Loading...
04/27/2010CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2010 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 27, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. PRESENT: Maryetta Ferre, Mayor Lee Ann Garcia, Mayor Pro Tern Walt Stanckiewitz, Councilmember Betsy M. Adams, City Manager Brenda Mesa, City Clerk Bernard Simon, Finance Director Joyce Powers, Community & Economic Development Director Richard Shields, Building & Safety Director John Harper, City Attorney Sgt. Espinoza, San Bernardino County Sheriffs Department John Salvate, San Bernardino County Fire Department 0 ABSENT: Bea Cortes, Councilmember CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 6:00 P.M. The City Council meeting was opened with Invocation by Mayor Pro Tem Lee Ann Garcia, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilman Walt Stanckiewitz. ITEMS TO ADD/DELETE - None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS A. Chamber of Commerce Business of the Month Sally McGuire, President, Chamber of Commerce, presented Emeritus at Grand Terrace with the Chamber of Commerce Business of the Month Award for April, 2010. CONSENT CALENDAR CC-2010-32 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS ABSENT), to approve the following Consent Calendar Items: Council Minutes 0412'N?010 Page 2 3A. Approve Check Register Dated 04-27-2010 3B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda 3C. Approval of 04-13-2010 Minutes 3D. Emergency Operations Committee Minutes of February 2, 2010 and March 2, 2010 3E. Crime Prevention Committee Minutes of January 11, 2010 and March 8, 2010 PUBLIC COMMENT Denis Kidd, 22874 Pico Street, reported that the Environmental Impact Report for the Perris Valley Line is on display at the Highgrove Public Library and does not include a Highgrove Metrolink Station in the plan. He indicated that anyone that would like to comment can send an e-mail to hiehgovenews@roadrunner.com or call him at 951-683-4994. Charles Hornsby, 22656 Brentwood Street, he is sure that there are a lot of people around town, like him, that are wondering about the eye sore on the corner of Barton and Mt. Vernon. Obviously it is beyond the City's control as far as whether it is actually going to go through or not. The time has long come and gone when something needs to be done. If the project is going to move forward then people need to know when that is going to happen and if it's not going to happen for some time then the fence needs to be torn down and remove the ugly sandbags and gravel and plant some grass. Elsa Aguilar, 1088 Stevenson Street, Colton, invited everyone to their Honorary Service Award Dinner. It is going to be held on May 26, 2010 at Lincoln Elementary School. All proceeds go towards scholarships. She reported that pink slips have been given to teachers and 5 furlough days have been proposed reducing instructional days. A meeting will be held on the 291h of April at 6:00 p.m. in the Ace Building. She also would like to bring up Child Abduction Awareness in the schools. Randall Ceniceros, 15862 Falcon Court, Fontana, stated that he currently serves as the Treasurer of the Agua Mansa PTA Council. He stated that as a parent of 4 children with 2 being gate children who are in elementary and middle school. He is very concerned with what is going on within the Colton Joint Unified School District. It was proposed by the Board that they lay off 141 teachers but that number has risen to 160. They are also moving forward with the proposal to furlough 5 days, which is reducing the instructional days. He feels that this will hurt the kids and deny his child with quality education. One of the other proposals was the reduction of gate funding by 90%. He feels that this is very alarming because these are the kids who graduate and go on to higher education. These are our future leaders. He recently learned that the District plans on opening the new Grand Terrace High School without bleachers, concession building and a swimming pool, these are all items that were on the architectural drawing when the proposal was made. He feels that it is important I Council Minutes 04f2712010 Page 3 for the City of Grand Terrace and City Council to be aware of what is going on within our schools. City Manager Betsy M. Adams, stated that staff will bring back information at a later date in response to the questions raised regarding the property at the corner of Barton Road and Mt. Vernon. COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, agreed with Mr. Hornsby regarding the corner of Mt. Vernon and Barton Road. She feels that student safety is very important and she would like staff to look into what school related programs are available through the Sheriff's Department and also some type of program for children and their parents that could be done in the evening hours. She thanked JoAnn Johnson for always being an inspiration to the City. She commended the Chamber of Commerce for all that they are doing. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, reminded everyone that Market Night will be held on Monday, May 3, 2010. He urged everyone to come out and support the businesses. He reported that the 26" Annual Art Show will be held on Sunday, May 2, 2010 from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. He stated that he has been looking at the Crime Stats and it appears that we are up about 50° o. Sat. Espinoza, responded that there was a rise in vehicle burglaries which was addressed. Since that issue was addressed there have been much less. He stated that the actual crime rate for 2009 was down from 2008 overall. Mayor Ferrd, stated that the Art Show is a very worthwhile event to attend and that the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee do a great job. The artists are all local. She encouraged everyone to stop by and enjoy. She thanked the Community and Economic Development Director for all of the work she has done on the reader boards and signs and feels that they are a great asset. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6A. General Plan Update - Certification of the Final Program EIR Resolution Certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report Prepared for the Grand Terrace General Plan Update. Resolution Adopting the Grand Terrace General Plan Update Applicable City -Wide Mayor Ferrd opened the Public Hearing. Council Minutes 04/-7/2010 Page 4 Sandra Molina, Senior Planner, reported that there have been a number of Workshops held by the Planning Commission and also by the City Council to prepare this General Plan. The draft General Plan has been prepared in accordance with Section 65300 et. Seq of the California Government Code, which requires all cities and counties to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the city or county. State law requires that the General Plan be comprised of seven mandated elements: land use, circulation, housing, conservation, Open Space and Conservation (combined as one element), Public Health and Safety, Noise, and Housing Elements, and two optional Elements: Public Services and Sustainable Development. The Draft General Plan also contains an Introduction chapter and Appendix A, which is a compilation of General Plan goals, policies, and actions. She went over each element and why they are required and what they are intended for and the goals and policies for implementation. She stated that all legal requirements were met with regards to public notices and mailings. She recommended that the City Council conduct the Public Hearing and adopt the Resolution certifying the Final EIR prepared for the Project and Adopt the Resolution adopting the Grand Terrace General Plan Update. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, stated that in Open Space and Conservation it is stated that it clarifies that BMP's should incorporate low impact development principles and questioned what low impact development principles are. Building and Safe/Public Works Director Richard Shields, responded that BMP's are the best management practices that are utilized through the permit from the County which they are calling the National Pollutant Discharge Eliminations System and we are the co- permitees. Any construction site has to comply with certain management practices to conduct their construction and local staff is suppose to make sure that they follow through with those commitments. Staff does that and soon that requirement is going to increase even greater with new requirements from the State of California. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, questioned if this will cause development to be even more expensive. Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields, responded in the affirmative. It's a mandate and it takes a lot more effort from City Staff to ensure that these requirements are met. There are provisions that are set -forth for the local jurisdictions to try and collect fees for that. Most jurisdictions have not been able to do that. It's a tough requirement and we have been doing it for many years and each year it gets a little bit tougher. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, questioned if we are sending a formal letter in regards to the response from the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection informing them that they were outside of the 60 day window and therefor their comments were not taken into consideration. pli Council Minutes 04.."27;2010 Page S Senior Planner Molina, responded that she will send a letter indicating that we will consider their recommendations when the Safety Element is amended again. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, stated that the only other issue he has is the land use map that they pulled from the General Plan but left in the EIR. He expressed his discomfort with pulling the map from the General Plan but leaving it in the EIR with a small comment that the consultant says it will have no impact. Senior Planner Molina, responded that the map was used to establish a baseline of existing traffic volumes. Traffic that is generated within the City, then it evaluated our build -out with our proposed land use map and that difference was our increase in traffic volumes. Whether a property was vacant and now has a single family home on it is not going to generate a whole lot of traffic that would impact the conclusion of our traffic study. Meaning that the one or two houses is not going to add so much traffic that it makes our conclusions inaccurate. Especially when the traffic study not only considered the City of Grand Terrace but it's part of the East Valley Traffic Model, which considers the East Valley Region, which was a document that was created through a consortium of the agencies within the East Valley Region and it also looks at the traffic for that region. They look at it at that scale that there is now a new restaurant or office building and that it doesn't generate so much traffic that it nulls or voids the conclusion of the traffic study. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, responded that it is his understanding that some of those vacant parcels that we are talking about have not been vacant for close to five years. He questioned if we started with inaccurate information when we moved forward with the consultant. Senior Planner Molina, responded that this has been a process that was started with the previous director and that she doesn't have an answer, however she feels that it would not be vastly different. Community and Economic Development Director Joyce Powers, stated that the General Plan does not require the inclusion of the existing land use map and that primarily because it's changing and ever evolving so naturally it would be confusing. The Environmental Impact Report is more of a study of the conditions and that was the basis of the study. They have looked at the map to determine whether or not it would change any outcomes mitigation measures and their conclusions were that it would not. Craig Neustaedter is available if Council has any additional questions. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, clarified that staff is saying that the age of the map is not going to make that big of a difference. Consulting Traffic Engineer Craig Neustaedter, stated the study was conducted by preparing Council Minutes 0407/2010 Page 6 a traffic impact study for the General Plan Amendment. There are typically two or more alternative or scenarios that are studied as part of that process. They look at an existing conditions scenario and they looked at the existing general plan, which projects growth over a horizon of approximately to 2030 and then there were general alternatives also projecting conditions to a future year. All of this was based on a traffic model that is run and maintained by the City of San Bernardino. The existing conditions map and the existing conditions analysis is helpful and instructive in term of describing approximately how conditions currently are. They are always slightly out of date with respect to what actually is on the ground just by terms of the process and given that this is a fairly technical process and dealing with data information. This was the case with the existing conditions analysis. It was in fact three or four years out of date already. This is a matter that is beyond our control. As others here have cited and he is sure other traffic engineers would concur, this information is useful in terms of establishing a bench mark of existing conditions, it's not exact duplication of existing conditions but it in no way affects the ultimate finding or relevant conditions that this Council has to act on because that is based on an analysis of conditions projected to this 2030 horizon year. The analysis for existing conditions does not affect that horizon year. That is where most of the relevant analysis is done and it is done on the basis of that long term horizon analysis which they have established what are the appropriate mitigation measures or overwriting condition that are necessary for the Council to consider and adopt. He fully concurs with what others have said that this map in terms of being slightly out of phase with what was actually on the ground is certainly not a problem in any respect in terms of the ultimate findings and analysis of the traffic study. Myor Pro Tern Lee Ann Garcia, questioned if it was cost prohibitive to do this study ourselves to where it could be more accurate because we know what is on each comer. She questioned if there was a financial benefit to going with it regional. Should we ever have to do a model again could it be done just for Grand Terrace so it could be more accurate or is there some reason why we went through the regional model, which we probably got a cost savings because it is regional but it is not accurate. Traffic Engineer Neustaedter, responded that the approach that they took here was clearly much more cost effective then if we tried to do our own local model. Some agencies do that but it would have been for a very significant cost. We are talking about $50,000.00 to $ l 00,000.00 just to do the model development and that would have been prior to any sort of in depth analysis that would be required to do the EIR traffic Study. Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, requested that staff explain, at the end of the Public Hearing, that even if the map would have been accurate the final decision that is in the plan would not have changed. 11 JoAnn Johnson,12723 Mt. Vernon Avenue, stated that she served on a General Plan Update Committee for several years and she is aware of the amount of work, discussions, arguments, Council Minutes 04,'27,;2010 Page 7 etc. that go into this. No one is ever going to agree with every point, she does not agree with every point but she certainly agrees with the overall plan and definately supports the plan. Denis Kidd, 22874 Pico Street, indicated that he supports the General Plan Update. Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan Street, stated that she is submitting a document regarding the certification of the 2010 General Plan Update, Final Program EIR, and Amendment #b: To Whom this may concern: Grand Terrace residents local agencies and the State of California It is a fact there are past and present officials and staff that know that the accuracy of maps and major information in some of the most important city documents has been questioned for years. They also know that there are a lot of things that have been done wrong for many years which has cost us huge amounts of money which has definately helped contribute to our current condition. There are also past and present officials and staff that know that major information regarding the update of our General Plan and map accuracy was being questioned in 2007 and everything has not been revised adequately or noted in the Final Program EIR of our 2010 General Plan Update. Major data has also been used that is outdated, not accurate, incomplete and illegally processed. Any study such as a Traffic Impact Analysis is absolutely worthless if it is based on a map that is not accurate and information that is not all accurate or complete. Also proposed mitigation would not be accurate based on any of this information and we certainly would not be prepared for the future when all the proposed or approved projects are finished which might produce major gridlock. No one in the City of Grand Terrace has ever proven that the current General Plan Land Use Map for 1988 which appears undated in the final version