT & NICHOL ENGINEERS FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $6,012 WITH THE CITY'S NET COST OF $1,202 TO BE APPROPRIATED FROM CITY'S GAS TAX FUND BALANCE. JK/JS/lh Attachment /' r September 17, 1985 Mr Arun K. Jain, S.E. Moffatt & Nichol Engineers 250 West Wardlow Road Long Beach, CA 90807 Dear Mr. Jain Enclosed are two copies of Supplemental Agreement No 1 for the Vivienda Street Bridge Design. This agreement is necessary for the City to be reimbursed for a portion of the $6,012, due to Moffatt & Nichol Engineers, for additional work performed on this pro3ect Please sign all three copies and return to this office for further processing. A completely executed copy will be returned to you for your files. Sincerely, 1 JOHN SHONE FOR JOSEPH KICAK CITY ENGINEER JS/lh cc Seth Armstead Enclosures HUGH J GRANT Mayor BYRON MATTESON Mayor Pro Tern Counc,l Members TONY PETTA DENNIS L EVANS BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN SETH ARMSTEAD City Manager 12 52A 22795 BARTON ROAD Civic Center — (714) 824-8621 GRAND TERRACE, CA 92324-5295 Planning — Engineering — (714) 825-3825 r Ar SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 1 VIVIENDA STREET BRIDGE (COST $5373, NET FEE $ 639) This Supplemental Agreement between the City of Grand Terrace and Moffatt & Nichol Engineers is to authorize additional reimbursement to Moffatt & Nichol Engineers in the amount of $6,012, (cost $5373, net fee $639), to pay for additional engineering services not anticipated in the original agreement. These services include 1. Determining actual street right of way in relation to the existing bridge and the proposed bridge. 2. Resolve the question of prior rights for water -line relocation. 3 Coordinate efforts to resolve the overall utility relocations The method and time of payment shall be the same as specified in the original agreement. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE BY MAYOR ATTEST MOFFATT & NICHOL ENGINEERS CITY CLERK DATE DATE CALTRANS DATE aA September 18, 1985 ST FF REPO-rm*',T 12-1.1016 6W C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (XX4 MEETING DATE:— September 26, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. eZ SUBJECT: Tract 9482 FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED xx At their regular City Council meeting of June 26, 1980, Subdivision Bonds guaranteeing the maintenance of public improvements were accepted from Griffin Development Company for Tract 9482 Tract 9482 is located between Palm Avenue and Barton Road east of paradise. Griffin Homes is requesting that the Maintenance Bonds be released at this time. All improvement have been installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer The bonds to be released are Tract No. 9482 Subdivision Bond Subdivision (L & M) Maintenance Landscape -Maintenance No. 100525 No 100525A No. 100526 No 100527 $ 7,000.00 $ 3,500.00 $19,000.00 $ 2,400.00 STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE EXISTING IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE BONDS JK/lh Date. r--- F REPOkT September 18, 1985 STi 12-1-1045 S* C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) MEETING DATE_ September 26, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT' Tract 9773, 9773-1, 9773-2 Grading Bond FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED xx At their regular City Council Meeting of October 11, 1984, a Grading Bond guaranteeing the completion of grading was accepted from Griffin Development Company for Tract 9773, 9773-1, and 9773-2 Tracts 9773, 9773-1 and 9773-2 are located south of DeBerry at Observation Drive. Griffin Homes is requesting that the bond be released at this time. All grading has been completed to the City Engineer's satisfaction. Existing Grading Bond No. 908242 $150,000.00 STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE GRADING BOND. JK/lh 0 COV-1,119SIOV AND COMV-11TTEE REPORTS SEP 2 $1%5 COUNCIL AGENOA MV 11 Ye61) COUNCIL MEETING DATE September 26, 1985 DATE 9/19/85 COMMISSION/COMMITTEE PARKS & RECREATION 5^ SUBJECT DECLARE GARY DISHAW'S POSITION VACANT PROBLEM - Facts - Since Gary Dlshaw has moved out of the Grand Terrace area, the Parks & Recreation Committee recruest that the Council declare his position vacant. ALTERNATIVES: If the Council declares Gary Dishaw's seat vacant, the vacancy on the Parks & Recreation Committee should be advertised. SOLUTION Accept resignation of Gary Dishaw REQUESTED ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY COUNCIL AND/OR STAFF THAT GARY DISHAW'S POSITION ON THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE BE DECLARED VACANT, AND ADVERTISE VACANCY ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE. SEP 2 6 ---J5 W"C112"MEN15R ITEM 7 ' / 0- Historical & Cultural Committee mutes of the September 9th, 1985 meeting The meeting ws called to order at 7.05 PM by Chairman Barbara Mathews. Irene Mason and Barbara Bayus were absent. Secretary's report: The Secretary's report for August 5th was corrected to incluae in paragraph 9 that Ann Petta is working vith the schools for historical information on Grand Terrace. with this correction, Ann made a motion to accept the minutes, Viola seconded, all approved. Betty reported that there was no Treasurer's report - these reports have been dblayed due to computer problems. Ann reported that vie had been given hardware (circa 1908-1913) from one of the doors at the Community Center by the Lion's Club. Ann also showed the members the pictures she had reproduced, three of our sister city in Italy contributed by Ernie Zambesi and one of Grand Terrace children at school in 1916 which was contributed by Mr. Houplin of Hemet. She also reported that she has two more possible interviews to folio x up. Historical Research: Hannah reported that she had not had time to go to the Colton library as yet, Viola has had sickness in the family. Barbara is going to the Riverside Museum to inquire about show cases. Now that it is cooler, she is also going to take more pictures around town. Betty gave the Committee the inspection report on the new Civic Center for our hist,orical records. She also reported that the Chamber of Commerce Installation dinner will be October 19th. Art Show November 3, 1985: We will get an article in the Chamber of Commerce Newsletter. We will send a form to all respondees and Betty will compose a poster for us to get in the appropriate places to advertis our Art Show. Ann wLll call the people on the list she has. Storage of Artifacts Ne will request storage space from the City Manage for all our papers and artifacts, preferably a room hi th lock. Our gold shovel vas borrowed and is missing. It was last seen in the City Clerk's closet. ,fie will make a search. City Anniversary. The committee voted to have a pot, luck supper again this year. Motion was made ey Ann, seconded oy Hannah, approved by all. lie vill request the Council meeting date from Staff so that the Mee -Lin g room can be reserved in time and further plans can be finalized. Meeting was adjourned at 8 05 on motion from Viola, seconded by Betty. The next meeting will be October 7th, 1985. Restiectfully quomitted, RECEIVED Hannah Laister, ��•�-�- c f ;r� Secretary CITY OF 4R,�ND TERRACE COMM19SION AND COMMITTEh REPORTS SEP 2 9 685 90U14C1L AGENDA UWN COUNCIL MEETING DATE !?ZaG1fs� DATE 9/9/85 COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Historical & Cultural Committee SUBJECT: City Anniversary PROBLEM Facts • ThR Comm�.t t egnv� e m �rhave a pot luck dinner for the City an iversa In order for us to reserve the meeting room for this occasion, we are requesting Staff to provide the date of the last Council meeting in November, ALTERNATIVES. SOLUTION Staff requested to provide date of last Council meeting in November. REQUESTED ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY COUNCIL AND/OR STAFF Same as above RECEIVED CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMMISSION I.,JD COMMITTLmm. REPORTS SE? 2 6 1985 !GOUNCiL AGENDA l�E � 'yC C2, COUNCIL MEETING DATE DATE 9/9/85 COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Historical & Cultural Committee SUBJECT Storage of Artifacts S:1:w Facts The Committee has acquired many papers and artifacts which we find we are having a problem storing. We are asking Staff to provide a place for us where we can keep all of our things together. ALTERNATIVES: SOLUTION Se are asking Staff for storage space. REQUESTED ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY COUNCIL AND/OR STAFF Same as above RECEIVED SEr 1 � 1s 8,5 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE SEP 21 85 CdUNCIL AGENDA LT A'/0 (3� I submit my resignation as a member of the Historical and Cultural Committee. This resignation to be effective immediately. FECEIVED F-1 SEP 2 6 -- COUNCILA 300A I1MR Z' CC 66 0OMM I SS I 0" A"E> 0OMM I TT'EE FZEF='0F;ZTS i COUNCIL MEETING DATE. 9/5-�/�3 DATE: 9/ 2 6/2 5 COMMISSION/COMMITTEE• Crime Prevention SUBJECT: Application for committee membership submitted by Mr Edward C O'Neal PROBLEM. To till an existing vacancy on the Crime Prevention Committee. Facts: The committee has reviewed Mr. O'Neal's application and agreed that he would be an asset to the committee. ALTERNATIVES - SOLUTION Recommend acceptance by City Council. REQUESTED ACTION TO BE TAKER BY COUNCIL AHD. OR STAFF The Crime Prevention Committee respecttulif recommends that the Cit• Council appro,je Mr O'Neal s application, and appoint him as a member of the Crime Prevention Committee RECEIVED SEPI '1G85 CITY OF GRAND TERR,01 4 C CITY OF G RAN D TERRACE APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN SERVICE COMPLETE AND SUBMIT TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AS A MEMBER OF Crime Prevention Committee NAME Edgard C . O'Neal ADDRESS 22bO8 Minona Dr Grand Terrace HOME PHONE 783 1371 BUSINESS PHONE OCCUPATION Retired — politics EDUCATION (List highest year completed and all degrees) BS in Mecnanical Engineering Are there any workday evenings you could not meet? Yes (g) No ( ) If so, please list. Tuesda Why are you interested in this position TTtI l , 7,P m � -Pt, rPm-net" fa= tue betterment od the community — impressed ith Sheriffs rep. What do you consider to be your major qualifications? Interest in making Grand Terrace a better place to live .-. r+ f f � -• REFERENCES RE ,rE` JE 1 Setn Armstead - City Manager vnrlc 2 Grand Terrace City Council memoers 3 _ y_ Please attach a written statement containing any additional information you feel would be useful to the City Council Date: September 18, 1985 -S � 12-8.8008 ::F REPOF T C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) MEETING DATE: September 26, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. .6"A SUBJECT: Zone Change for Area 10. FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED xx Several weeks ago, the Planning Commission and City Council approved a Master Plan for development presented by Mr. Al Trevino, to construct apartments in the area bounded by Mt. Vernon Street, Canal Street and Britton Way. The City Council directed Staff to initiate the appropriate zone changes and waived City Zone Change Fees for this area. First reading of the Ordinance was approved by the City Council September 12, 1985. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL 1. CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED ORDINANCE 85- 2. WAIVE FULL READING AND ADOPT SECOND READING OF ZONE CHANGE ORDINANCE FOR AREA 10 BY TITLE ONLY. JK/JS/in Attachment A 0 ORDINANCE NO. PENDING Wr( COUNCIL APPROVAL. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENTS FROM R-R TO R-3, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984. (AREA 10) 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 19, 1985, 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 Exhibits "A" and "B" 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 Exhibits "A" and "B," attached hereto and incorporated herein, are hereby rezoned and the zoning amended as shown on said Exhibits 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) puFTio places within fifteen (15) days of its adoption, as 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 1.1 day of _ . , , 198 , and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regu ar meeting or said City Council on the day of -, r , 198 1 • EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE AREA NO. 10 All that portion of Lot 5, Block "E" as shown on Map of Grand Terrace Tract on file in Book 1, Page 33, Record of Surveys, Records of the Recorder of San Bernardino County, California, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the South line of Lot 5 with the west right of way line of fit. Vernon Avenue as shown on Map of Grand Terrace Tract; THE.ZiCE Northerly, a distance of 148.02 feet, along said right of way line, to the true point of beginning; THENCE Westerly, along a line parallel with the South line of Lot 5, to the intersection of said parallel line with the east right of way line of Gage Canal; THENCE Northeasterly, along the east right of way of Gage Canal, to the intersection of said right of way with the west right of way of Mt. Vernon Avenue; THENCE Southerly, along the west right of way line of Mt. Vernon Avenue, to a point distant 148.02 feet from the south line of Lot 5, being also the Point of Beginning; EXHIBIT "B" ZCNE CHANGE ON AREA 10 FROM R-R "RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT" To R-3 "MULT2PLa FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.' AT i f _Un PRlO O � nil ` CHANGE � s ti AP • <' \d� l N � n fl I� I s � t �8 �RR y 4 i August 28, 1985 STA - 12_8.8008 1 I A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM ax ) KETING DATE: September 12, 1985 ,. '.NOA ITEM NO. 7 ZZ, IJECT: Zone Change Amendment for Area 10 DING REQUIRED FUNDI;.G REQUIRED xx On August 19, 1985, the Planning Commission approved the attached Resolution, recommending that the City Council change the Zone from R-R to R-3 of the property known as Area 10, located at the intersection of Mtn Vernon and Canal Street. The property is part of the area previously approved in concept by the Planning Commission and City Council for a Master Plan development of apartments. The attached Ordinance would implement the Planning Commission's recommendation. STAFF RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL: 1. WAIVE FULL READING AND ADOPT FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCF RV TITLE nNiLY 2. SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE FOR COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 26, 1985. JK/lh STkFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: FROM: AGENDA I NUMBER: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: PROJECT LOCATION: Ty tvv .0 L 12-8.8008 AUGUST 19, 1985 PLANNING DEPARTMENT AREA 10 ZONE CHANGE FROM R-R TO R-3 City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Area 10 - Legal Description: All that portion of Lot 5, Block "E" as shown on file in Book 1, Page 33, Record of Surveys, Records of the Recorder of San Bernardino County, California, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the South line of Lot 5 with the west right of way line of Mt. Vernon Avenue as shown on Map of Grand Terrace Tract; I-HF-NCE Northerly, a distance of 148.02 feet, along said right of way line, to the true point of beginning; THENCE Westerly, along a line parallel with the South line of Lot 5, to the intersection of said parallel line with the east right of way line of Gage Canal; 'THENCE Northeasterly, along the east right of gray of Gage Canal to the intersection of said right of way with the crest right of .a; of Ott. Vernon Avenue, i -„1 O 7 P c, 1AEc i i,.G Ga 7 E D THENCE Southerly, along the west right of way line of Mt. Vernon avenue, to a point distant 148.02 feet from the south line of Lot 5, being also the Point of Beginning. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: Medium Density Residential CURRENT ZONING: R-R, "Residential Agricultural District" PROPOSED ZONING: R-3, "Multiple Family Residential District REQUEST: The City Council of Grand Terrace has directed the Staff to proceed with the Zone Change of Area 10 to bring these parcels into conformance with the Community Development Element of the General Plan Update of April 28 1984. ENVIRONMENTAL ' ANALYSIS: A Negative Environmental Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. STAFF ANALYSIS: On July 8, 1985, a proposal by Mr. Al Trevino, known as as the Mt. Vernon Master Plan, was presented in concept to the Joint Session of the City Council and the Planning Commission for a development of the area, known as Areas 10, 11, and 12 in the :lass Zone Change. Said area is bounded by Mt. Vernon Avenue on the east, Canal Street on the west and northwest, and Britton Way on the South. The plan as proposed by Mr. Trevino incorporated all of the acreage with the boundaries of these areas. Mr. Trevino will attempt to gain control of all of the properties within the area and develope as per the proposed Mt. Vernon ;Taster Plan. 4s part of processing the Master Plan, the City Council authorized Staff to change the area 10 Zoning District from R-R to R-3. • RECOMM ENDATIONS: STAFF RECOrMDS THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND TARE THE FOLLOWING ACTION: A. The proposed amendment will not be (1) detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the City, or; (2) Injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City. B. The proposed amendment will be consistent with the latest adopted General Plan. C. Adopt the attached Resolution, including the findings as written in the Staff Report, approving the Zone Amendment; and to recommend adoption of the Negative Environmental Declaration to the City Council. DATE • Sept. 19, 19,95 .oTArr ►c U T C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (j MEETING DATE September 26, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO �40�' SUBJECT SCHOOL IMPACTION FEES FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED BACKGROUND: City staff, along with Colton Unified School District staff, have been addressing the principal legal, administrative and other barriers relative to determining school impaction within the Grand Terrace area. In order to focus in on this issue, City staff has analyzed two primary studies: 1) Student Impaction Report, as prepared by the Colton Unified School District. 