The URL can be used to link to this page

09/27/1984CITY OF GRAND TERRACE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA TERRACE VIEW ELEMENIARY SCHOOL 22731 Grand Terrace Road * Call to Order * Invocation - Pastor Ray Williams, Grand View Baptist Church * Pledge of Allegiance * Roll Call SEPTEMBER 27, 1984 5:30 P.M. CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1. Approval of Minutes (9/13/84) Staff Recommendations Council Action Approve 2. Approval of Check Register No. CRA092784 Approve 3. Economic Development Status Report Oral Presentation (Rosenow Spevacek Service Group) ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONVENE CITY COUNCIL 1. Items to Add/Delete 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS A. 1983 Pedestrian Safety Citation Accept Award (James Celano - Auto Club of So. Calif.) B. Jarvis Initiative --Proposition 36 Bob Elliott - San Bernardino Public Oral Presentation Employees Association (1) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE Adopt CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, OPPOSING THE JARVIS IV INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT (PROPOSITION 36) C. Proclamation - Minority Enterprise Development Week (Oct. 7-13) 3. Civic Center Construction Briefing 4. Approval of Minutes (8/23/84) (9/5/84) (9/13/84 Approve COUNCIL AGENDA Staff 9/27/84 - Page 2 of 3 Recommendations Council Action 5. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine & non -controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. Any Council Member, Staff Member, or Citizen may request an item be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Approve A. Approval of Check Register No. 092784 B. Authorize $35.00 Expenditure from Approve 10-4110-220 for a 1/2 Page Ad in the Grand Terrace Woman's Club 1984-85 Yearbook C. Reject Liability Claim Nos. GTLC84-1; Approve GTLC84-2; and GTLC84-3 6. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 7. ORAL REPORTS A. Planning Commission B. Parks & Recreation Committee (1) Blue Mountain Wilderness Park C. Historical & Cultural Activities Committee D. Crime Prevention Committee E. Emergency Operations Committee F. Police Chief G. Fire Chief H. City Engineer I. City Attorney J. City Manager K. City Council (1) November/December meeting dates 8. PUBLIC HEARING - 7:30 P.M. A. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY Adopt by title OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE only following AMENDMENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL Public Hearing PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984. (Second Reading) (Areas 3 thru 7; 9; 14 thru 22; 24; 25; 26A [being a portion of original Area 261; & 27 thru 39) COUNCIL AGENDA 9/27/84 - Page 3 of 3 9. NEW BUSINESS A. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY Approve 1st reading OF GRAND TERRACE, CA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE & set 2nd reading & AMENDMENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL public hearing for PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984. 10/11/84 (First Reading) (Areas 10, 11 & 12) 'ADJOURN THE NEXT REGULAR CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WILL BE HELD THURSDAY, OCTOBER 11, 1984, AT 5:30 P.M AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS FOR THE 8/11/84 MEETING MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BY 12:00 NOON ON 10/3/84. M CRA APPROVAL SEP 2. 7 10034 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY C,1�19 AGENDA ITEM Z CITY OF GRAND TERRACE REGULAR MEETING - SEPTEMBER 13, 1984 The regular meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency, City of Grand Terrace, was held in the Terrace View Elementary School, 22731 Grand Terrace Road, Grand Terrace, California, on September 13, 1984, at 5:40 p.m. PRESENT: Hugh J. Grant, Chairman Jim Rigley, Vice Chairman Tony Petta Barbara Pfennighausen Seth Armstead, Executive Director Thomas J. Schwab, Treasurer Ivan Hopkins, Attorney Myrna Erway, Secretary ABSENT: Roy W. Nix MINUTES - AUGUST 23, 1984 CRA-84-112 Motion by Mr. Petta, Second by Mr. Rigley, ALL AYES by all present, to approve the Minutes of August 23, 1984, as presented. CHECK REGISTER NO. 091384 CRP,-84-113 Motion by Mr. Petta, Second by Mr. Rigley, ALL AYES by all present, to approve Check Register No. CRA091384, as presented. ADJOURN The Community Redevelopment Agency adjourned at 5:43 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held October 11, 1984, at 5:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, SS e�a APPROVED: gal rman Page 1 - CRA 9/13/84 rA PEN.'DiNG CRA APPROVAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF GRAND TERRACE SEPT. 27. 1984 _ c /2, ,-) AGENDA ITEM � Z CHECK REGISTER NO.CRAO92784 CHECK NO. OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF SEPT. 27, 1984 (1) P1424 HUGH GRANT (2) P1425 JAMES RIGLEY 3) P1426 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN 4) P1427 ROY NIX (5) P1428 BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN (6) P1429 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE (7) P1430 KICAK AND ASSOCIATES (8) P1431 NAZAREK,HARPER,HOPKINS & McFARLIN (9) P1432 ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP INC. PI AGENCY DIRECTORS' FRINGE SEPT. 1984 AGENCY DIRECTORS' FRINGE SEPT. 1984 MEDICAL INSURANCE, PETTA-DEF.COMP.,NIX,SEPT. 1984 AGENCY DIRECTORS' FRINGE SEPT. 1984 AGENCY DIRECTORS' FRINGE SEPT. 1984 INTEREST DUE ON LOAN 1st QUARTER F/Y 1984/1985 CITY SERVICES FOR 1st QUARTER F/Y 1984/1985 ENGINEERING SERVICES 8/20-9/9/84 VIVIENDA BRIDGE LEGAL SERVICES FOR JULY 1984 AUG. BILLING FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SERVICES TOTAL: $ 150.00 150.00 200.00 100.00 150.00 52,500.68 10,206.25 620.00 65.00 1,545.00 $ 65,686.93 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 StAFF REP(YRT "": C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X ) MEETING DATE: 9_27_84 AGENDA ITEM NO. 2A SUBJECT: 1983 Pedestrian Safety Citation FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED Mr. Janes Celano, Automobile Club of Southern California, requested that he be allowed time on this agenda to present the 1983 Pedestrian Safety Citation to the City. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT COUNCIL: ACCEPT THE 1983 PEDESTRIAN SAFETY CITATION FOR THE CITY. M, E SZOAFF REPORT C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X ) MEETING DATE: 9-13-84 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: ProQosition_36_- Oral Presentation and Pesolution FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED X Mr. Bob Elliott, General Manager, San Bernardino Public Employees Association, offered, and has been invited to make a presentation on the adversity Proposition 36, if passed, would have on local government. t,"r. Elliott is requesting Council to go on official record as opposing Proposition 36. A resolution opposing Proposition 36 has been prepared for consideration of adoption following Mr. Elliott's presentation. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT COUNCIL: ADOPT A RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION TO PROPOSITION 36, FOLLOWING AN ORAL PRESENTATION BY MR. BOB ELLIOTT. ME M SAN BERNARDINO PUBLIC EMPIOVEES ASSOCIATION August 31, 1984 Mayor Hugh Grant City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Dear Mayor Grant: As you are aware, Howard Jarvis is now promoting Proposition 36, which, in effect, will once again seriously deplete the coffers of local govern- ment. In addition, it will require, not a simple majority vote to in- crease levies, but instead, a two-thirds vote of the electorate. User fees and other assessments that have become necessary after Prop- osition 13 will no longer be allowed and such things as assessments for employee retirement must come from general fund monies. As in Proposition 13, the real benefactors of Proposition 36 will be business and long term property owner interests. Approximately two-thirds of the homeowners face tax increases. In addition, the municipal bond market will be greatly endangered by a lower rating by Standard and Poors. In the interests of fairness and the survival of local government, I would like to request that the City Council go on official record as opposing Proposition 36. I would be more than happy to appear before your Council to give greater detail as to the reasons for opposition to this poorly thought out Proposition. If this is your desire, please contact me at my office so that I may plan accordingly. Sincerely, Robert C. Elliott General Manager RCE/bao RECEIVED 1384 433 North Sierro Woy 9 PO Box 308 • Son Bernardino. (A 92402-0308 0 (714) 889-8377 P�Np1N� � AL CvUti�IL ApPR RESOLUTION NO. 84- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, OPPOSING THE JARVIS IV INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT (PROPOSITION 36) WHEREAS, the Jarvis IV Initiative Constitutional Amendment which will appear on the November ballot as Proposition 36 would lead to minority rule by requiring a two-thirds vote for many important local government decisions; and WHEREAS, the Jarvis IV Initiative, by restricting local government revenue -raising authority beyond the already strict limits imposed by Propositions 13 and 4, would make local agencies more dependent upon the State for financial stability and policy direction; and WHEREAS, the property tax provisions of Jarvis IV would widen the disparities between the taxation of properties with similar market values; and WHEREAS, Jarvis IV, while it is purported to reduce taxes, will actually increase property taxes for nearly all property taxpayers who have purchased properties since 1978, including approximately 50% of homeowners in California; and WHEREAS, one widely applauded result of Proposition 13 has been to relieve general taxpayers of the burden of paying for services which could be charged directly to the service user through fees, and this trend will be reversed, returning part of the financial burden for fee -supported services to general taxpayers if Jarvis IV is enacted; and WHEREAS, Jarvis IV will further reduce the ability of local government to finance public services and capital improvements needed to accommodate economic growth; and WHEREAS, many of the provisions of the lengthy Jarvis IV Initiative are confusing and ambiguous; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace does hereby resolve its opposition to Proposition 36, the Jarvis IV Initiative Constitutional Amendment; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Council urges all city officials throughout California to provide materials to community leaders outside city government to help them communicate to voters the public policy and practical problems that would result. ADOPTED this 27th day of September, 1984. . SEPTEMBER 27, 1984 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 2C MINORITY ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT WEEK OCTOBER 7-13, 1984 WHEREAS, America's growth and prosperity depend on the full participation of all its citizens, and we must ensure that all Americans are involved in our economic progress if we, as a Nation, are to remain the world's leader in innovation, technology, and productivity; and WHEREAS, the fulfillment of this challenge has become acre realistic today because of the significant contributions of minority American entrepreneurs to our economy, bringing innovative products and services to our economy and constituting a source for jobs and training for many workers; and WHEREAS, as we enter an era of greatly expanded opportunities in economic growth and development, it is appropriate that we encourage minority husiness owners by recognizing their tremendous contributions toward the continued economic development of our community; 1.^It, THFIFFORE, I, laugh J. Grant, Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace, on behalf of the City Council, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM the week of October 7 through October 13, 1984, as "MINORITY ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT WEEK" in the City of Grand Terrace, and I urge all residents to join together with the minority business enterprises of our Nation in appropriate observance. layor o t . i and of the Cv t urana rerrace ncil thereof; This 27th day of September, 1984� OR1TY M YR-OCUREMENT ELETHON August 23, 1984 The Honorable Hugh J. Mayor, City of Grand City Hall 22795 Barton Road Grant Terrace •Truaan Jacques Grand Terrace, CA 92324 CBS TV -Ray Gonzales [TLA TV 'Fernando Del Rio Dear Mayor Grant: [HJ TV -Lew Marren [VCR TV •Dr. Glenn Miller Enclosed is a copy of a Presidential Proclama- Defense Audio Visual Agency .Paul tion for a nationwide observance of Minority Greenwood HEO Production Studio Enterprise Development Week to be held October •David Jones Group WCable 7 through 13th. A packet of information is •Gary Ayala David whoa also enclosed that gives the history of tine Buenavision Cable TV 'Martin Gcetsch program developed for local support. 'Sailey' Paredes TRW •Janice Me —an Continental Telephone We would like to enlist the support of your *Dean Jones Kevin taverty city in promoting the Inland Empire's first GTE -Ann lrassaan minority Procurement Telethon scheduled for Pacific 'elephone *Jerry Hanson Tuesday, October 9, 1984, from 7:30 to 11 : 30 San Bernardino County Cable Coordinator 'Asseablywrivan p.m. The Telethon will be broadcast live via Gwen Moore microwave from hVCR-TV studios in San Bernar- •Adrian Dow* Deputy Area Manager din 7 HUD •Mary Parente Chair_Ax n 5. B. Co �nty Dev. C_.. We feel this telethon represents an effort to Hattie BEco"7eic •1 cta,re D.S, cept of Cap rce create more awareness of our local minority Y.BDA •Mite kyle businesses to the general business community. Pu b11C Utilitils COe!•. 'France s 'rice Through this effort the results to be forth- Gperat1on Second Chance •C.JHirefield coming are an expansion of procurement and job California Cable T.l.v la son .Alvin opportunities at our local and neighborhood Siapeon 1, tiooal Federation level . of Lrx 1 Cable Prograiasers •relth Lee Inland Chapter National A..V i.tion of M, nori ty Contra tors pCCJVED 1 ' f )4 The Honorable Hugh J. Grant August 23, 1984 Page 2 We would also like a Proclamation from the city in support of MED week 1984 to create more awareness of the program. Ad- ditionally, we would like to pre -tape you, and other Inland Empire Mayors for a segment to be included in the broadcast. The segments would involve a brief statement trom each of you showing support of the purpose of the telethon, which is to generate contract and business opportunities for minority businesses in both Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. If you have not heard from Mr. Ross Adkins, Defense Audio Visual Agency, you soon will be. He has developed a draft overview that can be used as a guide in pre -taping a select number of politicians. Again, these pre -tapes will be aired on the night of our telecast. A draft Resolution is enclosed for the Council's approval and subsequent proclamation. If you would like more details about the telethon or MED Week, please contact Dean Jones, General Telephone at (714) 625-3496 or myself at (714) 884-8764. your support is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, l� v I � �TCD Keith Lee Projram Coordinator KL/ac Enclosures n 4 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - AUGUST 23, 1984 PENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL SEP 2 7 1984 ICOUNC14 AGENDA u.>,.4�..