04/27/2006 TILE ,GOPT .
0Tr
GRF+HD TEZR CE April 27, 2006..
22795 Barton-Road
Grand Terrace:1
California 92313-5295
A, .Civic Center
'(909)824-6621 .
Fax(909)783-7629
Fax(909)783-2600. '
Nlaryctta.Ferre" ' 'CITY' OF.-GRAN TERRACE '.
Mayor
Bea Cortes.. ,
Mayor Pro Tein
Herman Hilkey ,CRA/CITY COUNCIL
Lee Ann, Miller Jim er REGULA'R'_MEETINGS
- ,
Council Members
Thomas J.Scliwab' 2]DT AND 4TH'Thursday."-. 6-':00' p.m'.
Citj•Manager
' Council Chambers = ;
nto r r nd T G errace Civic Ce a
22795 Barton Road
i
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS APRIL 27,2006
GRAND TERRACE CIVIC CENTER .6:00 PM . I'
22795 Barton Road
a
THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE.COMPLIES WITH THE AMERICAN'S', DI8 ABILITIES ACT OF1990 IFYOU;,
REQUIRE,SPECIAL ASSISTANCEGTO PARTICIPATE'IN THIS MEETING, PLEASE CALL THE CITY CLERK'S;,
OFFICE AT.(9..09)824 6621 AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO,THE M<EETING
i
IF YO.0 DESIRE TO,ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL DURING THE MEETING,4PI EASE:COMPLETE.A REQI7EST
TO SPEAK FARM AVAILABLE AT THE'ENTRANCE AND PRESENT IT TO THE CITY CLERK: SPEAKERS SWILL
BE CALLED UPON BY THE MAYOR AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME
r; s
* Call to Order-
* Invocation-
* Pledge of Allegiance-
* Roll Call-
- STAFF COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEMS RECOMMENDATION -ACTION
CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
1. Approval of 04-13-2006 Minutes Approve
2. Closed Session-Real Property Negotiations(GC 54956.8)
1. Real Estate Negotiations
A. Property Address:22115 Barton Road APN#1167-23 1-11
and APN# 1167-141-08.
B. Negotiating Parties:
1) Tom Schwab on behalf of the Agency
2)Ali Yasin on behalf of the Seller
C. Areas of Negotiation: Real Property Purchase(Price and
Terms)
ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
1. Items to Delete
2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Proclamation-Blue Ribbon Week
I
i
i
I
COUNCIL AGENDA
04-27-2006 PAGE 2 OF 3
AGENDA ITEMS STAFF COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATIONS ACTION
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and
noncontroversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time
without discussion. Any Council Member,Staff Member,or Citizen
may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar for
discussion.
A. Approve Check Register Dated April 27,2006 Approve
B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda
C. Approval of 04-13-2006 Minutes Approve
D. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Approve
2006-09 Delegate Agency Agreement
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the opportunity for members of the public to comment
on any items not appearing on the regular agenda. Because of
restrictions contained in California Law,the City Council is
prohibited from discussing or acting on any item not on the
agenda. The Mayor may request a brief response from staff
to questions raised during public comment.
5. REPORTS
A. Committee Reports-None
B. Council Reports
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Specific Plan No.05-02(SP-05-02),Vesting Tentative Tract Approve
Map No. 05-03 (TTM-05-03/County No. 17766) and
Environmental Review Case No. 05-21 (E-05-21) to
construct a 35 single family condominium development
Ordinance of the City Council Approving Specific Plan No.
05-02 (SP-05-02) for a condominium subdivision with 35
single family detached units on a 3.7 acre site located on the
westerly side of Mt. Vernon Avenue at 11830 Mt. Vernon
Avenue and Environmental Review Case No. 05-21 (E-05-
21) Mitigated Negative Declaration as Provided by the
California Environmental Quality Act
Resolution of the City of Grand Terrace Approving Tentative
Tract Map No. 05-03 (TTM 17766) for a 35 Single Family
Residential Condominium Development in the City of Grand
Terrace
COUNCIL AGENDA
04-27-2006 PAGE 3 OF 3
AGENDA ITEMS STAFF COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATIONS ACTION
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Second Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the Approve
City of Grand Terrace,California,Amending Chapter 8.112
of the Municipal Code and Regulating the Sale and Discharge
of Fireworks
B. Second Reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the Approve
City of Grand .Terrace Rescinding the Traffic Signal
Improvement Fee Schedule and Circulation Fee Schedule
(4.104) and Replacing it with a new Fee Structure and
Rescinding the Capital Improvement and Maintenance Fee
Schedule(4.80)and replacing it with a new Fee Structure
8. NEW BUSINESS -None
I
9. CLOSED SESSION-None
ADJOURN .
I
- - 1
I
THE NEXT CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE HELD ON
THURSDAY,MAY 11, 2006 AT 6:00 P.M.
..................................................................
AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS FOR THE 05-11-2006 MEETING
MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S
OFFICE BY NOON 05-04-2006.
FF
i
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
i
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
I
REGULAR MEETING-APRIL 13, 2006
A regular meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency, City of Grand Terrace, was held in
the Council Chambers,Grand Terrace Civic Center,22795 Barton Road,Grand Terrace,California,
on April 13, 2006 at 6:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Mar etta Ferre, Chairman
Bea Cortes, Vice-Chairman
Herman Hilkey, Agency Member
Lee Ann Garcia, Agency Member
Jim Miller, Agency Member
Tom Schwab, Executive Director
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Steve Berry, Assistant City Manager
Larry Ronnow, Finance Director
Gary Koontz, Community Development Director
Richard Shields,.Building & Safety Director
John Harper, City Attorney
Lt. Hector Guerra, Sheriff's Department
Doug Wilson, Planning Commission Chairman
i
Matthew Addington, Planning Commission Vice-Chairman
Tom Comstock, Planning Commissioner
Robert P. Bidney, Planning Commissioner
Darcy McNaboe, Planning Commissioner
ABSENT: None
CONVENE SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY, CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION
I. Jack Brown, CEO/Don Baker, President of Stater Bros. Markets
Jack Brown, CEO Stater Bros. Markets, stated that their motive to be at the meeting
this evening is to tell the community that Stater Bros.wants to serve the community
better than they have been with a larger store. They hope that the service has been
good. They are very excited about the prosperity of building a new store in Grand
Terrace to serve,those that have been so loyal to them. .
2. Steve Gale, Director of Real Estate, Lowe's Western Division
Jqy Brun, Lee and Associates Commercial Real Estate, indicated that he does
CRA AGENDA ITEM NO. �
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 2
representation for Lowes throughout the Inland Empire. He was asked to speak on
behalf of Steve Gale. He gave a brief history of Lowes, how it began and what it
would bring to Grand Terrace.
Councilmember Hilkev, questioned how they will deal with the day laborers that
hang around the stores and how the back of the stores are maintained.
Mr. Brun, responded that Lowes takes advantage of serving contractors, however,
their primary customer focus is for those in the community.
Councilmember Miller, stated that some truck traffic will be generated and
questioned the timing of the trucks.
Mr. Brun, responded that Lowes likes being a part of the community and they place
time limitations on delivery trucks.
Councilmember Miller, questioned if Lowes provides security at their stores.
Mr. Brun, responded yes when needed.
3. Owner Participation Proposals from Jacobsen Family Holdings and Stringfield
Investment Company
— Staff Report
City Manager Schwab, gave a report on the background of this project and
the process. He indicated that staff recommends that the Council consider the
two proposals and give staff direction as to which owner participation.
proposal it wishes to accept and direct staff to carry out the necessary actions
to accomplish the project.
Mayor Ferr6, stated that she has heard throughout the community that this is
a done deal and requested that staff explain the process of this project.
City Manager Schwab, indicated that they are attempting to assemble all of
the properties. Currently, there are 14 parcels involved in this 20 acre
project. Mr. Jacobsen has control over 13 of those 14 parcels. .Whether or
not the land can be assembled, this project must go through the entire
process. The decision tonight doesn't approve a Lowes or a Stater Bros. all
it does is give staff direction on how to proceed with a particular developer.
It will still need to go to the Planning Commission as well as the City
Council.
i
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 3
— Jacobsen Family Holdings Proposal
Javier Vasquez,Miguel's Jr.Restaurant, 1920 Frontiers Road,Corona,stated
that they approached the City of Grand Terrace some time ago about i
relocating their store onto Barton Road. They strongly support this project
and feels that it is advantageous to the Community. He stated that Mr.
Jacobsen has been very helpful and has participated in meeting their needs.
He stated that their location at the new site will be beneficial to the
community of Grand Terrace as well as their family and business.
Douglas Jacobsen, 21800 Burbank Blvd, Suite 300, Woodland Hills, CA,
91367, gave a presentation on the Town Square Project and how they got
where they are today. He introduced the proposed project and what it will
bring to Grand Terrace. He introduced the Development Team. He gave a
presentation showing a visual of how the proposed project site will look.
Mayor Ferre,questioned if there is a contingency plan that is involved in the
project.
Mr.Jacobsen,responded in the affirmative but clarified that the proposal that
they have tonight is their first choice.
Councilmember Garcia, indicated that she appreciates the visual that he
provided. Her concern is the buffer to the residents. She questioned how
much sound is going to be buffered by the sound wall.
Mr. Jacobsen, responded that the plan is that they are going to propose a 9.
foot wall because they want to be sure to stop the sound. They will limit the
hours of delivery as a condition of approval that runs with the land so that it
is enforceable forever.
Councilmember Garcia, questioned what they would do about air quality.
Mr. Jacobsen,responded that air quality is always a big issue. He stated that
the two most stringent aspects of the Environmental Impact Report according
to City Manager Schwab will be air and noise. The guidelines for AQMD
will be used in the mitigation.
Councilmember Garcia, suggested the possibility of requiring them to use a
fleet of clean air trucks. She stated that air quality is going to be very
important as we go through the process. She questioned what the security
plan will be for the site.
I
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 4
Mr. Jacobsen,responded that through architectural treatment and real estate
management. They have a huge investment in this project and they are not
going to allow kids or anyone deface it or destroy it. If security is required
it will be provided.
Councilmember Garcia, questioned how graffiti will be handled.
Mr. Jacobsen, responded that it will be removed within 24 hours.
Councilmember Garcia, questioned how will they deal with gum on the
sidewalks.
Mr. Jacobsen,stated that shopping centers generate trash. They have people
that clean the centers daily.
Councilmember Garcia, questioned the flow of traffic into the center.
Mr. Jacobsen, responded that there are two main entrances on Barton Road
with a signalized intersection. There is also a secondary main entrance on
Michigan that is signalized and controlled.
Mayor Pro Tem Cortes, stated that this is a presentation and that it has not
gone before the Planning Commission. She questioned what the lighting will
be in the complex and what the trucking schedule will be like.
Mr.Jacobsen,responded that lighting and glare are crucial. His commitment
is that if the lights are shining onto residential homes call him and they won't
be the next day. They do a photometric study that shines on the complex
only. He stated that the State of California allows for truck deliveries
between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. They have to look at it from a air quality
management perspective. They talk to the tenants up front about what their
plans will be and the City will be notified. They are typically at off hours so
there is little inconvenience.
Councilmember Miller, stated that there appears to be a sea of parking and
questioned what is required from Stater Bros. and Lowes for parking.
Mr. Jacobsen, stated that they have a full blown traffic study. The next step
is to do a shared parking study.
Councilmember Miller, questioned if shared parking means reciprocal
parking. He also questioned if the other tenants would have their own
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 5
parking or would they be using the Stater Bros. and Lowes parking.
Mr. Jacobsen,responded that the City will require them to have a reciprocal
parking agreement. They will show how all of the uses will fit in the parking
lot.
Councilmember Miller,questioned if Chilis is located in front of the assisted
living facility. He questioned if that property belongs to the Agency or the
Assisted Living Facility.
City Manger Schwab, responded that a portion of the lot belongs to the
r r �
Assisted Living Facility and that the Agency is going to negotiate with them
for that land and the issue of the street that needs to be widened and dedicated
to the City. This still needs to be worked out.
Councilmember Miller,stated that if the Assisted Living Facility does not do
that will they move Chilis into the center itself.
Mr.Jacobsen,responded that he would like them inside ofthe center adjacent
to the Lowes, however, Chilis wants to be out on the street.
Councilmember Miller, stated that he isn't crazy about traffic signals and
expressed.his concern with the proposed traffic signal on Michigan. He feels
that it may be too close and that there will be people backing up.
Mr. Jacobsen, responded that the signals actually give you more control of
traffic flow.
Councilmember Miller,questioned what Lowes procedure is for day laborers.
Mr. Jacobsen, stated that day laborers is not a problem that haunts Lowes.
Lowes says their store managers will not allow loitering and that they will
contact the Sheriff's Department.
Councilmember Miller, stated that could be an issue.
Mr. Jacobsen, gave a presentation on the alternative plan without Lowes.
Councilmember Miller,questioned ifthe developer is planning on holding on
to the portion of the project that he owns or is he planning on selling it.
Mr. Jacobsen, responded that the Lowes will be owned by Lowes. The
it
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 6
balance of the shopping center will be owned by Jacobsen Family Holdings,
LLC. His intent is to remain as the owner.
Councilmember Miller, questioned if he will be the property manager.
Mr. Jacobsen, responded that his staff will manager the property. He stated
that if the property manager is not doing what they say they are going to do
then Mr. Jacobsen should be called.
Councilmember Miller, stated that Mr. Jacobsen is building Sav-on and.that.
there was supposed to be an additional 3,000 square foot of stores. He
questioned if this was still going to happen. He stated that there is 16,000
square feet of stores and questioned if he was going to be able to fill those
stores.
Mr. Jacobsen,responded that filling the stores isn't an issue. He stated that
the Sav-on transaction was originally a ground lease. With the prices of
construction going up the bids came in a lot higher so Jacobsen entered into
a reverse build to suit agreement. Sav-on still builds the store,however they
know that they have the backing of Jacobsen to pay off their construction
costs that they funded internally. Sav-on was in charge of all of the
construction including the site work. To build the 3,000 square foot he has
to have a certified pad. They have tenants for the building. The experience
has been extremely frustrating.
Councilmember Hilkev,stated that Grand Terrace has a problem with traffic.
He expressed his concern with the traffic study and that it may not reach the
new homes in Riverside.
Mr. Jacobsen,responded that the scope of the traffic study is determined by
City Staff. The traffic study is done by what staff tells them to.
Councilmember Hilkev, expressed his concern with access to the back area
of the library.
Mr. Jacobsen, responded that it is emergency access only.
Councilmember Hilkev, indicated that the library will not be paid for by the
Developer. He stated that it will be paid for by Agency and financed with
income from the development. The City will purchase the library and the
County will run it.
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 7
Mr. Jacobsen, stated that they will pass every benefit of their volume
construction to the City.
Councilmember Hilkev, expressed his concern with pallet jacks and storage
in the back of Lowes.
Mr. Jacobsen, stated that Lowes needs to know that the way the back of the
store looks is just as important as the front. They have asked them for
agreements regarding the storage, etc.
Councilmember Hilkev, questioned if Mr. Jacobsen was ok with plan B.
Mr. Jacobsen, responded that it isn't his first choice, however, he was
surprised at the tenant interest.
Councilmember Hilkev, stated that the Barton Road Specific Plan was
designed to encourage walking and shopping. He questioned if it was
possible to have a road connection through the back of the project.
Mr.Jacobsen,responded that they did look at that possibility,however,there
is a lot that needs to be done to make that happen and is very challenging.
Planning Commissioner,Robert Bidney,stated that all ofthese questions will
be addressed during the Planning Commission process. He thanked Miguels
Jr. Restaurant for their patience and for.working with the developer and the
City. He thanked everyone for being at the meeting.
Planning Commission Chairman Doug Wilson, stated that Mr.Jacobsen has
made a substantial financial investment to this proj ect, It is his understanding
that the Agency has the responsibility of choosing a developer,which he feels
is a unique opportunity. He questioned in all of the projects that Mr.
Jacobsen has done how many have an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement
attached to them.
Mr. Jacobsen,responded that most if not all of them.
Planning Commission Chairman Doug Wilson,stated that this project has to
do with an element of the General Plan. He questioned if there has been any
discussion with the City with what happens to the existing Stater Bros. and
the surrounding uses after this move is made.
Citnager Schwab, responded that the lease that Stater Bros. had at the
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 8
current center expired and is on a month to month lease. There is a
commitment from the landlord to keep that store there. Stater Bros.wants to
stay in the community. It will require cooperation with the owner and the
Redevelopment Agency to help to provide incentives to attract a tenant. He
stated that Mr.Jacobsen has suggested some tenants that would work in that
location. The current challenge is keeping Stater Bros. in town and
rehabilitating the existing center or having no Stater Bros. and still having to
deal with the existing center.
Planning Commmission Vice-Chairman Matthew Addington, stated that he
won't be commenting on the project itself because it is a concept and will
change. He questioned if the Planning Commission will be participating in
the decision of choosing a developer and going through the list of items on
the agenda.
Mayor Ferr6, stated that it is the Council that will be making a
recommendation as to which developer they want to choose.
Planning Commission Vice-Chairman Addington, indicated that Mr.
Jacobsen has done quite a few projects in the past. He questioned what the
estimated value of those project are.
Mr. Jacobsen, responded under 400 million.
Planning Commission Vice-Chairman Addington,questioned ifMr.Jacobsen
has financial backing if this project was to move forward.
Mr.Jacobsen, stated that his cash in the project area today is adequate for his
construction lender Bank.of America. They are prepared to proceed today.
Planning Commission Vice-Chairman Addington, stated that Mr. Jacobsen
stated that he has somewhere between 3 and 4 million invested in the project
already and that is appreciated. As a resident it is important to know that Mr.
Jacobsen has the financial backing to move forward.