2) Review of the Declaration of Impaction, as prepared by Donald G. King, Ph.D., Associate Planners. In order to evaluate the consistency of the District pr03ections with recent trends, estimates of current population, housing and employment were collected from the county and the state. A ma3or purpose of staff's investigation was to make findings of consistency/inconsistency between monitored trends and the District forecast. Such findings were intended to determine if 1) Actual events match the forecasts. 2) The growth assumptions within the Grand Terrace area appear to be valid given available data Because of the importance of a finding of consistency, care was given in defining that term. As used in this report, consistency between Grand Terrace area growth and District forecast means that, given everything we know about observed trends, anticipated short-term development, student enrollment appears to be proceeding along the lines forecast by the District, and there appears to be no contradictions. To Staff Report - School Impaction Page 2 September 26, 1985 Ma3or conclusions of the detailed review identify that the Colton Unified School district needs to maximize its ability to generate revenue through a variety of funding sources ro resolve the problem of impaction. Since state and federal revenues have become more restrictive, it is apparent that no money will be available to help alleviate the impaction condition. The Student Impaction Report, as prepared by the Colton Unified School District has addressed 15 possible methods of mitigating impaction within the School District. Several questions arose in regards to the mitigation measures. These questions were responded to by district staff, and attached to this report. In view of the fact that the Board of Education has declared that "conditions of overcrowding exist", and that "no feasible method for reducing such conditions exist", and that Section 65 971 of the Government Code states, "conditions of overcrowding exist which will impair the normal functioning of the educational programs, and that all reasonable methods of mitigating conditions of overcrowding have been evaluated and no feasible method for reducing such conditions exist", "the governing body of the City may by ordinance require the payment of fees for classroom and related facilities". Given this context: Options Before the City Council - DECLARE THAT CONDITIONS OF OVERCROWDING EXIST WITHIN THE GRAND TERRACE AREA AS DEFINED BY THE COLTON JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT; 2) DIRECT THE CITY STAFF TO IMPLEMENT CITY ORDINANCE NO. 54 AND ESTABLISH A RESIDENTIAL BUILDING FEE OF $1,678.00 PER DWELLING UNIT TO HELP OFFSET THE IMPACTION CONDITION; 3) REJECT THE DECLARATION OF OVERCROWDING AND TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION, OR 4) REJECT THE DECLARATION OF OVERCROWDING, BUT RETAIN CONSULTANT(S) TO STUDY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY THE IMPACTION SITUATION WITHIN GRAND TERRACE, RLA ac 4 d ORDINANCE NO. _54 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, RELAT- ING TO SCHOOL FACILTIES FEE AND DEDICA- TIONS. . WHEREAS, the City of Grand Terrace has entered into an agreement with the Colton Joint Unified School District for the City to provide furnished school classrooms and related facilities herein sometimes referred to as "school facilities" or "classroom facilities" or "school class facilities" or "facilities" or "classroom related facilities," and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Colton Joint Unified School District have determined the need to establish school facility fees and dedications and to implement the provisions of Government Code Section 65970 et seq.; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace DOES HEREBY ORDAIN as follows SECTION 1. Citation - This Ordinance shall be known and may be cited as the "School Facilities Dedication and Fee Ordinance." SECTION 2. Authority - This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to the pro- visions of Chapter 4.7 commencing with Section 65970) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. SECTION 3. Purpose - The purpose of this Ordinance is to provide a method for financing interim school facilities necessitated by new residential developments causing conditions of overcrowding. SECTION 4. Regulations - The City Council may, from time to time, by resolution, issue regulations to provide for the administration and imple- mentation of this Ordinance. SECTION 5. Findings - The City Council of the City of Grand Terrace finds and declares as follows (a) Adequate school facilities should be available for all children residing in the City, including children residing in new residential developments. (b) Public and private residential developments may require the expansion of existing public schools or the construction of new school facilities. (c) In many areas of the City, the funds for the construc- tion of new classroom facilities are not available when new development occurs, resulting in the over- crowding of existing schools (d) New housing developments frequently cause conditions of overcrowding in existing school facilities which cannot be alleviated in a reasonable period of time without City involvement as provided for under existing State law. y e (e) That, for the above reason, new and improved methods of financing for interim school facilities necessitated by new development are needed in the City of Grand Terrace. SECTION 6. General Plan - The City of Grand Terrace General Plan pro- vides for the location of public schools. Interim school facilities, whether temporary or permanent, to be constructed from fees paid or land required to be dedicated hereunder, or both, shall be consistent with the City General Plan. SECTION 7. Definitions (a) "Conditions of Overcrowding" - shall mean that the total enrollment of a school, including enrollment from proposed development, exceeds the capacity of such school as determined by the governing body of the school district. (b) "Decision -Making Body" - shall mean the Grand Terrace City Council or their designee. (c) "Dwelling Unit" - shall mean a building or a portion thereof, or a mobile home, designed for residential occupation by one person or a group of two or more persons living together as a domestic unit. (d) "Reasonable Methods for Mitigating Conditions of Over- crowding" - shall include, but are not limited to, agreements between a subdivider or other developer of a residential development and the affected school district whereby temporary -use buildings will be leased to or for the benefit of the school district or temporary -use buildings owned by the school district will be used. (e) "Residential Development" - shall mean a project containing residential dwellings, including mobile homes, of one or more units or a subdivision of land for the purpose of constructing one or more residen- tial dwelling units. Residential development includes, but is not limited to (1) A privately proposed amendment to the City General Plan which would allow an increase in authorized residential density and where no further discretionary action for residential development need be taken by a decision making body prior to application for a building permit, (2) A privately proposed specific plan or amendment to a specific plan which would allow an increase in authorized residential density, -2- -k e (3) A tentative or final subdivision map or parcel map or a time extension on such a tentative map, (4) A special use permit, (5) An ordinance rezoning property to a residential use or to a more intense residential use; (6) A building permit, or (7) Any other discretionary permit for residential use. (f) "Exemptions" - A residential development shall be exempt from the requirements of this Division when it consists of any of the following (1) Any modification or remodel of an existing legally established dwelling unit where no additional dwelling units are created. (2) A condominium project converting an existing apartment building into a condominium where no new dwelling units are created. (3) Any rebuilding of a legally established dwelling ( unit destroyed or damaged by fire, flood, explosion, act of God or other accident or catas- trophe. (4) Any rebuilding of an historical building recog- nized, acknowledged and designated as such by the City. SECTION 8. Finding of Overcrowded Attendance Area - If the governing body of a school district which has jurisdiction within the corporated boundaries of the City of Grand Terrace makes a finding supported by clear and convincing evidence that (a) Conditions of overcrowding exist in one or more attendance areas that include territory within the City which will impair the normal functioning of educational programs, including the reasons for the existence of such conditions, and (b) That all reasonable methods, within established school district policies, of mitigating conditions of over- crowding have been evaluated and no feasible method, as determined by the school district, for reducing such conditions exist, the governing body of the school district shall notify the City Council. The notice of finding sent to the City shall specify the mitigation measures considered by the school district. If the City Council concurs in such findings, the provisions of Section 10 herein shall be applicable to 6k official actions taken on residential development application by a decision making body. SECTION 9. Notice of Findings Requirements - Any notice of findings sent by a school district to the City shall specify (a) The findings listed in Section 8 herein; (b) The mitigation measures and methods, including those listed in the definitions herein under "Reasonable Methods for Mitigating Conditions of Overcrowding," considered by the school district and any determina- tion made concerning them by the District. Other mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to (1) Any other agreements entered into by the affected school district which would alleviate conditions of overcrowding caused by new residential devel- opment. (2) The use of relocatable structures, student trans- portation and/or school boundary realignment. (3) The use of available bond or State loan revenues, to the extent authorized by law. (4) The use of funds which could be available from the sale of surplus school district real property and funds available from other appropriate sources, as determined by the respective govern- ing bodies of the affected school district. (c) The precise geographic boundaries of the overcrowded attendance area or areas. (d) Such other information as may be required by the City Council regulations. SECTION 10. Restriction on Approval of Residential Development/City Council Findings - Within any attendance area of a school district where it has been determined pursuant to Section 8 herein, that conditions of over- crowding exist, no decision making body shall approve an application for a residential development within such area, unless such decision making body makes one of the following findings (a) That action will be taken pursuant to this Division to provide dedications of land and/or fees to mitigate the conditions of overcrowding within that attendance area or (b) That there are specific overriding fiscal, economic, social, or environmental factors which in the judgment of the decision making body would benefit the City, thereby justifying the approval of a residential -4- development otherwise subject to the provisions of this Ordinance. An agreement between the applicant for a residential development and the school district to mitigate conditions of overcrowding within that attendance area may be considered by a decision making body as such an overriding factor. SECTION 11. Requirement of Fees and/or Dedications - For the purpose of establishing an interim method of providing classroom facilities where overcrowding conditions exist as determined pursuant to the provisions herein - above, the City shall require, as a condition to the approval of a residential development, the dedication of land, the payment of fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both as determined by a decision making body during the hearings or other proceedings on specific residential development applications falling within its jurisdiction, unless it has been determined by the City Council that provisions of subsection (b) of Section 10 hereinabove are appli- cable. Prior to imposition of the fees and/or dedications of land, it shall be necessary for a decision making body acting on the application, or the City Council, to make or to have made the following findings: (a) The City General Plan provides for the location of p public schools. (b) The land or fees, or both, transferred to a school district shall be used only for the purpose of providing interim elementary, junior high or high school classroom and related facilities as defined by the governing body of the District. (c) The location and amount of land to be dedicated or the amount of fees to be paid, or both, shall bear a reasonable relationship and will be limited to the needs of the community for interim elementary, junior high or high school facilities and shall be reasonably related and limited to the need for schools caused by the development. (d) The facilities to be constructed, leased, or rented from such fees or the land to be dedicated or both is consistent with the City General Plan. SECTION 12. Payment of Fees in Smaller Subdivisions - Only the payment of fees shall be required in subdivisions containing fifty (50) parcels or less. SECTION 13. Standard for Land Dedication and Fees - The standards for the amount of dedicated land or fees to be required shall be established by the governing board of each school district where a determination has been made pursuant to the foregoing provisions herein contained that conditions of overcrowding exist. Such standards and facts supporting them shall be trans- mitted to the City Council. If the City Council concurs in such findings, they shall, until revised, be used by decision making bodies in situations where dedications of land and/or fees are required as a condition to the approval of a residential development. Nothing herein shall prevent the City Council from establishing and using standards other than those established by the school district in the event that the City Council is unable to concur in those transmitted by the district. -5- SECTION 14. Filing Application for Residential Development - At the time of filing an app ication for approval of a residential development located within an attendance area where the findings required have been made, the applicant shall, as part of such filing, indicate whether it prefers to dedicate land for school facilities, to pay a fee in lieu thereof, or do a combination of these. If the applicant prefers to dedicate land, it shall suggest the specific land. SECTION 15. Notification to School Districts. (a) Upon receipt of an application for a residential development within an attendance area where the findings required herein have been made, the Planning Director of the City shall notify the affected school districts thereof. With the exception of applications for building permits, said notification shall be made no later than thirty (30) days prior to consideration of the application by a decision making body. (b) For the purpose of advising school districts of proposed residential development which may affect them, the Planning Director of the City shall notify a school district of any application not governed by subsection (a) hereinabove submitted to City for approval of any residential development within the jurisdiction of that school district. SECTION 16. Decision Factors. (a) Upon receipt of notification required by subsection (a) and (b) hereinabove, the governing board of the affected school district shall determine whether to require dedication of land within the development, payment of a fee in lieu thereof, or a combination of both. The school district shall