� q A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order at the Terrace View Elementary School, 22731 Grand Terrace Road, Grand Terrace, California, on August 23, 1984, at 5:40 p.m. PRESENT: Hugh J. Grant, Mayor Jim Rigley, Mayor Pro Tempore Tony Petta, Councilman Roy W. Nix, Councilman Barbara Pfennighausen, Councilwoman Seth Armstead, City Manager Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney Joe Kicak, City Engineer Myrna Erway, City Clerk ABSENT: None The meeting was opened with invocation by Councilman Nix, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, led by Councilman Rigley. CERTIFICATE OF COMMENDATION Mayor Grant read and presented a Certificate of Commendation to Dr. Barbara Poling for her outstanding achievements while serving as Principal of Terrace Hills Junior High School from September, 1974, to June, 1984. Dr. Poling commended the City Council and the community for the unity, support and the high ideals within the community. Mayor Grant announced that Mrs. Pat Ensey has been appointed as the new Principal of Terrace Hills Junior High School and congratulated her on the appointment. CIVIC CENTER CONSTRUCTION Architect Field Report Nos. 28 and 29 were provided. City Manager Armstead reported the following: (1) Advised there will be an emergency power unit outside the Civic Center with the transfer unit to be inside the building; (2) Authorized a $1,000 Change Order to install a walkpath around the solar energy panels to prevent damage to the roof - this item was not included in the construction drawings; (3) Was advised that the bronze plaque has been ordered and that there is a problem with the flag poles at this time; (4) Installation of the drywalling should begin next week. Page 1 - 8/23/84 Councilwoman Pfennighausen noted that the Architect Field Report No. 28 indicated the Dedication Ceremony would be held on February 17 from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. and should be corrected to indicate 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. on February 17; voiced concern that problems similar to those with the Fire Station could possibly exist regarding the emergency power unit; recommended immediate attention to the matter. Councilman Petta recommended consideration be given to extending the height of the block wall at the apartment complex adjacent to the Civic Center site to prevent debris from accummulating on City property and to provide a more uniform appearance. City Manager Armstead stated the contractor has been requested to get a cost estimate to be presented at the next meeting; noted coordination will be required with the apartment owner. Councilman Nix recommended a sketch also be provided; felt the cost could be expensive. MINUTES - AUGUST 9, 1984 CC-84-217 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Mayor Grant, ALL AYES, to approve the Minutes of August 9, 1984, as presented. CONSENT CALENDAR Item 5B, Budget Amendment, was removed for discussion. CC-84-218 Motion by Councilman Nix, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to approve the following Consent Calendar Items: A. Approval of Check Register No. 082384; C. Appropriate $10,500 in Expenditure Line Item No. 10-4180-600 for Traffic Control Device Inventory; and establish $10,500 revenue estimate in Revenue Account Line Item No. 10-3272-000; D. Approve and authorize execution of Cooperation Agreement with San Bernardino County for Community Development Block Grant Funds for FY's 1985-86; 1986-87; 1987-88; E. Approve the Caltrans Change Order Policy to be used for the Barton Road Reconstruction Project; F. Authorize Mayor to execute a contract with San Bernardino County for Collection of Special Assessments. FY 1984-85 BUDGET AMENDMENTS Councilwoman Pfennighausen questioned what functions were performed by Bond Counsel for a cost of $3,000. Finance Director Tom Schwab advised Bond Counsel fee for the Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes was one -quarter of one percent of the total Bond Issue; attended five meetings in Grand Terrace regarding the Issue, and was in Los Angeles for the Bond closing; the most important function performed by the Bond Counsel was to prepare and execute documents for the Federal and Page 2 - 8/23/84 1 State governments stating the Bonds are tax free which allow them to sell at 7-1/4%. CC-84-219 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to approve the following amendments to the FY 1984-85 Budget: (1) Increase Revenue Estimate from $20,000 to $140,000 for Account No. 10-3246; (2) Appropriate $87,000 for interest expense in the General Fund, Department No. 4190; (3) Increase Expense Account No. 10-4140-250, Professional Services, Finance Department, from $5,500 to $8,500 for Bond Counsel expense. HISTORICAL & CULTURAL ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE Community Services Director Anstine stated the Historical & Cultural Activities Committee is requesting Council approval to issue a parade permit for a parade to be held on November 3, 1984, in conjunction with the Country Fair, to begin at 8:30 a.m. at the intersection of Barton Road and Preston and to conclude at the Community Center. CC-84-220 Motion by Councilman Nix, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to approve the issuance of a parade permit to the Historical & Cultural Activities Committee for a parade to be held on November 3, 1984. CRIME PREVENTION COMMITTEE CC-84-221 Motion by Councilman Nix, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to accept the resignation of Larry Williams from the Crime Prevention Committee, with regret, and to direct Staff to post a vacancy notice. EMERGENCY OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Community Services Director Anstine reported there was no quorum at the recent Committee meeting. Members present discussed expediting the Emergency Operations Plan for the City; will be presented to Council in the next month or two. City Manager Armstead advised the San Bernardino County Emergency Plan is to be ready in October or November; when completed it will be furnished to the Emergency Operations Committee for coordination with the City's Plan. FIRE CHIEF REPORT City r4anager Armstead advised Staff met with CDF representatives August 16 to discuss streets, street signs, addresses, checking of all fire hydrants for pressure, painting, locations, and to ensure all are in workable condition; Engineering is conducting a study on the cost Page 3 - 8/23/84 and financing methods for water lines and fire hydrants in the area behind Stater Bros.; a meeting will be held every two weeks. CITY MANAGER REPORT City Manager Armstead reported the following: (1) The City is not qualified to compete for the League of California Cities' Award for Excellence relative to the Fire Station, since the facility must be operational for a year prior to the award; (2) The League of California Cities has questioned if the City would be interested in having a booth at the Annual Conference in Anaheim for a cost of $85.00 to display the Fire Station and Civic Center. Councilwoman Pfennighausen felt a City booth would be a good idea, but indicated there would be additional cost to staff the booth. Councilman Nix felt it would be worthwhile to display the Fire Station and Civic Center in a City booth at the Conference, feeling the City needs to advertise its existence in order to have effect and influence with other members of the League. (2) Councilwoman Pfennighausen and Mr. Armstead will meet with Supervisor Riordan regarding the Library; funding for the Library will be considered at the Board of Supervisors' meeting on September 10. Councilman Rigley recommended following up to ensure all organizations send letters of support to the Board of Supervisors; (3) Interim Funding -Southern California Water Committee City Manager Armstead referenced correspondence dated July 30 requesting interim funding to assist in the formation of a Southern California Water Committee consisting of a coalition of government, private sector, businesses, water districts and public interest groups to ensure that Southern California receives adequate water; questioned whether the City should contribute. Councilman Nix recommended referring the matter to Riverside Highland Water Company for a contribution; felt a contribution would not benefit the City, since it has no authority over water distribution and our water company has no problem. Councilman Rigley recommended making a commitment, feeling there will be a water shortage in Southern California, which could result in a local water price increase. Councilman Petta felt it is the responsibility of all cities in Southern California to support this project, and would benefit the entire area. CC-84-222 Notion by Councilman P,igley, Second by Mayor Grant, to authorize a $200 donation to assist with the formation of a Southern California Water Committee, carried 3-2, with Councilman Nix and Councilwoman Pfennighausen voting NOE. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilwoman Pfennighausen referenced correspondence received from San ernardino ounty inaic Ling that free dump days are to be held in Page 4 - 8/23/84 I October and requested that CCS be advised since they normally organize a school poster program in conjunction with a free dump day in November. Councilman Nix requested that Staff conduct a study to provide Council with the necessary data to determine to what extent development is creating present or future impaction in the schools; this information is to be presented in a Staff Report as an agenda item. Feels it is very important to work with the School District to ensure the best and most cost-effective utilization of existing facilities; wants to propose more cost-effective alternatives jointly with the School District other than building new facilities, if impaction exists. Questioned the City Attorney as to whether developer fees are restricted to capital improvements only or if they can be levied for purposes other than building new facilities. The City Attorney will investigate and provide that information at the next meeting. Councilman Rigley felt the matter should be coordinated with the other cities within the School District. Verification is to be ascertained on whether funding provided by the City would be utilized only for the Grand Terrace schools; it was noted the High School would pose a different problem since students from more than one city attend. Councilman Rigley reported the following: (1) Referenced Councilwoman ennig ausen s statements in the Council Minutes of August 9 relative to Tom Coyle; is aware the City Manager has full authority over personnel, but feels actions involving key personnel should be justified to Council. City Attorney Hopkins advised this matter was discussed in a Closed Session on August 9. Councilman Nix requested a Closed Session to discuss this matter further following the regular Agenda items. (2) Recommended beautifying Mt. Vernon, south of Barton Road, if feasible, such as planting sod if arrangements can be made for watering; noted the vacant lot owned by Ernie Zampeze and Bill DeBenedet adjacent to the Keeney Building is an eyesore. Councilman Petta reported the following: (1) Referenced correspondence from the California Association of the Deaf requesting a letter of support from the City for the proposed facility they will be constructing. CC-84-223 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Mayor Grant, ALL AYES, to direct Staff to send a letter of support to the California Association of the Deaf. (2) A citizen has questioned whether the City plans to erect signs at the City's entrances to include the various organizations in the City; questioned the status, since this has previously been discussed. Mayor Grant voiced opposition to a sign with the various organization signs attached, as seen in other cities; supports a more dignified sign. Councilman Petta recommended that the Community Services Director study City entrance signs to include service organizations and submit a recommendation for Council consideration. Page 5 - 8/23/84 T Mayor Grant reported the following: (1) Stated good public a minis ra ion policy dictates that the City administrator will hire and fire; is reluctant to interfere with that policy; Council has the right and obligation to voice its dissatisfaction in open and closed session. Wants the City administrator to be sure the quality of work by Staff is not jeopardized due to increased workloads, feeling any cost savings is not worthwhile if that occurs. (2) Noted that more debris is collecting within the City; requested that the debris and beer bottles on the hill on Mt. Vernon be cleaned up; noted that if the citizens or the Committee involved don't pick up the debris, then the City must pick it up. (3) The shopping center is once again becoming very dirty, particularly in the area of the food establishments. PARK/PARKWAY MAINTENANCE CONTRACT Community Services Director Anstine advised a Staff Report was prepared indicating Staff's recommendation to renew the Contract with Daniel's Landscaping, which includes the justification for renewing this Contract. Councilman Nix questioned the wide differential in the price quotation received and whether the firms were aware of the existing budget appropriation. Councilman Petta felt park maintenance is needed on weekends; questioned what action would be taken to maintain the large bank; understands the $5,000 appropriated will not be used to purchase an exercise course; recommended utilizing those funds for picnic tables. Mr. Anstine stated he did not feel the contractor who submitted a bid for $650 a month could perform the job according to the specifications for that amount; the functions to be performed by Daniel's Landscaping is mowing, edging, and weed control; Staff cleans the parking lots and restrooms Monday through Friday; a young man has been employed for maintenance on weekends for the past six or seven months; relative to maintaining the large bank, stated an effort is being made at this time to control the weeds; as soon as they are under control, plans to allow the red fescue to grow to full height; will advise the Parks & Recreation Committee of the picnic table recommendation. CC-84-224 Motion by Councilman Nix, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a contract for annual park and parkway maintenance for $1,075 per month with Daniel's Landscaping, to expire June 30, 1985. ANNUAL STREET & STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE CONTRACT Community Services Director Anstine recommended renewing the contract with Harber Companies, Inc.; noted that most contractors are not interested in performing this type of time and materials contract and would not guarantee emergency response. The response of the present contractor within an hour has been valuable. Page 6 - 8/23/84 Following clarification that the labor increase of $5.00 per hour also includes equipment, and the work performed by this contractor is on an CC-84-225 as -needed basis for time and material only, Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, to approve and authorize the Mayor to execute a renewal contract for annual street and storm drain maintenance with Harber Companies, Inc., to expire June 30, 1985, in an amount not to exceed $27,000. Mayor Grant stated, for the record, that he feels competition is extremely important. We are not getting it here because it doesn't exist, according to Staff; doesn't feel this is always the case, and there are services this City contracts for which is not the case. Will continue to look for viable competition and alternatives unless convinced what the City is getting is the best. Is not so sure the service the City is receiving from Harber Companies, Inc., is the best; will vote in favor of the Motion since it appears there is no choice. Motion No. CC-84-225 carried, ALL AYES. Recess was called at 7:00 p.m. and reconvened at 7:32 p.m., with all mem emirs present. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984. (Second Reading) City Attorney Hopkins read the title of the Ordinance. Planning Director Kicak advised that Council adopted the General Plan for the City on April 26, 1984, following many public hearings, conducted through the Planning Commission and the City Council over a period of many months. State law requires that each entity bring its General Plan and zoning into conformance as a result of the change in the General Plan. Staff was directed to proceed to bring the zoning into conformance with the General Plan; approximately 39 areas within the City would be affected by this zone change; these areas were reviewed and presented to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. All property owners affected by this zone change and those property owners within a 300-foot radius of the affected parcels were advised by two mailings - one for the public hearing before the Planning Commission and the second for the public hearing before the Council. Mr. Kicak reviewed the proposed zone changes. !1ayor Grant opened Public Hearing. Supporting Testimony Area 1 - Ray Daul, 22893 Grand Terrace Road, supported the zone change Trom 1�-1 to M-2. Area 32 - Mr. Lynch, 22330 DeGerry, favored the zone change from R-1 to R-2. Page 7 - 8/23/84 M u Area 38 - Francis Carter, 11938 Arliss Drive, owner of Area 38, av orea the zone change to C-2; questioned, received confirmation, and supported Area 39 zoning to C-2. Opposing Testimony Sanford Collins, 22697 Brentwood, Planning Commission Chairman, speaking as a minority of the Planning Commission, stated many public hearings were held on the General Plan at which time the Planning Commission promised the people their zoning would not be changed until they requested it; therefore, voted against all zone changes at the August 6 Planning Commission meeting. Questioned why a mass zone change is being processed at this time; noted the people are being led to believe State law requires it; quoted Section 65860 of the Government Code, which states that zoning is to be brought into conformance with the General Plan within a reasonable time. The Planning Director has previously stated that a reasonable time is up to 30 years; Many people are saving money - feels it is approximately $50,000; questioned why the City is being so benevolent; if the zoning is passed and enforced, it will eliminate all horses; questioned why people should have to move their horses from presently undeveloped land which is designated as R-1. Feels Council owes an explanation for the urgency on zone changes and why fees are not being charged. Requested rejecting the zone change in its entirety. The Planning Commission made a decision to set a restriction of 12 units per acre on the property in the area of Mt. Vernon and Canal, which was removed by the City Council; questioned whether Council is listening to the developers or the residents. Danny Gurnola, 11957 Pascal; Robert Martin, 11939 Pascal; and Marjorie McCrorey;-7 Pico, opposed the zone change. Ms. McCrorey av-ore3-rezoning on an individual basis; requested and received confirmation that her property is remaining as an A-1 zone. Areas 1 & 2 Joy Borgstedt, 41545 Big Bear Blvd., Big Bear Lake, owner of two parcels al[T808 Walnut and 21758 Walnut, adjacent to Area 1 being designated as M-2; when she purchased those properties in the early 60's, they were designated M-1. San Bernardino County rezoned her property from M-1 down to R-1. Felt that is improper zoning for the use. Requested R-3 zoning, feeling it would provide a buffer zone for the residential area. Opposed the present zoning of her properties, since they already have multiple units. Roberta Fernandez, 11858 Maple Avenue, opposed zoning either Area 1 or re�srTi§FT—industrial, stating access to and from that area is limited, is a family community, and wants it to remain as such. Submitted a petition signed by 17 property owners opposing zoning Area 1 as M-2. Grant Rich, 11171 Grand Terrace Road, and Frederic Carter, 11818 Burns Avenue, opposed light industrial zoning for Area 1. Palle 8 - 0/23/84 60 Area 8 - Larry Halstead, 21894 Vivienda Avenue, owner of Parcel 8, stated he-Tavors more controlled low growth; opposed the mass zone change - favored rezoning on an individual basis; requested RR zoning for Area 8, rather than R-1; opposed light industrial zoning for Areas 1 and 2. Areas 10, 11, 12 Phil Fowler, 11940 Canal Street, wants the City to maintain a "small-town family atmosphere. Presented a petition signed by 47 residents opposing changing the zoning of Areas 10, 11 and 12 from RR to P,-3. John Langdon, 11954 Canal, is opposed to changes in Areas 10, 11, 12. The folloti.ing citizens requested limitations on density if zoned R-3: Homer Howell, 11821 Nit. Vernon; Jack Booker, 11785 Mt. Vernon; Patric TlTen , 11947 Pascal ; Kim iat iaway, 22998 Vista Grande Way; Hersli�e�1<ob sni on, 11791 So. Mt. Vernon; Cleophas Mims, 11743 hit. Vernon, and Livera Elmbuck, 11909 Mt. Vernon. Vicky Castillo, 11880 Arliss Drive. opposed zoning Area 12 for rcni ti-ram7,i y purposes, feeling more development and population rakes the area less desirable. Area 26 - Barney Karger, 11668 Bernardo Way, opposed zoning that area feeling 5nat rrea should be 1/2-acre lots or larger as the land continues up to Blue t"ountain. Bill I'cK.eever, 12714 Blue ('ountain Court, has 1-1/2-acre lot wig, horses; opposed to being surrounded by R-1 zoning. Area 30 - Jesseca Douglas, 22330 DeBerry, opposed the zone change from Ito R-3f or -ire �T, which is adjacent to her property; stated R-3 property, which adjoins P,-1 or R-2, is to be landscaped with a 25-foot separation, which doesn't esist. Area 33 - t,x. Burris, 22456 Van Buren, opposed the zone change. ?orna^me ioc�, i�7il Darwin, cpposed the zone charge on south `!an ',urn n Eo f:-,`_ T.ni le her property regains as R-l. Rchuttal to Opposing Testimony Rarrr•y Vi rcer, 116G8 Bernardo �,'ay, st�.ted people opposed building hoes'=s L7 years 4::s dc-itroyirg rrand Terrace; l0:es r+oncy on i�. nccd u pl,, F are In �rI-nd Tcr,race. Area 26 - Denis Kind, 22f.;74 Pico, supports zoning without res ric.tionf7_7_ar e lots can be restricted in hicher elevations, but in the lo'.,rr elev,-ations shculd be 4Lhe s nee as adj,ir,e;,t property. 9 - -/L i%f,4 M Areas 10, 11, 12 M Vince Michaels, USA Properties, 1801 Wilshire Blvd., Santa Monica, stated t afi-t alter several years of meetings and public hearings, the City approved the General Plan Housing Element to make areas 10, 11, and 12 medium density residential; control of density and the scope of development is controlled through provisions of the General Plan. All projects exceeding 9 units per acre require Conditional Use Permits; any project 16 units or more requires a Specific Plan. Consultants were commissioned to study different densities, engineering, and traffic concluding no impact; the apartments would not change the street classifications. The plan for the property in Areas 11 and 12 have been negotiated for two years. Stated the development includes swimming pools and open space; access points are being changed across Canal and to Mt. Vernon to make it a nicer and safer area than empty land. Area 38 - Francis Carter, stated she resents comments made by Mr. T Tins relative to tR—e zone change process being ramrodded and that she should pay to have her property zoned back to what it was when she bought it; has been attending meetings regarding the proposed zone changes for almost a year. Area 35 - Allen Tuck, representing Wilden Pump, 22069 Van Buren, voi� cea-opposition to testimony requesting voting against the Ordinance in its entirety; has attended meetings for a long period of time regarding the Wilden property; the matter has been debated many times. A building permit has been issued and since March of this year his firm has been in the process of investing One Million Dollars in improvements on the property. Requested that Council take action to bring the zoning of Area 35 into conformance with the General Plan. Recess was called at 9:07 p.m. and reconvened at 9:25 p.m., with all members present. Rebuttal to Supporting Testimony Homer Howell, 11821 Mt. Vernon, stated the hill on t1t. Vernon is two lanes, cannot be widened, and will become more dangerous if there is higher density development and more traffic. Vicky Castillo, 11880 Arliss Drive, after hearing comments of Mr. F�ic' hae sT , still opposes high density development; urged a NOE vote on the entire rezoning, and as the area residents in each section want the area rezoned, consider individually, especially for Areas 10, 11, and 12. Areas 1 & 2 Mrs. Roberta Fernandez, feels that area would look nicer with homes 'than ig t inaustrial buildings. Page 10 - 8/23/84 LJ M Rose Marie Taylor, 12434 Vivienda, did not oppose the rezoning, but objected to in ividuals from other areas, such as Santa Monica, telling our community how to live, how to run our community, and how to build houses. Area 10, 11, 12 Jack Booker, 11785 Mt. Vernon, regarding areas 10, 11 and 12, does not oppose growth as long as it is controlled; not opposed to zoning 10, 11 and 12 as R-3, but concerned about the density. Jerry Rentfro, 11845 Mt. Vernon, feels Mt. Vernon and the Mt. Vernon Fill must widened if changes are to be made in Parcels 10, 11 and 12. Opposed to any changes at the present time. Cleophas Mims, 11743 Mt. Vernon, voiced concern about the population density; questioned if there are any plans to widen the bottom of the Mt. Vernon hill. Area 35 - Marjorie McCrorey, 22247 Pico, recommended voting down all the zone changes except Trea No. 35. Mayor Grant closed Public Hearing. Mayor Grant voiced concern for the magnitude of this issue's effect on the community; Staff did a good job, but disagrees and not as concerned as Staff with the possible repercussions regarding the mandatory nature of the density levels as set forth in the Housing Element of the General Plan; has examined proposals for Areas 10, 11, and 12 and concerned about traffic increase. Opposed considering all zone changes and encouraged Council to oppose Staff's recommendation. Councilman Rigley advised State law mandates that cities have a General Plan with certain elements; a consultant was hired at considerable expense to amend the County's General Plan; this included traffic surveys and many elements, such as the Housing Element. A proposed General Plan for City development for the next 5-10 years was prepared and presented to the Planning Commission and City Council for review and hearings. The City made every effort to notify the citizens that the General Plan was being updated and there could be changes affecting their property. Since all zoning must be brought into conformance with the General Plan within a reasonable period of time, Council felt it would be beneficial to the citizens to bring all zoning into conformance at one time, which would save the citizens a considerable amount of honey; apparently it was not a wood idea, in some instances. Council wants what is best for the City; recommended approving the zone changes for only the uncontested areas and taking no action on those areas contested; at such time as those areas propose development, the owners will be responsible for applying for a zone change and paying the necessary fees. Page 11 - 8/23/84 Councilman Nix disagreed with statements referencing opposition to "Staff Recommendation," since Staff was following Council direction. Council determined, with good and magnanimous intentions, that it had an obligation to correct governmental errors, whether County or City, which were revealed in the review process, whereby some properties, through errors or omissions, had been zoned or rezoned without the owner's knowledge. Council could have required the property owners to pay for those changes, pursuant to the law; concurred with Council determination to waive the fees. Council thought ample opportunity had been provided to hear all opinions on the General Plan prior to adoption; the proposed zone changes are pursuant to the General Plan. Concurred with Councilman Rigley's recommendation to approve the uncontested areas and reviewing all contested zone changes individually. Councilman Petta stated everyone who spoke said how much they love the City of Grand Terrace; feels it is a pretty good recommendation for what Council has done in the past. A Council that has brought this City to the point that people say they want to continue to live here is not going to sell that plan down the river. Councilwoman Pfennighausen stated she chose Grand Terrace because of the small community atmosphere; dislikes apartments and high density buildings; concerned for schools, traffic, and the Mt. Vernon hill; plus factors are play facilities and a park will be provided. Doesn't want the City to grow to 14-20 thousand population, but wants children who grow up here to be able to afford to live here, but they can't. The rationale for the mass zone change was to correct past unfair zone changes at no cost; concurred with deleting items of controversy and approve the remainder of the recommendations. Councilman Rigley recommended returning the matter to Staff for the next meeting agenda, only including those areas on which there was no controversy. Attorney Hopkins recommended continuing the public hearing to September 27, with first reading of the ordinance, as amended, at the September 13 meeting; the public hearing and consideration of adoption would be held September 27. Council reviewed Areas 1 through 39, and determined that the following Areas will be included in the new zone change ordinance to be presented at the September 13 Council Meeting for first reading, since those areas were not contested at the Public Hearing held this date: 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 9; 14; 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 21; 22; 24; 25; 27; 28; 29; 31; 32; 35; 36; 37; 38; 39. The following areas were contested at the Public Hearing; therefore, these areas will be considered individually upon the property owners' requests: 1; 2; 8; 10; 11; 12; 26; 30; and 33. Area Numbers 13 and 23 were not used originally. Page 12 - 8/23/84 CC-84-226 Motion by Councilman Nix, Second by Councilman Rigley, to direct Staff to prepare a new zone change ordinance to include the following areas: 3 through 7; 9; 14 through 22; 24; 25; 27 through 29; 31; 32; and 35 through 39. Mayor Grant stated he will vote against the Motion; feels this issue will need to be considered again in its entirety even though there was no testimony against certain areas; opposed addressing the issue as proposed. Motion No. CC-84-226 carried 4-1, with Mayor Grant voting NOE. CC-84-227 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Councilman Nix, ALL AYES, to direct Staff to notify those property owners whose areas were deleted for approval at this time and advise them of the events that occurred at this meeting and that their area is not under consideration for automatic approval; thus, the property owners will be aware and will be given the opportunity to address Council. Councilman Rigley requested that Staff research a "reasonable length of time" to bring zoning into conformance with the General Plan. Attorney Hopkins will have that information at the next meeting. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Bob Yeates, 12888 Fremontia, stated he had been working with Tom Coyle, in behalf of the Chamber of Commerce and the Clean Community Systems, on the sign ordinance and non -conforming signs, including a location which had a non -conforming sign as well as signs erected without benefit of a permit; voiced concern this could be the reason for Mr. Coyle leaving, since the building is owned by a Council Member; stated he was advised by Mr. Coyle that his leaving the City was due to budgetary reasons; indicated dissatisfaction with a previous staff reduction; questioned the City's present policy which provides the City Manager with full authority over employees. City Attorney Hopkins recommended no further discussion regarding Mr. Coyle, since it is a personnel matter, is a matter of confidentiality, and Mr. Coyle is not present. Councilman Nix raised a point of order regarding this matter; questioned if a member of the public has spoken on a personnel matter, whether Council is obligated to accept informal hearing testimony and conversation that involves personnel without knowing whether or not those personnel want the matter discussed publicly. Questioned if Council doesn't have an obligation to protect that individual publicly. Attorney Hopkins stated Council is not obligated to allow that type of public testimony. Councilman Nix requested that the record reflect that the testimony given by Bob Yeates is out of order. Page 13 - 8/23/84 Marjorie McCrorey, 22247 Pico, questioned and received confirmation that the zoning of the area owned by Verda Hixson will not be affected by the present zone change and will retain its present R-3 zoning. Virginia Fernandez, 11858 Maple Avenue, referencing comments about noise coming from the Stater Bros. warehouse, stated she is an employee of that firm and advised Mr. Brown of the citizen's concerns for the noise; stated action has been taken to reduce the noise at night and also water down the area to reduce dust problems. Feels action will be taken by Mr. Brown if he is aware of problems. Allen Tuck, 22069 Van Buren, questioned and received confirmation that Area 35 will be included in the zone change. Joy Borgstedt, mailing address 41545 Big Bear Boulevard, Post Office Box 3422, Big Bear Lake, California, 92315; requested that Staff record her mailing address to ensure receiving future notices. Homer Howell, 11812 Mt. Vernon, questioned if some action could be taken on the timing of the signal in the left turn lane onto Freeway I-215 off Barton Road. The City Engineer advised he will advise Caltrans since they have maintenance responsibility. Closed Session - The meeting adjourned to a Closed Session at 10:50 p.m. with ouncil Members only in attendance. Reconvene - The regular meeting reconvened at 12:00 a.m. with all members present. Mayor Grant announced that two issues of personnel matters were discussed with no action taken. Adjourn - The regular meeting adjourned at 12:02 a.m. The next regular meeting will be held September 13, 1984, at 5:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, City C.6prk APPROVED: Mayor Page 14 - 8/23/84 M CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL MINUTES M SPECIAL MEETING - SEPTEMBER 5, 1984 PENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL SEP 2 7 ►234 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM #g If A special meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order in City Hall Bldg. No. 4, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on September 5, 1984, at 8:04 p.m. PRESENT: Hugh J. Grant, Mayor Jim P.igley, Mayor Pro Tempore Tony Petta, Councilman Roy W. Nix, Councilman Barbara Pfennighausen, Councilwoman Myrna Erway, City Clerk ABSENT: None Mayor Grant stated, for the record, that he was approached Saturday morning by a Councilman advising there would be a request made for a special session of Council for the purpose of going into closed session; was advised later that in order to effect this, would have to sign a statement, which he did; not certain what the meeting involves, since no one advised him what it involves officially. Understands it is a request for a closed session involving personnel; has an aversion to closed sessions; they are generally repugnant to him because it smacks of something he doesn't think anyone wants; once in awhile it is necessary in personnel matters and thinks this is the case tonight, but feels every time a closed session is held, the newspapers print the subject of the meeting and what it may or may not involve, then feels the whole idea behind closed sessions is useless; feels it is very unfortunate this kind of thing happens and that control must be maintained in this kind of thing. Considered not participating in the closed session, but since he would be excluded from voting on issues, will go into closed session, otherwise his vote won't count. Councilman Nix stated, for the record, that in spite of the connotations that all probably don't want, there is a positive side; there is a legal requirement side; is very anti -closed sessions to discuss business that could be done in open session; Council has a legal right to go into closed session if it involves a legal matter, but is reluctant and feels it is wrong to go into closed session anytime it involves a legal opinion. On the other hand, feels Council has no choice if it involves personnel; doesn't think there is a legal or moral choice. No public employee can be constitutionally, nor should they be criticized just because they are a public employee, in open session, where the press is in attendance, unless that individual knows the accusation, the content, and specifies they want it in open session. Thinks this is a legal entitlement; doesn't think Council has a choice. Page 1 - 9/5/84 440 Mayor Grant stated he also indicated his dislike for closed sessions, but made it clear that he feels closed sessions are necessary, in the case of personnel actions, to prevent what he feels is happening in the newspapers - that information is being brought out without the individual involved being involved. Since the newspapers will print any news given them, feels Council must be judicious - if closed sessions are going to be held, keep them that way; if the information is not going to remain in closed session, then don't have them; personnel matters must be discussed in closed session to defend the integrity of the individual being discussed. Councilman Petta stated in personnel matters, the individual being discussed has a right not to be exposed publicly just on the basis of rumors; it can be very dangerous to the individual and to the City legally. Council has a responsibility to the individuals involved to discuss them in private session, and then whatever action is taken must be made public, but felt what is the use of closed sessions if someone is going to go out and spread the word about what happened, defeating the purpose of the closed session. Councilman Rigley stated he feels he has been more vocal than anyone regarding closed sessions; made a motion to go into closed session, which died for lack of a second. Councilwoman Pfennighausen stated she received a telephone call today from an individual that was talking to Ann Petta; the individual was concerned about what Ann said - that Councilwoman Pfennighausen supposedly has contacted the press and started all this and admitted it. Stated she did not contact the press and has admitted to nobody that she did; the press has contacted her two times - tonight was the second time, questioning the purpose of the meeting; stated she advised them of the information indicated in the special meeting notice; stated she is not responsible for the statements made by Bob Yeates and at no time contacted the press in this matter; doesn't appreciate someone going to her friends and saying she did. Councilman Petta stated the newspapers quoted individuals. CLOSED SESSIO14 Council adjourned to a closed session at 8:14 p.m., with all Council Members present. RECONVENE The Special Meeting reconvened at 10:08 p.m., with all members present. Mayor Grant announced Council met in closed session to discuss the following subjects: (1) Evaluation methodology of the City Manager position; Council decided to select a methodology designed to rate the City Manager; selected a form used by the City of Pasadena; Staff is to convert that form into a City form. Page 2 - 9/5/84 During open session at the meeting of September 13, Council is to agree upon the essential points to be made; is to outline a schedule for the evaluation of the City Manager and communicate it to the City Manager and the public; each Council Member will be provided an evaluation form, as revised, at that time. A meeting will be called for September 20 at 7:00 p.m.; at that time Council will immediately adjourn to a Closed Session for the purpose of submitting typed evaluations for discussion to assist the Mayor in creating an aggregate of all five evaluations of the City Manager position. On October 1 at 7:00 p.m. another meeting will be held at which time the Mayor will present a draft composite of the evaluation of the City Manager to Council for review; the City Manager will be advised at that time that Council will be meeting with him on October 4. Council clarified that the September 20 meeting date has been firmly established; the October 1 and 4 meeting dates are tentative. (2) Council discussed their own actions relative to events that have occurred and what Council should do in the future; the area under consideration was comments that members of the council from time to time may or may not make about matters discussed in closed session; (3) A letter of reprimand is to be issued to the City Manager to criticize the method of communicating with Council, the use of judgment in the recent staff reduction and the method of communicating with Council. Mayor Grant and the City Attorney will prepare the letter, subject to Council approval. ADJOURN The Special Council Meeting adjourned at 10:24 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held September 13, 1984 at 5:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, -C ty r APPROVED: Mayor Page 3 - 9/5/84 M CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL MINUTES M REGULAR MEETING - SEPTEMBER 13, 1984 PENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL SEP 2 7 1984 P�DllNCIU AGENDA ITEM Z A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order at the Terrace View Elementary School, 22731 Grand Terrace Road, Grand Terrace, California, on September 13, 1984, at 5:43 p.m. PRESENT: Hugh J. Grant, Mayor Jim Rigley, Mayor Pro Tempore Tony Petta, Councilman Roy W. Nix, Councilman (Arrived at 5:44 p.m.) Barbara Pfennighausen, Councilwoman Seth Armstead, City Manager Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney George McFarlin, Attorney Joe Kicak, City Engineer Myrna Erway, City Clerk ABSENT: None The meeting was opened with invocation by Pastor Rick Petronella, Praise Fellowship Foursquare Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, led by Councilman Petta. ITEM DELETED FROM AGENDA - Item 4, Minutes of August 23, 1984. Councilman Nix arrived at 5:44 p.m. PRESENTATION OF EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS Mayor Grant presented three-year service awards to the following employees: Ross Valenzuela; Alicia Chavez; Barbara Michowski; Linda O'Grattis; Randy Anstine; Elizabeth Duarte; Ilene Dughman; Myrna Erway; and Seth Armstead. Mayor Grant presented five-year awards to the following employees: Ilene Dughman; Myrna Erway; and Seth Armstead. Mayor Grant expressed appreciation to the employees, stating they are dedicated, have done a good job, and have worked hard; commended them for their length of service. RESOLUTION NO. 84-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, OF INTENTION TO PROVIDE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS TO PROVIDE FINANCING FOR A MULTI -FAMILY RENTAL HOUSING PROJECT DEVELOPMENT. Page 1 - 9/13/84 George McFarlin, Bond Counsel, advised that Mr. Bob Keeney had originated this matter; has property on Britton Way, on which he proposes to build an apartment complex, and would like to receive financial assistance through the Multi -Family Rental Housing Program; has requested the City initiate this process by adopting the subject resolution which establishes the date after which any project costs incurred can be recovered. There is no commitment on the part of the City in adopting this resolution; the project is still subject to the normal review and approval process. Councilman Rigley felt adoption of the resolution would indicate approval of the density and zone change for that area. The Planning Commission has approved a condominium project for that area at a density of 10 units per acre; this proposal is for apartments with a density of approximately 20 units per acre. Felt the matter should be processed through the Planning Commission for approval prior to being presented to Council, since there has been strong public reaction to the proposed density of that area. Questioned and was advised it would take at least two months to process a project through the Planning Commission. Mayor Grant concurred with Councilman Rigley, voicing concern for additional traffic if the proposed densities are approved. Councilman Petta questioned and received confirmation from Attorney McFarlin that the number of units per acre could be deleted from the resolution. Councilman Nix stated he has no problem with approving in principle the intent to use the legal financing aspects of the City's assistance program to help multi -family housing development, since it does not usurp the normal approval process through the Planning Commission; felt more affordable housing is needed in the City; felt the proposed development for Areas 10, 11, and 12 should be considered on an individual basis following review of the SCecific Plan. Bob Keeney requested approval of the resolution as an indication of approval of the bond program, since it is a lengthy process, and is required to make the project feasible; is not requesting density approval; is requesting financing for a possible 160 units and Six Million Dollars; the amount of financing and number of units can be reduced, but cannot be increased. The acreage for this proposed development would increase from 6.9 to approximately 11 acres; voiced objection to his Area 12 being lumped in with Areas 10 and 11; stated it is presently zoned AP; feels this proposal would not create any more density or traffic problems than the presently approved commercial project. Councilman Nix felt it is wrong for Council to give the impression of categorically opposing any project of a density of 20 units per acre or which would increase traffic, feeling it implies the City doesn't want any kind of development in Grand Terrace; any development is going to add traffic; no project should be approved without first Page 2 - 9/13/84 n M considering the overall impact on traffic, parking, schools, and safety protection services; cautioned against taking a position of opposition on issues which have legal implication and placing undue restrictions on how property owners can develop their properties. Noted the property owners have legal rights and have the right to develop their property in conformance with the General Plan and guidelines which have been provided. Councilwoman Pfennighausen felt a developer would not begin to process a project of this magnitude without knowing how the project could be financed. CC-84-228A Motion by Councilman Nix, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, to adopt Resolution No. 84-30. CC-84-228B Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Councilman Nix, to amend Motion No. CC-84-228A to delete all reference to densities from the Resolution. Councilman Rigley felt even if references to the number of units is deleted, it