Mr.Jacobsen,stated that when he started the business he sold everything that
he built and today he doesn't have to do that. There is a large team behind
the project,however,he is the main guy. He stated that if Bank of America
is confident that he has the capacity to perform on this project then the City
should feel pretty much the same way. He indicated that he can give financial
references. He can assure the City and prove to the City that he has the
capacity to perform and make this vision a reality.
i
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 9
Planning Commission Vice-Chairman Addington, questioned what other
projects Mr. Jacobsen has going on right now.
Mr. Jacobsen, responded that he has a 105,000 square foot office building
that he has just finished construction on and moved in THQ, corporate
headquarters. He stated that he is rehabilitating a 40,000 square foot
building that is occupied by Line 6. In 45 days he will finish a Longs Drug
Store, Quiznos, Wells Fargo shopping center in the City of San Gabriel. In
the City of El Monte he is doing a CVS Drug Store and in the City of Duarte
he did a presentation to the City Council to do a Best Buy and a In and Out l
Burger. In the City of Norco he owns 5 acres at Hidden Valley Parkway and
the I-15 they are currently grading it. The project went to the Planning
Commission last night. In the City of Redlands he bought the shopping
center at Church and Lugonia, which is in bad shape and they just signed a
lease with Walgreens. He stated that there is more.
Planning Commission Vice-Chairman Addington, questioned if he should
move forward with the project would he have the bonding capacity to take the
project forward.
Mr. Jacobsen, responded that developers do not need to get bonds. They
have to get improvement bonds. He has a 10 million dollar blanket approval
and is well beneath his bonding capacity.
Mayor Ferr6,thanked Mr.Jacobsen and asked if there was anything he would
like to say in closing.
Mr. Jacobsen, stated that he has been in the City for almost four years now.
The staff has been gracious and the City Council is great. He is proud to be
here and believes that they are doing the right thing. He is hopeful that they
have the opportunity to see it through.
— Stringfield Investment Company Proposal
C.Robert Ferguson,Attorney for Stringfield Investment,thanked the Council
for the opportunity to speak tonight. He gave an overview of the proposals
that have been made to his client and the various ways in which they have
been made. He indicated that his client would like participation rights. He
stated that his client withdraws their proposals. They feel that the Agency
needs to start over. It needs to set aside performance under the DDA . It
needs to seek to develop a reasonable participation with his client without
Jacobsen Family Holdings. He stated that if the Agency proceeds they leave
II
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 10
no choice for Jo Stringfield and others to challenge the project.
Peter Wallin, Special Counsel for Governmental Acquisition, stated that the
original DDA between the Community Redevelopment Agency and Jacobsen
Family Holdings,LLC did not.provide for acquisition and development ofthe
entire site. It called for sale of four agency owned parcels and a combination 4
of those four parcels with other parcels that Mr.Jacobsen was able to acquire.
It didn't provide any powers for acquisition of hold out property's. Late last
year Mr.Jacobsen asked that the DDA be amended to provide for acquisition
of Ms. Stringfield's property. At that time, the agency sent out a notice and
copies of owner participation rules and offered an opportunity to Ms.
Stringfield to make an owner participation proposal. She indicated that she
was interested and submitted plans for her parcel. Those plans included a
restaurant in the front and an office development in the back. At that time
staff decided that the best thing to do is to try and have both participants
come in and show what they have proposed for their individual properties.
Stingfield Development requested more time so that they could develop a
larger development plan. They presented a site plan for an entire shopping
center. Jacobsen already owns all.of the property or has it under contract.
They can't make owner participation proposals which would have them
acquiring all of Jacobsen's property unless they told them how theywould go
about doing it. Staffrequested that they make a proposal on the property they
own or control. He clarified that Mr.Ferguson is withdrawing that proposal.
He stated that Mr. Ferguson indicated that Ms. Stringfield should have the
right to proposal without competition. Those rules apply to outside
developers not other participants. Mr. Jacobsen is the owner of a substantial
amount of property in the project area and is also entitled to make owner
participation proposals. The rules go on when there are conflicting proposal
that it is up to the Agency to determine which proposal they want to move
forward with.
Councilmember Hilkev, clarified that Ms. Stringfield is withdrawing her
request to develop.
Mr. Ferguson,_ responded that she is withdrawing her proposal at this time,
however, she still seeks participation.
Councilmembr Hilkey, stated that the purpose of the hearing is to pick a
developer. He really would like to know what Jo Stringfield wants not her
attorneys, etc.
Mayor Ferre,asked if there was any reason why Ms. Stringfield can't speak.
i
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 11
Mr. Ferguson, responded that the situation has become very complex. He
indicated that Ms. Stringfield would be happy to talk to them,but not tonight.
Councilmembr Hilkey, questioned if this can be postponed to when Jo is
comfortable talking. He feels that there is no reason to force this.
Councilmember Garcia, reiterated what Councilmember Hilkey said. She
feels that it is extremely important for Ms. Stringfield to talk to the City. She
would like to hear what Ms. Stringfield wants not the attorneys.
Mayor Pro Tern Cortes, concurred with Councilmember Hilkey,
Councilmember Garcia and Mayor Ferr6.
Councilmember Miller,also agreed with Councilmember Hilkey. Asked Mr.
Ferguson what Ms. Stringfield would like to see happen.
Mr. Ferguson,responded that she would like to see things go on hold so that
she can sit down and negotiate with the City and start the process over again
with her participation rights.
Councilmember Miller, questioned if she wants to develop.
Mr. Ferguson, stated that there has been a whole new element introduced.
This is not a decision that can be made just like that. It has to be discussed
outside of a forum like this.
Councilmember Miller,indicated that he understands where they are coming
from and feels that Council felt that when the extension was given that they
would be hearing something positive in the development. The developer that
has been performing all along has had to make contacts with a lot of
individuals and retail tenants that are on hold waiting to see_what takes place
tonight and where we are going in the future. He is concerned that what they
are asking for could take a lot longer and could lose the potential of losing
some of those tenants. This is a viable market and there is a lot of other areas
that these tenants can go. The Council needs to make a decision fairly
quickly. He supports the Council 100%. We need something to come from
Jo Stringfield, however, we don't need to beheld up.for a long period of
time.
Plannins Commission Chairman,Doug Wilson, stated that he has seen a lot
of action in the City over time and we know that there is a lot at stake. As
Planning Commissioners, that they will be analyzing will be General Plan
i
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 12
application and so on and it is better suited for them to analyze those items
when the whole plan is brought before the commission.
Planning Commission Vice-Chairman Addington, concurred with Planning
Commission Chairman Wilson. He doesn't want to pre judge the project.
City Attorney John Harper, gave a brief explanation of the process and
reminded the Council that the only thing that they need to do is weigh the
competing proposals and make a decision on a developer.
Councilmember Miller, questioned if Ms. Stringfield has an opportunity to
have an appraisal done on her property.
City Attorney Harper, responded in the affirmative.
Mr. Ferguson,provided everyone with a copy of the items that he discussed.
Roger Kowalski, 22645 Arliss, thanked Mr. Jacobsen for his presentation.
He feels that Grand Terrace is a nice place to live but it is not a model City.
In order to become a model City, we need to look forward and make plans
that address housing for all ages, schools, shopping, restaurants and
recreation,roads,city beautification,services,safety and City Financing. He
supports the Council and Planning Commission in their efforts to make
Grand Terrace a truly model City and to encourage them to continue to make
our City the most desirable city in the Inland Empire.
Shawntel Stewart,22669 Minona Drive,stated that she loves living in Grand
Terrace. She feels that the schools are wonderful and so are the people that
live here. She feels that the only thing the City is missing was a drug store
and a larger grocery store. She is proud to live in Grand Terrace and would
love to see this project happen. She is in favor of eminent domain. She feels
that residents deserve the right to shop in Grand Terrace.
Brian Reinarz, 13909 Vivienda Court, stated that he has been listening and
reading about the Town Square Project for quite some time. He.has read
accusations of conspiracy that involved the City Council,the City Manager,
Jacobsen Family Holdings,LLC and some people would have him believe
that all three bodies are conspiring to destroy our way of life. He indicated
that he works in a crime lab so the first question he asks when faced with any
issue is why. Why would City leaders propose and support a project that
would significantly damage our City. The only conclusion he can come to is
they would not. To hear one vocal opposition group talk, everything that the
I
i
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 13
i
City does is evil and has malice. He doesn't feel that this is a productive
discourse and he feels that it is flat out not true. If you disagree with an issue
or a position that is one thing but the baseless allegations and scare tactics
such as hords of teenagers rampaging through town destroying everything
that they can affects the credibility of the accuser. He feels that he speaks for
the majority out there that doesn't have time to come.to the meetings. He
lives in Grand Terrace and his daughter goes to school here and plays soccer
here and the residents that he has discussed this project with over the last year
or so are firmly for the project and virtually all are in favor of Jacobsen
completing the project. He stated that it is easy to say that there is a
conspiracy when things don't go your way but doesn't feel that does anything
to further intelligent debate no matter what the issue is or who you are
debating with. He sees good people working hard to make out City a better I
place to live. I think Council has shown that they are really looking out for
everyone in the City. He feels that once everyone cools off they will realize
eventually that this project is good for the City and the Council will make the
decision that is best for the City as a whole.
I
Ken Henderson, 23000 Finch Street, stated that he and his wife have been
residents in Grand Terrace since 1984. He stated that he is the Director of
Economic&Community Development for the Towne of Apple Valley of ten
years. He is also the Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency. The
Jacobsen Family Holdings,LLP proposal and the Stringfield Investments j
proposal are items that he has been dealing with in his career. He indicated
that Jacobsen Family Holdings has an existing relationship with the Towne
of Apple Valley. They are working with him on an approximately 200,000
square.foot shopping center and they are one minor issue away from the.
commencement of construction. He stated that he has worked with Mr. Jack
Brown and his Director of Real Estate for a number of years. You can not
have better corporate citizens in your community than Stater Bros., Lowes
and Jacobsen Family Holdings. Jacobsen had demonstrated in his efforts
over the last several years that this project that the Council should select him
as the Developer of Record. Have faith in the Developer and faith in your
staff,they know what they are doing and they will present a project that will
work in the best interest of the community. If you don't want this project
then you will delay this project. The longer the delay the greater the cost to
the developer and the prospective tenants. He urged the Council to select
Jacobsen Family Holdings as the Developer of Record.
Sylvia Robles, 23008 Orangewood Court, indicated that she has been a
resident since 1977. She indicated that her concern goes back to our
constitutional rights as citizens and the more global issues facing us as a
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 14
Country and especially locally. She has worked for 25 years in Government
and has a hard time understanding the City's budgeting. She feels that for
citizens to understand whether they are being properly served they have to be
an expert in Redevelopment Law and probably a Certified Public Accountant.
She stayed up trying to make heads or tails of the budget. She is strongly
concerned with the fact that the City has gotten into Redevelopment areas
that they have no business getting into. She feels that this is creating one of
the best dialogs and debates on what the present condition of government is in this Country and probably what it should be in the future. Property tax that
you get for general purposes is somewhere around$435,000. Property taxes
that are going to be RDA are about 5.4 million dollars. It use to be very
simple, taxes from our property.taxes and residents gave Council power to
decide with our public input, constitutionally guaranteed to decide how best
to fund our police, etc. It is not her desire to get into government's role to
decide where Stater Bros. gets to lease or what is most appropriate for Stater
Bros.to lease or taking property from someone. The main discussion is what
is the role and should we have a secret government and she says no and feels
that this dialog needs to continue further.
Helen Waller,22005 Vivienda Avenue, since 1960. She stated that she is in
favor of the Jacobsen plan, either one. Enough money has been wasted
already on all this talk. She would like to shop locally,because of the price
of gas and other reasons. She feels that Jacobsen has the track record that we
need. She sees no track record for Stringfield Investments and feels that it is
very important. We don't want a lot of empty buildings that can't get a
retailer. She feels that the Council needs to be strong enough to do what the
majority of the people in Grand Terrace want and need.
Mary Lou Williams, 22270 Barton Road,has lived in this community since
1954. She has enjoyed this community over the years. She stated that she
doesn't feel that the City needs a Lowes. She feels that it will increase the
traffic. There isn't adequate traffic flow now, she can hardly get in and out
of her driveway now. She realizes that the community has to change and they
have to have a tax base but does it have to be done in such a manner that it
destroys the beautiful environment that we have had for years. She lives on
Barton Road and keeps her property up and feels that a big box store is an
error.
Vincent Bartman, 12220 Reed Avenue,stated that there is a lot of money that
is invested in the project,however,he feels that this project will be a problem
for his neighborhood. He stated that there is shopping opportunities in the
surrounding cities and feels that this project is going to destroy the
I
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 15
i
community and his neighborhood.
Cynthia Bidney, 12219 Pascal, feels that this project is wrong for Grand
Terrace. She feels that the City seems to be set on tax revenue and tax base,
however,no one has ever said what it is we actually need and how much we
are looking for and why we are looking for it. It seems to have been threats
all along. She referred to the Specific Plan page 9 where it says that they
want to promote distinctive commercial clusters that are sensitive to a village
scale. Big box is not a village scale. Super grocery stores don't earn super
taxes but sales tax revenue should be contrasted with expected increase cost
to the City. It has been said that a mix use retail office development concept
has been encouraged to add variety throughout the commercial corridor. Big
Box is not variety. It has been said that the City wants to ensure that gradual
upgrade of underutilized parcels functioning at less than their market
potential, gradual does not force the sale or development using-eminent
domain. You also said that you wanted to establish regulations that ensure
compatibility of new commercial uses with village design concepts while
employing specific well designed buffers from adjacent residential
development. Big stores do not say village. It has been said that the City
wants to establish redevelopment programs to assist business with property
improvements, she has not seen anything addressing helping businesses
improve in the area. It has been said that the City wants to encourage the
development of superior architectural and site planning design,which in time
would create an image of regional magnitude for Barton Road that attracts
quality oriented specialty shops as well as additional shoppers. Sav-on is an
example of Jacobsen's design. Sav-on was not built to the specifications or
drawings shown to the public. It has been said that the City wants to
establish land uses that compliment existing village orientation within the
specific plan area,big box stores are not village orientation. Jacobsen has not
met his exclusive right to negotiate with the City and therefore she feels this
project should go back out to bid. It should go to the local developers,people
who have Grand Terrace and the citizens in mind. She feels that Big Box
development is wrong for Grand Terrace, it will increase traffic. It has been
said that the City needs more money and police and if this development is
built we will.
Bill Hays,22114 De Berry Street,questioned the difference between control
and ownership. He indicated that Mr.Jacobsen states that he owns 13 parcels
and according to the County Assessors Office Mr. Jacobsen only owned 4
parcels. He stated that as soon as Mr. Jacobsen hit town on this project he
started greasing palms. $7,500 to the City of Grand Terrace for Grand
Terrace Days and other functions,a cash donation to the Grand Terrace Area
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 16
Chamber of Commerce, Councilmember Garcia accepted the maximum
allowed by law in campaign contributions from Mr. Jacobsen and his wife.
At the Town meeting Mr. Jacobsen and City Manager Schwab assured no
City or RDA funds would go into this project and two days later he read in_
the newspaper that the tax payers would have to pay$7,500 a month for a
new library. Now they understand that the RDA is going to buy the library.
He feels that the three mailers misled the public with the artists conception.
Now Mr.Jacobsen wants the City to use the power of eminent domain. This
is a private development, we say no and why should the tax payers fund his
stealing of our neighbors property. Let Mr. Jacobsen do his own dirty work.
If he can't buy the property we will not force our neighbor to sell so he can
make a quick buck and move on. They don't.believe fora second that most
of the Council will listen to them, they as they always do will side with the
money not the voters and for that there will be consequences. Mr. Jacobsen
has said in a newspaper story that he has signed long term leases with Stater
Bros. Mr. Schwab confirmed this at the last Council meeting by telling.the
Council and the Community that he has seen these leases. If that is the case
then why are they here at the meeting this evening. All they are doing is .
helping the Council provide the residents with another dog and pony show.
In a Press Enterprise story it was said by Mr. Brown that all he wanted was
what the folks wanted,yet he has made no attempt to hold a town meeting to
find out how the community feels. He feels that if Stater Bros.builds a new
store in the Town Square Center they will not gain business. There will be
another grocery store that will move into the old location and they will lose
what he will call the"resentment shoppers." He knows that Mr.Brown and
Mr.Jacobsen already have a relationship,please remember that the residents
of Grand Terrace have supported the Grand Terrace store for many years and
feels that it is their turn to support the residents. No super Stater Bros. and
no Lowes.
Thomas O'Neal, 1156 North F Street, San Bernardino, indicated that he is
against this project and feels that eminent domain should not be used.
Dr. Deanna Adams, 1156 North F Street, San Bernardino, stated that blight
is used as a political tool and that the RDA takes money away from the fire
and police services as well as other public services. She stated that Mr.
Jacobsen offers power and money, Ms. Stringfied offers something that she
feels is much more important, which is the sacredness of the constitution.
She feels that Ms. Stringfield means something and represents the dignity of
what it is to be an American and feels that she should be allowed to
participate and she can't according to her standards then he should do
everything possible to make sure that her constitutional rights are met. If this
i
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes f
April 13,2006
Page 17
project goes through and eminent domainis used then everyone has been
violated. She feels the money that goes to the RDA should go to Police and
Fire. Progress is good, however, dignity and the constitutional rights are
much more important.
Lou Ann Archbold, 12218 Pascal Avenue,indicated that she has lived in her
home for 19 years and that it is located just behind the proposed project. A
meeting was held almost a year ago at City Hall with Doug Jacobsen, City
Manager Schwab and Jay Brun where the Town Center project was talked
about. She stated that she was told that there would be ongoing
communication and meetings to discuss how this project would be developed.