then transmit the determination to the Planning Director of the City for submission to the appropriate decision making body for concurrence. If the decision making body concurs in such determination it may at the time of its consid- eration of a residential development application, impose such requirements. In the respective actions regarding this determination, the school district and the decision making body shall consider the following factors (1) Whether lands offered for dedication will be consistent with the City General Plan; (2) Whether the lands offered for dedication meet the criteria established within Education Code Section 39000 et seq., (3) The topography, soils, soil stability, drainage, access, location and general utility of land in the development available for dedication, SM V 1 s (4) Whether the location and amount of lands proposed to be dedicated or the amount of fees to be paid, or both, will bear a reasonable relationship and will be limited to the needs of the community for interim elementary or high school facilities and will be reasonably related and limited to the need for schools caused by the development; (5) If only a subdivision is proposed, whether it will contain fifty (50) parcels or less, Nothing herein shall prevent a decision making body from imposing requirements other than those trans- mitted by the school district in the event that a decision making body is unable to concur in the district's determination hereunder. (b) If the School district has entered into an agreement with the applicant for the residential development to mitigate conditions of overcrowding within the attend- ance area covered by the application, the governing body shall upon receipt of the notification required herein so advise the Planning Director and transmit a copy thereof for submission to the appropriate decision making body for consideration. SECTION 17. School District Schedule - Following actions by a decision making body to require the dedication of land or the payment of fees, or both, the City Planning Director shall notify each school district affected thereby. The governing body of the school district shall submit a schedule specifying how it will use the land or fees, or both, to solve the conditions of overcrowding. The schedule shall include the school sites to be used, the classroom facilities to be made available, and the times when such facilities will be available. In the event the governing body of this school district cannot meet the schedule, it shall submit modification to the City Council and the reasons for the modifications. SECTION 18. Land Dedication - When land is to be dedicated, it shall be offered for dedication to the affected school district in substantially the same manner as prescribed by the school district. Dedicated land which subse- quently is determined by the school district to be unsuitable for school purposes may be sold at the option of the school district. The funds derived therefrom must be used in accordance with this Ordinance. SECTION 19. Fee Payment - If the payment of a fee is required, such payment or the prorata amount thereof shall be made to the Planning Director` of the City at the time a building permit within the residential development is approved and issued. SECTION 20. Fees Held in Trust - Fees paid under this Division shall be held in trust by the City. Such fees shall be transferred within thirty (30) days of payment to the school district operating schools within the attendance area from which the fees were collected. -7- 1 SECTION 21. Refund of Paid Fees - If a residential development approval is vacated or voided, and if the City or the affected school district still retains the land and/or fees collected therefor, and if the applicant so requests, the City Council or the governing board of the school district shall order the land and/or fees returned to the applicant. SECTION 22. Use of Land and Fees - All land or fees, or both, collected pursuant to this Division and transferred to a school district shall be used only by the district for the purpose of providing interim elementary, junior high, or high school classroom and related facilities, whether tempor- ary or permanent. SECTION 23. Fee Fund Records and Reports - Any school district receiving funds pursuant to this Division shall maintain a separate account for any fees paid and shall file a report with the City Council on the balance in the account at the end of the previous fiscal year and the facilities leased, purchased, or constructed during the previous fiscal year. In addition, the report shall specify which attendance areas, which include City territory, will continue to be overcrowded when the Fall term begins, and where conditions of overcrowding will no longer exist. Such report shall be filed by August 1 of each year and shall be filed more frequently at the request of the City Council. SECTION 24. Termination of Dedication and Fee Requirements - When it is determined by the City Council that conditions of overcrowding no longer exist in an attendance area which includes territory of the City, decision making bodies shall cease levying any fee or requiring the dedication of any land for that area pursuant to this Ordinance. Action under this Section shall not affect the validity of conditions already imposed for levy of fees and dedications of land and such conditions shall remain binding. SECTION 25. The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted within fifteen (15) days after its adoption in three (3) public places within said City. SECTION 26. First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on the 24th day of September, 1981, and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the 8th day of October , 1981. ATTEST. G Llty Jerk of the City of Granc Terr ce and of the City Council thereof. Approved as to form J 7 / J -,I- L/ C City Attorney t mayor of t and of the _ii— i ty 5dTt Terrace uncil thereof. M STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ) I, MYRNA LINDAHL, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 8th day of October, 1981, and that it was so adopted by the following vote - AYES Councilmen Grant, Petta, Nix; Mayor Tillinghast. NOES• None ABSENT Councilman Rigley. i t City C k of the City of Grand Terrace M and of he City Council thereof. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) ss. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ) I, MYRNA LINDAHL, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of Ordinance No. 54 of said City, and that the same has not been amended or repealed. DATED October 8, 1981. i ity k of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof. 6 lanct/Amaociatre "-In= K aY ^ 4 � P Seland/Associates, Inc H SCHOOLS Grand Terrace is served by the Colton Unifiea School District There are three schools within the community, as listed below Table 11-17 Schools in Grand Terrace Total Add'I School Location Level Stdnts Capacity Terrace View Grand Terrace/ Elementary K-6 395 At Capacity Vista Grande Grand Terrace Barton Road / Elementary K-6 398 One Classrm Vivienda (30 students) Terrace Hills DeBerry/ Junior High 6-8 774 At Capacity Mount Vernon Source Colton Unified School District, 5/83. Students attending the two elementary schools reside almost entirely within Grand Terrace The junior high school serves an area larger than the City, including a portion of San Ber- nardino County and the City of Colton All high school students attend Colton High School in Colton Because the junior high school is currently at capacity, and the elementary schools are nearing capacity, the school district has asked the City of Grand Terrace to implement an existing ordi- nance (City Ordinance #54) which would require housing de- velopers to provide either land or money for additional school facilities The amount of land or money would be based on the number of children expected to be generated by the proposed development The school district has no major plans for improvements, finances having been severely restricted as a result of Proposition 13 In addition, there are no school district funded summer programs The total number of school age children living in Grand Terrace, as recorded by the 1980 Census, is presented on Table 11-18 The City is currently working with the school district to insure 141 that adequate facilities are available as the City continues to grow. This will include in lieu fees for new residential development 11-78 -k /T t3DCOLTON JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 1212 VALENCIA DRIVE • COLTON, CALIFORNIA 92324 • (714) 824-4227 September 10, 1985 BOARD OF EDUCATION MRS PATRICIA I NIX Mr. Rand} Anstine President COmmuri ty Ser"ices Di -ector City of Brand Terrace MR ARLIE R HUBBARD 22?95 PartonFrs✓ad Vice President Brand Terrace, CA 9232A MR RAY ABRIL JR Clerk }ear Rand f : MRS DORTHA E COOLEY The following is in response to your request for MR J FRANK FERRE i n+o -^iati on or the Status of impaction in the Calton Joint Unixied School District. lr Order to answer MRS RUTH 0 HARRIS four questions, I ha,,e tat<en each ox- your concerns froT your Septembe•- 4, lQSA letter and responded MRS PHYLLIS V ZIMMERMAN with data relevant to your question. C0hlCEPN 41 MR RICHARD L JACOBSEN Superintendent All ox the classY-oom facilities available to the DR MARILYN BUSH District. Assistant Superintendent Curriculum and Instruction RESPONSE MR RUSSELLI DICKINSON The District has 285 permanert classrooms and d5 Assistant Superintendent Business portable classrooms. This number does not Include MR CHARLES H JORDAN st-ops, libraries, labs, special education Assistant Superintendent Personnel el assrooms, etc. MR DANNY CARRASCO CBNCEPM #2 Director Administrative Services MS BONNIE RUSSELL 1 de^ti xyi rg t^ose facilities which ch are not utilized Director Pupil Personnel Services at t)-1 s t i rile. RESP NS E : Time Coltor Joirr tUnixiec S&-,00l District has all schools ;ace-. Smith School was opened in the AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 1984,95 school year and Alice Birney School in Colto^ was reopened in the 1985/86 school year. CONCERN #� Facilities in Grand Terrace and their utilization by adjoining communities. RESPONSE: The Colton Joi^t Unified School District has established attendance boundaries for Terrace Hills Jr. High. On the basis of these boundaries for the 1985l86 school year, bth graders from Wilson School located in Colton will be attending Terrace Hills Jr. High in 7tn and 8th grade. Likewise. those students residing in the vicinity oz Reche Canyon will also attend Terrace Hills Jr. Nigh School in grades 7th and 8th. The District has provided portable classrooms at Terrace Hills Jr. wigh to accommodate the incomi-g students from both Wilson and Feche Canyon areas. For Terrace Hills Jr. High attendance areas, please refer to map provided to M—. Joe Kicah in Jul;, i'455. CONCERN ##4 The fees paid to the District by those adjoining communities. RESPONSE Tne Colton Joint Unified School District has established developer's fees from several governmental agencies. At the present time, the City o? Colton has imposed developer's fees for any housing develoomentwithin its jurisidiction. Riverside County has imposed developer's fees as well for any Fecke Canyon Development within Riverside Court- sere ed b, the Colton Joint Unified School Dist -act. The Di strict has established a - RDA Agreeme^r uith the Cit': of Fontana and the City of San Ber-r ardi no. Or august 2", 1985, the P1 arr i ng Commission -nor the City o4 Rialto recomme^ded to the Fialto Citr Council tKe establishment ox developer's fees in order to mitigate overcrowding conditions in Colton Schools as a result o� Pi al to housi rg de"e opmert. CONCERN #E The net imoact b,, Grand Terrace on various 4acilities used b'r the Grand Terrace students. FESF ONSE : Tie District has established the estimated enroll,nests and ma> imu�n capacity for each Grand Terrace School on page 8 of the impaction report. The Citv o4 Colton has established developer's fees that would, in fact, mitigate overcrowding conditions at Wilsor School and Colton High School for Colton students. Students xrom Grand Terrace attending Colton High School on the other hand have not recei : ed any relief from developers in the Gr-anc Terrace area. Due to e^rollme^t projections, the DZSt-ict has 'no,,ed three oortables to Terrace View E1ementary and two portables to Grand Terrace Elementary School. These xive portables were moved from Terrace Hills Jr. High School to accos-modate the bth graders that viere to remain at both Grand Terrace Elementary Schools as a result of the new grade span at the elementar. schools for the 1985/8b school year. CONCERN #6 Tre cost of those facilities to mitigate the impact on the school district as a resulm of Grand Terrace area development. RESF'ONS-E : t On August 29, IQ85, I delivered to Mr. Seth Armstead and you -self a corrected copy of page 10 and 16 of the District's impaction report. Essentially, these pages contain the necessary data that you are p-equesting. Thus, the facility would cost $85,300 as calculated on page 16 and the Y-equi red builder's fee could be $1678. Regarding the letter from p1chard Jacobsen dated Jura 5, 1985, his response in paragraph three is based on the fact that portable buildings would be used in order to accommodate the enrollment cited of 600 to MO. There is no way that the e> i sti rg sites could accommodate 600 to 650 students without portable buildings to house the students. Here's hoof^g that this inzorTation will meet with your approval. Should you have any questions or need something clarified, please don't hesitate to call. Sincerely, -O Darnv Carrasco, Director Admiristative Services DC/lb BOARD OF EDUCATION MRS PATRICIA I NIX President MR ARLIE R HUBBARD Vice President MR RAY ABRIL JR Clerk MRS DORTHA E COOLEY MRS RUTH 0 HARRIS MR J FRANK FERRE MRS PHYLLIS V ZIMMERMAN COLTON JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 1212 VALENCIA DRIVE • COLTON, CALIFORNIA 92324 • (714) 824-4227 Mr. Seth Armstead, City Manager City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Dear Mr. Armstead 1NFE�MATi0?',1 C(:fy June 5, 1985 FURNISHED TO: - �J 7�- Confirming our recent conversation, I am certain that our Board of Education would be willing to discuss a possible trade of the Grand Terrace Elementary School Site for another acceptable site in the Grand Terrace area. To be acceptable to the District, the new site and facilities must be at least equal to the present Grand Terrace Elementary School with equal space provided for classrooms, restrooms, cafeteria facility, office space, library, blacktop, landscaping, sprinkler systems, etc. Such a trade would have to be 'turn key', with no cost to the District. Informal estimates of the cost of such a new site range between MR RICHARDL JACOBSEN three to four million dollars. If the city wishes to pursue this Superintendent matter, more precise estimates could be obtained through services of a qualified school architect. DR MARILYN BUSH Assistant Superintendent Regarding your question concerning new school sites in the Grand Curriculum and Instruction Terrace area, at this time the District does not foresee acquisi- MR RUSSELL I DICKINSON tions. Enrollment at the existing sites are still considered Assistant Superintendent Business somewhat small and could be expanded to comfortably accommodate MR CHARLES H JORDAN between 600 and 650 kindergarten through sixth grade students. assistant Superintendent Personnel At this time, there is no known funding available to the District MR DANNY CARRASCO to acquire and develop new school sites. Because of current Director Special Projects requirements for State aid, this District does not qualify for finanacial assistance. It may be several years in the future MR CHARLESE CLEVELAND before our enrollment reacher a level that would make it possible Director Pupil Personnel Services to qualify for State help. As you know, school districts may no longer conduct bond elections to secure funds for new schools. MR ROBERT RICH The only other alternative that appears to be available would be Director Administrative Services through the Mello -Roos procedure. I hope the above information answered your questions. If you think of other items, please call me. Sincerely, Amw I RECEIVED Richard L. acobsen Superintendent RLJ ak AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 'T_ S e 1' wun w f l i j r,rPAR 'rapt u 1 -'-h/r -lyil rnt lu r '1 i i n c.• TT A ], 111111 [ 4 a an •I�LTO i'VI - I rrtrrn.lww ,tl . ! - I . '' t 1 `u ' � �r �' � - _ .�- ! , . `t r^±- I'� rt15, � L RIA TO r� 1' 4, I f • , Ir [I•IIaVI ,•` ��° L m /� T 11 -T'•}= r Mln,n t ro I j i 1 - * }j o.n I. ulr o' ' ' �•[aaxL rt� ' 1 ■Ill C r .. t w I 1 • S1 i + }MILL M LL a t .r LEGEND -' , - .- - - n - t?� t un1 n 1' 1 OI IcriMi t �"gi, %,1 9 ROGERS • ,• ,\ ps•�' .� a .�t • t• 17 WILSON . YaMll s ` aiI - A i _�{ �. 18 SAN SALVADOR ' r "r•rM, � -/-.. I is �[°1°°j� 19 TERRACE VIEW �.. Wa.rT rl=:iTA? 20 GRAND TERRACE;" [m tar ' 1 t - -- ! • „At>a�a " t 21 TERRACE HILLS - 1 [a,o. ` _ I [»..b,.l > } t J R H I GH `�; ; �. " 1._ rr V 1A.oFrr Amc/ A „"i^" I `� o.A �i 1 VALLEY r %t r J C ■AN /[RNAIrdNO - i r at vO ti } '_ 1 ..i,• 1,� .rucn L Bloomington ,. .