is still for a specific project of 160 units; felt the number of units should be included. Attorney McFarlin stated the Federal tax regulations are somewhat vague in providing guidance in defining a project; some of the examples are vague, saying a multi -family project on a certain site with a financing level not to exceed a certain amount; feels deleting the number of units still makes it a viable inducement resolution; the code recognizes there will be some variance between the original proposal and the project as finally approved. The smallest viable issue, in order to be competitive, is Five Million Dollars; this project would need approximately 130 units to be financially feasible under this structure, and financing may not be viable, unless pooled with other projects for a bond issue. Councilman Nix concurred with deleting the number of units so it doesn't imply approval of a specific number of units; noted the details of density, traffic, etc. will be addressed when the project is processed through the Planning Commission. The amendment to the Motion, Motion No. CC-84-228B, carried 3-2, with Councilman Rigley and Mayor Grant voting NOE. Motion No. CC-84-228A, as amended, carried 3-2, with Councilman Rigley and Mayor Grant voting NOE. CIVIC CENTER CONSTRUCTION Architect's Field Report Nos. 30, 31, and 32 were provided. CONSENT CALENDAR Item 5A, Check Register 091384, was removed for discussion. Page 3 - 9/13/84 CC-84-229 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Councilman Nix, ALL AYES, to approve the following Consent Calendar Items: B. Accept $500 Road Improvement Bond No. 83-SB-100044185-BCA from C.T.S. Underground, Inc., for Street Cut; C. Authorize a City flag to be provided to San Bernardino County to be displayed at the County Administrative Center; D. Authorize City Clerk to record Notice of Completion for Reconstruction of Barton Road/LaCrosse and traffic signal installation pursuant to Contract GTC83-14 (Steve Pandza Constructors); E. Fee waiver for issuance of permit for the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee for a parade to be held in the City on November 3, 1984. CHECK REGISTER NO. 091384 Councilwoman Pfennighausen questioned and was advised that the $30.61 on Warrant No. P4072 to Petra Enterprises was a deposit for half the cost of Christmas cards. Councilman Petta requested verification of the number of Water Shares presently owned by the City and requested that Staff confer with the Water Co. Board of Directors to determine whether the City's water cost could be decreased by purchasing additional shares. CC-84-230 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Councilman Rigley, ALL AYES, to approve Check Register No. 091384, as presented. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Barney Karger, 11668 Bernardo Way, stated the architectural design, types of materials and the manner in which the project is planned are the determining factors of a good or bad project, rather than density; felt that economics are mandating smaller living units for the future. Mr. Al Trevino, USA Properties, requested an early resolution of the R-3 zoning issue, since time is very important to his firm's business climate, and to allow his firm to proceed with supplying much needed housing. Stated that under R-3 zoning, Council still maintains control over the density, design elements, planning, landscaping, energy and the environment through the Specific Plan process; noted that approving R-3 zoning does not make any commitment on density. Allen Tuck, representing Wilden Pump, 22069 Van Buren, stated public hearing and consideration of adoption of the zone change, which includes the Wilden Pump Area 35, will be held on September 27; there has been no opposition to M-1 zoning for Area 35; requested that Council continue the zone change matter to the next meeting in the event there is some question or opposition expressed for the zoning of Page 4 - 9/13/84 Area 35 at the meeting attend that meeting. 4 of September 27, since he will be unable to Bill DeBenedet, 22799 Barton Road, requested that property owned by him and Ernie Zampese, 16 acres south of the City park, northeast of Van Buren, presently zoned agriculture, be rezoned to R-1, which would conform with the surrounding zoning. Merle Burris, 22456 Van Buren, stated he spoke in opposition of the zone change for Area 33 at the August 23 Council meeting; felt he was being selfish in opposing the zone change in Area 33, since the 12 or 13 other property owners do not object; felt the zoning should be in accordance with that desired by the majority of the property owners in that Area. Denis Kidd, 22874 Pico, objected to 17 acres on Van Buren, a portion of Area 26, being omitted from the mass zone change; wants it zoned R-1; does not object to the property on Pico, which is also in Area 26, being eliminated from the zone change. Barney Karger, 11668 Bernardo Way, recommended reviewing and redesigning Area 26; concurred with a portion of Area 26 being 7,200 square -foot lots, but felt the higher elevations of Area 26 should be 1/2-acre lots or more. PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE The Committee minutes of July 16, 1984, were provided. EMERGENCY OPERATIONS COMMITTEE The Minutes of June 21, 1984, and a memorandum indicating no minutes for May or July due to lack of a quorum were provided. City Manager Armstead stated he has advised Mike Harris of the EOC Committee that the San Bernardino County Emergency Plan will be reviewed on September 26 at 10:00 a.m. at Norton Air Force Base. POLICE CHIEF REPORT Lt. O'Rourke advised the Sheriff's Department now has four canine units, with one being assigned to each station, which will be operational October 1; will be available on a 24-hour call. Dennis Evans stated he has access to a video tape of the certification of the first canine unit in Redlands. Lt. O'Rourke indicated arrangements could be made to present the animal and the handler at a future meeting. FIRE CHIEF REPORT City Manager Armstead advised the City now has two fire engines. Page 5 - 9/13/84 1W LJ CITY ATTORNEY REPORT M Attorney Hopkins reported the following: (1) In response to a request to study whether there are limitations on school facility fees and where they may be used, advised the Government Code provides they can only be used in areas of impaction; if it is determined that sufficient impaction exists to adopt a school facilities fee, it would be necessary to provide an agreement method whereby the school facilities fee would be discontinued when impaction no longer exists. Councilman Nix stated he had also questioned whether fees can only be used to construct additional facilities or whether they could be used to alleviate impaction. City Attorney Hopkins stated the fees could only be used to construct new or temporary facilities. Councilman Nix disagreed with being required to construct additional facilities when the present facilities are only being used a small percentage of time; felt other alternative methods, such as year -around schools or double sessions, could alleviate impaction; most of those methods cost money, but would be considerably less than constructing additional facilities; questioned if there is some way to consider the total cost issue and methods of alleviating the problem. City Attorney Hopkins felt it would not be difficult to amend the current statutue to provide for that method; feels the School District would cooperate. Councilman Nix questioned whether present legislation only provides for assessing fees for additional facilities. City Attorney Hopkins felt unless legislation is amended, fees can only be assessed for additional facilities. Councilman Nix stated that due to present financing and construction costs, consideration should be given to more effective and efficient utilization of existing facilities before additional facilities are built. City Attorney Hopkins will study the matter further. (2) City Attorney Hopkins responded to a request by Councilman Rigley to study the amortization schedule pursuant to the sign ordinance; stated it varies upon investment and economic life of a particular sign, including such factors as when the sign was constructed. Signs which legally existed at the time the sign ordinance was adopted, but are not in compliance with the ordinance are non -conforming signs. There are court cases on the legal period to amortize signs which vary up to 40 years. There are no cases which have determined a sign has a longer economic life for amortization purposes than 10 years. The State Highway Act provides for amortization of outdoor advertising signs, particularly those within 1,660 feet of interstate or major highways, including those visible from the highway, over a 2-7 year period. This matter should be investigated, since this affects a large area of the City, due to its proximity to the freeway. The City's ordinance, which has been in effect five years, satisfies the amortization schedule of signs, by court precedent and the State Highway Act, in most instances; there could be a few cases which will need to be studied individually if the City proceeds with enforcement of the ordinance. Page 6 - 9/13/84 Recess was called at 7:00 p.m. and reconvened at 7:20 p.m. with all men ers present. CITY MANAGER REPORT City Manager Armstead advised he attended two meetings on the Jarvis Initiative, Proposition 36, which will also be addressed at the Leqgue of Cities Annual Conference in Anaheim. -- COUNCIL REPORTS Councilman Petta stated the Council received a letter from a resident wMch included two questions; requested the City Attorney answer those questions since the individual is present. City Attorney Hopkins stated that the letter from Ed O'Neal, Chairman of the Concerned Citizens of Grand Terrace, made reference to a newspaper article about signs located on Councilman Petta's place of business and asked the following: Question (1): Does the City Manager have the right to terminate a City employee? Answer: Under the City Manager form of government, the City Manager has the right to terminate and hire City employees; Question (2): Is a firm or individual in violation of the City code? If the answer is affirmative, what enforcement action has been taken or is pending? Answer: No, Councilman Petta is not in violation of the City Code; as explained earlier, the existing sign on top of Councilman Petta's building is a totally legal sign which is non -conforming. Mayor Grant recessed the Council Reports to the end of the agenda upon Councilman Petta's request. Councilman Rigley questioned the status of the Redevelopment Project Implementation contract with the Rosenow Spevacek Service Group, noting the program was to have been initiated July 1; questioned whether they had contacted firms and commercial organizations in an attempt to promote development; understood periodic reports were to be provided; Finance Director Tom Schwab stated the project didn't get started until August and is in its early stages; the firm is presently conducting an inventory of available property; is preparing a survey for property owners to determine the marketability of the available land to provide data for developers; is working with brokers to bring in development; and has been working with the County Economic Development Department to utilize some of their contacts; meetings are being held biweekly; two reports have been received and can be provided. Councilman Rigley noted the City previously contacted the property owners; is not satisfied with the progress; concerned the program is stagnant and that the City will expend $30,000 for the contract, receiving nothing in return; understood the consultant was to spend a certain amount of hours each day in the City; requested more action Page 7 - 9/13/84 from the consultant; requested a project status report at each future Council meeting. Councilman Nix stated he feels the City is being ambiguous and in o sis en in the area of development, since it is trying to promote desirable commercial development in some areas of the City, yet appears to be obstructing development in other areas such as Areas 10, 11 and 12; feels the City has an obligation to provide assistance to -- those developers presently in the City who have a desirable plan, even though it is not commercial. Mayor Grant reported the following: (1) Attended special Omnitrans meeting September 12, with no items directly affecting the City; (2) Referencing Councilman Nix's comments, disagreed Council is being inconsistent; stated Council has not taken a "no -growth" policy; feels commercial development in a specific area and considering density in terms of apartments and condos are two different issues; has always been concerned about the City becoming overpopulated, with traffic and school problems. Concurred with requiring a status report from the firm on economic development to ensure they are earning the funds being paid by the City. CITIES & COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO CONFERENCE Councilmen Rigley and Petta and Mr. Armstead will attend the conference in Lake Arrowhead on October 11 and 12. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION - SA83-9 Planning Director Kicak stated the appellant, Yolanta Trading & Land Corporation, is appealing Conditions 7 and 9 for the proposed remodeling of a project located some distance from Barton Road on the southerly side, westerly of Mt. Vernon, known as the Garden Home Apartments. The owner plans to enclose the existing patios to provide additional living space. Condition 7, pursuant to the City's ordinance, requires one enclosed parking space for each unit; the appellant is requesting to be permitted to install open -space parking. Condition 9 is also pursuant to the City's ordinance which requires installation of improvements along the frontage of the apartments as a condition of approval of any remodeling modifications; the appellant is appealing the requirement to install curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and necessary paving, requesting that those improvements be waived at this time. Staff recommends the property owners be required to execute an agreement providing for the installation of those improvements pursuant to this proposal at such time as either requested by the City or if it becomes a necessity due to future development of the property, if those requirements are to be waived. Councilman Rigley disagreed with requiring enclosed parking at this time, since the apartments have existed many years and have not had carports or enclosed parking and currently use open -space parking; concurred with enclosing the patios, feeling the appearance will be Page 8 - 9/13/84 improved; disagreed with requiring sidewalks since they would be located on the other side of an eight -foot high fence and would not benefit the project unless new facilities were built, the wall removed, and an entrance and exit were built at that location. Mr. Kicak advised these are requirements of the ordinance and can therefore only be changed by Council approval; would not object to waiving the requirements if an agreement is required for installation of improvements at some future date as a condition of approval. Dan Corcoran, 25610 North Road, Twin Peaks, California, speaking for Yolanta Trading & Land Corporation., introduced Dr. Jakubiec, the President; stated he felt the intention of the ordinance and the interest of the City would be served by enclosing the patios since the units are small and would provide more storage and living area. The roofs presently cover the entire area, including the patios, so the rehabilitation involves enclosing two walls. Opposed the