Communication is the number one thing and she feels that the problem is
with the lack of communication. She stated that she has e-mailed Lowes four
times and each time they respond that they don't have any plans to build in
Grand Terrace. She indicated that she asked Lowes where they have stores
in residential areas so that she could go see them. They gave her addresses
from Lowes of locations that are not in residential areas. She requested that
the Council really consider this issue. Mr Jacobsen is going to make millions
from Grand Terrace residents and the residents are depending on the Council
to maintain the quality of the lives for the residents.
i
I
Tony Petta, 11875 Eton Drive, stated that the issue before the City Council
and the Planning Commission is very clear and that is to select a developer.
It doesn't say what goes into the shopping center. It is up to the Planning
Commission, at a later date,to accept or reject what the developer brings in.
There will be public hearings for the Planning Commission and before the
Council. The Planning Commission and the City Council can reject,change,
or alter the project in any way.
Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan, feels that the biggest issue before the
Council tonight is eminent domain. People like Jo Stringfield whose families
have lived here for many,this is their private property and it shouldn't matter
what she wants to do with it. How dare the City try and take it away from
her. The Grand Terrace Town Center being proposed by Jacobsen Holdings
has not produced the necessary E1R or Traffic Circulation. She feels that they
are approving a developer when you haven't even thought about the things
that are more important. Neither the City or the Developer have attempted
to mitigate the damages of this project, in fact she feels that they have been
breaking it up into different parts and approving different parts which she
feels is illegal. She feels that the Council doesn't listen. The fact is that the
City or staff of Grand Terrace is proposing you already have a negative
declaration saying there is no effect on the City. She feels that this is a lie,
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 18
the reports that are necessary haven't been done. The costs to the City of
having Lowes would be way more than any tax money that will be brought
in. The manipulation and land grabbing going on by Grand Terrace and
Jacobsen Family Holdings is unconscionable. The Developers second
Exclusive Agreement with the City expires in two days. Under this
agreement he is suppose to be assembling all the land and she questioned why
the City is helping him with her tax money. Economic Development Funds
should be used to bring new tenants to town not just move existing tenants
into preferred development projects. Jacobsen has donated thousands of
dollars to the City of Grand Terrace and he has donated to Councilmembers
campaigns , which she considers bribes. If you have accepted funds from
Jacobsen you should not be voting on his projects. It should be embarrassing
to Stater Bros. to even be considering taking land cheaply and unfairly
through a misuse of eminent domain when they have a perfectly good
location where they are and an owner that will expand to whatever they
desire. Where Stater Bros. is currently located in the center of town and
should. remain so. Why would Stater Bros. blight our town and alienate
private property owners in Grand Terrace. She is unwilling to support or
shop at any business that is involved in any way in the taking of private
property and peoples homes through eminent domain in Grand Terrace or any
other place. She will not shop at any Stater Bros. or Lowes if this occurs.
Rita Schwark, 21952 Grand Terrace Road, stated that she may have
supported the project if the property hadn't been taken by eminent domain.
She feels that the biggest problem is not only going to be traffic, smog, and
graffiti, but it will be illegal aliens as well. She stated that if she sees any
type of illegal- aliens working on the construction she will contact
immigration. She stated that Autozone is going to be moving across the,
street next to the school. The traffic is horrible already. She questioned how
this project is going to increase the value of her property. She questioned
how the Town Square project is going to add to our community and feels that
Jacobsen doesn't care what happens in Grand Terrace because he doesn't live
here.
Brian Phelps, 22857 Wren Street, stated that our community is unique
because we know each other and talk to each other every where we go. Some
of the things that,can be done to nurture this is to have lots of social activities
and bring back things like the Park and Recreation Department. One of the
reasons that we don't have a park and Recreation Department is because we
didn't have the money to continue it. One of the ways to bring this back is
by increasing our tax base, by having development. Growth is a very
important part of a healthy city. Many believe that if we leave everything as
i
i
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13, 2006
Page 19
it is things will be ok,not true..With the High Grove homes coming in down
the street we will be forced to do some improvements. We will receive some
funds for the improvements but it won't be enough. Some of the money that)
we need will come from developments. The improvements will need to be
made no matter what. The question is how do we pay for them. There are
only two things that can be done, have development and growth and a good
tax base to pay for those items or tax our residents. He stated that he doesn't
feel that property owners want to pay higher taxes to pay for these
improvements or services. The best option for Grand Terrace is growth.
This evening the Council is only picking a developer,what they build comes
later. We need to look at who will work with the City and who can creatively
solve the many potential issues that a site like this will have. We should be
looking for a top notch developer that will bring in a quality product to the
City. We should be encouraging high class developers because we area high
class City. He feels that commerce way is going to have to be extended to
Barton Road. He fees that it is going to have to be looked at as part of this
project. He feels that taking the traffic off of Michigan.would be a big
benefit. The developer that should be chosen should be able to address these
problems. Growth can be a good and we shouldn't be afraid of change.
Corrine Robinson, 22145 De Berry Street, stated that she was excited to see
Mr. Morales get the home of distinction award. She has brought before the
City over the years, three or four developments under different Planning
Directors and was unable to get them through: Her concern with this
development is that the plan was to bring in a Village concept and that a
Lowes is not. She has a problem with a large box store coming in and then
going out of business and leaving a serious problem. She would like to see,
nice specialty shops. She expressed her concern with the deals at the trailer
park.
Sharon Carey, 22980 Finch Street, stated that she came tonight.to be
informed and that she hasn't chosen one side or the other. As a school
teacher she is very concerned about a library. When people think of a library
they think of convenience, availability, and safety. When people think of
Grand Terrace they think of a safer environment than most other cities. In
keeping with that reputation, she would like all community.members and
parties involved to consider the increased traffic and location. Please
reconsider the location of the much need library. Loma Linda just received
grants to build a new library.
Thelma Beach, 12570 Mt. Vernon Avenue, expressed her interest in a new
library and feels that we need it now. She feels that the City should build a
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 20
new library now on the property that they currently own.
Mark Jolstead, 12198 Country Club Lane, stated that one of the things that
his group has done(We the residents of GT @ Yahoo .com) is hit the streets
and done some research. They have spoke with about 800 residents who
thought this project was a done deal. He interviewed the store managers and
feels that if Lowes has to rely on residents alone that they would be out of _.
business those who make money for Lowes and Home Depot are the
contractors and the want to be contractors. The clientele for Home Depot and
Lowes are the same. The Redlands store has said that they have day laborer
problems and crime. Grand Terrace is a bed room community and they don't
want a Lowes in Grand Terrace. He can't understand why Lowes would want
to place a store in Grand Terrace.
Charles Hornsby, 22656 Brentwood Street, feels that it is unfair how the
presentations were handled at the meeting and feels that Mr.Jacobsen got far
too much time for his presentation. He referred to a resident that spoke about
Barton Road being an eye sore and stated that he doesn't feel Barton Road is
an eye sore. He feels that there is only one property on Barton Road that is
an eye sore, the old Shell Station, and that is going to be replaced soon. He
questioned what the Mayor thinks of the perception that people in town have
that part of the reason the City is trying to take Jo Stringfield's property is not
the increase sales tax that it will bring the City but also that it will be newly
assessed for property tax purposes because it will be taxed at a much higher
rate than it is now and wondered of that would be characterized as a
underhanded way for the City to get around prop 13. Also, in a climate
where municipality seems to place a need for a tax base above individual
property rights, do all people that have lived here for along time and pay
lower property taxes as a result have reason to worry now. He questioned
Councilwoman Garcia that it seems to him the only reason that the City is
trying to steal Jo Stringf eld's land is that it will harm her retirement. The
simple fact of the matter is that many people depend heavily upon real estate
holdings as their retirement nest egg. She is the rightful owner of a piece of
property that is very valuable now and will only increase dramatically in the
next few years and she has the right to keep it. By taking her property you are
also taking her retirement. Mayor Pro Tem Cortes by moving Stater Bros.
down the street the current market and the current shopping center will turn
to blight and that will give the City the opportunity to move in condemn it
and obtain that property through eminent domain as well.
Candy Bozner,stated that at a prior meeting she observed Ms.Stringfield and
her proponents from her view point emphasized her fundamental right to buy
!
i
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 21
and share it,develop,use and sell her property located at 22273 Barton Road.
She knows from several conversations that she has had with Ms. Stringfield
that her main desire is to keep the land that she has inherited from her family
and to use it to provide for her retirement. It occurred to her during the last;
meeting that there may be a solution or alternative to condemnation that!
would satisfy everyone's need. Her idea was a land trade. After several
conversations with City Manager Schwab,Doug Jacobsen and Jo Stringfield
and Robert Ferguson she was able to propose in writing to Ms. Stringfieed
and her attorney the following: In exchange for Ms. Stringfield's 1.89 acres
she would receive a 4,500 square foot finished pad with all utilities to it. In
addition, she would be offered $150,000 cash. This proposal can be
accomplished and a 1033 tax exchange and will avoid all capital gains taxes.
In addition, Wells Fargo bank has shown significant interest in leasing the ,
site. If this is accomplished with their customary practice they build out the
pad at their expense and they also pay all property taxes and all tripple net
expenses. The average lease payments that are estimated for that site are
$90,000 plus per year. She was so excited to present this proposal to Ms.
Stringfield and her Attorney because it sufficed all of the needs that she had
expressed at the last meeting. She asked Mr. Ferguson to discuss the
proposal with Ms. Stringfield and she has yet to receive a phone call back.
She would be delighted to work with that to make this a go. She believes that
this is a prime piece of land which still allows a front on Barton Road, she
will avoid capital gains tax, she will be given a wonderful opportunity to see
her land development and to receive significant money to use now and in her !
retirement. For us as citizens we get a new library and generate new
businesses to shop in and no one gets blighted by the black eye of
condemnation.
Mike Yasin,22975 Orangewood Court,22087 Barton,22115 Barton Road,
owners of Arco Gas Station and GT Pit Stop. He has lived in Grand Terrace
for 20 years. The City needs development. We tend to go to other cities for
entertainment and shopping. He feels that bringing Lowes to Grand Terrace
and a new Stater Bros. is,a great idea. There is a high demand for jobs and
feel that Lowes and Stater Bros. would be great employers. There is crime
in the area already and feels that the lighting at the new center would be
helpful to the existing Arco Station. He feels we need growth. He feels that
Ms. Stringfield has received many great offers and feels that if she doesn't
take one of the offers she will never have an opportunity like this again.
Jack Brown, 21700 Barton Road, stated there have been a lot of statements
tonight about what he has or hasn't done. He stated that Stater Bros. has
signed nothing. He has indicated to City Manager Schwab and to Mr.
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 22
Jacobsen that if they obtain the property he will build a new Stater Bros.
there. If Jacobsen can't financially build a new store he will,he would prefer
the store himself. . He stated that he is on a month to month lease at the
current location. They can throw him out at any time with two weeks notice.
He can't do his job to serve the community not knowing what is going to
happen next month. They want to build a new and large store there where
they can have fresh fish, hot bakeries, wider aisles, more check stands, and
better parking all to encourage the residents to shop there. The sales tax that
will be generated in the new store will be about 800,000 dollars a year so
there is a contribution that will be made thanks to the shoppers. Either plan
does not require Stater Bros.to have one foot of Ms. Stringfields land. He is
not stealing her land or even owning the land. He can be accused of whatever
they want, but please stay truthful. He is not taking one penny from Ms.
Stringfield and wishes her well. His commitment is to build a new Stater
Bros. to serve the customers in town and they will do it with great pride. If
you want to know what Jack thinks, ask Jack.
— Council & Commission Discussion
City Attorney John Harper stated that the Council is selecting a development
proposal without committing to any specific development.
Councilmember Hilkey,stated that we need to look at a Lowes that has been built in
a residential neighborhood so they can drive by and check it out. He feels that we
need to put this on hold until they hear from Jo Stringfield..The City is not taking her
land. If she wants to live there we can handle that,however, she needs to tell us what
she wants. Traffic has gone up in Grand Terrace and we haven't built a thing. We
will get more traffic whether we do this project or not. Grand Terrace Elementary
is right on the corner, however, when the freeway is widened the school will no
longer be there. He doesn't like the idea of the library on Michigan,he doesn't think
it is a good place for it. If we are going to buy it, lets build it where it suits our town.
He doesn't feel that this development will improve the housing values in Grand
Terrace. The High School will improve the house values.
Councilmember Miller, questioned if we select the only proposal that is on the table
tonight, what will be the next step that will be taken.
Peter Wallin, responded that they would bring forward an amended DDA to the
Community Redevelopment Agency. The amended DDA would provide for
acquisition ofthe Stringfield parcel and its sale to Jacobsen Development for the first
plan of development. That doesn't commit the Agency to use the power of eminent
domain. They would only be committing to making an offer to acquire the property
i
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 23
and to negotiate. If it is the desire of the Council to pursue the plan that includes the
Lowes then we would come back with an amended agreement that would implement
that plan and whether or not they choose to use eminent domain would be decided
in the future.
I
Mayor Pro Tem Cortes,thanked Jack Brown for being at the meeting and appreciates
him standing up and clearing the air so that there are no more rumors. She stated that
we are here only to select a developer and nothing else. Jacobsen has a good track
record and she asked him if he would be willing to help locate some type of business
to come into the existing Stater Bros. site. She hopes that after tonight there will be
some type of agreement between Jacobsen and Ms. Stringfield.
Councilmember Garcia, she feels that there have been things in the community that
have separated the residents and feels that there is no need for separation in the small
town that we have. She would like Jo Stringfield to know that.this a sincere request
for her to work with the City. She stated that nobody wants to hurt Ms. Stringfield
and no one wants to take her land. We just want to move forward to what would be
in the best interest of the City. The.Council would like to know Ms. Stringfields
wishes so that the City can accommodate them as best we can. She stated that dialog
is very important and she requested that Mr. Jacobsen have more communication as
the project moves along.
Planniniz Commission Chairman Wilson, stated that we have two decisions,to have
no developer or a developer that has been presented. It would be his
recommendation to consider this.
Planning Commission Vice-Chairman Addington, agrees with much of what
Councilmember Hilkey has said tonight. Based upon his 25 years in the land
development industry, and looking at the track record of what Mr. Jacobsen has
proposed tonight,he would recommend going with Mr.Jacobsen as the developer for
the project.
Planning Commissioner Robert Bidney, concurred with his colleagues. It would be
his recommendation to go with Jacobsen as the developer and to proceed under those
terms and hope that something will develop in a very short time that will.make this
project move forward.
Planning Commissioner Darcy McNaboe, stated that she had nothing to add and
agrees with her fellow commissioners.
Mayor Ferre, expressed her disappointment with not being able to hear directly from
Jo Stringfield. She stated that the Council does not want to take her property,
i
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 24
however,they do not know what it is that she wants and they are waiting to hear from
her. She feels strongly that the Jacobsen proposal is a good one and it does have a
safety valve so that her property does not need to be taken.
CRA-2006-09 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY VICE-CHAIRMAN
CORTES, CARRIED 5-0, to choose Jacobsen Family Holdings, LLP as the -
developer of the Town Center Project and for them to proceed with plans that have
been discussed tonight.
CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
APPROVAL OF 03-09-2006 MINUTES
CRA-2006-10 MOTION BY VICE-CHAIRMAN CORTES, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER
MILLER,CARRIED 5-0,to approve the.March 9,2006 Community Redevelopment
Agency Minutes.
Chairman Ferr6 adj ourned the Community Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 10:3 0 p.m.,until the
next CRA/City Council Meeting scheduled to be held on Thursday, April 27, 2006, at 6:00 p.m.
SECRETARY of the Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Grand Terrace
CHAIRMAN of the Community Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Grand Terrace
v tZ
n.
�71 J, IN-e
BLUE RIBBON WEEK
Week of May 14, 2006
WHEREAS, the community's peace officers have long sustained a tradition of
performing their work to the highest quality possible in order to provide a better life
environment for others; and
WHEREAS,in an effort topreserve the continued commitment of allpeace officers and
law enforcement agencies, the members o "Support Our Law Enforcement"committee have
designated the week of May 14, 2006as "BLUE RIBBON WEEK"- and
WHEREAS, "BLUE RIBBON WEEK"is intended to be a show of confidence for all
peace officers and law enforcement agencies from the general public and to provide 'a
tremendous morale booster for all the dedicated men and women wearing a badge for the
protection of our community, and is
WHEREAS, each citizen displaying a blue ribbon during the week of May 14, 2006,
will demonstrate support for every police agency now serving the Cities and County of San
Bernardino; .
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, does hereby
proclaim the week of May 14,2006, as "BLUE RIBBON WEEK"in recognition and support
of all peace officers and law enforcement agencies.
This 2 7' day of April, 2 006.
Mayor Ferri Mayor Pro Tem Cortes
Council Member Hilkey Council Member Garcia Council Member Miller Ej
k.
'k
U
CINED
A
ju
Check Register, -' ited April 27, 2006
i
vchlist Voucher List Page: 1
04/19/2006 1:52:43PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57355 4/6/2006 005702 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT PR end 3/24/06 Paymt for PR end 3/24/06
10-022-62-00 12,508.19
Total : 12,508.19
57356 4/12/2006 006597 SCHOLASTIC BOOK FAIRS 032006 Apr 06 Scholastic Book Fair CC
23-200-14-00 1,132.48
Total : 1,132.48
57357 4/12/2006 001907 COSTCO#478 04781200613 C. CARE SUPPLIES
10-440-228-000-000 72.06
10-440-220-000-000 212.90
Total : 284.96
57358 4/12/2006 001907 COSTCO#478 04781600823 C. CARE SUPPLIES
10-440-228-000-000 59.97
10-440-220-000-000 84.06
Total : 144.03
57359 4/12/2006 010164 GREAT-WEST March, 2006' Mar. Def. Comp & Loan Pmts
10-022-63-00 9,937.92
10-022-64-00 2,900.74
Total : 12,838.66
57360 4/13/2006 006720 SO.CA.EDISON COMPANY March 2006 March Electricity
15-500-601-000-000 18.31
10-805-238-000-000 630.85
26-600-238-000-000 49.80
26-601-238-000-000 41.50
26-602-238-000-000 58.10
16-510-238-000-000 3,952.75
Total : 4,751.31
57361 4/13/2006 006980 . TEXACO/SHELL 8000209687604 March fuel
10-180-272-000-000 44.13
Total : 44.13
57362 4/13/2006 006730 SO.CA.GAS COMPANY March, 2006 March CNG charges
Page: 1
C,OUNFIUL AGLENa N
vchlist Voucher List Page: 2
04/19/2006 1:52:43PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57362 4/13/2006 006730 SO.CA.GAS COMPANY (Continued)
10-180-272-000-000 57.19
10-440-272-000-000 19.06
34-800-272-000-000 19.07
Total : 95.32
57363 4/13/2006 010546 MPOWER COMMUNICATIONS 387767/387798 April phone charges
10-440-235-000-000 315.46
10-450-235-000-000 30.32
10-805-235-000-000 31.67
10-190-235-000-000 1,359.60
10-808-235-000-000 69.56
Total : 1,806.61
57364 4/17/2006 003420 INLAND COUNTIES INSURANCE SVCS April Dental/Visic April Dental &Vision Ins.