� I� ROGERS �" r ,. ?l , r Al ' W I L 50 Nr- rTERRACE HILLS JR HIGH Z rJ 0 1 / ' nu of - ;: • Nouw s - r^ L r••4$• J } TERRACE HILLS - - g--_ MA — t r. �M ■, I. � J R HIGH f r� � IND [ Aa1 - Arr t Darr ,.anpll I . n d 1 rorc i ,r 46. MAN �S 1'O _ i M -r �7 i ' � ' 5 i 'L•L ;i3 L2t- 1 r 14A r•Aoud rnr nn r I Y A, 11 7 r t lvw _ al 7Crestme -!-I 1 _ , afnr Avr1 +�I - } J wrolrAr rr» l r ^ r •!r !! . ,'Y!w ,. 1 iijy''j{} -t7 1 ` 'rA, 1 •' ' - �' / ,r/ l I1t1 ` • "•r�,1 4 Ir. 11 1 n w-C) / y �.JJ..'Le 7.i nonlrl OrIMa•/ �� i ■Ax1ON [t ■In.O • • �� — - — -- § t �'� L� - rand TERRACE • ,�a r 1 - Terrace_ VIEW • N ^ al.ol GRAND-. 21.; • ;� � �' ?� ' •'nrt I'I� - � ROGERSI TERRACE -_ • (INCLUDING) .Ito RECHE CANYON ANYON ♦ �,°�4 SI+ AREA '^ r r ► A iNO- x 1 � __ � w � i ■ r r i i i Q L COLTON JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 1212 VALENCIA DRIVE s COLTON, CALIFORNIA 92324 • (714) 824-4227 STUDENT IMPACTION 1;14:101- PREPARED BY: Administrative services May, 1985 8 FORWARD For the past year, the Colton Joint Unified School District has been researching enrollment and building patterns within the school district's boundaries. As a result of this study, it has become evident that in the very near future, the school district will suffer from school overcrowding at all levels if appropriate action is not taken. This presentation contains the data and the results of the Impaction Study. For your convenience, Board of Education action and all supportive data has been included. Richard L. Jacobsen Superintendent BOARD OF EDUCATION Mrs. Patricia I Nix President Mr. Arlie R Hubbard Vice President Mr. Ray Abril, Jr Clerk Mrs. Dortha E Cooley Mrs. Ruth 0. Harris Mr. J. Frank Ferre Mrs. Phyllis V. Zimmerman i n DECISION BY THE BOARD OF EDUCATION On Thursday May 16, 1985, the Board of Education of the Colton Joint • Unified School District took action regarding impaction in the Colton Joint Unified School District. (See following Certification of Minutes and Board Item) . After a thorough review of the data, the Board of Education found that conditions of overcrowding does exist in one or more attendance areas within the district. At the same meeting the Board of Education carefully reviewed and evaluated the various methods of mitigating the problems of overcrowding. As a result of their evaluation, two methods were identified as being feasible for the school district. One was the use of BUILDERS' FEES; the other was the utilization of RDA FUNDS WHEN AN RDA EXISTS IN THE ATTENDANCE AREA OF CONCERN. ' TO: PRESENTED BY: SUBJECT: BOARD AGENDA REGULAR MEETING May 16, 1985 \ ACTION ITEM BOARD OF EDUCATION Richard L. Jacobsen, Superintendent APPROVAL TO PROCEED IN SECURING BUILDERS' FEES AND UTILIZING RDA FUNDS BACKGROUND: A study of existing enrollments combined with anticipated en- rollments from new dwelling units indicates that all political entities in the Colton Joint Unified School District are effectec by student impaction (see following information). At this time the Board of Education needs to accept or reject the fact of impaction. If the Board of Education finds that impaction exists in the school district, it must then consider methods of mitigating the effects of the impaction. Several methods of alleviating impaction have been suggested (see following pages). There may be other methods which board members would like to suggest. The Board of Education should reject or accept the different methods of mitigating the impaction problem. Based upon the outcome of the Board of Education's decisions, the District will either contact the governing body of each political subdivision to initiate ordinances for builders' fees and/or RDA funds, or discontinue the impaction project. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve to proceed in SECURING BUILDERS' FEES and UTILIZING RDA FUNDS as the methods to mitigate the problems of impaction and direct the Administration to initiate the necessary actions for their implementation, based on the followii findings: (a) Conditions of overcrowding exist in one or more attendance areas within the District which will impair the normal funtioning of educational programs. (b) All reasonable methods of mitigating conditions of over- crowding have been evaluated. (c) No feasible method for reducing such conditions exist (from District sources). ACTION: On motion of Board Member ZIMMERMAN and HARRIS , the Board approved to proceed in SECURING BUILDERS' FEES and UTILIZIP RDA FUNDS as the methods to mitigate the problems of impaction and directed the Administration to initiate the necessary action: for their implementation, based on the listed findings. (CARRIED 6-0) C x COLTON JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 1212 VALENCIA DRIVE • COLTON. CALIFORNIA 92324 • (714) 824-4227 BOARD OF EDUCATION MRS. PATRICIA L NIX Cer of icat ion of Minutes Presrderte MR. ARLIE R. HUBBARD I, Richard L. Jacobsen, Superintendent, Colton Joint Unified VK*-Pn3sKkmt School District, do hereby certify that the following is a true and correct excerpt from the minutes of a Regular Meeting of MR RAY ABRIL JFt the Board of Education held on May 16, 1985: Cork MR& DORTHA E COOLEY "On motion of Board Members Phyllis Zimmerman and Ruth Harris, the Board finds that: MRS. RUTH O. HARRIS (a) Conditions of overcrowding exist in one or MR J FRANK FERRE attendance areas within the district which will impair the normal functioning of MRS. PHYLLIS V ZMNMERMAN educational programs; (b) All reasonable methods of mitigating conditions MR RICHARO L JACOBSEN of overcrowding have been evaluated; Supenntenderd (c) No feasible method for reducing such conditions MR cHARLEs H. JOROAN exist (from district resources); Assstartt Supenntendem Personnel (d) The Board accept SECURING BUILDERS' FEES and BUSH UTILIZING RDA FUNDS as the methods to mitigate DR ��nt the problems of impaction and direct the Cum e�� L administration to initiate the necessary actions for their implementation." MR. RUSSELL I DICKINSON Assistant Superintenderm Business MR ROBERT RICH Director Adrrnnistrawe Services MR DANNY CARRASCO Richard L. J obsen, Superintendent Director Special Protects Executive Secretary to the Board of Education MR CHARLES E CLEVELAND Director Pupil Personnel Services &KI cnr ini noonan wrTv crop nvca k • FONTANA I - I RIA ,.� - L i � � r 1 i V 41 mom COL TON JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL Q/STR/CT L IMPACT STUDY OF THE COLTON JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT The Colton Joint Unified School District lies in eight governmental jurisdictions. The jurisdictions are: 1. Colton City S. 2. Fontana City 6. 3. Grand Terrace City 7. 4. Loma Linda City 8. (SEE PRECEDING MAP) Rialto City Riverside County (Reche Canyon) San Bernardino City San Bernardino County (Bloomington and other unincorporated areas) DISTRICT FACILITIES The District is composed of 1 preschool center, 13 elementary, 3 junior high, 2 high, 1 continuation, and 1 alternative high school. Washington Independent Study High School has not been included in the Impact Study. It is a small school (7 rooms). It also houses Adult Education, Opportunity Classes, S.T.E.P., Independent Study, and Handicapped Programs It has no kitchen, cafeteria, nor multipurpose room. Because of its size and lack of facilities, it has been rejected as a means of relieving impaction Slover Mt. must remain_a continuation high school and cannot be included in the mitigation of impaction. GENERAL The Study has been conducted basically in three major attendance areas. They are. Colton, Bloomington and Grand Terrace The schools have been grouped to reflect these areas. In Bloomington the schools are. 1. Crestmore S 2. Mary Lewis 6. 3. Ruth Grimes 7 4. Smith Zimmerman Bloomington -Junior High School Bloomington High School -2- P In Colton the schools are: 1. Alice Birney 2. Grant 3. Lincoln 4. McKinley In Grand Terrace the schools are 1. Grand Terrace 2. Terrace View 3. Wilson S. Rogers 6. 'Colton Junior High School 7. Colton High School 4. Terrace Hills Junior High School S. Colton High School The District has just completed a comprehensive revision of all elementary school boundaries. The revision was brought about because of the complete utilization of the two previously closed schools (Alice Birney & Smith), and the assignment of the sixth grades to the elementary school sites. Increased demand for junior high school classrooms has been created by the re-establishment of a seven period day. The seven period day was originally terminated when the sixth grades were placed at the junior high school campuses several years ago. -3- IMPACTION REPORT The Impaction Report presents data in the following format: I. REGIONAL Each area, Colton, Bloomington and Grand Terrace, are presented on separate pages II. COMPLETE A picture of impaction and how it affects the total district is included. While the acceptance of moving students from region to region is a major problem, nevertheless, the general statistics are provided. III. FACILITY REQUIREMENTS - (Elementary) The basis for elementary facilities requirements is provided to assist the reader in understanding what a complete school requires. IV. STUDENT PROJECTIONS The student in school projections are based upon present students and do not consider the many housing units being built and planned. When the maximum load for a school was calculated, an average class size of 30 was utilized. The 30 class size is a liberal allocation and in practice, would be very difficult to maintain in every classroom without violating State law and labor agreements. The maximum capacity also depends upon perfect student distribution, i e., 120 Kindergarteners, which can be evenly divided into 4 groups of 30. -4- BASIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FACILITIES In addition to the regular K-6 classroom space allocations, space must also be provided for the following: A. One library. B. One resource room. C. Adequate space for various "pull-out" programs required by law for handicapped students. D. Classroom space for special day classes for handicapped students. E. Office area. F. Lunch area. -5- 0 5 IMPACT STUDY BLOOMINGTON AREA SCHOOL MAX. CAPACITY 85/86 ENROLLMENT DIFFERENCE Crestmore 494 480 +14 Grimes 484 443 +41 Lewis 465 472 -7 Smith 330 301 +29 Zimmerman *690 686 +4 Bloomington Jr. HS **730 659 +71 Bloomington HS *1260 1261 -1 CAPACITY BY GRADE LEVEL Elementary 2463 2382 +81 Jr. High 730 659 +71 Sr. High 1260 1261 -1 AVAILABLE CLASSROOM SPACE Elementary 81 DIVIDED BY 30 = 2.7 CLASSROOMS Jr. High 71 DIVIDED BY 30 = 2.4 CLASSROOMS Sr. High 0 DIVIDED BY 28 = -0- CLASSROOMS * TWO ADDITIONAL PORTABLE CLASSROOMS FOUR PORTABLE CLASSROOMS DIST TO ELEM. SCHOOLS AND FOUR CLASSROOMS REQUIRED FOR 7TH PERIOD CLASSES ME 11 IMPACT STUDY '' COLTON AREA SCHOOL MAX. CAPACITY 8S/86 ENROLLMENT DIFFERENCE Birney 34S 334 +11 Grant S2S 491 +34 Lincoln S70 562 +8 McKinley 5SS 523 +32 Rogers SS5 484 +71 Colton Jr. HS *61S S38 +77 Colton HS **1900 1900 -0- CAPACITY BY GRADE LEVEL Elementary 2S50 2394 +1S6 Jr. High *61S S38 +77 Sr. High **1900 1900 +0 AVAILABLE CLASSROOM SPACE Elementary 1S6 DIVIDED BY 30 = 5.2 CLASSROOMS Jr. High 77 DIVIDED BY 30 = 2.6 CLASSROOMS Sr. High 0 DIVIDED BY 28 = -0- CLASSROOMS * FOUR CLASSROOMS REQUIRED FOR 7TH PERIOD CLASSES ** INCLUDES TWO NEW CLASSROOMS AND TWO RETURNED BY R.O.P. -7- \ f IMPACT STUDY GRAND TERRACE AREA SCHOOL MAX. CAPACITY EST. ENROLLMENT DIFFERENCE Grand Terrace *55S S32 +23 Terrace View **S10 484 +26 Wilson 64S 627 +18 Terrace Hills Jr. HS 555 S46 +9 Colton HS *1900 1900 +0 CAPACITY BY GRADE LEVEL Elementary 1710 1643 +67 Jr. High S5S S46 +9 Sr. High 1900 1900 +0 AVAILABLE CLASSROOM SPACE Elementary 67 DIVIDED BY 30 2.7 CLASSROOMS Jr. High 9 DIVIDED BY 30 = .3 CLASSROOMS Sr. High 0 DIVIDED BY 28 = -0- CLASSROOMS * TWO ADDITIONAL CLASSROOMS ** THREE ADDITIONAL CLASSROOMS *** FIVE CLASSROOMS DIST TO ELEM. SCHOOLS AND FOUR CLASSROOMS REQUIRED FOR 7TH PERIOD -8- IMPACT STUDY DISTRICT TOTALS CAPACITIES BY TOTAL DISTRICT LEVEL GRADE LEVEL EST. ENROLLMENT DIFFERENCE Elementary (K-6) 6723 6419 +304 Jr. High (7-8) 1900 1743 +157 Sr. High (9-12) 3160 3161 -1 TOTAL AVAILABLE CLASSROOM SPACE Elementary 304 DIVIDED BY 30 10.2 CLASSROOMS Jr. High 1S7 DIVIDED BY 30 = S.2 CLASSROOMS Sr. High 0 DIVIDED BY 28 -0- CLASSROOMS moll CORRECTED COPY/JULY, 1985 STUDENT PROJECTION (K-12) FOR EACH GOVERNMENTAL JURISDICTION Jurisdiction Generation Factor Dwelling Units Total Students Colton 73 1055 770 Grand Terrace 59 566 334 Fontana 73 256 187 Loma Linda 73 None at Present -0- Rialto 73 273 199 San Bernardino County 73 600 438 San Bernardino City 73 Fees in place or at -0- present commercial/ industrial Riverside County 16 Fees in Place 3 TOTAL 1931 Area STUDENTS BY AREA Available Student Space (K-12) New Students K-12 Bloomington 152 1003 Colton 233 800 Grand Terrace 76 334 REQUIRED BUILDER'S FEES The required builder's fee is derived from the formula cost of facilities x generation factor number of students in a classroom Grand Terrace Area ( 59) = 1678 00 Areas except Grand Terrace ( 73) = 2076 00 *facilities cost $ 85,300 room loading = 30 *SEE PAGE 16 CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR In the Bloomington, Fontana and Rialto Areas, the District relied heavily upon the student factor derived by Fontana Unified and Rialto Unified. Data was collected from a variety of apartments and subdivisions. The data ranged from .6S to 1.26. The school principals have reported that parents from the new subdivisions are leaving their children in the previous school districts until the end of the year. This factor makes precise tabulations difficult. In the Colton area, student generation data was gathered from areas of new construction in the north and south portions. At this time, there is inconclusive data regarding the area around the I-10/I-lS. However, this area is already included in an RDA agreement. Data thus far indicates a student generation factor similar to Rialto Unified (.74). In the Grand Terrace area, data indicates a lower student generation factor. There are few recent single family residence subdivisions. Most of the new dwelling units appear to be apartments and condos. However, data was gathered from east and west of Mt. Vernon for single family residences, and throughout Grand Terrace, for apartments and condos. The generation factor ranged from .11 to .9S. A most representative figure for the entire area is .59. STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR Including Surrounding Districts Colton Joint Unified (1) All areas except Grand Terrace .73 (2) Grand Terrace .59 Rialto Unified (1) All areas Fontana Unified (1) All areas San Bernardino Unified (1) Single family (2) Multiple units .74 .77 .78 .71 J / Redlands Unified (1) 1 bedroom .15 (2) 2 bedroom .63 (3) 3 bedroom .96 San Bernardino County (1) The County has accepted the student generation factor developed by each of the school districts which have implemented builder's fees within the County. ` J PLANNED DWELLING UNITS BY AREAS WITHIN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT t Barton Road West of Mt. Vernon Mt. Vernon & Canal St. TOTAL Southern Pacific Business Park TOTAL Cedar & San Bernardino Avs. Larch & San Bernardino Avs. Cactus & San Bernardino Avs. Cedar & Randall Avs. Spruce & San Bernardino Avs. Lilac & San Bernardino Avs. Spruce & San Bernardino Avs. Between Lilac & Cactus Avs. TOTAL Reche Canyon Fairway & I-10 Reche Canyon Long Beach Dr. Rosedale and LaLoma Reche Canyon Harbor & Westin Reche Canyon TOTAL GRAND TERRACE FONTANA RIALTO COLTON 157 Apts. 157 & 252 Apts. 566 256 2S6 16 Homes. 23 Homes. 37 Homes. 24 Homes. 38 Homes. 38 Homes. 26 Homes. 70 Homes. 273 276 Homes. 9 Homes. 84 Homes. 9 Homes. 27 Apts. 294 Homes. 160 Apts. 196 Homes. 1055 -13- r1 Maple & Linden Between G & H (Colton) Olive & Latham (Colton) Maple & Ash Reche Canyon Jurupa & Spruce Marygold & Alder Lilac & Santa Ana Randall & Linden Cedar & Hawthorne Slover & Maple Locust & Mindanao Spruce & Grove Pl. Santa Ana & Larch Tamarind & Alder Marygold & Palm Marygold & Alder Spruce & Grove Pl. TOTAL SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY i MA i Tuna IM SAN BERNARDINO Fees in Place or Commercial and Industrial GRAND TOTAL RIVERSIDE COUNTY Fees in Place 60 Homes 13 Homes. 11 Homes. 16 Homes. 60 Homes. 45 Homes. 4 Homes. 121 Homes. 83 Homes. 39 Homes. 60 Homes. 35 Homes. 17 Homes. 26 Homes. 20 Homes. 