requirement for garages; will provide additional parking; the owners have no objection to installing the necessary improvements for future development, but feel requiring those improvements at this time would serve no purpose. The owners, in the two years they have owned this property, have spent considerable funds to improve the property; requested favorable Council consideration of this matter. Mayor Grant opened Public Hearing and closed Public Hearing, there being no testimony for or against the matter. CC-84-231 Motion by Councilman Rigley, Second by Councilman Nix, ALL AYES, to approve the appeal of the Planning Commission decision on SA83-9, 22325 Barton Road, Yolanta Trading & Land Corp., based on the fact the owners want to enclose patios, have never had garages, are planning to build more parking spaces, and have agreed to sign an agreement providing for future installation of sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and necessary paving. ZONE CHANGE RECONSIDERATION - AREA NO. 30 Planning Director Kicak advised correspondence from Dr. Jakabiec, President, Yolanta Trading & Land Corporation, dated September 5 and September 11, requesting that Council consider including zoning of Area 30 as R-3 within the mass zone change, was provided to Council with a Staff Report; this zoning would bring that property into conformance with the General Plan designation. Jessie Douglas, 22320 DeBerry, property owner, stated she opposed the proposed zoning for Area 30 due to a concern it could allow a highrise building to be built at that location, which would overpower her property; requested restrictions if the property is to be zoned R-3; had preferred that property be zoned R-2, which would only allow duplexes and triplexes; noted a 25-foot buffer area is required between that property and her property. Mr. Corcoran stated there are no plans to erect a highrise building; the property owners want to maintain the present units in the best condition possible; in the Page 9 - 9/13/84 M M future wants to develop the property into a more aesthetically attractive project, which won't be possible without R-3 zoning. Dr. Jakubiec stated any new project to be built in that area would require approval through the planning process, at which time Mrs. Douglas' concerns could be addressed; noted that property has had an R-3 use since World War II. Discussion revealed that Area 30 can be included in the first reading of the zone change ordinance at this meeting, since the matter has been continued from August 23; the present ordinance prohibits - structures over three stories in height; any highrise or high -density proposals for that Area would require processing through the Planning Commission, with the adjacent property owners to be notified. CC-84-232 Motion by Councilman Rigley, Second by Councilman Nix, to include Area 30 in the first reading of the zone change ordinance to be rezoned to R-3 carried 3-2, with Mayor Grant and Councilwoman Pfennighausen voting NOE. 70NE CHANGE AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984. (First Reading) Attorney Hopkins read the title of the Ordinance; advised that letters were sent to those property owners whose property was deleted from this zone change, as directed, and that there will be no further notification to the property owners affected by this zone change for the second reading and Public Hearing to be held September 27, since this matter has been continued from the August 23 meeting. Planning Director Kicak advised the City Council held a Public Hearing on August 23rd regarding zone changes to bring all zoning within the City into compliance with the General Plan; at that time Council made the determination to exclude all Areas from the zone change which had been contested in the Public Hearing. The Areas deleted were 1; 2; 8; 10; 11; 12; 26; 30; and 33. As directed by Council, letters were sent to property owners within those Areas advising of the action taken by Council. As a result of action taken at this meeting, Area 30 will be included in the proposed zone change. Mayor Grant opened the meeting to public participation. Councilwoman Pfennighausen left the Council Chambers at 8:30 p.m. and returned at 8:32 p.m. Area 26 - Denis Kidd, 22874 Pico, requested inclusion of his 17 acres on Van Buren in'the mass zone change to be zoned R-1; has no objection to excluding the portion on Pico within Area 26 from the R-1 designation and that area remaining agricultural; felt the dividing line for the two zoned areas could be be the Edison Co.'s Page 10 - 9/13/84 M n right-of-way and would be a logical continuation of the surrounding development. Bill DeBenedet, 22799 Barton Road, requested that zoning for 16 acres owned y iTi'm and Mr. Zampese, adjacent to the Griffin Tract and the Terrace Hills Community Park, be changed from agricultural to R-1, which would be in conformance with the adjacent properties and the General Plan. Council discussed the possibility of splitting Area 26 in different areas, since there appears to be a consensus among the property owners that a portion of that Area should be zoned R-1, with another portion of that Area being zoned for larger acreage for horse lots. Area 2 - Steve Ferris, 6465 Carnegie Avenue, Anaheim, stated there has Been some oppose ion to changing the zoning of Area 2 from agricultural to M-1 or M-2; requested that a portion of the property, 4.6 acres north of Vivienda and east of Terrace Avenue, be included in the zone change; feels other people don't want their property changed but doesn't think they oppose his property being changed; the residents adjacent to his property are not in opposition to his property being rezoned as light industrial. Bob Keeney, 12139 Mt. Vernon, requested that Area 12 be included in the mass zone change; stated he has an approved project that requires R-3 zoning; questioned why Area 12 is being excluded from the zone change when the project requires that zoning designation. Al Trevino, USA Properties, requested that Area 11 be included in the zone change; noted half of Area 11 is already zoned R-3; would have processed the zone change for this property several months ago had the mass zone change not been proposed; stated this is causing a hardship on his firm from the standpoint of planning and coordinating efforts with other agencies, particularly since they were planning to install an alterntive energy system program and there is a date that certain laws will cease to exist which allow this system to be installed and credits to be available. Mayor Grant closed the meeting to public participation. Recess was called at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened at 9:15 p.m. with all member present. CC-84-233A Motion by Councilman Rigley, Second by Councilman Petta, to include the portions of Area 26 owned by Mr. Kidd and Messrs. DeBenedet and Zampese in the mass zone change, to discuss Area 2 separately, and that Areas 10, 11, and 12 are different since they were excluded from the mass zone change due to the violent reaction of a large element of residents who oppose high density in those Areas. Councilman Nix disagreed with the Motion, since Mr. Kidd has already pointed out that it would be logical to zone a portion of his Area as R-1, but the other portion of his property is a different situation. Page 11 - 9/13/84 The area to the north of Van Buren is a different issue; feels Area 26 must be worked out so there will an appropriate transition point from the higher densities R-1 to 1/2-acre area. It was noted that there is a 60-foot power line easement through the Area, which could be a buffer between the two areas. CC-84-2338 Motion by Councilman Nix, Second by Councilman Petta, to amend Motion No. CC-84-233A to include in the mass zone change the northwesterly 17 acres within Area 26, southerly of Van Buren and north of the Edison power line easement, to be zoned R-1. Motion No. CC-84-233B carried, ALL AYES, and Motion No. CC-84-233A, as amended, carried, ALL AYES. CC-84-234 Motion by Councilman Nix, Second by Councilman Rigley, ALL AYES, to include Area 33 in the mass zone change. Areas 1 & 2 - Planning Director Kicak clarified that a portion of Area is buil le and was proposed on the General Plan for light industrial. One individual opposed light industrial zoning for Areas 1 and 2. Councilman Petta questioned what other land use would be possible for that area. Mr. Kicak stated this is the only area which is designated as a flood plain; Councilman Nix noted the Cooley Ranch development is very likely part of the same flood plain. Mr. Kicak concurred. Mr. Ferris stated Area 1 includes several property owners, and that there are three property owners in Area 2. Mr. Kicak stated the property is heavily encumbered with Edison easements, so it is very unlikely the area, except for that addressed by Mr. Ferris could be used for anything. Councilwoman Pfennighausen declared a potential conflict of interest regarding Area 2 and withdrew from discussion and action on this matter. CC-84-235 Motion by Councilman Rigley, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to drop Area 8 from the mass zone change. CC-84-236 Motion by Councilman Nix, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to approve the first reading of the Zone Change Ordinance by title only as amended by the previous Motions, to include the following Areas: 3 through 7; 9; 14 through 22; 24; 25; 26A (being a portion of original Area 26); and 27 through 39. Under Councilman Nix's recommendation, Council directed that separate ordinances are to be prepared for each of the following areas: Areas 1; 2; 10; 11; 12; and 26B. First reading of the ordinances pertaining to Areas 10, 11 and 12 will be held September 27, with second reading and public hearing to be held October 11. Page 12 - 9/13/84 First reading of the ordinances for Areas 1, 2 and 26B will be held on October 11, with second reading and public hearing to be held October 25. Staff is to study and determine a reasonable approach for Area 26B which will satisfy all property owners. Mr. Kicak indicated he will try to meet with the affected property owners prior to the first reading of the ordinance for Area 26B. City Attorney Hopkins stated the record should reflect that all of the referenced ordinances and public hearings for those ordinances are continued public hearings from August 23. Questioned and received clarification that Council concurs it will not be necessary to readvertise and re -notice the property owners for the public hearing on the zone change ordinance for Areas 3 through 7; 9; 14 through 22; 24; 25; 26A; and 27 through 39; this will be a continued public hearing from August 23. Staff is to readvertise and re -notice the property owners for the public hearings relating to zone changes for Areas 10, 11 and 12, and for Areas 1, 2 and 26B, even though they are also continued public hearings. PARKING ON HOLLY & MT. VERNON Community Services Director Anstine advised that, as directed by Council, Staff investigated the feasibility of allowing residents to park on Holly and Mt. Vernon with no restrictions. Results of Staff research, including photographs depicting the availability of parking within the alleyway immediately adjacent to both areas, and Staff recommendation is outlined in the Staff Report. Mayor Grant stated he had expressed concern about the unique situation of most of the homes in that area and felt an exemption could be made for that area; felt although the Staff Report was thorough, could not support the staff recommendation. Councilman Rigley stated the issue being discussed concerns not being able to park on the street once a month during the morning hours; similar requests have been rejected; feels if an exception is made in this case, there will be many more requests; feels those cars can be moved for sweeping purposes once a month. Councilwoman Pfennighausen stated the problem also involves the 72-hour parking limitation, in which a car was towed away from Holly Street; clarified it is not only a street sweeping problem. The fact that a resident's car was towed away while on vacation for parking over the 72-hour parking limit was one of the issues that prompted this investigation. The residents themselves agree their garages are full; they own five vehicles, one of which is a motorhome; can't park all those vehicles in an alley. City Manager Armstead stated he lives on the alley and has plenty of parking space in back; keeps one car in the garage and has room to park four others, and can also park in the alley; felt the other Page 13 - 9/13/84 L n residents could do the same; has discussed this matter with the neighbors, and most residents have no complaints. CC-84-237 Motion by Councilman Rigley, Second by Councilman Petta, to instruct Staff to continue to enforce Ordinance No. 63 as adopted by Council on September 23, 1982, carried 4-1, with Mayor Grant voting NOE. COUNCIL REPORTS (CONTINUED) Councilman Petta stated he felt it is necessary to comment on the recent consi era le publicity in the newspapers, since he feels an attack on one Council Member reflects on the integrity of the entire Council, especially when the attack comes from a member of Council. Felt a need to clear the air to restore the good standing of Council. Stated the accuser is Councilwoman Pfennighausen, and when she decides to create an uprising in the community, makes public accusations through the news media. Referenced the accusations she made a year ago in which Councilman Petta was tried publicly in the news media; noted she also sent her accusations to every judicial body in the County and State, but no one would take on the case because there was no substance. Stated when correspondence finally came from the District Attorney's office, Councilwoman Pfennighausen didn't divulge the information because, as she stated at the Council table, she didn't like the answer. Stated Council and the community had a right to know that information; felt she covered up information which clearly resulted in defamation of character. Stated she is now creating another crisis by her recent claims which are unsubstantiated and are absolutely false. Councilman Petta stated the sign problem is not unique to our City - read a newspaper article regarding a similar problem with signs in the City of Fontana. Councilman Petta then read an article in the April Chamber Newsletter indicating there are only six or seven businesses in the City which presently have signs which comply with the City's existing ordinance, and if the existing ordinance is enforced, all signs must be brought into compliance by December, 1984. Noted the Planning Commission is presently reviewing the existing ordinance and that Council will either revise the ordinance or mandate that all nonconforming signs are to be taken down by December. Assured Council that he will set an example and be the first to take down his signs if the ordinance is enforced as it presently exists. Felt it made no sense that he, as one individual business firm among many not in compliance, would do what Councilwoman Pfennighausen said he did, since Council will publicly resolve this matter by December 5. Questioned the habitual character assissination. Councilwoman Pfennighausen stated she did not contact the press to make any statements regarding the matter at hand; made statements for the record regarding the firing of an employee. Felt if Councilman Petta had truly believed he had a case of defamation of character during the conflict of interest case, he would have filed that case; the letter from the District Attorney stated the matter would not be pursued at this time due to budgetary constraints and that it appeared Page 