10-022-63-00 1,298.51
Total : 1,298.51
57365 4/17/2006 005452 PACIFICARE OF CALIFORNIA April Health PACIFICARE HEALTH INS
10-140-142-000-000 1,078.84
10-120-142-000-000 870.49
10-125-142-000-000 487.80
10-172-142-000-000 152.33
10-175-142-000-000 121.87
10-180-142-000-000 885.67
10-370-142-000-000 834.38
10-380-142-000-000 290.51
10-440-142-000-000 795.57
10-450-142-000-000 243.90
21-572-142-000-000 327.98
32-370-142-000-000 238.40
34-400-142-000-000 1,012.05
34-800-142-000-000 243.90
10-022-63-00 7,373.40
Total : 14,957.09
57366 4/18/2006 004587 MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK April MHN MHN INSURANCE
- Page: 2
vchlist
4'vuCher List Page: 3
04/19/2006 1:52:43PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57366 4/18/2006 004587 MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK (Continued)
10-380-142-000-000 5.94
10-440-142-000-000 137.01
10-450-142-000-000 5.94
21-572-142-000-000 5.94
32-370-142-000-000 .2.37
34-400-142-000-000 19.38
34-800-142-000-000 15.46
10-120-142-000-000 17.83
1,0-125-142-000-000 11.89
10-140-142-000-000 17.84
10-172-142-000-000 2.98
10-175-142-000-000 2.37
10-180-142-000-000 20.23
10-370-142-000-000 8.32
Total : 273.50
57367 4/18/2006 006772 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY std STANDARD INS- LIFE AND DISABILITY
10-172-142-000-000 3.48
10-120-142-000-000 20.85
10-175-142-000-000 2.78
10-380-142-000-000 6.95
10-440-142-000-000 75.20
10-450-142-000-000 6.95
21-572-142-000-000 6.33
32-370-142-000-000 2.53
34-400-142-000-000 22.81
34-800-142-000-000 20.85
10-022-63-00 1,155.38
10-180-142-000-000 20.22
10-140-142-000=000 20.85
10-370-142-000-000 8.85
10-125-142-000-000 13.90
Total : 1,387.93
57368 4/27/2006 001024 ACCENT PRINT& DESIGN 251270 Child Care Letterhead/Envelope
10-440-210-000-000 . 381.44
Page: 3
vchlist Voucher List Page: 4
04/19/2006 1:52:43PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57368 4/27/2006 001024 ACCENT PRINT& DESIGN (Continued)
251274 Business Cards- Bea Cortes
10-110-220-000-000 92.67
Total : 474.11
57369 4/27/2006 001040 . ADDINGTON, MATTHEW 040606 Apr 06 Planning Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00.
57370 4/27/2006 010622 ADP 04042006 HP Profile Implementation Fee
10-120-268=000-000 -250.00
Total : 250.00
57371 4/27/2006 010594 AEI-CASC ENGINEERING INC. 508014 ENGINEERING SRVS-48"WATER PIPELINE
10-370-255-000-000 2,260.61
Total : 2,260.61
57372 4/27/2006 010563 ALLDREDGE, AMINA 040406 06 1st Qtr Med Reimb-Alldredge, Amina
10-120-139-000-000 557.49
Total : 557.49
57373 4/27/2006 010293 AVAYA, INC. 2723343622 MAINTENANCE FOR PHONE SYSTEM &VOICE M,
10-180-246-000-000 183.46
Total : 183.46
57374 4/27/2006 001365 BARBU, DRAGOS S. 041106 06 1st Qtr Med Reimb-Barbu, Dragos
10-180-139-000-000 270.00
Total : 270.00
57375 4/27/2006 001391 BERRY, STEVE .041206 06 1st qtr Med. Reimb Berry, Steve
10-180-139-000-000 245.76
Total : 245.76
57376 4/27/2006 010084 BIDNEY, ROBERT 040606 Apr 06 Planning Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
57377 4/27/2006 010060 BOUSTEDT, MICHELLE 041206 06 1st Qtr Med Reimb- Boustedt Michelle
i Page: 4
r
,j
vchlist V''., i.;her List � � Pager 5
04/19/2006 1:52:43PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57377 4/27/2006 010060 BOUSTEDT, MICHELLE (Continued)
10-140-139-000-000 72.34
Total : 72.34
57378 4/27/2006 001694 CA HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES 010406 .06 Annual Licensing Fee Child Care
10-440-228-000-000 2,300.00
Total : 2,300.00
57379 4/27/2006 001713 CA. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION 032306 Feb 1-215 Signal Maint/Energy
16-510-238-000-000 .193.60
Total : 193.60
57380 4/27/2006 010217 CALIFORNIA OVERNIGHT 5143894 March Document Delivery.
10-120-210-000-000 36.92
34-500-726-000-000 10.72
Total : 47.64
57381 4/27/2006 010218 CHEVRON &TEXACO CARD SERVICES 7898191957604 Mar/Apr Fuel
10-180-272-000-000 788.18
Total : 788.18
57382 4/27/2006 010086 COMSTOCK, TOM 040606 Apr 06 Planning Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
57383 .4/27/2006 010144 CRUZ, MICHAEL 041106 06 1st Qtr Med Reimb-Cruz, Michael
10-180-139-000-000 500.00
Total : 500.00
57384 4/27/2006 001930 DAILY JOURNAL CORPORATION B944930 LEGAL PUBLICATION NOTICES
10-370-230-000-000 270.90
B948431 LEGAL ADVERTISING
10-125-230-000-000 44.72
B948432 LEGAL ADVERTISING
10-125-230-000-000 35.26
B950424 LEGAL PUBLICATION NOTICES
10-370-230-000-000 270.90
Page: 5
vchlist Voucher List Page: 6
04/19/2006 1:52:43PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57384 4/27/2006 001930 DAILY JOURNAL CORPORATION (Continued)
B951190 LEGAL PUBLICATION NOTICES
10-370-230-000-000 95.46
Total : 717.24
57385 4/27/2006 001937 DANKA OFFICE IMAGING COMPANY 704706662 COPIER CHARGES
10-172-246-000-000 21.59
10-175-246-000-000 26.98
34-400-246-000-000 59.36
Total : 107.93
57386 4/27/2006 010566 DEL HIERRO, RACHEL 041006 06 1st Qtr Med Reimb-Del Hierro
10-440-139-000-000 477.07
Total : 477.07
57387 4/27/2006 002165 DRUG ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM 6246 LAWN CARE
34-700-767-000-000 40.00
Total : 40.00
57388 4/27/2006 010115 DUENES, MARION 041006 06 1st Qtr Med Reimb/Duenes-Herrera
10-440-139-000-000 528.06
Total : 528.06
57389 4/27/2006 002301 FEDEX 3-449-97848 Mar. Document Delivery
10-380-249-000-000 15.67
Total : 15.67
57390 4/27/2006 002673 FLANN, ALISA 040406 06 1st Qtr Med Reim - Flann, Alisa
10-172-139-000-000 150.00
Total : 150.00
57391 4/27/2006 002901 G.T. AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 4072-AD BLUE MT OUTLOOK
10-125-213-000-000 620.00
Total : 620.00
57392 4/27/2006 003152 HARPER& BURNS LLPN 041206 March 2006 Monthly Services
10-160-250-000-000 2,567.50
Page: 6
vchlist �bui'cher List
04/19/2006 1:52:43PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE Page: 7
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57392 4/27/2006 003152 HARPER & BURNS LLPN (Continued) Total : 2,567.50
57393 4/27/2006 003490 INMARK/VICTOR 36734 Name Plate- Darcy McNaboe
10-370-210-000-000 13.28
36977 Smith & Montes name badges
10-370-210-000-000 1.74
10-180-210-000-000 11.85
10-370-210-000-000 13.96
10-180-210-000-000 1.29
10-370-210-000-000 11.36
Total : 53.48
57394 4/27/2006 003850 JANI-KING LAX04060065 BUILDING CLEANING
10-440-244-000-000 815.00
LAX06061977. BUILDING.CLEANING
10-440-244-000-000 100.00
Total : 915.00
57395 4/27/2006 004589 MARTINEZ, TRACEY 040406 06 1st Qtr Med Reim.=Martinez, Tracey
10-125-139-000-000 262.00
Total : 262.00
57396 4/27/2006 010013 MAURICIO, VERA 041106 06 1st Qtr Med Reimb-Mauricio, Vera
10-440-139-000-000 34.52
Total : 34.52
57397 4/27/2006 01.0611 MCNABOE, DARCY 040606 Apr 06 Planning Comm Stipend
10-801-120-000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
57398 4/27/2006 006780 MESA, BRENDA 040506 06 1st Qtr Med Reimb- Mesa, Brenda
10-125-139-000-000 1,113.24
Total : 1,113.24
57399 4/27/2006 005670 PRESS ENTERPRISE 4797946 4/06-4/07 Subscription
10-804-210-000-000 35.00
Total : 35.00
Page: 7
vchlist Voucher List Page: 8
04/19/2006 1:52:43PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57400 4/27/2006 010620 RIDGEL, LYNETTE 040406 06 1st Qtr Med Reimb- Ridgel, Lynette
10-440-139-000-000 288.45
Total : 288.45
57401 4/27/2006 010453 RUIZ, DEBRA 040506 1 st Qtr 06 Medical Reim-Ruiz Debra
10-440-139-000-000 567.90
Total : 567.90
57402 4/27/2006 006531 S.B. COUNTY SHERIFF 6456 SHERIFF CONTRACT
10-410-255-000-000 3,361.50
10-410-256-000-000 102,637.80
14-411-256-000-000 20,911.70
6552 SHERIFF CONTRACT
10-410-255-000-000 3,361.50
10-410-256-000-000 102,637.80
14-411-256-000-000 20,911.70
Total : 253,822.00
57403 4/27/2006 006614 SCHWAB, THOMAS O40406 06 1st Qtr Med Reim -Schwab, Thomas
10-120-139-000-000 190.00
Total : 190.00
57404 4/27/2006 006681 SMART& FINAL 4936 SCHOOL AGE SUPPLIES
10-440-223-000-000 53.72
Total : 53.72
57405. 4/27/2006 006730 SO.CA.GAS COMPANY March 2006 March 2006 Monthly Charges
10-190-238-000-000 456.38
10-805-238-000-000 43.06
10-440-238-000-000 119.37
Total : 618.81
57406 4/27/2006 006778 STAPLES CREDIT PLAN 6040707454 Office Supplies/Budget Binders
21-572-210-000-000 100.75
Page: 8
l �
vchlist Voucher List Page: 9
04/19/2006 1:52:43PM CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code : bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account Amount
57406 4/27/2006 006778 STAPLES CREDIT PLAN (Continued)
9161586486 Office Supplies- paper
10-190-212-000-000 129.56
10-140-210-000-000 19.4.7
10-190-212-000-000 9.40
10-140-210-000-000 1.41
Total : 260.59
57407 4/27/2006 006898 SYSCO FOOD SERVICES OF L.A. 603290477 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 478.46
603290478 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 72.87
604050447 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 86.42
604050448 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 471.00
604089048 FOOD SUPPLIES
10-440-220-000-000 10.99
Total : 1,119.74
57408 4/27/2006 010590 TERRA LOMA REAL ESTATE 040506 Mar/Apr 06 Mgt Commission
34-400-04 66.00
Total : 66.00
57409 4/27/2006 010586 THE JAMIESON GROUP 2006.48 PROVIDE PROF. SRVS FY 05/06
10-370-255-000-000 3,800.00
Total : 3,800.00
57410 4/27/2006 010037 TORRES, GREGORY W. 041106 06 1st Qtr Med Reimb-Torres, Gregory
10-180-139-000-000 322.00
Total : 322.00
57411 4/27/2006 007579 VARELA, CATALINA 041006 06 1st Qtr Med Reim b-Varela
10-440-139-000-000 150.00
Page: 9
vchlist Voucher List
04/19/2006 1:52:43PM Page: 10
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
Bank code: bofa
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Description/Account
57411 4/27/2006 007579 VARELA, CATALINA (Continued) Amount
041706 Petty Cash-Child Care
10-440-220-000-000 12.00
10-440-221-000-000 40.06
10-440-223-000-000 .19
109
10-440-228-000-000 10 .19
Total : 411.70
57412 4/27/2006 010038 VERHELLE, JO A. 040406 06.1st Qtr Med Reim-Verhelle, Jo
10-120-139-000-000 500.00
Total : 500.00
57413 4/27/2006 007925 WILSON, DOUG 040606 Apr 06 Planning Comm Stipend
10-801-1207000-000 50.00
Total : 50.00
57414 4/27/2006 007938 WIRZ&COMPANY 45220 (500) Certificate Covers
10-125-210-000-000 369.09
10-110-220-000-000 369.00
Total : 738.09
57415 4/27/2006 007987 XEROX CORPORATION 016546846 COPIER USAGE
10-190-700-000-000 493.14
Total : 493.14
4/13/2006 007400 U. S. BANK TRUST N.A. April 2006 LEASE PAYMENTS
33-300-206-000-000 23,128.04
Total : 23,128.04
62 Vouchers for bank code: bofa
Bank total : 353,933.70
62 Vouchers in this report
Total vouchers : 353,933.70
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the afore-listed checks for payment of City and Community Redevelopment
Agency liabilities have been audited by me and are necessary and, appropriate for the operation off the City and Agency.
4"Iw
Larry Ronnow, Finance Director
Page: 10
1
i
i
CITY OF GRAND TERRACEcck
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING-APRIL 13, 2006
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order in the Council
Chambers,Grand Terrace Civic Center,22795 Barton Road,Grand Terrace,California,on April 13,
2006, at 6:00 p.m.
i
PRESENT: Maryetta Ferr6, Mayor
Bea Cortes, Mayor Pro Tem
Herman Hilkey, Councilmember
Lee Ann Garcia, Councilmember
Jim Miller, Councilmember
Tom Schwab, City Manager
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Steve Berry, Assistant City Manager
Larry Ronnow, Finance Director
Gary Koontz,Community Development Director
Richard Shields, Building & Safety Director
John Harper, City Attorney
Lt. Hector Guerra, Sheriff's Department
ABSENT: None
The City Council meeting was opened with Invocation by Pastor John Brunt,Azure Hills Seventh-
Day Adventist Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Pro Tem Bea Cortes.
A Special Joint meeting was held between the Community Redevelopment Agency, City Council
and the Planning Commission to present the Owner Participation Proposals from Jacobsen Family
Holdings and Stringfield Investment Company for the Town Square Project. Please see the
Community Redevelopment Agency Minutes of April 13, 2006.
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ITEMS TO DELETE -None
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Proclamation -National Crime Victims Week
i
Mayor Pro Tem Cortes read a proclamation proclaiming National Crime Victims Week in j
Grand Terrace April 23 - 29, 2006 and presented it to Agnes Gibboney.
i
COUNMUL AGENDA ITEM Wd. 3C
Council Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 2
Ames Gibboney, thanked the Council for the Proclamation.
B. Proclamation- Child Abuse Prevention Month
Councilmember Garcia read a proclamation proclaiming Child Abuse Prevention Month -
April 2006 in the City of Grand Terrace encouraging citizen's to participate in the events and
to join in the efforts to end child abuse and presented it to Sue Taylor.
Sue Tam, thanked the Council for the Proclamation and for their continued support.
C. Proclamation- Community Development Week
Councilmember Miller read a proclamation proclaiming Community Development Week
2006,April 17 -23, 2006 in the City of Grand Terrace urging all citizens to join the City in
recognizing the Community Development Program and the importance it serves to our.
community.
D. Women of Distinction
Mayor Ferr6 presented Certificates ofRecognition to the following individuals in recognition
of being named as one of the 63 Women of Distinction in the 63rd Assembly District of the
State of California at Assemblyman Emmerson's 2"d Annual Women of Distinction
Luncheon and thanked them for their contribution to the Community.
Carol Robb
Darcy McNaboe
Vicki Doyle
Bea Cortes
E. Home of Distinction
Assistant City Manager Steve Berry announced that the Morales Family are the winners of
this quarter's Home of Distinction award.
Mr. Morales, thanked the Council.
CONSENT CALENDAR
CC-2006-32 MOTIONBY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
HILKEY,CARRIED 5-0,to approve the following Consent Calendar Items with the
removal of items 3E. and 3F.:
i
I
Council Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 3
3A. Approve Check Register Dated April 13, 2006
3B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda
3C. Approval of 02-09-2006 and 03-09-2006 Minutes
3D. Special Event Permit Requested by Calvary,The Brook for the use of Rollins
Park for a Sunrise Service and Easter Experience on Sunday,April 16,2006.'
3G. Council and City Manager Meeting Attendance - Legislative Action Days,
Sacramento May 17 & 18, 2006
3H. Authorization for the MIS Specialist to Attend Interop in Nevada,May 1-5,
2006
ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR
i
3E. Redlining Curbing on the West Side of 12210 Michigan in front of Park
Center Business Park
Bill Hays, 22114 DeBerry Street, requested that they redline down to DeBerry and
Michigan on the opposite side of the road. He indicated that it is a single narrow lane
and when people park there it becomes a hazard.