40 Apts. 13 Apts. 17 Apts. 600 27SO . The planned dwelling units are distributed into geographical areas rather than individual school attendance areas because changes in elementary school boundaries can be readily adjusted to accommodate shifting population. Each of these areas has one junior high school whose attendance area includes the respective geographical area. The high school boundaries are regional in nature and are much less affected by minor student population shifts. CORRECTED COPY/JULY, 1985 BUILDING COSTS BASE BUILDING 30 x 32, 4 ton heating/AC, carpet, chalk $45,000 and tack boards, wood sill foundation, access ramp, vinyl wall covering GState specifications -basic elementary class- room) Sink $ 11500 Ceiling Insulation $ INCL Minimal Casework $ 3,000 BASE BUILDING SUBTOTAL UTILITY SERVICES Electricity, water and sewer $3,000 PAD PREPARATION Grading $1 500 Sidewalks $1,500 SUBTOTAL LEGALLY REQUIRED EXPERT SERVICES Architect/Engineer-8% $4,000 OSA $ 300 Inspection (in plant and on site) $27500 EXPERT SERVICES SUBTOTAL FURNISHINGS $ EQUIPMENT $4,000 COMMUNICATIONS/ALARMS $ SIGNAL SYSTEMS $2,000 SUBTOTAL TOTAL BASIC CLASSROOM ADDITIONAL EXTERIOR COSTS (Approportioned on Basis of 26 Room School) Restrooms Library/IMC/LRC Storage Office (Areas for principal, secretary, reception, illness, teacher workroom) Office Equipment (copier, typewriters, etc.) Minimum Legal Food Service Area Food Service Equipment Site Acquisition Playground Equipment Landscaping Inside Meeting Capability (assemblies, music, etc_) $17,000 SUBTOTAL GRAND TOTAL $49,500 $ 6,000 $ 6,800 $ 6,000 $17,000 $68,300 . $85,300 -16- 0 � 1 POSSIBLE METHODS OF MITIGATING IMPACTION Possible methods of mitigating impaction within the school district are: 1. Double sessions. 2. Year -around schools. 3. Movement of students from one area to another. 4. Securing LeRoy Green emergency building funds. S. Securing builder's fees. 6. Utilizing RDA funds 7. Do nothing. 8. Modify school attendance boundaries. 9. Utilization of bond money. 10. Utilization of district funds. 11. Sell surplus sites. 12. Sell surplus property. 13. Use facilities in other districts. 14. Use inter -district attendance agreements. 15. Schedule a special service area tax election. DOUBLE SESSIONS j By utilizing double sessions, the housing capability of a school day may be doubled However, new requirements for time spent by students in class practically eliminate the use of double sessions. The new law requires that primary students (grades 1-3), spend a minimum of 288 minutes in class, exclusive of recesses and lunch. This means that the students must have 12 minutes less than S hours per day in the classroom. The entire school day requires recesses so that a student's day will be S hours long, not including a lunch period. It would be impossible to schedule reasonable double sessions in less than an 11 hour span. This would require a starting time at 7 00 a m. (home -to -school -to -home) and closing the classes at 6:00 p m. All bus transportation would have to be before 7:00 a.m. and after 6.00 p.m. Parents will not accept these hours for 6 to 8 year olds. At the intermediate grades (4-6), the problem is worse because a 30S minute school day is required. YEAR -AROUND SCHOOLS The year -around school can increase the capacity of the school by 20-30%. A major drawback is the lack of air-conditioning in many of the schools of the district. Also, in many areas, parents have rejected year -around schools. Some district areas have air-conditioned classrooms at the elementary and junior high levels but neither high school is air-conditioned. This could make coordination of a vacation schedule difficult for anyone with students in high school and any other elementary or junior high level. MOVEMENT OF STUDENTS FROM ONE AREA TO ANOTHER By redistributing students among Bloomington, Grand Terrace and Colton, a better equalization of student population could be made. The individual communities concerns would probably far outweigh the advantages of the evenness of student distribution and it would also require additional bussing The lack of capacity in all areas does not warrant mass movement of students. Another major concern is the State of California requirement for desegregation and integration (ethnic balance) . -18- SECURING LEROY GREEN FUNDS The Colton Jt. Unified School District does not qualify, under existing requirements, for the extremely limited LeRoy Green funds. There are school districts already eligible and that's where the funds are being directed. Unless the State provides more money and increases square footage allotments, this source of funds is in the distant future. However, the District is preparing an application for funding. BUILDERS' FEES Builders' fees do provide funds for developing classroom housing. At this time, they cannot be used for permanent facilities and they do raise the final price of the house. They also require an ordinance by the local governmental jurisdiction. At present this is a source of funding which the District needs to implement. These fees are needed to compliment the District expenditures for classrooms. UTILIZATION OF RDA FUNDS Utilization of RDA funds is legal under the laws of the RDA. How available the funds are and to what extent depends on the size of the RDA and the willingness of the RDA board to share them. Many areas of the School District are not involved in RDA's. The recent RDA agreements include language to assist the schools. Recent legislation has greatly limited RDA usages. DO NOTHING This solution only aggravates the problem of school housing and leaves many students unhoused. MODIFY SCHOOL BOUNDARIES The School District has just completed a reboundaring process In order to bring Smith School (Bloomington) up to capacity and reopen Alice Birney School (Colton), extensive changes have been made in elementary school boundaries. As a result of the elementary boundary changes and the assignment of the 6th grades to the elementary school sites, the student population at all elementary schools within the total District have been equalized. c UTILIZE BOND MONEY y1 The existing bond money has been spent and Proposition 13 eliminated bonding as a source. UTILIZE DISTRICT FUNDS District funds are extremely limited and continued assignment of funds from the regular budget will damage the instructional program for the students. The District has lease -purchased a limited number of portable classrooms, but there are insufficient monies to completely alleviate the impaction problem. SELL SURPLUS SITES The District regularly sells obsolete property which is declared surplus. The amount received is small and the money is placed into the general funds. USE FACILITIES IN OTHER DISTRICTS The District explored the possibility of surplus classrooms with surrounding school districts, but they are also facing student impaction. Parent support for distant bussing would be limited even if school housing could be found in desert or mountain areas. The cost of bussing would be prohibitive. USE INTER -DISTRICT ATTENDANCE AGREEMENTS The Colton Jt. Unified School District has inter -district attendance agreements with many districts. It is not a feasible method to reduce impaction. The parents must provide transportation and other districts must accept the students At present, many surrounding districts are denying Interdistrict Attendance Agreement due to existing student impaction in those districts. SCHEDULE A SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT TAX ELECTION The District is investigating the use of a special district tax election in order to levy a tax in all district areas for the development of school facilities The election requires a 2/3 majority and securing this majority could be extremely difficult. Very few districts in California have succeeded �o DIED h r© ass t • plan", wr►� _ Pe (ZTT-t�_ 7-9 Mr. Phil Elliott, City Manager 650 North La Cadena Drive Colton, California 92324 i 26 June 1985 1 _ � u t RE: Review of the Declaration of Colton Joint Unified School DiIsttricton 85-54 ` Dear Mr. Elliott: Following the City's authorization to ~ comprehensive•analysss of the ImpactionrDeclarationvo£ctheucte on-' Joint Unified School District. I am now pleased to forward�to`, you eleven (1I) copies o£ out summary a wish I will be happy to present and report Should 'yoa _ Council. _ my findings directly to the Ci The District has been most: cooperative and --helpful in the data required. and back-up explanations we r Providing �} further assistance please. advise. If I can be °of Sincerely, QN 6 & Donald G. Kin .D. Principal DGR:sgd Enclosure 9375 Archibald Avenue, Suite 212 Rancho Cucamo. ga, California 91730 (71 dl 9A7.7n7*r IMPACTION DECLARMON ANWZ3I3 Page l Colton Joint Unified School District Impaction Declaration An Analysis Prepared for the City of Colton June 1985 by D.G. King Associates•Planners A California Corporation Background The Colton Joint Unified School District has prepared a Declaration of Impaction as provided for by Section 65971 of the California Government Code. This declaration was prepared following a thorough review of -data by the Board of Education who found that overcrowding exists within the District. A student impaction report was prepared by District Administrative Services in May 1985. The impaction declaration states that the District is impacted by more students that can be housed by present permanent facilities, and that temporary facilities must be utilized to house new students until one or more new schools can be built. The District has requested that the City of Colton levy a school fee (of $1,953.00 per each new dwelling unit approved by the City within District Boundaries except in Grand Terrace where the builder fees would be $1 479.00 per each new dwelling unit) in. order to recover the actual costs for the necessary temporary facilities, to house the children generated from these housing units. The City of Colton has authorized this independent study to answer several questions and provide basic data prior to making a decision regarding the District's Impaction Declaration and fee request. These questions are: IMPACTION DI ARATION ANALYSIS Page 2 1 1. Is the Colton Joint Unified School District Impacted? a. What is the present District -wide total housing capacity; b. What is the 1984-85 (present) enrollment total; - c. Are present facilities adequate to house present enrollment; d. What is a probable forecast of future (19867 1990) enrollment; e. Are present facilities adequate to house forecast enrollment. r- Raw the District exhausted all reasonable means of mitigating an impaction problem, other than fees? a.. Are underutilized facilities available in nearby districts which. potentially could be utilized; Y i b. Are nearby districts willing to provide space in existing facilities. `3. Are fees of. $1,953.00/or U,579.00 per each y R ..<_... G a dwelling unit reasonable and appropriate to cover .. the costs of temporary facilities required? j,. 0 IMPACTION DECLARATION ANALYSIS Page 3 Analysis Data has been assembled from the Colton Joint Unified School District, the Cities of Colton, Rialto, Fontana _and the unincorporated areas of Riverside and San Bernardino Counties.. The adjacent school districts were contacted to ti determine their enrollment status. Following our analysis, answers to the basic questions listed were developed as follows: Q. Is the Colton Joint Unified'School`District4lmpacted? 31 A. Yes. DISCUSSION: At the present time the Colton Joint Unified School District has l preschool center_r. 13 elementary, 3 3unior high. 2 high, 1 continuation, and 1 alternative high school, with a 1985 enrollment of 11,323 students, grades R-lZ. The permanent school facilities have a housing capacity of 9,780 students, plus 345 special education students but excluding any spaces not owned or controlled by the District. The District has already leased 45 temporary (relocatable) units. These temporary units can house up to 1,350 total additional students. Capacity of permanent facilities Total enrollment 'Dnhoused students' Capacity of temporary facilities Net available student capacity 1983-1984 9,780 11,144 -(1,364) 1,350 -(14) 1 984-1985 9,780 ll,323 -(1,543) 1,350 -(193) A� _y INPALTION DEC RASION ANALYSIS Page 4 Based upon a five year cohort methodology we forecast potential enrollments as follows: 1985-86 1986-87 1987-88 Present CapacLt 9,780 9,780 9,780 Present Portables 1,350 1,350 1,350 Total Capacity 11,130 11,130 11,130 Enrollment Forecast 110,346 13,004 13,762 Net Difference -(216) -(1,874) -(2,632) IMPACTION DECz:estAnorr AmLYSIS Page 5 Q. Should the Colton Joint Unified School - District:, anticipate a problem in housing students 1985 through 19903.1' A. Yes.. Utilizing modern forecasting techniques approved by the State Department of. Education, a forecast using an adjusted cohort survival methodology was prepared. -J 1985/86 1986/87 1987/88 1988/89 1989/90 capacity of Permanent Facilities: 9,780 9,780 9,780 9,780 -_;:--9,780 Capactty of Existing _ �: -"; - Portables: 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350 Total District capacity: 11,130 11,130 11,130 11,130 11,130 Enrollment Forecast Highl: Enrollment Forecast Lov2: Net Unhoused Students Highl: Net Unboused Students Lov2r Net X4n4 **a Classroon Need (9 30 per) z Net Minimum School. Need (@ 600 per): 11,346 13,004 13,76Z 11,302 11,771 12,333 -216 -1,874 -2,632 -17Z -641 -1,203 5.7 21.3 40.1 0.29 1.0 2.0 14,366 ' 15,035 12,895__,13,523, -3,236 -3,905 -1,765 -2,393 58.8 " 79.6 2.9 3.9 Dotes: 1. This forecast includes new cohorts generated from approved developments. 2. This forecast assumes continuation of 5 year average of development. -These forecasts assume continuation of past long term enrollment trends. -Detail forecast modeling is attached. k� IMPACTION DEQ 'ATION ANALYSIS Page 6 Q. Are classroom facilities available in nearby districts' which could be utilized by the Colton Joint Unified School District? A• No. (See correspondence) The Colton Joint Unified School District is impacted. We forecast a need for for about two new schools now and Potentially four new schools within five years The Fontana, Rialto, and San Bernardino City School Districts are also impacted, no commitment for use could be made by those Districts. No other facilities are available at this time. Q. - are fees of $1453.00 and $1,579.00 per each dwelling unit reasonable and appropriate? A. . Reasonable: Arguable. Appropriate: No. - - The data provided by the Colton Joint Unified School_ District in the latest Impaction Declaration (May 1985) includes estimated cost data for new leased relocatable units. It is important to note that outright purchase of relocatable -classrooms would be less costly in dollars in the long run, but to do so would be administratively unwise because of. the way the present law is written. New schools today tend to go through the Leroy Green Lease Purchase Act for facility financing. This law counts relocatable facilities the same as permanent facilities if they are owned by a District; but does not count this space if only leased. Owning them, therefore, would penalize the District significantly by making it- harder to secure decent housing in which to offer education to children. T"108 DECL&RATIOH MMry=S Page 7 Fees proposed by the District in are calculated based upon bid costs received ion Declaration to secure and furnish tempura by the District for ancillary facilities and costs classrooms supported ms plus estimates bids. These cost figures are significantly hi her etnan those now experienced by other nearby school districts. The Rialto Unified School District presently has a three year commitment of relocatable units at a total net figure of $63,499.00 per unit, installed. ' (These are defined to be middle of the line" quality School District Portables). The Alta Loma presently is experiencing costs of $ 62000.00 per portable unit, installed. The Fontana -- Unified School District has recently contracted for portable units at a cost of $ 56,747.82, installed. _..��"� Bernardino City Unified School • District has Aprile�I98S a estimated costs of $ 66,924.00 per ° --"�' :"�" P portable unity installed.� The Colton Joint Unified School District's proposed fees. =are7 within the 'reasonable" range, but they are indeed on,'_the: high limit of reasonable. The District Proposes variable student generation ratios for ~ each governmental agency within District boundaries. Present data does not support this distribution as being Justified. The District data shows an overall, total of 2.750 new dwelling units generating a total of 1,931 new students, for an averse g generation ratio within. the I'i �; ' District of 0.70. Because individual, school enrollment �,►�'L areas can be C and are regularly adJusted to enrollment, a District -wide equalize whereas the breakdown pro generation ratio is Justified posed by the District is not. _ I e IMPACTION D$Car� ION ANALYSIS Page 8 Using the generation ratio actually experienced by the District then, one can calculate the necessary fees. The" formula, adopted in County Ordinance No. 2409 provides that where: L : equals the" number of students generated by each dwelling unit; C : equals the cost of leasing one furnished classroom for 5 years; S r equals a constant of 30 students per classroom (unless otherwise stated) Then the fee is scheduled as: Fee = L(C/S) Based upon this fee formula, with the overall student generation ratio (calculated from data prepared by the District) of 0.70, a classroom capacity of 30 students, and an annual lease cost of $80,300.00 the fee for each new dwelling unit would be: Fee = L(C/S) ` Fee = (0.70)(80,300.00/30) _ $1,873.67 If unit costs were to average $70,000.00, installed, then with 30 students per each relocatable and a generation ratio of 0.70, the appropriate fee would be $1,633.33 per each new housing unit. This fee is based upon bid costs received by the District Plus District estimates of other costs and the ratio of 0.70 overall. If equity is a criterion, then the fee could be adjusted to more closely reflect the potential student generation. The Colton Joint Unified School District, however, does not have a survey with a statistically significant base of new housing of various types. in order to develop a statistically defendable set of ratios. This 1]R1`r.3j1ATION Asaw.ax5 Paq* 9 should be done as soon as possible. Tf the results of the survey completed in the fall of 19" by the Fontana Unifiedf School District is comparable to probable actual yield (wei believe it is) then the fees. would be as follows: i Sin le Faail ' 4 y• (a.9095� (80,300/30) � $ 2,434.43 { Multiples Family: (0-SZ74) (80,300/30) = 4 1,411.67 Overall average: CM 6�73) (W,300/30) z $ Zo,053.80 - - --_ AMOUNT APPROVED Mr COLTON CITY COUNCIL 30) (;Z, 3 3 3.33) = -lix 7 4) (70, a S-17 x o7. 