14 - 9/13/84 to them that the actions that had occurred up to that time had accomplished the purpose, since Mr. Armstead and Mr. Petta were no longer pursuing the avenues that made the charges necessary. If they were to start again, that issue would be open again with the District Attorney. Advised when the charges were made, all material was first presented to the City Attorney for review, and before filing it, supplied Mr. Armstead, Mr. Petta, and the other three Council Members copies of everything that went to the Attorney General and the District Attorney. Stated the issue wasn't a matter of a sign ordinance violation; there were accusations that involved the firing of a City employee that tied him directly into the firing of that employee and some pressure being applied over the sign issue. Stated she has had to defend hereself against the other Council Members in regard to violating the confidentiality of a closed session; stated everything she said to the press she said before that meeting, and has not violated the rules of confidentiality; referenced a letter from Ann Petta stating the contents could only have been gathered by information discussed in closed session. Councilman Petta stated his remarks stand, and can verify that Councilwoman Pfennighausen's remarks were made prior to closed session. Closed Session - Council adjourned to a closed session at 10:30 p.m., with i y - tUorney Hopkins in attendance. Reconvene - Council reconvened the regular meeting at 11:37 p.m. Mayor Grant announced that Council met in closed session. City Attorney Hopkins advised that Council met in closed session to discuss a matter involving personnel, with one action taken which involved a reprimand of a City employee. Adjourn - The regular meeting adjourned at 11:38 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held September 27, 1984, at 5:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, i ty Cl e APPROVED: ayor Page 15 - 9/13/84 PENDING CITY CHECK REGISTER NO. 092784 COUNCIL APPROV GRAND TERRACE PAGE NO. 1 SEP � � ,0�4 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 85-0 32 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM & �'� DATE 0 9 / 27 / 8 4 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK 0. NO. DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNTCHG'D INV.NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT ACCENT PRINT & DESIGN REG.FLIERS FOR FAIR 10-4804-210 4075 135.57 12499 135.57 AMATEUR ELECTRONIC SUPPLY RADIO/MICROPHONE E.O.C. 10-4808-220 00433 594.56 12500 594.56 RANDALL ANSTINE LOCAL MILEAGE,ANSTINE 10-4120-249 15.00 LOCAL MILEAGE,ANSTINE 10-4180-271 6.25 12501 23.25 BASTANCHURY BOTTLED WATER BOTTLED WATER,FINANCE 10-4190-238 76492 22s80 BOTTLED WATER,C/S & EOC 10-4190-23R 76491 29.)0 BOTTLED viATER,C/M 10-4190-238 76493 23.00 12502 73.80 CITY/COUNTY PLANNING CONF.9/20,3 PLANNING COMMIO-4801-270 38.25 P4080 3e.25 COLTON COURIER SUB.C/C►7/3/84-7/3/85,FIw10-4140-210 12.00 12503 12.00, COLTON UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRI C/C MEET.8/9 & 8/23/84 10-4110-242 90.00 SQUARE DANCE,8/4/84 10-4430-242 60.00 PLANNING MEET. 8/6/84 10-4801-242 25.00 12504 175.00 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGEN LOAN #1 F/Y 1984/1985 CRAIO-4200-800 125000.00 12505 125000.00 30 COMPUTER SUPPLY TYPING ELEMENT 10-4421-210 0094 13.32 12506 18.3E DATAPOINT CORP. MAINT.ON COMPUTER 10/84 10-4140-246 58P58 93.00 n GRAND TERRACE n PAGE NO. DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 85-032 DATE 09/27/84 1CHER NO. PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNTCHG'D INV.NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT MAINT.ON COMPUTER 10/84 21-4572-246 458258 93.00 12507 186.00 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN DEF.COMP.P/R END. 9/7/84 10-2164-000 596.00 DEF.COMP.P/R END. 9/7/84 10-2170-000 157.91 DEF.COMP.P/R END. 9/7/84 10-4120-139 456.01 DEF.CONiP.P/R END. 9/7/84 10-4125-139 404.09 DEF.COMP.P/R END. 9/7/84 10-4140-139 493.60 DEF.COMP.P/R END. 9/7/84 10-4180-139 448.28 DEF.COMP.P/R END. 9/7/84 21-4572-139 121.81 P4082 2677.70 ELIZABETH DU.ARTE f PAYROLL 10-216q-000 250.00 P4081 250.00! ILENE DUGHMAN LOCAL MILEAGE,DUGHIAAN 10-4125-271 36.00 12508 36.00 EASTERDAY SUPPLY COMPANY TRASH CAN LINERS 10-4180-245 133265 72.80 12509 72.80 EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT FUND RETIRE.P/R END. 9/7/84 10-2167-000 35.6b RETIRE.P/R END. 9/7/84 10-4120-140 312.40 RETIRE.P/R END. 9/7/84 10-4125-140 276.84 RETIRE.P/R ENO. 9/7/84 10-4140-140 338.15 RETIRE.P/R END. 9/7/84 10-4180-140 307.12 RETIRE.P/R END. 9/7/84 21-4572-140 83.45 P4084 1353.62 FLOWERS BY YVONNE FLOWERS-B.MATHEWS 10-4110-220 3409 24.91 12510 24.91 ALEXANDER GRANT & COMPANY MAILING LABELS 10-4190-221 08046 270.60 12511 270.60 HARBER COMPANY OVERLAY ST.VARIOUS LOCATI15-4900-255 2682 347.30 12512 347.30 m GRAND TERRACE rl PAGE NO DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 85-032 DATE 09/27/84 iUCHER NO. PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNTCHG'D INV NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT IPS SERVICES INCORPORATED i STREET SWEEP.8/28/84 18-4908-255 53d2 540.76 STREET SWEEP.9/3/84 18-4908-255 5416 319.54 12513 �^.30 KICAK & ASSOCIATES ENG. SVCS.8/20-9/9/84 10-4120-601 4957.45 ENG. SVCS.8/20-9/9/84 10-4170-250 1528.00 ENG. SVCS.8/20-9/9/84 10-4330-255 2109.95 ENG. SVCS.8/20-9/9/84 10-4370-255 2814.90 ENG. SVCS.8/20-9/9/84 10-4593-600 1477.00 ENG, SVCS.8/20-9/9/84 10-4610-255 1350.00 i ENG. SVCS.8/20-9/9/84 11-4902-600 39.00 ENG. SVCS.8/20-9/9/84 16-4930-600 1679.70 ENG. SVCS.8/20-9/9/84 21-4572-601 187.00 P4085 16143.00 KLEEN-LINE CORPORATION JANITORIAL SUPPLIES C/H 10-4160-245 336644 72.87 12514 72.87 K MART #4432 I SAFETY BOOTS,MAINT. 10-4180-21$ 566262 42.37 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES C/H 10-4180-245 566269 44.76 12515 87.13 LEAGUE OF CALIF.CITIES REG.L.C.C.CONF,9/23,2 COU10-4110-270 190.00 REG.L.C.C.CO`1F,9/23,SETH 10-4120-270 95.00 REG.L.C.C.CONF,9/23,�IYRNAIO-4125-270 95.00 P4079 3o0.00 VIRGIL LIVELY CROSSING GUARD.9/6-9/14/817-4910-250 111.30 12516 111.30 LOMA LINDA DISPOSAL TRASH PICK-UP 9/84 C/H 10-4180-245 37.05 TRASH PICK-UP 9/84,PARK 10-4430-245 37.05 12517 74.10 MICHAEL LUNA USE OF TRUCK,8/84,LUNA 10-4180-240 107.69 m GRAND TERRACE PAGE NO. DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 85-032 DATE 09/27/84 ICHER PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN N0. DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG'D INV NO. AMOUNT NO. AMOUNT LOCAL MILEAGE,LUNA 10-4180-271 64.90 12518 172.59 MARATHON GRAPHICS, INC. PLASTIC BIND COMBS 10-4140-210 4231 12.35 1251y 1c.35' PHILIP M. PAGE PARK CLEAN-UP,9/1-9/30/8 10-4430-245 274.00 12520 274.00 PETRA ENTERPRISES FALL REC.PROGRAMS 10-4430-230 4475 434.60 I 12521 434.60 PEOPLE HELPERS INC REC.SVCS.9/1-9/15/84 10-4430-250 1341.76 12522 1341.76 PUSTMASTER/COLTON BULK MAIL/REC.BROCHURES 10-4430-230 22.34 P4077 22.34 SAN BDNO CO CENTRAL CR UNIO EMPLOYEES DED.P/R END.9/710-2165-000 1714.89 P4083 1714.89 SAN BERNARDINO,AUDITOR/CONT PARK.CITES-CJFTCF 8/84 10-2200-000 54.00 12523 54.00 SHERIFF FLOYD TIDNELL LAN ENFORCEMENT 9/84 10-4410-256 34189.00 P4078 34189.00 SIGNAL MAINTENANCE, INC. SIGNAL MAINT. (3) 8/84 16-4909-255 A37550 199.23 12524 199.23 SU. CALIF. EDISON COMPANY ELEC. C/H 9/11/84 10-4190-238 537.66 ELEC.2 POLES,PARK,9/11/8410-4430-238 2/4.90 ELEC.SPRINKLERS/PARK,9/1110-4430-238 17.72 m GRAND TERRACE n PAGE NO. DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 85-032 DATE 09/27/84 JCHER N0. PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CHG'D INV NO. AMOUNT NO AMOUNT ELEC.BALL PARK LIGHTS 9/110-4430-238 119.18 ELEC.SIG,NALS,9/11/84 16-4510-238 232.19 ELEC.BART/PALM 9/11/84 16-4510-238 13.06 12525 944.71 SO. CALIF. GAS COMPANY GAS C/H 9/b/84 10-4190-238 24.84 12526 24.84 O.C.TANNER SERVICE AWARDS 10-4120-600 Cl 229 3808.39 12527 3808.39' TIGER SYSTEMS RENT STORAGE BIN 9/84 10-4110-240 100921 60.00 125?8 60.00� VJATTENBARGERS OFFICE SUPPLY POST -IT -NOTES 10-4120-210 2176 9.46 POST -IT -DOTES 10-4120-210 2010 12.41 LABELS,WHITE-OUT POST-IT-10-4125-210 2176 9.88 j INDEX FILE,GLUE STICKS 10-4140-210 2176 48.72 j NAME PLATES (2) 10-4801-210 1907 14.84 I INDEX CARDS & HOLDER 21-4572-210 2176 28.27 12529 123.581 i ZAMPESE & DE BENEDET RENT C/H 10/84 10-4190-242 625.00 12530 625.00 MR. BEAVER vidi.D.REFUND,BEAVER 21-3114-000 3.50 12531 3.50 SNYDER PUBLICATION COMPANY "ART OF TAKING MINUTES" 10-4125-210 15.23 12532 15.23 PUBLICATION PAYROLL PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-2161-000 1277.88- PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-2162-000 216.73- PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-2163-000 81.96- PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-2164-000 596.00- GRAND TERRACE PAGE NO. DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 85-032 DATE 09/27/84 UCHER NO. PAYEE DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WARRANT CHECK WRITTEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNTCHG'O INV.NO. AMOUNT NO AMOUNT PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-2165-000 1714.89 PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-2167-000 35.66 PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-2170-000 307.91 ' PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-4110-120 750.00 ' PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-4120-110 2519.35 PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-4125-110 2232.60 PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-4140-110 2727.07 PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 10-4180-110 2476.68 PAYROLL ENDING 9/7/84 21-4572-110 672.99 0 7147.66 GRAND TERRACE PAGENO. 7 DEMAND/WARRANT REGISTER NO. 85-032 DATE 09/27/84 PAYEE WARRANT CHECK JCHER DETAIL OF DEMANDS PRESENTED WRITTEN NO. DESCRIPTION ACCOUNTCHG'D INV NO AMOUNT NO AMOUNT RITTEN 136269.59 REPAID 63916.46: ACCRUED .00 TOTAL 200186.05 RECAP BY FUND RE -PAID RITTEN FUND 10 61132.51 134381.44 FUND 11 39.00 .00 FUND 16 1679.70 791.78� FUND 17 .00 111.30� FUND 18 .00 8bO.30 FUND 21 1065.25 124.771 I CERTIFY THAT, TO THE BEST F MY KNOWLEDGE, Till AFOR LISTED CHECKS FOR PAYMENT OF CITY LIABILITIES HAVE BEEN AUDITED BY QE AND ARE NECESSA Y AND APPROPRIATE EX ENDIT RES FOR THE OPERATION OF THE CITY. THOMAS SCHWAB FINANCE DIRECTOR a t e : QV-1 StAFF REPORT D 'a� C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X ) MEETING DATE: 9-27-84 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: Grand Terrace Woman's Club Yearbook Advertisement FUNDING REQUIRED X NO FUNDING REQUIRED Attached is a request from the Woman's Club to place an ad in their 1984-85 yearbook, as the City has done in past years. A one-half page ad would cost $35.00. Funds - are available in fund number 10-4110-220, Council Special Departmental Expense. STAFF RECONIMENDS THAT COUNCIL: AUTHORIZE A $35.00 EXPENDITURE FOR A ONE-HALF PAGE AD IN THE GRAND TERRACE WOMAN'S CLUB 1984-85 YEARBOOK. HE GRAND TERRACE WOMAN'S CLUB Post Office Box 1166 Colton, CA 92324 September 18, 1984 Attn: GRAND TERRACE CITY COUNCIL . 22779 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324 The Grand Terrace Woman's Club wishes to take this opportunity to thank you for your past support through advertising in our yearbook. We are preparing the new 1984-85 yearbook and if you wish to renew your ad, please send your check to the above address. We have attached a copy of your ad for last year. If you ~l .r... wish any ch:;nges, please return this copy with your check. RENEW,:L JF YOUR AD FOR THE 1984-85 YEAR BOOK WILL BE: 1/2 Page................................$35.00 Our rate schedule for the 1984-85 Yearbook is as follows: $5.00 per line $25.00 1/3 page (Business Card Size) $35.00 1/2 page ..� $60.00 Full page If you have any questions, please contact: Skippy Cooley 825-0366 Claire Kidd 783-2176 Frances Carter 783-0107 Again, Thank you very much for your past support. � �■rs.�■ r_�+� t.tacxa..3t3�:w::v:�'"'it�'.1:""^':�s±i..ma—.r' C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (XX) MEETING DATE: Sept. 27, 1984 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: CLAIM FOR GENERAL AND SPECIAL DAMAGES CLAIM N0, GTLC 84-1 FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED XXXX Thurman W. Arnold the attorney for Betty Jo Boyter has filed a claim against The City of Grand Terrace in the amount of $225,000.00 The claim is made due to an alleged failure to design and/or maintain the roadway at 23200 Barton Road, 489 feet south of Hill Top Drive resulting in an injury accident. This matter has been reviewed by the City Attorney. Staff Recommends That Council: 1. REJECT THE CLAIM AND REFER THE MATTER TO CARL WARREN AND COMPANY INSURANCE ADJUSTERS. 2. DIRECT THE CITY CLERK TO NOTIFY CLAIMANT OF THE ACTION TAKEN. C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM �xx) MEETING DATE: Sept. 27, 1984 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: CLAIM FOR DAMAGE OR INJURY CLAIM NO. GTLC 84-2 FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED XXxx Mr. Max Archer, 12490 Michigan Street, Grand Terrace, CA 92324, has filed a claim against the City of Grand Terrace in the amount of $308.67. The claim is made due to a faulty sewer at 12490 Michigan"Street, Grand Terrace. Staff Recommends that Council: 1. REJECT THE CLAIM AND REFER THE MATTER TO CARL WARREN AND COMPANY INSURANCE ADJUSTERS. 2. DIRECT THE CITY CLERK TO NOTIFY CLAIMANT OF THE ACTION TAKEN. C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM JXX) W ETING DATE: September 27, 1984 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: CLAIM FOR GENERAL AND SPECIAL DAMAGES CLAIM NO. GTLC 84-3 FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED XXXX James Boyter, 12542 Warbler Avenue, Grand Terrace, CA 92324 has filed a claim against the City of Grand Terrace in the amount of $200,000. The claim is made due to an alleged failure to design and/or maintain the roadway at 23200 Barton Road, 489 feet south of Hill Top Drive resulting in an injury accident. This matter has been reviewed by the City Attorney. Staff Recommends That Council: 1. REJECT THE CLAIM AND REFER THE MATTER TO CARL WARREN AND COMPANY INSURANCE ADJUSTERS. 2. DIRECT THE CITY CLERK TO NOTIFY CLAIMANT OF THE ACTION TAKEN. CiOMMISSION *ND COMMITT4E REPORTS SEPTEMBER 27, 1984 COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM #7B(1) COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 27, 1984 DATE: 9 21 84 COMMISSION/COMMITTEE: Parks & Recreation SUBJECT: Development of Blue Mountain Property for use as Wildnerness areas PROBLEM: Facts: That the City of Grand Terrace owns a portion of the side of Blue Mountain along with adjacent property owners and requests that the Parks & Recreation Committee propose a survey as to the use of this property. ALTERNATIVES: Leave the property as is for use by citizens desiring hiking or horseback riding and propose no development by the City as sponsoring a wilderness park that could become an expensive liability to the City for a very limited use by the public. SO(_UT?ON: The Parks and Recreation Committee voted unanimously that any acquisition or expenditure of monies for development of nearly virticle lands on Blue Mountain be abandon as the use of this land would not serve the overall interests of the general public and citizens at large. REQUESTED ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY COUNCIL AND/OR STAFF: No action as to regard to the development of any of the Blue Mountain areas. :ii = corical & aural Cor:...,ittee II\FC?�`°p'! !ON ONLY V 4robNC141CGENI ITEM ! 