City Manager Schwab, stated that he will look into his request.
3F. Request to use California Law Enforcement Equipment Program (CLEEP)
Funding for Surveillance Camera Purchases
CC-2006-33 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
GARCIA, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the following consent calendar items:
3E. Redlining Curbing on the West Side of 12210 Michigan in front of Park
Center Business Park
3F. Request to use California Law Enforcement Equipment Program (CLEEP)
Funding for Surveillance Camera Purchases
PUBLIC COMMENT
Patricia Farlev, 12513 Michigan, stated that at the last Planning Commission Meeting they
approved something that she believes to be illegal and she would like the Council to prevent
it from occurring. The Planning-Commission is approving ESSCO to move around in a
specific plan, which is the OAC, and it also is a business that has been using our public
streets without any reimbursements for storage. They clearly expect to continue to store
outdoors and she is tired of seeing Michigan trashed and more and more trucks being brought
in. She feels that the Council in the past was responsible for damaging Barton Road because
�I
Council Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 4
the poor people that lived there were always up in the air because the City was dealing with
developers and making it hard to do what they wanted to do with their property. Those
peoples property were not bought fairly and now they are going down Michigan Avenue
dealing and trading properties with GT Pit Stop and ESSCO irregardless to whether it is part
of Specific Plan and is illegal. ESSCO had the nerve at the Meeting to ask how the City is
going to help protect their outdoor storage from being burglarized. We need our money to
go towards police for our City. She hopes that the Council will undo these actions by the
Planning Commission. She is tired of people switching land. It is not right to be dealing
with our tax money and trading around and damaging the other property owners. She feels
that the people do not realize that the high school is not going to raise the value of homes in
our community and will not be positive for the community.
Bill Hays, 22114 DeBerry Street, stated that he missed Mr. Schwab's answer to the
difference between control and owning a parcel.
CityManager Schwab,responded that he has used the words under control or under contract.
Jacobsen Family Holdings owns several of the parcels outright or he has fee title to the
property. There are other properties that he has in escrow, for example Byron Matteson's
house. He has an agreement and a signed escrow to purchase that property.
ORAL REPORTS - '
5A. Committee Reports
1. Emergency Operations Committee
a. Minutes of 02-07-2006 & 03-07-2006
CC-2006-34 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM .
CORTES,CARRIED 5-0,to accept the February 7,2006 and March 7,2006 Minutes
of the Emergency Operations Committee.
b. Appoint Alternate Members
CC-2005-35 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBR
GARCIA, CARRIED 5-0, to appoint Randy S. Halseth and Jim Vert as alternate
members of the Emergency Operations Committee with terms continuing to June 30,
2008.
2. Crime Prevention Committee
a. Minutes of 02-13-2006
CC-2005-36 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
Council Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 5
GARCIA, CARRIED 5-0, to accept the February 13, 2006 Minutes of the Crime
Prevention Committee
3. Historical and Cultural Activities Committee
a. Minutes of 02-06-2006 and 03-06-2006
CC-2006-37 .MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
GARCIA,CARRIED 5-0;to accept the February 6,2006 and March 6,2006 Minutes
of the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee.
COUNCIL REPORTS -None
PUBLIC HEARING
6A. An Ordinance of the .City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, California,
Amending Chapter 8.112 of the Municipal Code and Regulating the Sale and
Discharge of Fireworks.
CitVManager Schwab, stated that at the Council Meeting of February 23, 2006 the Council
voted to accept the recommendations that were made by the Fireworks Ad Hoc Committee
with the understanding that they would be incorporated into an Ordinance that would be
approved by the Council. Staff recommends to Council that they not authorize use of the
parks for fireworks.discharge. He feels that unsupervised use of fireworks in the parks
would be dangerous and would subject the City to liability exposure if any injuries did occur.
He also feels that it will be hard to enforce the no discharge zones. This will be the first year
to actively target illegal fireworks and with our limited fire and sheriff's staff they will have
their hands full enforcing the prohibition of illegal fireworks and will likely have very little
time to enforce against legal fireworks in the non-discharge areas.
Councilmember Hilkev, clarified the changes that staff indicated.
Mayor Ferr6 opened the Public Hearing for discussion.
Laura Austin, 12356 Michigan,would like the Council to reconsider the sale and discharge
of fireworks. She feels that there are other ways for the youth organizations to raise money.
Brian Phelps, 22857 Wren Street, stated that when the Ad Hoc Committee meetings were
held,the Youth groups were under the impression that Colton was going to be scaling back
their days as well. They have instead approved 15 more stands in their City and have done
nothing to scale back their days. Colton is the only competition that we have. If we shorten
our days of sales of fireworks that money will most likely go to the Colton youth sports
groups. People will still buy their fireworks and bring them up to Grand Terrace. Little
Council Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 6
League has approximately 500 players a year and soccer has approximately 300 players a
year. They raise about$20,000 per year which is split between the Little League and Soccer.
Without the stand they will most likely have to raise their sign-up fees which will push out
those kids who need it the most. He would like to enforce and educate the public then
consider cutting back the sale days next year:
Bill Hays, 22114 De Berry Street, stated that he would like to see fireworks not allowed to
be discharged anywhere in the City. He feels that they should have an Ad Hoc Committee
to find better ways to raise money for the youth sports organizations.
Cheri Freund, 11743 Eton Drive, expressed her disappointment that the committee was not
notified that this item was going to be on the agenda. They agreed to scale back only if
Colton was going to do the same, which they have not and they are increasing the number
of stands they are going to have. She appreciates the concern of the residents regarding
fireworks. There has never been enforcement of illegal fireworks in the past and feels that
it would be unfair to penalize the organizations. It is very hard to raise funds and the leagues
rely on the fireworks sales.
Mayor Ferr6 returned discussion to the Council.
Councilmember Miller;questioned if it was understood that.the sale dates would only be cut
back if the surrounding cities did the same.
Councilmember Garcia, responded that everyone was under the belief that Colton was
scaling back when the decision was made.
Councilmember Hilkev,feels-that the Ad-Hoc committee did a great job and that we should
follow through. He feels that the Soccer Club has an excess of money, however, Little
League does not and their expenses are much higher than soccer.
Councilmember Garcia, she would like to see.an enforcement plan prior to the 41h of July.
Mayor Ferr6,feels that the Council should go along with the recommendations of the Ad Hoc
Committee with the recommended changes of staff.
Councilmember Hilkev,would like to see some financial statements of the organizations if
we are going to continue to support the clubs.
CC-2006-38 MOTION BY MAYOR FERRE, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES,
CARRIED 5-0, to approve the first reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of
the City of Grand Terrace, California, Amending Chapter 8.112 of the Municipal
Code and Regulating the Sale and Discharge of Fireworks with the changes
i
Council Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 7
recommended by staff.
6B. Master Facilities Plan and Development Impact Fee Calculation & Nexus Report,,
Circulation Fees and Calculation
An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace Rescinding the
Traffic Signal Improvement Fee Schedule and Circulation Fee Schedule(4.104)and
Replacing it with a new Fee Structure and Rescinding the Capital Improvement and
Maintenance Fee Schedule (4.80) and replacing it with a new Fee Structure.
Assistant City Manager Steve Berry, gave an overview of the proposed ordinance. He
indicated that Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Master Facilities Plan and
adopt an Ordinance pertaining to the Development Impact Fees based on the Master
Facilities Plan(MFP),and the Development Impact Fee(DIF)Calculation and Nexus Report
prepared by Revenue & Cost Specialists (RCS) and to approve the fee increase for the
Developer Impact Fees in Chapter 4.80 and the New Table"A"and approve the new Arterial
Improvement Fees in Chapter 4.104.060 and the new Table `B".
Mayor Ferre opened the Public Hearing for Discussion, there being none she returned
discussion to Council.
CC-2006-39 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM
CORTES, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the first reading of An Ordinance of the City
Council of the City of Grand Terrace Rescinding the Traffic Signal Improvement Fee
Schedule and Circulation Fee Schedule (4.104) and Replacing it with a new Fee
Structure and Rescinding the Capital Improvement and Maintenance Fee Schedule
(4.80) and replacing it with a new Fee Structure.
6C. Specific Plan No. 05-02(SP-05-02),Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 05-03 (TTM-
05-03/County No. 17766) and Environmental Review Case No. 05-21 (E-05-21)to
construct a 35 single family condominium development
Ordinance of the City Council Approving Specific Plan No. 05-02 (SP-05-02) for a
condominium subdivision with 35 single family detached units on a 3.7 acre site
located on the westerly side ofMt.Vernon Avenue at 11830 Mt.Vernon Avenue and
Environmental Review Case No. 05-21 (E-05-21) Mitigated Negative Declaration
as Provided by the California Environmental Quality Act
.Resolution of the City of Grand Terrace Approving Tentative Tract Map No. 05-03
(TTM 17766)for a 35 Single Family Residential Condominium Development in the
City of Grand Terrace
I
Council Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 8
John Lampe,Planner, stated that the second public hearing for this project was held
on March 9, 2006 and was continued to the Council meeting of April 13, 2006 to
allow,the applicant to respond to remaining issues consisted of the following items:
1. Fencing, especially along the southerly boundary of the site and along.Mt.
Vernon
2. Lighting plan concerns.
. 3. Better visualization of the project and adjacent areas.
He indicated that the applicant has prepared exhibits to address the concerns raised
by members of the Council at the second hearing on March 91h . The applicant and
their representatives are present to explain these new materials.
Walter Eeds,Greystone Group,went over the materials addressing the concerns that
the Council had at the previous Council Meeting.
Councilmember Hilkev,requested clarification on the fence in two locations. In front
of the facility there are two fences one that is wrought.iron with pilasters and one that
is a block wall.
Mr.Eeds,responded in the affirmative indicating that the wrought iron and pilasters
would go along the Mt. Vernon street frontage and go inside the development at the
entrance and then the homes that face Mt. Vernon will have a privacy yard with a 6
foot slump block wall that would match the material of the primary fence on Mt.
Vernon and would be painted a compatible color. He indicated that once this gets
implemented and installed that both fencing conditions won't be seen because of the
landscaping.
Councilmember Hilkev, questioned if the sizes of the back yards in the front get
decreased.
Mr. Eeds, responded in the negative.
Councilmember Hilkev, stated that in the information that was provided to Council
it showed that it was going to be a wood fence but tonight he indicated that it would
be vinyl.
Mr. Eeds, responded that it was.a mistake and that the fences would be vinyl.
Councilmember Miller, appreciates the fact that the developer changed the fence to
coordinate with everything else and feels that it was well done. He questioned if
there are going to be any lights in the main entry.
I
Council Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 9
Mr. Eeds, responded that they should have some lighting at the front and in the
refinement of the plan that would be included with a monumentation and a small
signage.
Councilmember Miller, added that there may need to be some lighting at the
emergency access entrance. He questioned if the fencing is going to be brown.
I
Mr. Eeds, responded that it was hard to show on.the graphic but that it would be in
the range of a tan color depending on the ultimate coloring of the buildings.
Councilmember Hilkey, stated that he has a problem with the white wall on the
canvass on the south side of the property. He thought that it was going to be
addressed.
Mr. Eeds, stated that they didn't want to cover up the wall to make it look like
something that it is not in the renderings, however, once it is complete part of the
landscaping plan would be to have vines growing on the face of the wall. It is a
retaining wall and they can't help it. .They will do anything they can to prohibit the
possibility of graffiti.
Councilmember Garcia, indicated that she still doesn't care for the retaining wall.
She was hoping that she.could get a better visual and would still like to see more
visuals.
i
Mr.Eeds,responded that there are many different types of conditions on Mt.Vernon.
He stated that this property is at the crest of the street.so the retaining is necessary if
the property is developed. Their thought is that some nice quality homes and an
excellent landscaping package will go a long way to mitigate the wall issue.
Community and Economic Development Director Gary Koontz,stated that staff has
a pretty good understanding of the direction the Council is going in terms of
landscaping and screening walls and they condition this project to direct staff to
focus heavily on.the front landscaping and the screening along the perimeters and
they will do that.
Mayor Ferre, would like staff to work with the developer on the landscaping.
Mayor Ferre opened the Public Hearing for discussion.
Rita Schwark, 21952 Grand Terrace Road, questioned who will be building these
homes and feels that the builder should hire first priority Grand Terrace residents.
Council Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 10
Mayor Ferr6 returned discussion to Council.
Councilmembr Hilkev, questioned if the new arrangement of the fence in the front
changed the backyard of the houses along Mt. Vernon. It looks like the placement
of the fences have been changed. He is looking at how this ties in with the property
next door. The pictures are lacking detail and feels that it is very frustrating. He
indicated that he would like to continue this item once again.
Mr. Eeds, stated that the fence at the north side and the south side from the
apartments would continue up into the property line of this property. When it meets
the property line of the proposed homes the new fence would then pick up except to
the extent when it goes to a 5 ft level.
Councilmember Hilkev, stated that he would like to see something that shows that
the 5 ft.fence wrought iron is aligned with the existing fence or does it come out into
the parkway.
Mr. Eeds, responded that they can provide a plan view.
Councilmember Hilkev, expressed his frustration.
Mayor Ferr6,stated that there seems to be a discrepancy with the plans and asked the
developer if he had any comments to make.
Mr. Eeds, responded that if there is any discrepancy they will fix it.
Community and Economic Development Director Koontz,stated that staff will have
to look at the plans again that there should have not been any changes.
Mr Eeds, stated that there does seem to be a discrepancy and apologized and stated
that they will make the changes and bring it back to the Council.
CC-2006-40 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA,SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER
MILLER, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBR GARCIA WAS ABSENT), to
continue Specific Plan No. 05-02 (SP-05-02),Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 05-
03 (TTM-05-03/County No. 17766)and Environmental Review Case No. 05-21 (E-
05-2 1)to construct a 35 single family condominium development and an Ordinance
of the City Council Approving Specific Plan No. 05-02 (SP-05-02) for a
condominium subdivision with 35 single family detached units on a 3.7 acre site
located on the westerly side of Mt.Vernon Avenue at 11830 Mt.Vernon Avenue and
Environmental Review Case No. 05-21 (E-05-21) Mitigated Negative Declaration
as Provided bythe California Environmental Quality Act and a Resolution ofthe City
of Grand Terrace Approving Tentative Tract Map No. 05-03 (TTM 17766) for a 35
Council Minutes
April 13,2006
Page 11
Single Family Residential Condominium Development in the City of Grand Terrace
to April 27, 2006.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS None
NEW BUSINESS
J
8A. Appropriation for Emergency Roof Repair
CC-2006-41 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM
CORTES, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBR GARCIA WAS ABSENT), to
approve an appropriation from the General Fund in the amount of$23,908 and award
a contract to Corona Coating of Colton for Emergency Roof Repair
CLOSED SESSION -None
Mayor Ferre adjourned the meeting at 12:03 a.m.,until the next CRA/City Council Meeting which
is scheduled to be held on Thursday, April 27, 2006 at 6:00 p.m.
CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace
MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace
i
�1Ty
RAND TERR C
Community Services Department
Staff Report
MEETING DATE: April 27, 2006
' SUBJECT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM �
2006-09 DELEGATE AGENCY AGREEMENT
NO FUNDING REQUIRED
BACKGROUND:
Since the establishment of the current CDBG Program format, the City of Grand Terrace
.has participated with the County of San Bernardino in the implementation of programs
within our jurisdiction. Examples of such projects can be seem at the Grand Terrace
Senior Center, the Grand Terrace Library, and numerous upgrades in facilities to benefit
the handicapped and hearing impaired.
Because the City does not qualify as an Entitlement City(requiring a population of
50,000 or greater), Grand Terrace is required to participate under the County of San
Bernardino Program. This includes funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) for both the CDBG.Program and the Emergency Shelter
Grant(ESG) funds.
As a participant in the County program, the City is responsible for identification of
funding priorities for the distribution of monies as set by a per capita funding formula.
The County assumes all responsibility for overall administration of the programs,
including submittal of grant documents with HUD and compliance monitoring.
The current Delegate Agency Agreement between the City and the County for
implementing Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funded projects will
expire on June 30, 2006. Attached is a new Delegate Agency Agreement that is similar to
the existing agreement. Under this new agreement, which will be effective from July 1,
2006, to .June 30, 2009, the city will be able to directly implement the CDBG-funded
activities. This period coincides with the term of the CDBG Program Cooperation
Agreement that was approved on June 21, 2005 by the Board of Supervisors.
i
i
i
��:. EL A.CENDi� k EEJ N(3s1v- i
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council Approve a COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2006-09.
ATTACHMENT: Delegate Agency Agreement from County ECD.
FOR COUNTY USE ONLY
� X New Vendor Code Dept. Contract Number
ERIC40INO Chanae SC A j
:. Cancel ECD
County Department Dept. Orgn. Contractor's License No.
Community Development and Housing CDH PROJ.
County Department Contract Representative Telephone Total Contract Amount
County of San Bernardino DOUGLAS PAYNE/Bryan Anderson (909)388-0990 $N/A
F A S Contract Type
[]Revenue []Encumbered []unencumbered []X Other: Delegate Agency Agreement
CONTRACT TRANSMITTAL If not encumbered or revenue contract type, provide reason:
Commodity Code Contract Start Contract End Original Amount Amendment Amount
Date Date
July 1,2006 June 30,2009
Fund Dept. Organization Appr. Obj/Rev Source GRC/PROJ/JOB Amount
No.