3 33 33 = /2 30. Sri: FACTION DECLARATION ANALYSIS Page 10 COLTON JOIRT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT The following developments are reported by the Colton Joint Unified School District, Additional 2- ' projects are like-ly to be unreported to date which will add to these numbers. The first forecast model projects enrollment based upon the constant rate of growth experienced by the District since the fall of 1980. The second model forecasts enrollment taking into account the probable impact of these reported new projects insofar as they exceed the 5 year average._ Data on new developments have been checked and verified with all Jurisdictions '-except for the City of Grand Terrace, � where data, was not readily available from the City or their' -'! consultant in time to include same in this analysis. To forecast enrollment from new development, several assumptions were made. They are as follows: 1. Tentative tracts will be constructed and occupied within three years after approval._ Of them, 75% will be occupied in 24 monthsr and the remaining 25% during the third year. 2� Projects now under construction will be occupied before June 1986. 3.. Students will be generated with ratios closely similar to ratios developed by the Fontana Unified School District. ZKPA ION DECJARATION ANALYSIS • Page 11 A list is attached showing location and details of approved developments. These are totaled below based upon the stated assumptions. Condominium units were not designated. UNT TYPE QUANTITY Occupancy 1986/87 SP 151 MFD 0 Occupancy 1987/88 Sp lr134 MFD 538 -` Occupancy 1988/89 SP 220 MFD 41 Total - 2 ,A 8 4 r Note: These totals reflect projects already approved.` New projects will add to these totals. f � t ENROLLMENY FORECAST for the COLTON SCHOOL DISTRICT BASE DATAs "1900/81 3-yyear average L chang9es 59.00 GRADE 197 1981/82 19,2/1.3 1983/84 1984/05 .. r...r.o.r...uorrr... rru u..ruou..r a rr u.------... KNDG 701 717 744 823 843 021 1 724 754 746 824 899 955 2 678 697 767 771 816 073 COLTON JOINT' UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICIWITH NBN D1iYBLOPME 3 771 717 712 790 761 840 r...................r..r....r..r.... ............r.... 4 769 790 729 755 760 BOB 5 714 768 820 725 769 801 ENROLLMENT FORECAST USING THE yIVE YEAR COHORT OBTHODOLOGYs 6 656 733 826 043 754 all 7 664 712 775 839 868 777 GRADE CBBD&84 1985/86 1906/87 1987/48 1988/89 1989/900 8 700 700 761 776 865 911 9 843 759 770 797 833 $67 RNDG 921 980.00 1,126.50 1,183.50 1,244.50 1,303 SO 10 607 669 752 729 741 793 1 955 1,003 67 1,100 46 1,227.41 1,291.91 1,356 20 11 733 598 698 718 621 686 2 872 949.98 1,109 97 1,192.91 1,221.16 1,205 12 12 609 544 706 656 585 570 3 648 895.59 1,105.29 1,162.15 1225.18 1,254 20 TOTAL 9369 9178 9806 10046 10135 10720 4 BOB 869.29 1;020 24 1151.67 1:191.34 1,255 95 5 801 645.26 992.08 1:071.37 1,101.54 1,222 23 COHORT FACTORS, COUNTY- STATE 6 81l 847.00 960.12 1 045 82 1,113.69 1,228 22 GRADE 1964 3-YEAR 5-YEAR WIDE WEIGHTED 7 777 856.64 966.04 1:019:52 1,091 54 1,162 37 0 911 812.54 989.82 1,047.71 1,066.15 1,141,47 RNDG 56.03 9 967 983.4E 941.75 1,080.09 1,131 05 1,150 95 1 1 1329 1,1109 1.0898 0.9871 66.00 10 793 692.12 972.68 050 26 996.45 1,043 47 2 0 9700 0.9979 0.9947 1 0185 43.07 11 686 725.71 665.09 887.92 795.19 900.15 3 1 0392 1.0107 1.0271 1.0287 46.83 12 570 685.08 745.14 809.23 016 03 730.81 4 S 1 0618 1.0539 1 0281 1.0223 1.0251 1.0259 1.0137 1.01T8 30.00 11.83 ;QTALrr.rr10.20r.r...rr1..�1:-ir�13 „4.--�13 aaa2r-- 14,366.�r-1S.Oa�Sr 6 1.054E 1.0409 1.0395 1 0673 1.67 7 1 0305 1.0253 1.0437 1 0176 -25.17 0 1 0495 1.0352 1.0457 1.0260 51.03 1 9 1.0927 1.0711 1.0795 0 9797 43.50 COMPARATIVZ FORECASTS USING ALTBRNATM MBTHODOLOGIRBS 30 0 9520 0.9426 0.9226 0 9261 26 17 11 0 9256 0 9108 0.9034 0 8504 3.50 state Methods 11,082 11,444 12,169 12,531�12 0 9179 0 8908 0.9190 0.8448 -39.50 84/65 Factors 11,030 12,211 5 512,900 13,269 3- ♦ar Factors 10,864 11,67 t1jift 02612,180 I1I..TOTALr.1-0234r^^1.0079r.t1.0097---0�9815--r.-..�---r362.17r 12 3S,5-year 15,,939 NEW HOUSING APPROVED BY TYPES Factors Countywide, 11,346 10,580 13,00� 11,307 71}},366 1� 11,009 10,664 1986 1987 1988 a F 151 1134 220 CONDO 0 0 0 tHOTFs Forecast yeara 1989/90 does not include considerations M F 0 of new children caused by development in excess of the 1984 average ........... ..r..538.......41.r.. 3-YEAR AVE CHANGE Which occured during the period 1961 through STUDENTS FORECAST FROM IN ENROLLMENT INCLUDED NEW DEVELOPMENT& IN COHORT RATIOS (1982-84) ..r......r......rrr....r......r..r....r..r....r....r.r.r...r.rr.... r.. KHDG` 15 84 146.50 25.10 69.67 1 15 22 171 50 26.53 59 00 ¢NROLLNBNT FORECAST, 1985/86 1986/417 1947/88 1980/89 1909/90 2 11.48 111.50 19.64 35.00 3 13 88 129 61 22.15 45.33 4 11 57 110 16 18 63 26.33 K-61 6,391 7,503 0,037 8,469 0,905 5 9.97 100 24 16.46 �-6.33 7-91 2,653 2,919 3,147 3,289 3,455 6 9 44 81.41 14.56 -5 00 10-120 2,303 2,583 2,577 2,608 2,674 7 10 86 102.73 17 43 0 67 9-12; 11,346 13,004 13,762 14,366 15,035 8 9 69 94.00 15 74 50 OO ...00....... r....r............r.... ....... .rr.rr...r................. 9 7 47 64 50 11 53 13 67 10 7 29 65 37 11.43 65 67 8ppac• eligibility by State standards for regular students using the 11 5 35 59 19 9 24 -4 00 fiv! your cohort forecast methodology, 12 9 29 78 19 14 17 -45 33 TOTL 421 49 1,168 61 196 54 304 67 (In eq.ft # 756,020 860,492 907,967 945,431 987,744 BNROLLMBNT FORECAST for the COLTON SCHOOL DISTRICT BASE OATAs C H.E.D. 3-year average R GRADE 1980/81 1981/62 ohanges 58.00 ........r..r.r...r.r....r.r.a............r...r....r........ RNDG ....... 701 1902/83 1983/84 1981/Bg 1 724 717 75c 71 823 843921 3 6024 78 697 767 171 899 955 S 71 769 790 761 848 6 714 656 788 729 820 755 725 760 008 733 826 843 76975A 801 811 9 700 043 700 759 761 839 797 868 885 777 911 10 11 733 770 729 11 609 590 511 698 706 718 711 621 793 686 TOTAL 9369 9180 9806 656 10046 505 570 COHORT FACTORS, 10135 10720 GRADE 198/ 3-YEAR 6-YEAR COUNTY- ISTAT6 RNDQ HIDE NBIGBTBD 1 2 1 1329 0 9700 1.1109 0.9979 1.0903 0.9942 5 ®3 66.00 3 1 1 0392 1.0618 1.0167 1.0281 1.0271 1.0185 1.0287 43.67 5 6 1 0539 1 1 0223 1.0251 1.0239 1.0137 10178 18 46.93 30.00 7 0516 1 0305 1.0409 1.0253 1.0395 . 1.067314.83 8 9 1 0495 1 1.0352 1.0437 1 0457 1.0176 10260 1.67 -25.17 0927 1.0711 0 9420 1 0795 0.9226 . 0 9797 51.83 83.50 11 12 0 9520 0.9179 09109 0.8908 0.9034 0.9261 0 9504 26.17 COLTON JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT .....................s...........::.C.r.111T.ROVT N M 1+ OOT NBM L DBVBLOPMBNT D9Vft BMROLLNB NTIFORBCAST ft ............••• D8IN0 THE SIVS YEAR COHORT METHODOLOGY1 GRADQ CB8Ds81 1905186 1986/87 1987 08 / 1908/89 RNDQ 1 921 95S 980.00 10004.19 1,039.00 1,068.52 1 098 00 1,157.01 1989/90* 1,216 00 3 048 893.59 695.59 998 37 1,132.85 1,062.33 197.18 1,126.29 6 5 BOB 069.29 29 975.15 891.08 1,025 38 999.61 1,091.07 1,261.51 1,196 76 6 7 oil 811 777 83S 29 837.61 868.28 868.28 941.89 927 1,051.13 1,023 57 1,118 17 1,070 10 0 911 846.45 074.25 07 906.21 979 10 967.59 1,066 09 1,021 90 10 967 793 983.16 892 12 877.jj 914.2� 947.69 986 96 10011 85 11 12 --686 686 720.36 907.21 805.l1 009�Zs 019.25 881.58 1,023 07 910 51 TOTAL 675.00 652 01 740.66 753.27 671 38 671.86 .......................11..0?....11:771-..r12�333-...12:tl............. 10720 1....3 COMPA1U TIVE FORECASTS TOTAL 1 0234 0.9190 0.8118 ..... ��_ 1.0079 1.0097 0.9915 3.50 -39.50 State 04/83 Methods ...r.rr...........r......... NEN HOUSING APPROVED �•••••••••••••••••••a., 362.17 3 Year Factors factors BY TYPBs 1985 1986 8 P 1987 Countv.,4A-.Ors CONDO M F ............................... STUDENTS FORECAST FROM HER DEVELOPMENTI 1NDG 0 00 -0.0V 0.00 2 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 1 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 5 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0.00 6 7 0 00 0 00 0 00 0.00 e o 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 10 0 00 0.00 a 00 0.00 11 0 00 0 00 0 00 0.00 0.00 12 TOTL 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 d811p ALTaRNATIVIs 1182pppO100I888 11,082 11�030 11117 11,807 11.671 12 169 , 12 531 , 11,030 11,302 11�009 11,771 11,155 12,003 11,302 12,343 11,451 10;580 10,443 12,330 10,30 10:177 12 895 10,023 10,017 3-YEAR AVE CHANGE NOTES Forecast yearn 1999/89, 1989 90 of new children / do not include IN ENROLLMENT INCLUDED IN COHORT caused b paantconsiderations in which occured during the Y in excess of the average RATIOS 11982-81) period period 981 1984 69.67 59 w . r...w.....r.....r........r..rr.w..wrwr............r...r..rr.....w 00 35 00 ONROLLNENT FORBCABTs 15 33 1985/e6 1984/87 19 87/e8 1188/89 1!8!/90 26 33 -6.33 -5 00 R-6s 7-91 6,371 6,759 0 67 10_12, 2,642 2,637 R-12s 2,288 2,373 776 7,902 8,087 2,776 2,l02 3,057 50 00 13.67 11,302 r....r.r.....■rrrrrrrrrr....wrrr.1........r 2,370 2,366 20379 12,333 12,895.rr.13,523 65 67 -1 00 Stac4 eligibility by State ,523 -45 33 standards for f ve year cohort forecast methodologys regular students using the 301 67 (in aq.tt.) 752#954 780,172 814,465 846,142 886,496 Title 7 ordinance xy 1, 1989, tute, which Sate 1989 51 ips or parcel map was re - conditionally for to July 1, 'leaning § 21 M h "990 et 3, approval overcrowd- :nbution of se -purchase rding Div 1 SCHOOL F kCILITIES § 65971 Sec 65980 Interim facilities, limitation 65981 Recommendation of fees to provide interim facilities, submission to city or county, failure to provide as waiver Chapter 4 7 was added by Stats 1977, c 955, p 2902, § 1 § 65970. Legislative findings and declaration The Legislature finds and declares as follows (a) Adequate school facilities should be available for children re- siding in new residential developments (b) Public and private residential developments may require the expansion of existing public schools or the construction of new school facilities (c) In many areas of the state, the funds for the construction of new classroom facilities are not available when new development oc- curs, resulting in the overcrowding of existing schools (d) New housing developments frequently cause conditions of overcrowding in existing school facilities which cannot be alleviated under existing law within a reasonable period of time (e) That, for these reasons, new and improved methods of fi- nancing for interim school facilities necessitated by new development are needed in California (Added by Stats 1977, c 955, p 2902, § 1 ) Forms See west's California Code Forms, Go%ernment Library References Zoning and Planning 0=169 C J S Zoning and Land Planning § 80 et seq Notes of Decisions I In general Inasmuch as exaction imposed under 6 65970 et seq authorizing imposition of fees or land acquisition by local go,.ern ment units as condition to approval of residential dei elopment was not imposed upon land in subdivision as such but aas imposed on prnilege of as land which caused overcrowding of local school facilities exaction was not an ad valorem property tax and, therefore, if exaction i% as a tax was not a 'special tax' within meaning of Const Art 13A, § 4 requiring mo thirds ,oter approval before city may impose special taxes " Trent 'Meredith Inc i, City of Oxnard (1981) 170 Cal Rptr 685, 114 C A 3d 317 § 65971. Findings by school district, notice to city or county If the governing body of a school district which operates an ele- mentary or high school makes a finding supported by clear and con- vincing evidence that (a) conditions of overcrowding exist in one or 141 § 65971 PLANNING 4,ND ZONING Title 7 more attendance areas within the district which will impair the nor - malfunctioning of educational programs including the reason for such conditions existing, and (b) that all reasonable methods of mit- igating conditions of overcrowding have been evaluated and no feasi- ble method for reducing such conditions exist, the governing body of the school district shall notify the city council or board of supervisors of the city or county within which the school district lies The notice of findings sent to the city or county shall specify the mitigation measures considered by the school district If the city council or board of supervisors concurs in such findings the provisions of Sec- tion 65972 shall be applicable to actions taken on residential develop- ment by such council or board (Added by Stats 1977, c 955, p 2902, § 1 ) § 65972. Findings by city council or board of supervisors Within the attendance area where it has been determined pursu- ant to Section 65971 that conditions of overcrowding exist, the city council or board of supervisors shall not approve an ordinance rezon- ing property to a residential use, grant a discretionary permit for res- idential use, or approve a tentative subdivision map for residential purposes, within such area, unless the city council or board of super- visors makes one of the following findings (1) That an ordinance pursuant to Section 65974 has been adopted, or (2) That there are specific overriding fiscal, economic, social, or environmental factors which in the judgment of the city council or board of supervisors would benefit the city or county, thereby justify- ing the approval of a residential development otherwise subject to Section 65974 (Added by Stats 1977, c 955, p 2902, § 1 ) § 65973. Definitions As used in this chapter (a) "Conditions of overcrowding' means that the total enroll- ment of a school, including enrollment from proposed development, exceeds the capacity of such school as determined by the governing body of the district (b) "Reasonable methods for mitigating conditions of over- crowding' shall include, but are not limited to, agreements between a subdivider and the affected school district whereby temporary -use 142 I Y. Title 7 Div 1 SCHOOL FACILITIES § 65974 pair the nor- buildings will be leased to the school district or temporary -use build - reason for ings owned by the school district will be used thods of mit- (c) "Residential development" means a project containing resi- and no feast- dential dwellings, including mobilehomes, of one or more units or a nmg body of subdivision of land for the purpose of constructing one or more resi- f supervisors dential dwelling units The notice (Added by Stats 1977, a 955, p 2902, § 1 ) e mitigation ` y council or Library References slons of Sec- Words and Phrases (Perm Ed ) itial develop- § 65974. Intenm classroom facilities where overcrowding exists; approval of residential development, conditions For the purpose of establishing an interim method of providing classroom facilities where overcrowded conditions exist, as deter- rvisors mined necessary pursuant to Section 65971, and notwithstanding Sec - mined pursu- tion 66478, a city, county, or city and county may, by ordinance, re- Yist, the city quire the dedication of land, the payment of fees in lieu thereof, or a nance rezon- combination of both, for classroom and related facilities for elementa- rrmit for res- ry or high schools as a condition to the approval of a residential de- ir residential velopment, provided that all of the following occur 3rd of super- (a) The general plan provides for the location of public schools 74 has been (b) The ordinance has been in effect for a period of 30 days prior to the implementation of the dedication or fee requirement. (c) The land or fees, or both, transferred to a school district zic, social, or shall be used only for the purpose of providing interim elementary or .y council or high school classroom and related facilities ?reby justify- ?e subject to (d) The location and amount of land to be dedicated or the amount of fees to be paid, or both, shall bear a reasonable relation- ship and will be limited to the needs of the community for interim el- ementary or high school facilities and shall be reasonably related and limited to the need for schools caused by the development, provided, .ti the fees shall not exceed the amount necessary ry to pay five annual lease payments for the interim facilities In lieu of the fees, the builder of a residential development may, at his or her option and at total enroll - his or her expense, provide interim facilities, owned or controlled by development, r the builder, at the place designated by the school district, and at the he governin conclusion of the fifth school year the builder shall, at the builder's expense, remove the interim facilities from