7G Einutes of September 10, 1934 Meeting _ S E P 2 7 i984 The meeting was called to order at 7:10 P14 by Secretarry Hannah Laister in the absence of Chairman Barbara Mathews wh-� is at horse r-cuperating :om surgery. `,Ve all ;rich her well and a speedy recovery. Those present were Irene Mason, Ann Petta, Barb=.ra Bayus and Betty Duarte. Secretary's report for July 2nd ::::s read and approved. Treasurer Betty Duarte reported that f 2,600 was submitted and approved for next fiscal y_.ar. ;Ie have spent $70' for flyers so far on our Country Fair. Ann reported that the library hearing was today. Tony Petta and Seth tirmstead attended. Supervisor Barbara Riordan seemed to feel that it ::ould be approved. Voting will take place on September 24th at 10 1A.M. Ann also gave each irember an article on the naming of Barton Road. She a -so met with Ernie Zampese and went through the pictures ::hich were donated. She will go over them -.,ith the committee at a future meeting. Betty reported that nothing concrete has been decided on the Civic Center dedicationa-: yet. This :rill probably be some time in January or February. Seth has given the committee pictures to be framed for the Civic Center. *i.e will select the most ap, rozriate and �;o to Council for their approval before we have them framed. Barbara resorted that the theme for our Country Fair ;.ill be "Country Our Viay". A parade is in the works with Randy Anstine, the Farks & Recreation c.;rnmittee, Chamber of Commerce all helping out. Ann is c_nta_cting the schools for an art disrlay and cooking con.est. Irene is contacting radio stagyions, Grouti .'a Cable, newspapers for publicity. All is going for,ra_-d on schedule. New Business: I t ;,: as decided to h--ve a Pot Luck Dinner for the Ci ty' s 6th anniversary in November. We will get flyers out for this at the next meeting. At the present time, the City keeps a book of daily articles from the Sun and Colton Courier. The committee secretary also keeps these articles. 'lye request that the City continue to keep this b;,ok and turn it over to this committee for historical preservation. If at any time in the future the City discontinues this practice, they will inform the committee and we will again collect these articles. The next meeting will be October 1st. Meetingadjourned at 9 FM. Respectfully submitted, j, v RECEIVED Hannah Laister Secretary SEP 17 1984 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM ( X) MEETING DATE: 9-13-84 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: Council Meeting Dates - November and December FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED X Since the second meeting in November falls on Thanksgiving, it will be held on November 29, unless Council w-ishes to establish a different date. The Registrar of Voters anticipates the canvass of the November 6 Election to be completed and the results certified by the Board of Supervisors on November 19. Therefore, there may be a need to have a meeting on November 20 to declare the final election results and swear in the members of Council accordingly. We assume that would be the only business to be conducted at that meeting, with the regular meeting to then be held on November 29. There doesn't appear to be a conflict for the meeting dates in December, so they will be held December 13 and 27 unless Council advises otherwise. STAFF RECO1,11ENDS THAT COUNCIL: CONFIRh, THE h'EETING DATES FOR NOVEfiBER 8 AND 29, WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR F'EETING ON NOVE1";BER 20; AND CONFIWI, THE t`EETING DATES FOR DECEF'BER 13 AND 27. 11E uate: AFF September 21, 1984 SlIr 12-8.8002 S* C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (XX) MEETING DATE:-- September 27, 1984 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE ORDINANCE - 2nd READING FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED XX City Council, at their regular meeting of September 13, 1984, had a first reading of the Zone Change Ordinance for Areas 3 thru 7, 9, 14 thru 22, 24, 25 and portion of 26, which portion is now being designated as 26A and 27 through 39. This Ordinance is now before the City Council for the second reading and a public hearing. Since that time, specifically on September 20, 1984, we received a letter from the Property Owners of Area 32 (Copy Attached) requesting that their property remain zoned R-1. This request creates two new problems: • 1. The General Plan as adopted designates Area 32 medium density residential allowing 4 to 9+ units per acre. Present zoning is R-1. Our Zoning Ordinance does permit single family homes in R-2. The problem that we are facing is the fact that if that parcel remains zoned as R-1, the zoning and General Plan are not consistant. Therefore, proposed modifications or additions to the existing structure, would examine the consistency between the zoning and the General Plan Land Use Policy Map and potentially could require that the zoning be changed to R-2 prior to issuance of such permit. After the change to R-2, this zoning would not create any problems to Staff in issuing the permit for additions or major alterations of a single family residence, since our present Ordinance does permit such uses in R-2. 2. It is my understanding that removing Area 32 from this Zone Change Ordinance would require, that the Ordinance once again, receive the first reading since it is a change in the boundaries, which is considered a major change. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL: 1. CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE. 2. APPROVE SECOND READING OF THE ZONE CHANGE ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY, WAIVING THE FULL READING. 3. ADOPT THE ZONE CHANGE ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY. To the Members of the %City Council, Grand Terrace, Calif. Sept. 181 1984 Since the last meeting, my brothers and I have changed our minds regarding our property. We no longer oppose the rezoning of Lot 30 to R3, but we wish our property Lot 32 to remain R1. ndsey yn Edwar Lynch y 6. tfie B. Douglas Address: 22330 DeBerry Street Grand Terrace, Calif. �KOENDING C(Ty COUNCIL APPROVAL ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace approved a General Plan Update on April 26, 1984; and WHEREAS, said General Plan Update resulted in various zoning within the City of Grand Terrace not being in compliance with said General Plan Update as required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace to study and to bring said zoning into compliance with the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on this matter on August 6, 1984, in the time and manner required by law at which all evidence and testimony was duly heard and considered; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended zoning amendments as described on 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 Moray after its adoption. SECTION 3. Posting - The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) puM cplaces designated for such purpose by the City Council. SECTION 4. First read at regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on the 13th day of September, 1984, and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of sai-J-1ity Council on the day of , 1984. ATTEST: City Clerkofthe Cityo ran Terrace and of the City Council thereof. Mayor of the City of Mnd 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 on the _ day of , 1984, by the following vote: AYES: NOES : ASSENT: ABSTAI14: Approved as to form: City Attorney -2- City Clerk 12-8.8002 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) MEETING DATE September 27, 1984 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.'a SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE ORDINANCE - AREAS 10, 11, and 12 FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED xx Attached for your consideration, is a proposed Ordinance for a Zone Change in the Areas 10, 11 and 12. The City Council, at their regular meeting of September 13, 1984, after considerable discussion, requested that these areas be brought to the City Council separately. STAFF RECOMMENDS: 1. MOTION TO APPROVE FIRST READING OF ZONE CHANGE ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY, WAIVING FULL READING OF THE ORDINANCE. 2. MOTION TO ADOPT FIRST READING OF ZONE CHANGE ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY FOR AREAS 10, 11 AND 12. NOTE: THREE (3) SEPARATE ORDINANCES ARE ATTACHED - ONE FOR EACH OF THE AREAS. A MAP OF THE AREAS HAS NOT BEEN ATTACHED SINCE IT WILL BE THE SAME MAP THAT IS ATTACHED TO YOUR AGENDA ITEM 8A. 1 APPROVALNDING CITY AREA 10 414CIL ORDINANCE N0. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace approved a General Plan Update on April 26, 1984; and WHEREAS, said General Plan Update resulted in various zoning within the City of Grand Terrace not being in compliance with said General Plan Update as required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace to study and to bring said zoning into compliance with the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on this matter on August 6, 1984, in the time and manner required by law at which all evidence and testimony was duly heard and considered; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended zoning amendments as described on 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 tfie MT -Jay after its adoption. SECTION 3. Posting - The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) puFilic places designated for such purpose by the City Council. SECTION 4. First read at regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on the day of , 1984, and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeti ng oT sai dT ty Council on the --_ day of 19s,4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION *40 PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE APEA 140. 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 Mt. Vernon Avenue as shown on Map of Grand Terrace Tract; THENCE 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 tit. Vernc . venu-, to a ooint distant 148.02 feet frcm the south line of Lot 5, being also `.he Point of Beginning; AREA 11 PENDING CITY ORDINANCE N0. 1NCIL APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace approved a General Plan Update on April 26, 1984; and WHEREAS, said General Plan Update resulted in various zoning within the City of Grand Terrace not being in compliance with said General Plan Update as required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace to study and to bring said zoning into compliance with the City 's General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on this matter on August 6, 1984, in the time and manner required by law at which all evidence and testimony was duly heard and considered; and VHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recor m nded zsni - , a— whuw, is 3s described on Exhibits "A" and "B" attached hereto and incorpor,ted 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, 1934; 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; NOW9 THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF TKE CITY OF GRAND TEP.RACE GOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ,,Et,TIG4. 1 SECTION i . That the real properties as sheen on Exhibits "A" and "B," e attached hereto and inccrporatcd herein, are hereby rezcn d and the zoning amonded as shown on said Exhibits. SECTION 2. Effective Date - This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m._on hire slst clay after its adoption. SECTION 3. Posting - The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) PAlic places designated for such purpose Q the City Council. SECTION 4. First read at regular oneti ng of the City Council of said City held on the day of 1924, and finally idaptad and crd.rcd posted at a regular f uting 01--s-;i-67--Fty Council en the � - d::y of 1004. LEGAL DESCRIPTION PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE AREA NO. 11 All that portion of Parcels 1, 2 and 13, Block "E" of the Grand Terrace Tract as per Map on file in Book 11, of Maps, Page 4 and that portion of Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block "E" of the Resubdivision of Grand Terrace Tract, as per Map on file in Book 1, of Record of surveys, Page 33, all Records of the Recorder of San Bernardino County, California, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of Lot 5 of Tract No. 10586 as per Map on file in Book 147 of Maps, Pages 91 and 92, Records of said Recorder of San Bernardino County, California, being a point on the Easterly Right of Way line of the Gage Canal; THEiICE Northwesterly and Northeasterly along said Easterly right of way line to the most northerly corner of that certain parcel conveyed to Herman H. McBroom and Patricia A. McBroom, husband and Wife as Joint Tenants by Qiit Claim Deed recorded June 1, 1979 in Book 9698, Page 1639, Official Records of San Bernardino County, California; 'T'HENTCE Southerly along the Easterly line of said McBroom parcel to a point in a line parallel with and distant 258 feet Northerly of, measured at right angles to the Southerly line of said Lot 4, Block "E"; :7HE':CE Easterly along said parallel to the intersection of said parallel line with the Westerly right of way line of Mt. Vernon Avenue; THE:.CE Southerly along said Westerly right of way line to the intersection of said Westerly line with the Northerly line of that certain parcel shown as "Not a hart" on said Map of Tract *;o. 10586; H DICE Westerly along the Northerly line of said "Not a Part" parcel and to ; the ":)rtherly _in.e o_` Lots 7, 6 and paid Lot 5 of said :Tact No. 10586, to Point of Beginning. I AREA 12 PENDING CITY N ORDINANCE NO. APPROVAL AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AhiENDhiENTS IN COIMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 263, 1984. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace approved a General Plan Update on April 26, 1984; and WHEREAS, said General Plan Update resulted in various zoning within the City of Grand Terrace not being in compliance with said General Plan Update as required by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council has directed the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace to study and to bring said zoning into compliance with the City's General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on this matter on August 6, 1984, in the time and manner required by law at which all evidence and testimony aras 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 lkHEREAS, the reconlm2nded zoning amendments are consistent and conform %•;ith 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 dilly issued in the time, form, and manner prescribed by law; IZ4, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF TF:E CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEP.EBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the real properties as shown on Exhibits "A" and "B," attached herr_to and incorporated herein, are hereby rc-zoned and the zoning a.r,ended as shown on said Exhibits. SECTION 2. Effective Date - This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m._on tiTe 7s-t lay after its adc, icn. SECTION 3. Fosti Posting - Tf�e Ci �,� Cl er-k ;i,;l 1 c,.use t�•i s Crr1i nance to i,e pasted in three (3) pull•(ic places d_si5nated for such purpose by the City Council. �[_r,TI01! 4. First read at rer1Il ar r^eeti n; of the City Colinci 1 of Said City h(ld on the d:y of ) and fin„lly adc; tcd and crd2rcd posted ,-rt a rcgul,ir of s�.i d i i ty C;;r'nci 1 On the �'';y of -----' 11•?I . LEGAL DESCRIPTION %, PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE AREA NO. 12 All that portion of Tract No. 10586 as per Map on file in Book 147 of Maps, Pages 91 and 92, Records of the Recorder of San Bernardino County, California, being more particularly described as follows: All of Lots 3, 4, 5 and 6 of said Tract.