SBA ECD PROJ. 200 2005 00000000
Project Name Estimated Payment Total by Fiscal Year
2006-2009 CDBG City/County FY Amount I/D FY Amount I/D
Delegate Agency Agreements N/A N/A
Contract Type 2(b)
CONTRACTOR City of Grand Terrace j
Federal ID No.or Social Security No. N/A
Contractor's Representative Thomas J. Schwab, City Manager
A >s 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, CA 92313-5207 Phone (909) 824-6621
Nature of Contract: (Briefly describe the general terms of the contract)
I
In Compliance with the requirements of Title I of the Housing and Community Development�At,of 1974, as amended, the County
executed Cooperation Agreements with thirteen(13)incorporated cities to qualify as an"urban.county'through mutual cooperation to
undertake or assist in undertaking essential community development and housingla`ktvities. This was accomplished on June 21,
2005, when said Agreements were executed for joint participation in the-CDBG program for fiscal years 2006 through 2009.
Pursuant to Section 15 of the Cooperation Agreements, the Dolegate.,Agency Agreements and their attachments are set forth to
further implement the provisions of the Cooperation Agreements.. - ey specify the p oce'dures,sequences,responsibilities and forms
to be used to carry out CDBG activities accord ing.to'Ual s6te and federallrequife'meots�The'Delegate Agency Agreements are
specifically subordinate and supplementary4o.an dconcurrent with the Coope-rjAon Agr ements?-
The attached Contract consists of 9 pag s, and Attachments; , and D
(Attach this transmittal to all contracts not prepared on they>`Standafd,.Co tact"form.)
i
Approved as to Legal Form(sign in blue ink) Reviewed a,.s'to.,Contract Compliance Presented to BOS for Signature
County Counsel ' Department Head
Date Date Date
Auditor/Controller-Recorder Use Only
❑GontracYDatabase � ❑FAS
Input Date Keyed By
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
CITY-COUNTY DELEGATE AGENCY AGREEMENT
For Fiscal Years 2006-07,2007-08, 2008-09
This Agreement is made and entered into,by and between the County of San Bernardino hereinafter referred to
as "COUNTY", and the City of Grand Terrace, a municipal corporation and a political subdivision of the State of
California located within the boundaries of San Bernardino County,hereinafter referred to as "CITY".
WITNESSETH
r
WHEREAS, COUNTY has been designated an "Urban County"by the United States Department of Housing
and Urban Development, hereinafter referred to as "HUD", as that term is defined in Title I of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974 as amended,hereinafter referred to as "ACT", and accordingly,COUNTY will
administer a Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)program that includes the development of a Consolidated
Submission of the HUD Housing and Community Development Grant Programs, hereinafter referred to as
"CONSOLIDATED PLAN",which constitutes COUNTY's application for Federal assistance under said ACT;and,
WHEREAS,CITY and COUNTY have entered into a"Cooperation Agreement for Community Development
Block Grant Funds",as part of COUNTY's CDBG Program,covering Fiscal Years 2006-07,2007-08,and 2008-09,to
which this is a subordinate and supplementary agreement per Section 15 (Other Agreements) of said Cooperation
Agreement executed by these parties, dated June 21, 2005; and,
WHEREAS, COUNTY administers a CDBG program in cooperation with thirteen cities, and in the
unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County,through County Department of Community Development and Housing,
hereinafter referred to as "CDH"; and,
WHEREAS, CITY has the ability to manage and administef CDBG projects; and,
WHEREAS,CITY chooses to assume the responsibility of project implementation within its corporate limits in
cooperation with COUNTY; and,
WHEREAS,both COUNTY and CITY seek to coordinate their efforts to maximize utilization ofpersonnel and
resources and increase efficiency and economies of scale in the planning and administration of the program hereinafter
set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE,it is understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows:
1. PURPOSE
This Agreement is made pursuant to the provisions of Article 1,Chapter 5,Division 7,Title I of the Government
Code of the State of California(commencing with Section 6500),relating to public agencies. The purpose of
this Agreement is to implement the provisions of the Cooperation Agreement in carrying out CDBG activities
that have been approved by COUNTY for CITY in accordance with CONSOLIDATED PLAN. The purpose
will be accomplished pursuant to the requirements of the ACT, its regulations and other Federal, State and
County laws and policies in the manner hereinafter set forth.
Unless specified otherwise, CDH shall have the authority to represent COUNTY regarding the terms and
conditions of this Contract and the administration thereof.
Page 1 of 9
2. TERM
This Agreement shall become effective starting fiscal year 2006-07 that begins July 1,2006 and shall continue in
full'force and effect through fiscal year 2008-2009 that ends on June 30, 2009. COUNTY may grant an
extension of up to six(6)months of the effective period of this Agreement for the purpose of completing CITY's
projects/activities that are underway and cannot be completed during the term of this Agreement. CITY must
request any such extension in writing. Any extension will only be effective if granted in writing by COUNTY.
Maintenance and operation and monitoring requirements for facilities developed under the terms of the
Agreement shall be in effect and continue in full force as prescribed in Section 9.
3. AUTHORIZATION OF PROJECT/ACTIVITY
CITY shall not initiate nor incur expenses for any CDBG funded project or activity covered under the terms of
_ this Agreement prior to receiving written authorization from COUNTY. Written authorization will be
accomplished when Attachments A (Request to Initiate Project or Activity) and B (Project or Activity
Description)of this Agreement have been completed for a CDBG funded project or activity and signed by CITY
and countersigned by CDH. Any such authorized Project or Activity shall hereinafter be referred to as an
"AUTHORIZED PROJECT".
4. IMPLEMENTATION OF AUTHORIZED PROJECT .
CITY agrees to implement AUTHORIZED PROJECTS in the manner prescribed in the Delegate Agency
Coordination Procedures (Attachment C), using the forms and language contained in the Delegate Agency
Construction Contract Provisions(Attachment D),and agrees to comply with all applicable local County,State
and Federal regulations associated with the implementation of CDBG projects.
CITY may contract for all necessary services to complete AUTHORIZED PROJECTS described on its executed
Attachment's A and B provided that contracts are submitted to and approved in writing by CDH prior to their
execution. CITY Attorney is responsible for assuring and certifying that the AUTHORIZED PROJECT
undertaken by CITY's contracting party complies with all applicable regulations and statutes,as amended,listed
in Attachment C, Section IV.
5. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORIZED PROJECTS
All modifications to AUTHORIZED PROJECT must be pre-approved by COUNTY in order to be considered a
part of AUTHORIZED PROJECT and eligible for reimbursement by COUNTY. CITY may request
modification(s)to CDBG funding levels authorized by Attachment A or the pertinent Project Description(i.e.
Scope of Activity)authorized by Attachment B. Upon receipt of a written request from CITY,and approval by
COUNTY, COUNTY will revise Attachments A and B.
6. CONSOLIDATED PLAN AMENDMENT
Requests by CITY to add,delete or substantially modify an activity listed in CONSOLIDATED PLAN must be
made in writing to COUNTY. Requests to add new activity(ies) must be accompanied by a CDBG project
proposal application.
Substantial modifications are defined as follows: 1)a net increase of greater than$25,000 for activities with an
allocation listed in a published CDBG Action Plan,or as amended,in an amount of$25,000 or less;or 2)a net
increase or decrease greater than 100% of the activity allocation if the allocation is over$25,000 as listed in a
published Action Plan, or as amended; or 3) a net increase or decrease in the activity allocation greater than
$100,000; or 4)a change in the type of activity; or 5)a change in the location of the activity; 6)a change in the
beneficiaries of the activity.
Page 2 of 9
Requests for additions and substantial modifications will be reviewed by COUNTY for eligibility and
compatibility with CONSOLIDATED PLAN. Additions, deletions and substantial modifications.must be
approved by CITY Council action and supportive documentation for said action must be sent to COUNTY.
CITY shall comply with the requirements of and participate in the implementation of the citizen participation
portion of CONSOLIDATED PLAN.
7. COUNTY RESPONSIBILITIES
COUNTY,through CDH,is empowered to enforce all Federal regulations pertaining to CDBG funded projects
undertaken by CITY under this Agreement. CITY recognizes that COUNTY, as the formal grantee of the
CDBG,has full responsibility and obligations to HUD for undertaking the CDBG.Program and has full authority
in administering and allocating funds. CITY will have no direct responsibilities or obligations to HUD,except
as identified, under this Agreement. COUNTY will provide technical assistance to CITY in a timely and
expeditious manner upon written request to the Director of CDH.
8. CONFORMANCE TO COUNTY PROCEDURES
Under this Agreement, CITY elects to be responsible for carrying out CDBG projects. However, in
implementing said projects,CITY must perform all services and activities in accordance with Federal and State
statutory requirements and with the policies and procedures established by the Board of.Supervisors,and shall
comply with the following:
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATOR
Upon COUNTY and CITY's mutual assent to this Agreement, CITY will designate a "Community
Development Administrator"by filling in the name of said person in the space provided below. The
Community Development Administrator is the responsible authority for all correspondence with
COUNTY, the signatory on AUTHORIZED PROJECT Attachments A and B and shall advise the _
CITY council, CITY administration and CITY staff, as appropriate regarding the CDBG program. \
CITY may, by written notification as set forth below, change the Community Development "
Administrator.
CITY's Community Development Administrator for this Agreement is
Steve Berry , TITLE: Assistant City Manager
B. FISCAL CONTACT PERSON
For purposes of this Agreement,CITY shall also designate a fiscal contact person by filling in the space
provided below. The fiscal contact person shall be responsible for billing and fiscal procedures
regarding the CDBG Program and will serve as the primary contact for technical fiscal matters. CITY
may,by written notification as set forth below, change the fiscal contact person.
CITY Fiscal Contact person for this Agreement is
Larry Ronnow , TITLE: Finance Director
C. CITY shall be responsible for maintaining complete and separate fiscal accounts for CDBG funds which
come under its control in such manner as to permit the reports required by COUNTY to be prepared
therefrom and to permit the tracing of CDBG funds to their final expenditure. CITY will submit to
CDH complete and detailed project descriptions, budgets, and expenses for each project that CITY
implements with CDBG funds along with monthly reports of grant expenditures.
Page 3 of 9
9. MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF FACILITIES
CITY shall provide maintenance and operation for the life of any and all facilities constructed with CDBG funds
under this Agreement that are CITY owned or operated,for the life of the facility, not less than twenty 20)
years.
10. FUNDING LIMITS
CDBG funding of AUTHORIZED PROJECTS is limited to the amount allocated by CITY in AUTHORIZED
PROJECTS Attachment A.
11. DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS
_ . All CDBG funds allocated to CITY'S AUTHORIZED PROJECT(S) shall be received from the Federal
Government by COUNTY under ACT. CDH will disburse the funds to CITY on a cost reimbursement basis.
Billing shall be accompanied by all pertinent source documentation to be presented to CDH by CITY on or about
the first day of each month, allowing 15 days for payment on the part of CDH. COUNTY shall be entitled to
retain from such funds such amount as is calculated as the direct costs (including,but not limited to, salar es,
benefits,mileage,actual cost of materials,meals and other authorized expenses allowable under the Travel Code
Section 13.0638 County of San Bernardino)incurred by COUNTY in implementing CITY's AUTHORIZED
PROJECTS.
12. WITHHOLDING OF FUNDS
COUNTY shall retain the right to withhold funds for any programs carried out by CITY,CITY's Contractor,or
CITY's subcontractor upon giving written notice to CITY indicating that COUNTY has determined that CITY
has not performed its obligations as stated in this Agreement in a satisfactory or timely manner consistent with
Federal regulations or policy. COUNTY shall notify CITY in writing of this determination, specifying the
objection(s) to CITY's performance. CITY shall then have a maximum of 10 days in which to remedy said
deficiencies. Should approval of COUNTY not be obtained within said period, COUNTY shall have full
authority to reallocate CITY's CDBG program funding to other eligible activities,which can be implemented or
to assume sole responsibility for carrying out any and/or all AUTHORIZED PROJECTS,upon written notice to
CITY. Upon such notice, CITY agrees to cease all activity provided hereunder, as specified in said notice.
13. PROGRAM INCOME
Program income represents net income directly generated from the use of CDBG funds by CITY as a result lof
the activity funded under the terms of this Agreement. When such income is generated by an activity only
partially assisted with CDBG funds,the income shall be prorated to reflect the percentage of CDBG funds used.
CITY shall retain the use of program income by returning program income to COUNTY and requesting project
budget increases for activities authorized under this Agreement. Program income shall be returned to COUNTY
within thirty(30)days after:a)disposition or sale of real or personal property occurs or;b)cumulative program.
income reaches increments of one thousand dollars ($1,000); or c) the end of each fiscal year. CITY shall
include the reports required by Section 14,PROGRAM REPORTING AND RETENTION OF RECORDS,all
sources and amounts of program income on a monthly and year-to-date basis.
Program income returned by COUNTY to CITY will be spent by CITY on only those costs authorized under this
Agreement. All provisions.of this Agreement shall apply to said use of program income funds. CITY shall
account for the receipt and use of program income in such a way that program income is. spent .on
AUTHORIZED PROJECTS before additional CDBG funds are spent.
Any program income on-hand when this Agreement expires or is received after such expiration,will be paid to
COUNTY.
Page 4 of 9
14. PROGRAM REPORTING AND RETENTION OF RECORDS
CITY agrees to prepare and.submit financial, program progress, and other reports as required by HUD or
COUNTY directives. CITY shall maintain such program,property,personnel, financial, statistical and other
records;supporting documents and accounts as are considered necessary by HUD or COUNTY to assure proper
accounting for all Contract funds. Said records, documents and accounts are to be retained by CITY for a
minimum of five (5) years. The retention period starts from the date the COUNTY submits its annual
performance and evaluation report,as prescribed in 24 CFR 91.520,in which the service,under the terms of this
contract,is reported on for the final time. Said COUNTY submission will follow CITY's final submission to
COUNTY of reports identified under this paragraph. Records and accounts subject to litigation or audit must be
maintained for the five(5)years or until the issue is resolved,whichever is longer. Records that pertain to real
estate transactions must be maintained for the five (5) years or the number of years there is an outstanding
obligation, whichever is longer. The starting date for retention of records on CDBG-purchased equipment
begins at the end of the equipment's use,when it is disposed of or transferred. The retention period for records
relating to program income begins on the last date of COUNTY fiscal year in which the income is earned. All
CITY records,with the exception of confidential client information,shall be made available to representatives of
COUNTY and the appropriate federal agencies. CITY is required to submit data necessary to complete the
Annual Grantee Performance Report in accordance with HUD regulations in the format and at the time
designated by the CDH Director or his designee.
15. MONITORING
CDH Director or his designee will conduct periodic monitoring of CITY administration of AUTHORIZED
PROJECTS. Monitoring will focus on the extent to which CONSOLIDATED PLAN has been implemented and
measurable goals achieved, effectiveness of project management, and impact of the AUTHORIZED
PROJECTS. Authorized representatives of COUNTY and HUD shall have the right of access to all activities
and facilities operated by CITY under this Agreement. Facilities include all files,records,and other documents
related to the performance of this Agreement. CITY will permit on-site inspection by COUNTY, and HUD
representatives, and insure that its employees furnish such information, as in the judgment of COUNTY and
HUD representatives, may be relevant to a question of compliance with contractual conditions and HUD
directives, or the effectiveness, legality, and achievements of the program.
16. ACCOUNTING
CITY must establish and maintain,on a current basis,an adequate accrual accounting system in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles and standards.
17. AUDITS
CITY is required to arrange for an independent financial and compliance audit annually for each fiscal year
during which Federal funds are received under this Agreement as required by Circular A-128 pursuant to the
Single Audit Act of 1984,Public Law 98-502. The results of the single audit must be submitted to COUNTY
within thirty(30)days of completion. Within thirty(30)days of the submittal of said audit report,CITY shall
provide a written response to all conditions or findings reported in said audit report. The response must examine
each condition or finding and explain a proposed resolution,including a schedule for correcting any deficiency.
All condition or finding correction actions shall take place within six(6)months after CDH's receipt of the audit
report. _An audit may also be conducted by Federal, State or Local funding source agencies as part of the
COUNTY's audit responsibilities. COUNTY and its authorized representatives shall,at all times,have access
for the purpose of audit or inspection to any and all books,documents,papers,records,property,and premises of
CITY. CITY's staff will cooperate fully with authorized auditors when they conduct audits and examinations of
CITY's program. If indications of misappropriation or misapplication of the funds of this Agreement cause
COUNTY to require a special audit,the cost of the audit will be encumbered and deducted from funds allocated
to CITY CDBG AUTHORIZED PROJECTS. Should COUNTY subsequently determine.that the special audit
was not warranted, the amount encumbered will be restored to said CDBG AUTHORIZED PROJECT
allocations. Should the special audit confirm misappropriation or misapplication of funds,CITY shall reimburse
COUNTY the amount of misappropriation or misapplication from non-CDBG funding sources.
Page 5 of 9
18. REVERSION OF ASSETS
Upon Agreement termination CITY shall transfer to COUNTY all CDBG funds on-hand at the time of
expiration and any accounts receivable attributable to the use of CDBG funds. j
I
All real property acquired or improved in whole or in part with CDBG funds in excess of$25,000 underlthis
Agreement must continue in the use that provides the service benefits and national objectives for which it lwas
funded until five years after expiration of.this Agreement, or such longer period of time as determined by
COUNTY;or it must be disposed of in a manner resulting in a reimbursement to COUNTY in the amount of the .
current fair market value of the property less any portion thereof attributable to expenditures ofnon-CDBG funds
for the acquisition of, or improvement to, the property.
19. TERMINATION AND TERMINATION COSTS
This Agreement may be terminated in whole or in part at any time by either party upon giving their(30)days
notice in writing to the other party. An agreement must be reached by both parties as to reasons and conditions
for termination in compliance with the provisions of Federal Regulations at 24 CFR Part.85.44,Termination for
Convenience. COUNTY CDH is hereby empowered to give said notice subject to ratification by the COUNTY
Board of Supervisors.