that place )ns of over- (e) A finding is made by the city council or board of supervisors its between a that the facilities to be constructed from the fees or the land to be amporary-use dedicated, or both, is consistent with the general plan 143 § 65974 PLANNING AND ZONING Title 7 The ordinance may specify the methods for mitigating the condi- tions of overcrowding which the school district shall consider when making the finding required by subdivision (b) of Section 65971 If the payment of fees is required, the payment shall be made at the time the building permit is issued or at a later time as may be specified in the ordinance Only the payment of fees may be required in subdivisions con- taining 50 parcels or less (Added by Stats 1977, c 955, p 2902, § 1 Amended by Stats 1979, c 282, p 1023, § 53, eff July 24, 1979, Stats 1982, c 923, § 3, urgency, eff Sept 13, 1982 ) Historical Note The 1979 amendment added the proviso to the first sentence in subd (d) added the second sentence of subd (d), and substituted '50" for "fifty (50)" in the last sentence The 1982 amendment substituted "the" or "that" for 'such" where appropriate, and added 'or at a later time as may be specified in the ordinance" to the penulti- mate sentence Library References Schools C -67 C J S Schools and School Districts § 256 Notes of Decisions in general I Fees 2 Ordinances 3 I In general The interim school facilities funded pur- suant to this section, are limited to tem- porary facilities 62 Ops Atty Gen 601, 10-16-79 A deduction for state personal income tax purposes is allowed for fees imposed by a city or county pursuant to this sec tion if those fees are paid directly by the homeowner who is legally responsible for their payment, and the homeowner incurs expenses either in carrying on a trade or business or for the production of income or the management, conservation or main tenance of property held for the produc- tion of income 62 Ops Atty Gen 473, 8- 30-79 Fees imposed pursuant to this section were not special taxes within the meaning of Const Art 13A, § 4, relating to the imposition of special taxes on cities, coun- ties and special districts 62 Ops Atty Gen 254, 5-18-79 2 Fees A city or county may not levy a fee upon builders of residential developments for the purpose of providing permanent school facilities in addition to the fee for interim school facilities under this section 62 Ops Atty Gen 601, 10-1649 3 Ordinances In enacting an ordinance providing for interim school facilities, a city council or county board of supervisors may provide that the location and amount of land or the amount of fees shall be determined by the school district within the limit speci- fied in subd (d) of this section 62 Ops Atty Gen 601, 10-16-79 § 65976. Schedule by school district, solution of conditions of overcrowding, contents, modifications Following the decision by the city or county to require the dedi- cation of land or the payment of fees, or both, the governing body of 144 e DATE- Sept. 19, 19 STAFF REPORT C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X ) MEETING DATE Sept. 26, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO & • SUBJECT GRAND TERRACE PLANNING SERVICES FUNDING REQUIRED X NO FUNDING REQUIRED At the City Council Meeting of September 12, 1985 Council directed staff to go back to our current Planning Contractor to reevaluate and re -negotiate our present planning contract. The City of Grand Terrace currently has in force a contract to provide professional services from Kicak and Associates. The current hourly costs to provide services are attached. It should be noted that the rates were established in 1983 and remain the current rates charged to the City. In negotiating with Kicak and Associates, the contractor has indicated that the City would be charged the same rates on an hourly basis as in the past, but that the budget for Planning would have to be increased to $70,000 per year. The contractor will provide planning services and has indicated that $70,000 represents the maximum the City would be charged. If the demand required less, only the actual man-hours would be billed. Scope of services would include providing a Planning Department that citizens and developers would have access to during business hours, attendance at City Council and Planning Commission Meetings and preparation/distribution of Planning Commission agendas and minutes, administration of the City's Zoning Ordinance and General Plan, Coordination with City Staff the preparation of new ordinances, amendments, general plan element revisions and special planning studies. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT COUNCIL CONSIDER THE CHOICES IN PROVIDING PLANNING SERVICES AND GIVE STAFF DIRECTION ON THE METHOD PREFERRED TO CARRY OUT PLANNING FOR THE CITY. 1. IF STAFF IS DIRECTED TO CONTINUE TO CONTRACT WITH THE CURRENT CONTRACTOR, APPROPRIATE $5,168 TO DEPARTMENT 370, PLANNING, MAKING THE TOTAL AMOUNT FOR CONTRACTUAL SERVICES AND THE TOTAL DEPARTMENT BEING $70,000. 5 Grand Terrace Planning Services September 26, 1985 Page 2 2. IF STAFF IS DIRECTED TO SECURE IN-HOUSE PLANNING, STAFF WILL REQUIRE COUNCIL TO A. CREATE CITY PLANNER POSITION SALARY RANGE 73. B. CREATE PLANNING SECRETARY POSITION SALARY RANGE 51. C. APPROPRIATE AN ADDITIONAL $11,261 TO DEPARTMENT 370, PLANNING, TO INCREASE THE TOTAL DEPARTMENT TO $76,093. TS bt Attachment (1) H FEE SCHEDULE The firm of Kicak and Associates would provide the engineering services in accordance with the following schedule of fees: City Engineering Services - City Council Meetings As City Engineer, the authorized representative, Joseph Kicak, would attend each regular City Council meeting, estimated not to exceed 2 meetings per month, for a fee of $20.00 per hour. This would include attending the Planning Commission Meeting during the period in which the City Council is acting as the Planning Commission. - Planning Commission Meetings Should the City Council appoint a Planning Commission which would meet at a time other than the City Council, the same $20.00 per hour fee would apply to the time required of the City Engineer by the Planning Commission. In addition, mileage which the City Engineer would be required to travel would be charged at the rate of $.20 per mile. Except, that no mileage would apply to the travel required between the established office of the Engineer and the place of meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission for their regular scheduled meetings. Other Engineerinq Services All other engineering services would be provided to the City at the following rates: Office Engineering Principal Engineer Pro3ect Engineer Designer Draftsman Clerical $30.00 per hour $26.00 per hour $24.00 per hour $22.00 per hour $10.00 per hour d J Field Surveys 3-Man Party 2-Man Party Mileage Inspection $75.00 per hour $60.00 per hour $ .25 per mile Field Survey rates may be sub3ect to changes granted under terms of the prevailing labor agreement. Chief Inspector Inspector Miscellaneous Xerox Prints Mileage (other than survey truck) Expert Witness and Court Appearance $22.00 per hour $20.00 per hour At Cost At Cost $ .20 per mile To be arranged Approved by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace on the 4th day of January, 1979 Mayor City of Grand Terrace ATT T i..�ty Cierk aAm"4 9/ KICAK AND ASSOCIATES City of Grand Terrace lam/ Date z Date - r REPOkT September 18, 1985 STi-\FF 12-8 1000 :TJW C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM jKx ) MEETING DATE: September 26, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: Ordinance Amending Section 18.66 050 of the Municipal Code Dealing with Appeals of Planning Commission Decisions. P.C. Resolution No. PC85-07 FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED xx The proposed amendment of Paragraph A, Section 18.66.050 of the Municipal Code would permit property owners to appeal a decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council, if they own property within 300 ft. of the site of the proposed use permit. If there is no appeal by the Applicant, Council Member, or qualified owner, the decision of the Planning Commission is final the attached Resolution No. PC 85-07 of the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approves the chanqe. Staff Recommends Council WAIVE FULL READING AND ADOPT FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.66.050 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE DEALING WITH APPEALS OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISIONS, BY TITLE ONLY. - - - JK/JS/lh - -_-- — -- Attachments N ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE'S MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18.66, SECTION 18 66 050, DEALING WITH APPEALS TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISIONS RELATIVE TO USE PERMITS. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 18.66 050 (A) is hereby amended to read as follows: - "A. The decision of the Planning Commission shall be final unless appealed in writing to the City Council by the applicant or by any owner of affected property which is located within three hundred feet of the property for which the Use Permit was requested, within ten calendar days from the date of the Planning Commission's decision. The letter of appeal shall be accompanied by a processing fee. The letter shall by filed with the City Clerk's Office." Section 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12:01 A.M. on the 31st day after its adoption. Section 3. Posting The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) public places within (15) days after its passage, as 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 day of , 1985, an finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the day of 1985. 1` RESOLUTION NO. PC 85- 07 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE, SECTION 18 66.050 DEALING WITH APPEALS TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF USE PERMIT DECISIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEREAS, The City Council has proposed a change in Section 18.66.050A of the City Code to make Use Permit decisions final with the Planning Commission, unless appealed by the Applicant or neighboring property owner. WHEREAS, This new procedure will reduce the time required to process Use Permits. WHEREAS, The rights of neighboring property owners are amply protected. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace, California does hereby support the amendment of the City of Grand Terrace Municipal Code Chapter 18.66 Section 18 66.050, dealing with appeals to the City Council of Planning Commission decisions relative to Use Permits. ADOPTED this 5th day of August, 1985. ATTEST: CITY CLERK Approved as to form CITY ATTORNEY RESOLUTION NO 85- 11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE, SECTION 18.66.050, DEALING WITH APPEALS TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF USE PERMIT DECISIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace does hereby RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER as follows: Section 1. That an amendment to the City of Grand Terrace Municipal Code Section 18.66.050 is hereby initiated. Section 2 That the proposed Ordinance of Amendment is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "A" hereto. Section 3. That the City Clerk, City Manager and Planning Director are hereby directed to transmit a copy of this Resolution, including Exhibit "A" to the Grand Terrace Planning Commission for their action pursuant to the Grand Terrace Municipal Code Chapter 18.81. ADOPTED this 11th day of July 1985. ATTEST: City Xerk of the City of Mayo of he ity of Grand Grand/Terrace and of e Terrace `�nd�o the City City Council thereof Council thereof. r f� 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 11th day of July 1985, by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Matteson, Petta, Pfennighausen, Evans, Mayor Grant NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Approved as to form: d>44n City Attorney >417,11 City lerk I, MYRNA ERWAY, Ciry Clerk of the Cary of Grand T rrace, Coun y of Saa Berrardrno, Sate of Califor, ra, here y err ify the fcre. bofrg ins iurren to be a full, true, rnd correct co, y of ,lia c rigira row on file M my office DAIS. MYRNA ERWAY CITY CLERK By it EXHIBIT "A" (RESOLUTION NO. 85-11) ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE'S MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18 66, SECTION 18 66.050, DEALING WITH APPEALS TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISIONS RELATIVE TO USE PERMITS. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS. Section 1. Section 18 66.050 (A) is hereby amended to read as follows: "A. The decision of the Planning Commission shall be final unless appealed in writing to the City Council by the applicant or by any owner of affected property which is located within three hundred feet of the property for which the Use Permit was requested, within ten calendar days from the date of the Planning Commission's decision. The letter of appeal shall be accompanied by a processing fee The letter shall by filed with the City Clerk's Office " Section 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12 01 A.M. on the 31st day after its adoption. Section 3 Posting The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) public 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 day of 1985, an finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the day of 1985. t ADOPTED this ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof. day of , 1985. 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 Ordinance was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held of the day of 1985, by the following vote - AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Approved as to form - City Attorney City Clerk a { t STAFF REPOf�T Date: September 18, 1985 12-8.3048 1,4650 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx ) MEETING DATE: September 26, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: Ordinance Amending Municipal Code Section 18 72 - Dealinq with Signs. P.C. Resolution No. 85-06. FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED xx Attached is Resolution No. PC 85-06, of the Grand Terrace Planning Commission recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance amending the Sign Code to change Paragraph "C", which now permits special signs for 45 days once a year, to 30 days twice a year. It would also add Paragraph "D", "D-1", and "D-2". STAFF RECOMMENDS WAIVE FULL READING AND ADOPT FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 18.72 DEALING WITH SIGNS BY TITLE ONLY. JK/JS/lh Attachments d ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE'S MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18 72, DEALING WITH SIGNS. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 18.72. 120(K) of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "K Banners, flags, pennants and balloons (except as provided for in this chapter)," Section 2. Section 18.72.200 is hereby amended to read as follows: "18 72 200 Special event signs Special event signs may be approved for a limited period of time, in any district, as a means of publicizing special events such as a grand opening, new management, inventory sale, for public or charitable events and Christmas tree lots To apply for approval of special event signs, the applicant shall submit a letter to the planning director which describes the proposed sign by means of a sketch and the display dates. The planning director shall review the request within ten working days after receipt and shall make a determination to approve, approve with modification or deny the request. Such special event signs shall be limited by the following provisions: A. No more than one special event sign shall be , permitted per activity and shall be either a wall, window or ground sign with the use of flags, banners and pennants. B. All special events shall be a maximum of thirty-two square feet and shall be posted below the roof or shall be no higher than eight feet in the case of a ground sign. C. Special event signs shall be limited to thirty days, twice per calendar year. D. Special event signs as provided for herein, may not be displayed, erected, hung,attached or affixed to any pole, staff, structure, or other appurtenance without the prior approval of the City Planning Director. 1. Special event signs shall be maintained in good repair at all times 2. A cash deposit in such amount as is designated by the City Council, shall be deposited with the sign application to ensure compliance with this chapter and removal of such sign. The deposit shall be refunded to the applicant upon removal of the sign by the applicant If the City is forced to either remove the sign or to bring abatement action, the City's costs of such action shall be deducted from the deposit." Section 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12:01 a m. on the 31st day after its adoption. Section 4. Posting. The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted the three (3) public places designated for such purpose by the City Council. Section 5. First read at regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on the day of , 1985, and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the day of , 1985. -2- r r RESOLUTION NO PC 85- 06 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 18 72.200 DEALING WITH SIGNS WHEREAS The City Council, by Council Resolution 85-12 has requested the Planning Commission to review a proposed Ordinance amending the Municipal Code Section 18 72.200 Special Event Signs. WHEREAS The proposed Ordinance would change Paragraph C, Time Limit for Special Signs from forty-five days a year to thirty days twice a year. It would also add Paragraph D, paragraphs 1 and 2. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace does hereby resolve as follows SECTION 1 The proposed changes would be beneficial to the City and to the applicant for Special Sign Permits and the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace does hereby urge the City Council to adopt the proposed change to Section 18 72.200 of the City Code ADOPTED this 5th day of August, 1985. ATTEST CITY CLERK Approved as to form CITY ATTORNEY L 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ) I, MYRNA ERWAY, CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace, State of California, do hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of CITY OF GRAND TERRACE RESOLUTION NO. 85-12 which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, City of Grand Terrace, Cal i form a IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of the City of Grand Terrace this 29th day of July , 1985 . )7) MYRN ERWAY, City Clerk 61 City of Grand Terrace RESOLUTION NO. 85-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18.72, DEALING WITH SIGNS NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace does hereby RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER as follows: Section 1. That an amendment to the City of Grand Terrace Municipal Code, Chapter 18.72 is hereby initiated. Section 2. That the proposed Ordinance of Amendment is attached hereto and incorporated hereto as Exhibit "A". Section 3. That the City CLerk, City Manager and Planning Director are hereby directed to transmit a copy of this Resolution, including Exhibit "A", to the Grand Terrace Planning Commission for their action pursuant to the Grand Terrace Municipal Code Chapter 18.81. ADOPTED this 25th day of July , 1985. ATTEST: �_GtJ City erk of the Cit of Gran Terrace and of the City Council thereof. N\" \ImMl Mayor o%nhd`e CitoTerrace 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 25th day of July , 1985, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN. p oved as to ity Attorney Councilmembers Mayor Grant None None None form. Matteson, Petta, Pfenniahausen, Evans, — * L��Jae' City lerk EXHIBIT "A" RESOLUTION NO 85-12 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE'S MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 18.72, DEALING WITH SIGNS. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 18.72. 120(K) of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: "K. Banners, flags, pennants and balloons (except as provided for in this chapter);" Section 2. Section 18.72.200 is hereby amended to read as follows: "18.72.200 Special event signs. Special event signs may be approved for a limited period of time, in any district, as a means of publicizing special events such as a grand opening, new management, inventory sale, for public or charitable events and Christmas tree lots. To apply for approval of special event signs, the applicant shall submit a letter to the planning director which describes the proposed sign by means of a sketch and the display dates. The planning director shall review the request within ten working days after receipt and shall make a determination to approve, approve with modification or deny the request. Such special event signs shall be limited by the following provisions: A. No more than one special event sign shall be permitted per activity and shall be either a wall, window or ground sign with the use of flags, banners and pennants. B. All special events shall be a maximum of thirty-two square feet and shall be posted below the roof or shall be no higher than eight feet in the case of a ground sign. C. Special event signs shall be limited to thirty days, twice per calendar year. D. Special even signs as provided for herein, may not be displayed, erected, hung attached or affixed to any pole, staff, structure, or other appurtenance without the prior approval of the City Planning Director. 1. Special event signs shall be maintained in good repair at all times. 0 2. A cash deposit in such amount as is designated by the City Council, shall be deposited with the sign application to ensure compliance with this chapter and removal of such sign. The deposit shall be refunded to the applicant upon removal of the sign by the applicant. If the City is forced to either remove the sign or to bring abatement action, the City's costs of such action shall be deducted from the deposit." Section 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the 31st day after its adoption. Section 4. Posting. The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted the three (3) public places designated for such purpose by the City Council. Section 5. First read at regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on the day of 1985, and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the day of , 1985. -2- M ADOPTED this ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof. day of 1985. 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 Ordinance was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held of the day of 1985, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Approved as to form: City Attorney City Clerk PENDING -CITY BE? 2 6 1985 COUNCIL APPROVAL ORDINANCE NO. Q0,U C1L AGENDA STEM Z 611E AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, DEALING WITH NOISE AND DECLARING THE EMISSION OF CERTAIN RISES TO BE A NUISANCE ,NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Intent It is the intent of this section to protect properties within the City and the health and safety of persons from environmental nuisances and hazards and provide a pleasing environment throughout the City. The standards set forth herein provide maximum tolerability limits on adverse environmental effects created through excessive noise. Section 2. Violations to be an Infraction. It is hereby determined that every violation hereof is an infraction punishable as follows (a) A fine not exceeding $50.00 for a first violation; (b) A fine not exceeding $100.00 for a second violation within a one year period; (c) A fine not exceeding $200.00 for each additional violation within a one year period Section 3. Exemptions The following sources of noise nuisances are exempt from the provisions hereof: (a) Emergency equipment, vehicles and devices. (b) Temporary construction, maintenance, or demolition activities between the hours of 7 00 a.m and 8:00 p m , except Sundays and National Holidays. Section 4. Special Activities In addition to the exemptions provided for hereinabove, the following activities shall be exempted from the provisions provided for herein: (a) City or school approved activities conducted on public parks, public playgrounds and public or private school grounds including but not limited to athletic and school entertainment events between the 7:00 a m and 11 00 p m (b) Outdoor gatherings, dances, shows, and sporting and entertainment events, provided that said events and conducted pursuant to the approval of a Temporary Use Permit issued by the City. (c) Noises produced by mechanical devices, apparatus or equipment used, related to, or connected with emergency machinery, vehicle, work or warning alarm or dell, provided the sounding of any bell, or alarm on any ouilding or motor vehicle shall terminate its operation within thirty minutes in any hour of its being activated (d) Noise sources associated with or vibration created by construction, repair or remodeling or grading of any real property or during authorized seismic surveys, provided said activities do not take place between the hours of 8.00 p.m. and 7 00 a m on weekdays, including Saturday, or at anytime on Sunday or a National Holiday, and provided noise levels created do not exceed the noise standards herein. (e) All devices, apparatus or equipment associated with agriculture operations provided as follows- (1) Operations to not take place between 8:00 p m and 7.00 a m. (2) Such operations and equipment are utilized for protection or salvage of agricultural crops during periods of potential or actual frost damage or other adverse weather conditions. (3) Such operations and equipment are as- sociated with agricultural pest control through pesticide application provided the application is made in accordance with permits issued or regulations enforced by the California Department of Agriculture (f) Noise sources associated with the maintenance of real property provided said activities take place between the hours of 8.00 a m. and 8.00 p.m. on any day except Sunday or between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Sunday Section 5. Prohibited Noise. No operation or activity shall cause any source of sound at any location or allow the creation of noise on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the Ambient Base noise levels to exceed 60 dBA during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7.00 a.m. and 65 dBA during the hours of 7•00 a m. to 10.00 p.m. In addition, the following noises are prohibited and are declared to be nuisances: (a) Peddlers Use of Loud Noise to Advertise Goods. No peddler or mobile vendor or any person in their behalf shall shout, cry out, or use any device or instrument to make sounds for the purpose of advertising in such a manner as to create a noise disturbance. (b) Animal Noises No person owning or having the charge, care, custody, or control of any dog, or other animal or fowl shall allow or permit the same to habitually howl, bark, yelp or make other noises, in such a manner as to create a noise disturbance (c) Radios, Television Sets, Musical Instruments and Similar Devices No person shall operate or permit the operation or playing of any device which reproduces, produces or amplifies sound, (such as a radio, musical instrument, phonograph or sound amplifier) in such a manner as to create a noise *2* i disturbance The operation of any such devise between the hours of 10.00 p.m. and 7 00 a.m. in such a manner as to be plainly audible at a distance of fifty feet from the building, structure or vehicle in which it is located shall be prunes facie evidence of a violation of this section. (d) The Sounding of Whistles, Horns, Bells or Other Such Devices No person shall make or cause to be made the loud, sudden and unnecessary blowing of whistles, sounding of horns, ringing of bells or use of signaling devices by operators or railroad locomotives, motor trucks and other transportation equipment (e) Loading or Unloading of Trucks. No person shall create or cause to be created loud and excessive noise in connection with the loading or unloading of motor trucks and other vehicles. (f) Operation of Equipment. The operation or use between the hours of 10.00 p m. and 7-00 a.m. of any pile driver, steam shovel, pneumatic hammers, derrick, steam or electric hoist, power driven saw, or any other tool or apparatus the use of which is attended by loud and excessive noise is prohibited. (g) Automotive Repair TAbrks No person shall do automotive repair, automotive body or fender or 4 other work on metal cb3ects and metal parts between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., so as to cause loud and excessive noise. Section 6 Exterior Noise Standards. It shall be unlawful for any person at any location within the City to create any noise or allow the creation of any noise on the property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the noise level when measured on the property line of any other property to exceed the basic noise level, as hereinafter ad3usted- (a) Basic Noise Level for accumulative period of not more than 15 minutes in any one hour W Basic Noise Level plus 5 dBA for accumulative period of not rrore than 10 minutes in any one hour (c) Basic Noise Level plus 14 dBA for accumulative period of not rrore than 5 munutes in any one hour (d) Basic Noise Level plus 15 dBA at any time Section 7 Effective Date This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12 01 a m. on 31st day after its adoption Section 8 Posting The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) public places, designated for such purpose by the City Council, within fifteen (15) days after its passage *3* e Section 9 First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on the day of 11 1985, and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the day of , 1985. Section 10 Adopted at a special meeting of the City Council of said City held on the 19th day of September, 1985. City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof. Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council there of. I, ILENE DUGHMAN, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was adopted at a special meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held of the 19th day of September, 1985 by the following vote AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Approved as to form City Attorney City Clerk *4 * Date ;Y "j� September 18, 1985 T)--\r"* K ST 12.-8.3112 C R A ITEM ( } COUNCIL ITEM X ) MEETING DATE: September 26, 1985 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7 .— SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission action re3ecting Sign Variances for La TiDera Barber Salon FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED xx On August 1, 1985, Mr David Ramirez submitted a request for a variance for his sign located at 22430 Barton Road. The sign was legal when it was installed, but does not meet the current requirements of the Grand Terrace Sign Code Both the height and size exceed the limit of 8 ft. high and area of 24 sq. ft. allowed by Section 18.72 260A of Title 18 Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission, at their meeting of August 19, 1985, by a 3 to 3 vote re]ected the request for a variance Mr. Ramirez is requesting that the City Council reverse the action of the Planning Commission, approve his request for a Sign Variance and refund the $117.00 fee he paid to appeal this matter to the City Council On September 16, 1985, the Planning Commission approved a similar sign for the Red Carpet Realty STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE SIGN VARIANCE AND REFUND OF THE APPEAL FEE PERMITTING THE NON -CONFORMING SIGN TO REMAIN FOR THE LIFE OF THE SIGN OR UNTIL THE BUSINESS CHANGES OWNERSHIP, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST JK/JS/lh STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE. FROM: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: J// �Z' 12-8.W AUGUST 19, 1985 PLANNING DEPARTMENT SIGN VARIANCE, LA TIJERA BARBER SALON SIGN OWNER/APPLICANT: David G. Ramirez 22430 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 (714) 825-6703 AREA: North side of Barton Road between Michigan and Canal Street. REQUEST- The Planning Department has received a request for a variance from La Tijera Barber Salon for an existing non- conforming sign. The sign does not comply with the existing City Codes. ZONING: C-2 STAFF ANALYSIS: The existing sign identifying the La Tijera Barber Salon was approved by the County Planning Department March 2, 1978, but does not comply with the current sign code of the City of Grand Terrace. The top of the sign is 18 ft. above ground level with an area of 32 sq. ft. on each of two sides Both the height and size exceed the limit of 8 ft high and area of 24 sq. ft. allowed by Section 18 72.260A of Title 18 Zoning Ordinance. The sign is supported by a single steel post located on private property. The sign met the requirements of all public agencies at time it was installed Through no fault of the Owner, it is now a non —conforming sign, as defined by the City of Grand Terrace Zoning Law. STAFF RECOMMENDS: THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE THE SIGN VARIANCE FOR THE LA TIJERA BARBER SALON, PERMITTING THE NON —CONFORMING SIGN TO REMAIN FOR THE LIFE OF THE SIGN OR UNTIL THE BUSINESS CHANGES OWNERSHIP, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST. JK/LH fN f :tom j* 1 ƒ � . , �� y® . . �� . \\� &v �y�& < .: z _�� . :� \� : � .. 12-8. t f2 � 5 7♦ c NOTICE OF HEARI NG: f r A PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED BEFORE THE GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED APPLICATION The applicant, Mr. Ramirez, La Ti]era Barber Salon, is requesting a Sign Variance for the non -conforming sign located at 22430 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, CA. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CIVIC CENTER PLACE OF HEARING 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 DATE AND TIME OF HEARING. MONDAY, August 19, 1985 7 00 p.m. ANY PERSON AFFECTED BY THIS APPLICATION MAY APPEAR AND BE HEARD IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSAL AT TEE TIME OF THE HEARING.