COUNTY may immediately terminate this Agreement upon the termination, suspension, discontinuation or
substantial reduction in HUD CDBG funding for the Agreement activity or if for any reason the timely
completion of the work under this Agreement is rendered improbable;.infeasible or impossible. If CITY
materially fails to comply with any term of this Agreement, COUNTY may take one or more of the actions
provided under the Federal Regulation at 24 CFR Part 85.43, Enforcement, which includes temporarily
withholding cash,disallowing non-compliant costs,wholly or partly terminating the award,withholding future
awards, and other remedies that are legally available. In such an event, CITY shall be compensated for all
services rendered and all necessarily incurred costs performed in good faith in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement that have been previously reimbursed,to the date of said termination to the extent that CDBG funds
are available from HUD.
20. PROJECT ACKNOWLEDGMENT
i
Should CITY determine that the funding sources or the names of responsible public officials be displayed on a
completed building or significant project,such identification should be acknowledged on a plaque,permanently
mounted in an appropriate location,made of bronze or other appropriate material,acknowledging the funding
source as the Department of Housing and Urban Development, San Bernardino County Community
Development Block Grant. The current Board of Supervisors and the members of the City Council shall also be
identified. In instances where multiple funding sources are utilized to construct a project, all funding sources
shall be identified. The listing order of multiple funding sources identified on the plaque shall be the largest
dollar amount first,the second largest dollar amount second, etc.
21. CONTRACT COMPLIANCE
CITY will take all necessary affirmative steps to assure that minority firms,women's business enterprises,aid
Labor surplus Area Firms (a firm located in an area of high unemployment) are used when possible in
compliance with provisions of Title 24 Code of Federal Regulations Part 85.36(e).
CITY shall comply with Executive Orders 11246, 11375, 11625, 12138, 12432, 12250,Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964,the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, County Policy 15-01, (Emerging Small
Business Enterprise Program) and other applicable federal, state and County laws, regulations and policies
relating to equal employment and contracting opportunities,including laws and regulations hereafter enacted.
i
Page 6 of 9
CITY shall make every effort to ensure that all projects funded wholly or in part by CDBG Program funds shall
provide equal employment and career advancement opportunities for minorities and women. In addition,CITY
shall make every effort to employ residents of the area and shall keep a report of CITY staff positions that have
been funded directly by, or as a result of this program.
22. DISCRIMINATION
During the performance of this Agreement,CITY agrees not to discriminate against any contractor or applicant
for employment in performing work because of race,color,religion,sex or national origin. CITY further agrees
to take affirmative action to ensure that its contractors employ and treat all employees during employment
without regard to their race,color,religion,sex or national origin. Such action shall include,but not be limited
to,the following: employment,upgrading,demotion or transfer,recruitment or recruitment advertising,lay off
or termination, etc. CITY will cause contractor to comply with the provisions of Executive Order 11246 of
September 24, 1965, and the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. CITY shall
require its contractor to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment,
notices setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause.
23. STANDARDS OF CONDUCT
Pursuant to Office of Management and Budget Circular A-110 Attachment 0 and 24 CFR 570.611,Conflict of
Interest,and 24 CFR Part 85.36,Procurement,CITY shall maintain a written code or standards of conduct that
shall govern the performance of their officers,employees or agents engaged in the award and administration of
contracts supported by Federal funds. No employee,officer or agent of the CITY shall participate in selection,
award,or administration of a contract supported by Federal funds if a conflict of interest,real or apparent,would
be involved. Such a conflict would arise when:
a. The employee, officer or agent;
b. Any member of his immediate family;
C. His or her partner; or _-
d. An organization,which employs,or is about to employ,any of the above,has financial or other
interest in the firm selected for award.
CITY officers, employees or agents shall.neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors or anything of monetary
value from contractors,potential contractors, or parties to subagreements.
CITY may set minimum rules where the financial interest is not substantial or the gift is an unsolicited item of
nominal intrinsic value.
To the extent permitted by State or local law or regulations, such standards of conduct shall provide for
penalties,sanctions,or other disciplinary actions for violations of such standards by CITY's officers,employees,
or agents, or by contractors or their agents.
24. FORMER COUNTY OFFICIALS
CITY agrees to provide or has already provided information on former COUNTY Administrative Officials (as
defined below) who are employed by or represent CITY. The information required includes a list of former
COUNTY Administrative Officials,who terminated County employment within the last five(5)years and are
now officers,principals,partners, associates, or members of the business. The information also includes the
employment with or representation of CITY. For purposes of this provision, "COUNTY Administrative
Official" is defined as a member of the Board of Supervisors or such Officer's staff,COUNTY Administrative
Officer or member of such Officer's staff, COUNTY Department or Group Head, Assistance Department or
Group Head, or any employee in the Exempt Group, Management Unit or Safety Management Unit.
Page 7 of 9
25. RELIGIOUS PROSELYTIZING OR POLITICAL ACTIVITIES
CITY agrees that it will not perform or permit any religious proselytizing or political activities in connection
with the performance of this Agreement. Funds under this Agreement will be used exclusively for performance
of the work required under this Agreement and no funds made available.under this Agreement shall be used to
promote any religious or political activities.
26. INDEMNIFICATION
CITY agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless COUNTY and its respective authorized officers,
employees,agents,and volunteers from any and all claims,actions,losses,damages,and/or liability arising out
of this Contract from any cause whatsoever,including the acts,errors or omissions and for any costs or expenses
incurred by COUNTY on account of any claim therefore, except where such indemnification is prohibited)by
law.
CITY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless COUNTY and its respective authorized officers,employe es,
agents and volunteers from any liability,claims,losses,demands,and actions incurred by COUNTY as a result
of the determination by HUD or its successor that activities undertaken by each of CITY under the prograin(s)
fail to comply with any laws,regulations or polices applicable thereto or that any funds billed by and disbursed
to CITY under this Contract were improperly.expended.
27. SELF-INSURANCE
The CITY and the COUNTY are authorized self-insured public entities for purposes of general liability,
automobile liability, professional liability and workers' compensation. CITY and COUNTY warrant that
through their respective programs of self-insurance they have adequate coverage or resources to protect against
any liabilities arising out of their performance of the terms and conditions of this agreement.
(continued on next page)
I
i
Page 8 of 9
28. AMENDMENTS: VARIATIONS
This writing,with attachments, embodies the whole of this Agreement of the parties hereto. There are no oral
agreements contained herein. Except as herein provided, addition or variation of the terms of this Agreement
shall not be valid unless made in the form of a written amendment to this Agreement formally approved and
executed by both parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the day and year first
written above.
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
By: By:
BILL POSTMUS, Chairman MARYETTA FERRE,Mayor
Board of Supervisors
Dated:
APPROVED AS TO FORM. THE TERMS ATTEST:
AND PROVISIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT
ARE FULLY AUTHORIZED UNDER STATE By:
AND LOCAL LAW AND THIS AGREEMENT BRENDA MESA, City Clerk
PROVIDES FULL LEGAL AUTHORITY
FOR COUNTY TO UNDERTAKE OR
ASSIST IN UNDERTAKING ESSENTIAL Dated:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND
HOUSING ASSISTANCE ACTIVITIES,
SPECIFICALLY URBAN RENEWAL AND
PUBLICLY ASSISTED HOUSING.
By: APPROVED AS TO FORM
MICHELLE D. BLAKEMORE for CDH
Deputy County Counsel
By:
JOHN R.HARPER, City Attorney.
SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY OF
THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED
TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD Dated:
DENA SMITH
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
of the County of San Bernardino
By:
Comdev/Temp/Cathy/Delegate Agency/06-09 Delegate Agency Agreement/06-09 Grand Terrace DA
01/20/06BA/cb
Page 9 of 9
]XX
f �
Community and Economic Development Department
CALIFORNIA
STAFF REPORT
CRA ITEM O COUNCIL ITEM (X ) MEETING DATE: April 27, 2006
.FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED X
SUBJECT: Specific Plan No.05-02(SP-05-02),Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 05-03 (TTM-05-03/County No. 17766) and
Environmental Review Case No. 05-21 (E-05-21) to
construct a 35 single family condominium development
(Continued from the meetings of January 26, 2006. March
9, 2006 and April 13, 2006
APPLICANT: The Greystone Group, Inc..and Sequoia Equities
LOCATION: 1183.0 Mt. Vernon Avenue (An approximately 3.7 acre
parcel located on the westerly side of Mt. Vernon Avenue
about 750 feet southerly of the intersection of Mt. Vernon
Avenue and. Brentwood Street.)
RECOMMENDATION: Open the Continued Public Hearing on the proposed
Specific Plan and Vesting Tentative Tract Map; Receive
any testimony; Close the Hearing and Approve the
Ordinance for Specific Plan No. 05-02 for First Reading
and Approve the Resolution for Approval of Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 05-03
Background:
The third public hearing for this project was held on April 13, 2006 and was continued to
the Council meeting of April 27th in order to allow the applicant to respond to a remaining
issue raised by a member of the Council. This remaining issue consisted of the location
of the fencing along Mt. Vernon and the size of.the rear yards of those units backing up to.
Mr. Vernon.
The applicant has prepared two exhibits to address this concern. The first exhibit
shows a plan view of the proposed fencing along Mt. Vernon and a conceptual Mt.
Vernon "street scene" elevation. The second exhibit shows a second elevation as
22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California-92E1, --_5295�• 2 -6621
an enlargement- of the southeastern portion of the Mt. Vernon street scene and
photos of the Mt. Vernon frontage. The applicant and their representatives will
present to explain these new exhibits at the continued public hearing on April 27tn.
The Planning Commission's and staff's recommendation remains the same as for the prior
meetings that this development be approved.
Also, Staff has also provided the proposed Ordinance for the Specific Plan No. 05-02 and
the proposed Resolution of Approval for the Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 05-03 which
are attached here as Exhibits 3 and 4 respectively, \
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission and Staff recommend that the City Council approve the
Ordinance for the Adoption of Specific Plan No. 05-02 (Exhibit 3) and the Resolution of
Approval for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 05-03 (County No. 17766) (Exhibit 4).
Respectfully submitted, Approved by:
J n Lampe Gary L. oontz
AYsociate Planner Community Development Director
GLK:JL:ji
Exhibits: Exhibit 1 - Conceptual Mt. Vernon Ave: Street Scene Plan View& Elevation
Exhibit 2 - Conceptual Mt. Vernon Ave. Street Scene 2nd Elevation and
photos
Exhibit 3 - Ordinance Approving and Adopting SP-5-02
Exhibit 4 - Resolution of Approval of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 05-03
c:\MyFiles\JOHN\Greystone\SP-05-02councilrpt.continued.3
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 05-02 (SP-05-02) FOR A CONDOMINIUM
SUBDIVISION WITH 35 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED UNITS ON
A 3.7 ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE WESTERLY SIDE OF MT. VERNON AVE.
AT 11830 MT. VERNON AVE. AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
CASE.NO. OS-21 (E-05-21) -MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AS PROVIDED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, the applicant has filed the necessary applications including four Site and
Architectural Review cases and a Vesting Tentative Tract Map to create 35 single family detached
condominium units; and
WHEREAS, there is no existing zone in the City's Zoning Code to accommodate the
proposed development; and
WHEREAS, the City's General Plan also requires the filing of a Specific Plan for any,
residential project with more than 20 units; and
WHEREAS,Section 18.90.040 ofthe Zoning Code allows for the adoption of a Specific Plan
for those unique properties where the existing zoning provisions are unique or unusual; and
WHEREAS, the subject site is an infill site left after the Highlands Apartments developed
to the north, west and south; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project will represent a transition between the Highlands
Apartments on the westerly side of Mt. Vernon Avenue and the single family residential on the
easterly side of Mt. Vernon Avenue; and
WHEREAS,the resulting density of this project at 9.5 units per acre is not inconsistent with
existing development in the area including the large apartment complex,the Highlands Apartments,
immediately to the north, west and south; and
WHEREAS, Specific Plan No. 05-M, Exhibit A, is consistent with the General Plan of the
City of Grand Terrace; and
WHEREAS,in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
an environmental review for Specific Plan No. 05-02 has been conducted and a Mitigated Negative
Declaration has been prepared under E-05-21 for this project with the Mitigated Negative
Declaration (Exhibit B) having been considered by both the Planning Commission and the City
Council; and
EXHIBIT 3
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission held properly noticed public hearing on this project
on December 15, 2005; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission following the conclusion of the public hearing on
December 15, 2005 recommended that the City Council approve Specific Plan No..05-02 and the
associated Mitigated Negative Declaration under Environmental Review No. 05-21,.set out in the
attached Exhibits A and B,by adopting this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission in taking the above action found that the proposed
Specific Plan No. 05-02 will not be:
l. Detrimental to the health,safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons
residing or working within the.neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within
the city; or
2. Injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within the City.
WHEREAS,the City Council held a properly notice public hearing to consider the Planning
Commission's recommendation and other relevant testimony on January 26,2006,March 9,2006,
April 13, 2006 and April 27, 2006 for SP-05-02 and E-05-21. -
NOW, THEREFOR, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE,
CALIFORNIA,DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Specific Plan No. 05-02 to allow for the development of 35 single family
detached condominiums, set out in full in Exhibit A,is hereby approved and
adopted by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace..
Section 2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration on file in the offices of the Community
Development Department under E-05-21 is hereby approved as Exhibit B.
Section 3. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m.
on the 3 1"day of its adoption.
Section 4 Posting: The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3)
public places within fifteen(15) days of its adoption, as designated for such
purpose by the City Council.
Section 5 First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand
Terrace held on the 27 day of April, 2006 and finally adopted and ordered
posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the 11'
day of May, 2006.
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the City of Grand Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace
Terrace and of the City Council and of the City Council thereof
I, BRENDA MESA, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, California, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Grand Terrace held on the April 27, 2006 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Brenda Stanfill
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John Harper
City Attorney
c:\MyFiles\JOHN\Greystone\spO5-02ordinance
RESOLUTION NO. 05
RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 05-03 (TTM 17766)FOR A 35
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT IN AT
11830 MT. VERNON AVENUE IN THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
WHEREAS, the applicant, The Greystone Group Inc. and Sequoia Equities, has applied for the
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.05-03(TTM 1.7766)to create a 35 unit condominium subdivision
on a 3.7 acre parcel in the City of Grand Terrace;and,
WHEREAS,the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.05-03 (County No. 17766)was deemed
complete on December 8, 2005; and
WHEREAS,a properly noticed public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on December
15,2005; and
WHEREAS,under the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA),Article 6,Section 15070,the
proposed project for 35 condominium units qualifies for a Mitigated Negative Declaration in that there is no
substantial evidence that the project will have a significant impact on the environment. The environmental
assessment of this project was completed under Environmental Review Case No. 05-21; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 05-03
(TTM 17766)to the City Council at its meeting of December 15,2005; and
WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the City Council on January 26, 2006,
March 9,2006,April 13,2006 and April 27,2006 regarding the approval of Tentative Tract Map-05-03(TTM
17766).
NOW THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
1. The proposed subdivision, together with the .provisions for its design and
improvements is.consistent with the General Plan in that the overall density and lot
size conform to the General Plan and that all required improvements will be provided;
and
2. The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development in that
the site is fairly level, is served by adequate public services and utilities and the
project conforms to the provisions of the existing zoning; and
3. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially or avoidable injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat in that this is an urban infill project with no wildlife habitats on the
EXHIBIT 4
site; and
4. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious
public health problems in that all necessary public utilities and services will be
provided; and
5. The proposed subdivision, its design, density and type of development and
improvements conform to the regulations of the City's Development Code and the
regulations of any public agency having jurisdiction by law in that the proposed
:development conforms to the Medium Density Residential Category of the General
Plan and the Zoning as established by Specific Plan No. 05-02.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT Tentative Tract Map No. 05-03 (TMM 17766) is hereby
approved subject to the following conditions:
General Conditions of Approval:
1. Details shown on the tentative tract map are not necessarily approved. Any details which are
inconsistent with requirements of ordinance,general conditions of approval,or City policies
must-be specifically approved in the final map or improvement plan approvals
2. Comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.
3. As a.vesting map,this request was deemed complete on December 8,2005.
Conditions Prior to Final Map Approval:
4. Upon approval of these conditions and prior to becoming final and binding; the applicant
must agree to and sign the"Acceptance of Conditions"form. The content of the form to be
prepared by the Community Development Department.
5. Provide a"will serve"letter from the Riverside Highland Water Company.
6. Monumentation of tract map boundaries, street centerline and lot boundaries is required
7. A final tract map prepared by,or under the direction of a registered civil engineer authorized
to practice land surveying, or a licensed land surveyor,must be.processed through the City
prior to being filed with the County Recorder.
8. A preliminary subdivision guarantee is required showing all fee interest holders and
encumbrances. An updated title report shall be provided before the final tract map,is released
for filing with the County Recorder.
9. Pay all required fees for the processing and approval of the final tract map.
10. Submit a preliminary soils/geotechnical report prepared by a California registered civil
engineer.
11. Prior to final map approval,a grading plan shall be prepared by a civil engineer based on the
recommendations of soils/geotechnical report.
12. Prior to the final map approval,the developer shall submit sewer plans to the City for review
and approval. All residential units within the proposed condominium subdivision shall be
served by the public sewer system.
13. Prior to final map approval, a drainage study shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer in _
accordance with the standards of the County of San Bernardino Hydrology and Design
Manual to the satisfaction of the City. The Drainage Study shall include,but not be limited
to,the evaluation of the capacity of the downstream storm drain. The study shall include the
design of all facilities required to mitigate downstream deficiencies and impacts to the
satisfaction of the City.
14. Prior to final map approval,the developer shall demonstrate that all legal rights to drain storm
water onto the down stream properties to a sufficient outlet exist or the Developer shall
obtain those rights prior to the final map approval.
15. Prior to final map approval,the downstream sewer system shall be analyzed to insure there
is sufficient capacity for the proposed development. The study shall include the design of
all facilities required to mitigate downstream deficiencies and impacts to the sewer system.
16. Prior to final map approval,the developer shall obtain sewer easements for the construction
of all required downstream sewer improvements on private property and rights to utilize the r
sewer capacity of privately owned downstream sewer mains.
17. Prior to final map approval,improvement plans shall be prepared by a civil engineer to design
the facilities required by the drainage and sewer studies
18. Prior to final map approval, the developer shall construct any and all missing public
improvements along the frontage of Mt. Vernon Avenue in accordance with City
requirements.
19. Prior to final map approval,improvement plans shall be prepared by a civil engineer for any
work in the public right-of-way and shall be approved by the City; and the appropriate
encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City prior to commencing any such work.
20. Prior to final map approval,all on-site and off-site curbs,gutters,paving,street lights,sewer
laterals, water services, utilities, grading, storm drain improvements shall be installed or
sufficient surety shall be posted to the satisfaction of the City to guarantee their installation.
21. Prior to final map approval,plans and specifications for the water system facilities shall be
submitted for approval to the Riverside Highland Water Company.. The subdivider shall
submit an agreement and other evidence, satisfactory to the City, indicating that the
subdivider has entered into a contract a contract with the water purveyor guaranteeing
payment and installation of the water improvements.
22. Prior to the final map approval,there shall also be filed with the City Engineer,a statement
II
I
I
from the water purveyor indicating subdivider compliance with the Fire Chief s fire flow)
requirements.
23. The project shall be used only for residential uses. Conditions,Covenants,and Restrictions
(C, C&R's) shall be recorded as part of this tract. As a minimum, these C, C &R's shall
include the provisions for the establishment of a"Homeowner's Association." The C, C&
R's shall be submitted to the Community Development Department and'City Attorney for
review and approval prior to recordation.
24. The Covenants,Conditions,and Restrictions(C,C&R's)applicable to the proj ect property
shall be consistent with the terms of this map and all City Codes. If there is a conflict
between the CC&R's and any City Code or this map,the City Codes or this map shall prevail.
25. Prior to a precise grading permit being issued,a Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP)
will be submitted to the City for review. The City shall approve the WQMP prior to granting
of a precise grading permit for the proposed development. The WQMP shall include current
documentation and/or evidence of the use ofthe proposed Stormwater 360 precast stormfilter
as approved by the Santa Ana Regional Board for use in development projects. The use of
the Stormwater 360 precast stormfilter or equivalent will also remain subject to approval by
the City Engineer. At the City's discretion, the City Engineer may opt to consult with the
Regional Board for verification of approved projects using similar structural devices for
water quality treatment.
Conditions After the Final Map Approval:
26. Final map shall be filed with the County recorder and one(1)Mylar copy of the filed map.
shall be submitted to the City offices prior to the issuance of any building permits.
PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace,California at a regular
meeting held on the 27`'day of April, 2006.
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace and Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace and
of the City Council thereof of the City Council thereof
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
John Harper
i
C:\MyFilcs\JOHN\Greystone\TTM-05-03resolution.rev.2
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER
8.112.OF THE GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE AND
REGULATING THE SALE AND DISCHARGE OF FIREWORKS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 8.112 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code is hereby amended to read
as follows:
8.112.010 Dates and hours of sale.and discharge. Safe and sane fireworks as defined by
Section 12529 of the Health and Safety Code of the state may be sold within the City during the
period of July I` - 4`.", 9:00 a.m. - 9:00 p.m. and the discharge dates are July 1" - 4`h, 9:00 a.m. -
11:00 p.m. pursuant to the provisions of this chapter and not otherwise.
8.112.020 License Required. Except as provided in this chapter,it is unlawful for any person
to offer for sale or sell at retail any fireworks of any kind in the city without having first applied for
and received a license therefor. This chapter shall supercede Uniform Fire Code Section 78.102 as
-, to safe and sane fireworks.
8.112.030 License - Land use application-Public liability insurance. All applications for
a license to sell fireworks shall:
A. Be made in writing accompanied by a license fee of fifty dollars and a land use application
fee of thirty-three dollars submitted to the community and economic development
department. The fees are not for the purpose of revenue,but will be used to defray the costs
of application processing, inspection and supervision. A 3% surcharge will be paid to the
City as partial reimbursement for extra law enforcement.
B. Set forth the proposed location of the fireworks stand applied for. The stands must be.on
private property located in the commercial and industrial or manufacturing zones and the
written permission of the owner of record or lessee must accompany the application
according to Zoning Code Section 18.73.211, Temporary Uses Allowed.
C. Be accompanied by an assurance that if the license is issued to applicant, applicant shall, at
the time of receipt of the license, deliver to the .City Clerk's office one hundred
thousand/three hundred thousand dollars public liability and fifty thousand dollars property
damage insurance policies with riders attached to the policies designating the City as an
additional insured under this chapter, and a copy of the requisite permit from the State Fire
Marshal.
D. Be routed to the Fire Chief,Building and safety Director, and the Sheriff's Department via
-1-
97 Ek`- ) :;,
the Land Use Application. The community and Economic Development Department will
evaluate the location of the fireworks stand and related issues.
8.112.040 License-Prerequisites to Issuance. The following qualifications must be met by
each applicant for a license issued under this chapter:
A. No license shall be issued to any person, firm or corporation except nonprofit associations
or corporations organized primarily for youth sports.
B. Each such organization must have its principal and permanent meeting place in the corporate
limits of the city and must have been organized and established in the city's corporate limits
for a minimum of one year continuously preceding the filing of the application for the
license, and must have a bona fide membership of at least one hundred fifty members.
C. No organization may receive more than one license for fireworks sale. One license may be
issued to two or more qualifying applicants as a joint venture. The maximum number of
licenses which maybe issued pursuant"to this chapter shall be one.
.8.112.050 Suspension of license-Appeal procedure.
A. The fire chief or his designee shall be authorized to suspend immediately and without notice
or formal hearing the license of any licensee which violates any rule,regulation or ordinance
while operating or preparing to operate a fireworks stand during or immediately preceding
any period of sale. If the fire chief or his designee establishes that a violation has occurred
too late to suspend the license during the period of sale,he shall have power to suspend the
licensee from future licenses, and to suspend the priority of the licensee for any such
violation found to have occurred during or immediately preceding or immediately following
the authorized period of sale.
B. The decision of the fire chief or his designee to suspend the license of any licensee shall be
subject to review by the city manager, forthwith. In view of the limited sales period each
year, for suspensions affecting the sale period, such hearing shall be held at the earliest
possible time that the licensee,city manager or his designee,and the representative of the fire
chief can schedule a meeting for such review.
8.112.060 Operation of stand.
A. It is unlawful for the licensee organization to permit any person other than the licensee
organization to operate the stand for which the license is issued or to otherwise participate
in the profits of the operation of such stand.
B. It is unlawful for the licensee organization to permit any person other than the individuals
who are members of the licensee organization, or the spouses or adult children of such
members, to sell or otherwise participate in the sale of fireworks at such stand.
C. It is unlawful for the licensee organization to pay any consideration to any person for selling
or otherwise participating in the sale of fireworks at such stand.
-2-
8.112.070 Temporary fireworks stands. All retail sales of safe and sane fireworks shall be
permitted only from within a temporary fireworks stand, and sales from any other building or
structure is hereby prohibited. Temporary stands shall be subject to the following provisions:
A. No fireworks stand shall be located within twenty-five feet of any other building nor within
one hundred feet of any gasoline pump.
B. Fireworks stands need not comply with the provisions of the building code of the city;
provided,however,that all stands shall be erected under the supervision of the building and
safety director,who shall require that stands be constructed in a manner that will reasonably
insure the safety of attendants and patrons.
C. No stand shall have a floor area in excess of three hundred square feet.
D. Each stand in excess of twenty-four feet in length must have at least two exits. Each stand
in excess of forty feet in length must have at least three exits spaced approximately
equidistance apart;provided,however,that in no case shall the distance between exits exceed
twenty-four feet.
E. Each stand shall be provided with two two-and-one-half gallon soda-and-acid or water
pressure type fire extinguishers, underwriter approved, in good working order and easily
accessible for use in case of fire.
F. Posters of current notices and fines need to be posted and copies of the rules and fines
handed out.
8.112.080 General requirements for licensees.
A. All weeds and combustible material shall be cleared from the location of the stand including
a distance of at least twenty feet surrounding the stand.
B. "No smoking"signs shall be prominently displayed on the fireworks stand.
C. Each stand must have an adult in attendance and in charge thereof while fireworks are stored
therein. Sleeping or remaining in the stand after close of business each day is forbidden.
D. . The sale of fireworks shall not begin before 9:00 a.m. on the 1 st day of July and shall not
continue after 9:00 p.m. on the 4`h day of July.
E. All unsold stock and accompanying litter shall be removed from the location by five p.m. on
the 6`h day of July.
F. The fireworks stand shall be removed from the temporary location by twelve noon on the 8`h
day of July, and all accompanying litter shall be cleared from the location by said time and
date.
8.112.090 License 'fee and land use application fee. The license fee for the selling of
fireworks within the city shall be eighty-three dollars(fifty dollars plus thirty-three dollars)per year
per stand,which fee must be paid at the time application for a stand is filed with the community and
economic development department.
8.112.100 Temporary sales tax permit required. Organizations licensed for the selling of
fireworks are required to obtain a temporary sales tax permit from the San Bernardino office of the
-3-
State Board of Equalization.
8.112.110 Display of license and sales tax permit. The license to sell fireworks and
temporary sales tax permit shall be displayed in a prominent place in the fireworks stand.
8.112.120 Permissible locations for discharge. The use of fireworks in the city shall be
limited to private property. No fireworks shall be discharged on public, semipublic or private open
areas such as parking lots, vacant properties, in a public street right-of-way or public parks.
8.112.130 Prohibition on discharge. It is unlawful for anyperson to ignite,explode,project,
or otherwise fire or use,any fireworks, or permit the ignition, explosion or projection thereof,upon
or over or onto the property of another without his consent, or to ignite, explode, project, or
otherwise fire or make use of, any fireworks within ten feet of any resident dwelling or other
structure used as a place of habitation by human beings. Fireworks shall not be discharged within
two hundred feet of any dry grass or brush-covered land.
8.112.140 Fireworks defined. Fireworks shall be defined as set forth in Section 9.108 of the
Uniform Fire Code.
Section 2. Effective Date-This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on
the 3151 day of its adoption.
Section 3. Posting-The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three(3)public.
places within fifteen(15) days of its adoption, as designated for such purposes by the City Council.
Section 4. First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on the 13`''day
of April and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the 27`'
day of April, 2006.
Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace
and of the City Council thereof,
Attest:
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
I, Brenda Mesa, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, California, do hereby certify that
-4-
the foregoing Ordinance was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Grand Terrace held on the 27"' day of April, 2006,by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Brenda Mesa,City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John Harper, City Attorney
-5-
Ordinance No.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE,
CALIFORNIA RECINDING THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT FEE
SCHEDULE AND CIRCULATION FEE SCHEDULE (4.104)AND REPLACING IT
WITH A NEW FEE STRUCTURE AND RECINDING THE CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE FEE SCHEDULE (4.80)AND REPLACING
IT WITH A NEW FEE STRUCTURE
i WHEREAS,.Grand Terrace is continuing to experience new development of its vacant
parcels as well as additions to and some replacement and remodeling of existing
buildings; and
WHEREAS, the rate of construction and growth continues to drive the demand_ for
municipal services which in turn generate the need:for expansion of the City's public
facilities in order to provide those services; and
WHEREAS, the City of Grand Terrace master facilities plan indicates that in order to in
accommodate future growth capital projects are needed including general government
facilities,parklands and open space, public meeting facilities, storm drainage facilities,
street and traffic signal improvements; and
WHEREAS, the City of Grand Terrace has conducted an extensive analysis in
accordance with Chapter 5, Section 66000 Of the California Government Code of
potential new development, identified anticipated capital improvements needed to
accommodate future growth, estimated the costs of these improvements, and identified
the potential beneficiaries of these improvements; and
WHEREAS, the City of Grand Terrace is required to update its Circulation Fees by
November 2006 to be eligible for supplemental funding that will become available under
San Bernardino County's Measure I Program starting in 2010; and
WHEREAS, notice of public.hearing has been provided per Government Code Section
6062a, oral and written presentation made and received, and the required pubic hearing
held; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government code Section 60623a, a general
explanation of the hereinafter.contained schedule of fees and charges has been published
as required; and
WHEREAS,all requirement of California Government Code Section 6600 et seq. are
hereby found to have been complied with; and
COUNCIL AGENDA ITER 4 NR �F.�
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND
TERRACE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS.
Rescinding the heading and fees in Chapter 4.80 and replace with the
following:
Developer Impact Fees
A. Storm Drainage Facilities Fund
1. Detached Dwelling Unit $2,234 `,
2. Attached Dwelling Units $429
3: Mobile Home Units $679
4. . Commercial/Offices (Units = SF) $0.353
5. Industrial Uses (Units = SF) $0.337
B. General Facilities Fund
1. Detached Dwelling Unit $1,102
2. Attached Dwelling Units $1,102
3. Mobile Home Units $1,102
4. Commercial/Offices (Units = SF) $0.208
5. Industrial.Uses (Units = SF) $0.208
C. Public Use Facilities Fund
1. Detached Dwelling Unit $674 .
2. Attached Dwelling Units $422
3. Mobile Home Units $515
4. Commercial/Offices (Units = SF) NO FEE
5. Industrial Uses (Units = SF) NO FEE
D. Parkland and Open Space Acquisition Fund
1. Detached Dwelling Unit $7,241
2. Attached Dwelling Units $4,534
3. Mobile Home Units $5,540
4. Commercial/Offices (Units = SF) $0.051
5. Industrial Uses (Units = SF) $0.046
Circulation Impact Fees
Rescinding the fees and Table "A". in Chapter 4.104.05.0 and replace with
the following:
Traffic Signal Improvement Fees
Single-Family Homes and Multi-Family Homes (per Unit)
1. Detached Dwelling Unit $666.36
2. Attached Dwelling Units $408.06
Retail
1. Retail (TSF-GLA) $1,500
(per thousand square feet of gross lease-able area).
Industrial/warehouse
1. Industrial/warehouse (TSF-GFA) $490
(per thousand square feet of gross.floor area)
Office
1. Office (TSF=GLA) $770
(per thousand square feet of gross lease-able area)
- See attached new Table "A"
Delete 4.104.040 "B"
Two circulation improvement fee districts are established.. District A shall
encompass the portion of the city bounded by I-215 on the west,Barton Road on the
north, Michigan on the east and Main Street on the south. District B shall
encompass all other areas of the city.
Delete 4.104.090 "Fee adjustments"
From time to time the city shall review the fee schedule and make
adjustments, as appropriate, in consideration of changes in construction and right-
of-way costs.
Replace 4.104.090 with "Fee adjustments"
On an annual basis, the city will review the Circulation and Traffic Signal
component of the fee schedule and make adjustments to it pursuant to the
construction cost index provided by SANBAG.
Rescinding the heading and fees and Table "B" in Chapter 4.104.060 and
replace with the following:
Arterial Improvement Fees
Single-Family Homes and Multi-Family Homes (per Unit)
1. Detached Dwelling Unit $2953.37
2. Attached Dwelling Units $1808.55
Retail
1. Retail (TSF-GLA) $6630.00
(per thousand square feet of gross lease-able area)
Industrial/warehouse
1. Industrial/warehouse(TSF-GFA) $2,150.00
(per thousand square feet of gross floor area)
Office
1. Office (TSF-GLA) $3,400.00
(per thousand square feet of gross lease-able area)
See attached new Table "B"
r�
ATTEST:
City Clerk of the City of Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace
Grand Terrace and of the. and of the City Council thereof
City Council thereof
I, BRENDA MESA, City Clerk of the City.of Grand Terrace, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced and adopted at a
regular meeting-of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held on the
2006 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
I
City Clerk
Brenda Mesa
Approved as to form:
'City Attorney
John Harper
�I
I
I
TABLE A
COST TO CONSTRUCT TRAFFIC SIGNALS
CitV Responsibility Dollar`:
1 Barton @ Grand Terrace 1.00 $250,000
2 Barton @ Palm 1.00 $250,000
3 Barton @ Honey Hill 1.00 $250,000
4 Michigan @ Commerce Way 1.00 $250,000
5 Mt.Vernon @ Canal 1.00 $250,000
6 Mt.Vernon @ Van Buren 1.00 $250,000
7 Mt.Vernon @ Pico 1.00 $250,000
8 Main @ Mt.Vernon 0.50 $125,000
9 Main @ Michigan 0.50 $125,000
Subtotal $2,000,000
"25% Design &contingencies $500,000
Grand Total $2,500,000
TABLE B
ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENT COST ESTIMATES
Street: From: To: Estimated Cost Local growth Fee
component Chargeable
Barton Rd. 1-215 overcrossin $4,000,000.00 0.40 $1,600,000.00
Barton Rd. S.P.R.R. 1-215 Overcrossin $1,252,800.00 0.40 $501,120.00
Barton Rd. (e.b.) Honey Hill Dr. N.E. City Limits $706,875.00 0.40 $282,750.00
Barton Rd. (w.b.) Honev Hill Dr. N.E. City Limits $1,060,312.50 0.40 $424,125.00
Michigan St. Barton Rd. Commerce Way $322,770.00 0.40 $129,108.00
Michigan St. Commercy Way. De BerrySt. $517,650.00 0.40 $207,060.00
Main St. S.F.R.R. S.P.R.R. $157,760.00 0.40 $63,104.00
Mt.Vernon Ave. Barton Rd. 700 ft. north of Minona $429,780.00 0.40 $171,912.00
Mt.Vernon Ave. Canal St. N. City Limit $403,100.00 0.40 $161,240.00
Commerce Way 900 ft. North of De Berry Pico $7,545,568.00 1.00 $7,545,568.00
Commerce Way Pico Main St. $2,488,432.00 1.001 $2,488,432.00
$18,885,047.50 $13,674,419.00