printed in 1989 is actually accurate in all areas. Also the map has no number on it even though it is referred to in text, and information on the Land Use Chart that indicates acreage does not even match the map because it is wrong. This map is being referred to in our 2010 General Plan Update which includes the DEIR and Amendment #5. It is also important to note at this time, that Developer Impact Fees that were established in order to accommodate future growth capital projects which are needed, have been done wrong for many years and everyone did not pay their fair share. It appears that these fees were never waived by City Council and it is a violation of our Municipal Code if they are not paid. This should mean that these fees which amount to a large amount of revenue are still owed, regardless of how they were done. This could help eliminate some major problems Council Minutes 04I37/2010 Page 8 that we have right now in our city. These fees are not paid by the RDA and help fund general government facilities, public meeting facilities, storm drainage facilities, traffic signal improvements, street improvements, parklands/open space. It is a fact that RDA has created blight in designated project areas in the City of Grand Terrace such as the Town Center, Barton Square and Grand Crossings preventing property owners from doing anything with their property for years. Property in any designated proj ect area should never have been sold to any developer or any developer given unlimited amounts of time until they can prove they can follow through and access should never be the last consideration. Wasting huge amounts of time and money on projects that were never feasible is absolutely absurd and it only benefits certain people which was not property owners who may have never wanted to relocate. Our Planning Commission should never have approved this update to be certified by the City Council at this time for all of these very important reasons and certain elements should be re -circulated after everything is accurate. It certainly did not seem to matter how accurate maps are or anything else when our Building & Safety Director convinced them to approve the update for other reasons and ignored residents concerns again. The Moreno Family should be insulted because they are one of the locations which show their property as vacant on one of the maps in question. They built a home in 2005 and even won a Home of Distinction award in 2009 because it is so beautiful. One of our Planning Commissioners was actually one of the judges. Also there are at least fifteen other locations that also are wrong and it appears that property owners on the other side of La Cadena may never have been notified. Edward DeMuth, 12210 Michigan Street, wanted to go on record that he supports the General Plan Update. Charles Hornsby, 22656 Brentwood Street, questioned if the Council should vote tonight. He would appreciate comments from the three Councilmembers as a group each of them as individuals and even the City Manager. There are only three representatives of five tonight and he feels that this is about as big of a deal that you can decide upon for this City. He realizes that this is not something that the Council planned on, Mr. Miller resigned and Bea Cortes is just not here. He feels that it is appropriate for the Council to vote tonight, you probably can and it is probably legal for you to vote but he doesn't feel that they should. Cynthia Bidney,12219 Pascal, stated that she is addressing the already overstated statement that the noise and pollution is already exceeding the limits here in Grand Terrace. At the Planning Commission meeting there was also a map showing the neighborhoods and the areas that would be the most impacted and one of those was her neighborhood. She is really concerned that the Council take real caution on agreeing to say that it is ok to over pollute 11 Council Minutes 04i27M 10 Page 9 her neighborhood. They already will be impacted by whatever is built there and she feels that by increasing the pollution and noise for her neighborhood they are severely going to deplete their duality of life and their right to quiet enjoyment of their own properties. Not to mention the increased respiratory illnesses that will come of this. She is hoping that the Council will explain what they plan to do to protect her neighborhood and those that are going to be impacted. Janese Makshanoff, 21816 Vivienda Avenue, stated that she lives in the re -designated area as the Industrial Flood Plain area. At the Commission Meeting staff was directed to research the changing of the code as was mentioned. They contacted the property owners with another option other than the zone change, it was a municipal code change. At this meeting they were asked if they wanted a workshop, maybe she misunderstood, but she thought that the workshop was going to be with the commission so that they could ask questions and get some feedback. All three houses down there were there long before the City was and they have been through a few zones and none were wanted by any of the residents. She would like to ask the City, do they have plans for this area because if the City does not they do. They want to continue to live there and raise their family grow old and have some piece of mind. 0 Mayor Ferre closed the Public Hearing and returned discussion to the Council. Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, appreciates the comments that have been made by the residents and would like to go through each issue that has been brought up by them. She understands how the residents feel that live in the designated industrial area. It seems like they are saying that the Planning Commission recommended it and so we go ahead and move forward but they still are out in limbo. It is not something that can be guaranteed and will still need to go through a public hearing process. Senior Planner Molina, responded that the code amendment would need to go through the process of both the Planning Commission and City Council. The Commission did suggest that the Council consider directing them to amend the General Plan at a later date to return that area to residential, however, we don't necessarily recommend that approach. Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, questioned why it is a flood plain. She stated basically what she understands is that State regulations say, because there is a higher propensity should there be the 100 year flood those people would be in danger. She wants to understand from the City's perspective why the staff is concerned. Senior Planner Molina, responded that from a land use perspective, you typically don't want to put structures or residents in an area that is subject to a flood hazard. You have seen many cases where that has happened in the past and there has been issues. Staffs perspective is two folded, the flood plain issue and looking at that entire area and changing Council Minutes 04.17/2010 Page 10 it back to residential or even just a portion of it, they would not want to do just a portion of it. What they are saying is that they are proposing an alternative that addresses the needs of the residents to be able to continue to use their homes and expand them or rebuild them should fire destroy them, which they don't currently enjoy under the non -conforming use provisions. Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, stated that we would be helping them. She stated that it is kinda like a variance. She wanted clarification that under this we would allow them to remain there as long as they want, however, industrial will be built all around them. Senior Planner Molina, responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Stanckiewitz questioned if the residents are satisfied with the alternative that has been given to them. Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, stated that Planner Molina has had discussions with the homeowners. She indicated that as a Council they want to help the homeowners. The solution that staff came up with she feels if she was in their place she still wouldn't be happy with it. Senior Planner Molina, stated to clarify, the property is already zoned Industrial and due to expansion of flood plain areas by FEMA we had to expand the flood plain industrial designation. They have met with the property owners and they drafted up some language for transitional residential uses which would apply to their properties and the non -conforming use concerns that they expressed during the public hearing. When she last spoke to them she asked that they meet to discuss the provisions prior to a Planning Commission and she is still hopeful that they can meet. She feels that they have just missed each others phone calls. They were told that the first step would be the work shop then to go to the Planning Commission and then the Planning Commission would make that recommendation to the City Council. The Planning Commission has expressed that they understand the concerns and they are not comfortable with them not being able to rebuild should the home completely burn and what they are proposing is language that would allow that, allow the rebuilding in these areas for those three homes that exist. Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, questioned if there is a way, should the Council move forward on this, to create language that would give a better comfort level to those residents. Senior Planner Molina, responded that there is language in proposed General Plan for this particular area that states that existing residential uses can continue to operate under the low density residential designations. They take that to mean that they would apply the low density single family residential requirements to it, which allows homes to be expanded or rebuilt. They feel that there is enough language in the General Plan to support what they are Council Minutes 04:27 2010 Page 11 proposing with regard to that code amendment but it is a separate process. Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, stated that she feels that one thing that they can do, should they move forward, she would like to call that out so that it would specifically address the homes in this specific area. Community and Economic Development Director Powers, clarified for the Council that as Sandra mentioned, the current zoning is Industrial and staff is not suggesting that it be changed or anything along that line. The General Plan does already state that any projects within that flood plain industrial area would be reviewed under the residential zoning. What staff is trying to do with moving some new language into the zoning ordinance is to provide process for doing that. As it is written now, they can only rebuild if it's 75% or less destroyed. What they are seeking is to be able to rebuild if it is 100% destroyed keeping in mind that the residents would now have to be raised out of the flood plain. Title 18, the zoning ordinance already explains the process for non conforming residences so to set this apart as a transitional use and set up their process does belong in that section along with the non conforming steps to process it. Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, stated that should a motion be made she would want to bring some emphasis to that. City Attorney John -Harper, stated that obviously they can't consider the zone code tonight, but one of the requirements in the zone code is that it be consistent with the General Plan. To the extent that it hasn't taken into account the language that has been added to the General Plan it needs to be made consistent. Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, stated that when she move to the community she was saddened to see an Elementary School so close to the freeway because it's not a good thing because of the noise and the pollution from the freeway. She would like to address Mrs. Bidney's concerns as far as how are we going to ensure that the residents are protected from pollution. She expressed her concern with the statement of overriding considerations. Senior Planner Molina, clarified that there was no map provided at the Planning Commission that showed the air quality impacts. The map that was provided to the Planning Commission was on noise not pollution. With regard to air quality, there are several policies and actions in the open space and conservation element, sustainable development element and even in the land use element it talks about buffering or separation of uses. All of these policies and actions that they would implement upon adoption ofthis General Plan will serve to minimize air quality impacts, however, even with all those goals, policies and actions, at build out of the General Plan there will be air quality impacts which based upon the standards that are in place today would create a significant impact that we can't avoid. There are policies in place, there are actions that are in place but they are not adequate to fully mitigate impacts. Council Minutes 04+2712010 Page 14 Resolution becomes effective upon adoption. CC-2010-33 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILEMEMBER STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS ABSENT), to adopt a Resolution Certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report Prepared for the Grand Terrace General Plan Update. Mayor Ferre stated that it is before the City Council for consideration the adoption of a City Council Resolution Adopting the Grand Terrace General Plan Update Applicable City -Wide, the Resolution becomes effective upon adoption. CC-2010-34 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS ABSENT), to adopt a Resolution Adopting the Grand Terrace General Plan Update Applicable City -Wide and directed staff to proceed with a Development Code Amendment relating to transitional residential uses in the Industrial Floodplain area, that includes the three existing homes. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7A. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 8.112 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code Establishing a No Fireworks Safety Zone CC-2010-35 MOTION BY MAYOR FERRE, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, CARRIED 3-0-1-0, (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS ABSENT), to approve the Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 8.112 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code Establishing a No Fireworks Safety Zone. NEW BUSINESS 8A. Third Quarter Budget Review for Fiscal Year 2009/2010 CC-2010-36 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY MAYOR FERRE, CARRIED 3-0-1-0, (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS ABSENT), to receive and file the Third Quarter Budget Review for Fiscal Year 2009/2010. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL 1. Joint Public Hearing on Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Council Minutes 04.27.2010 Page 15 Resolution Certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report Prepared for Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Revised Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Applicable City-wide Ordinance Certifying Amendment No, 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area Mayor Ferre opened the Joint City Council and Community Redevelopment Agency Public Hearing. The purpose of this Joint Public Hearing is to discuss Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project. In the form of the amended and restated redevelopment plan. The City Council and Redevelopment Agency are separate legal entities under State Law and in this case though the members of the City Council also sit as members of the Redevelopment Agency and have each consented to hold a joint public hearing. The public hearing will be conducted as follows, first the staff will give a presentation on the proposed amendment and related documents. After the staff presentation then any written correspondence received by the City Clerk will be reviewed. Finally the members of the public that would like to speak may do so and any one wishing to speak needs to complete a request to speak card and hand it to the City Clerk. Those who wish to speak should state their, name, address and organization if applicable for our record. We ask that you limit your comments to three minutes. Community and Economic Development Department Powers, stated that over the past 20 years, the Agency has undertaken significant work toward achieving the goals of the Redevelopment Plan. Although there are many successes on record, the entire Redevelopment Project is not yet complete. The following is a list of accomplishments: - Designed and developed Rollins Park, the Child Care Center, the Fire Station, City Hall, the Library, and Pico Park. The Agency has also completed the design for a new baseball field to be built on Agency -owned land. - Developed and implemented programs for neighborhood improvement, including the Neighborhood Grant Program, the Commercial Improvement Program, wall -painting projects, and neighborhood cleanup projects. - Purchased and cleared property for the City's first dog park. - Completed the affordable senior villas, senior center, and Petta Park - Sponsored and supported economic development programs, including business training, the Chamber of Commerce, and new signage. The following is a list of projects that are not yet complete: Barton Road infrastructure improvements Storm drain and road improvements near Main and Michigan Reconstruction of Grand Terrace Road, west of I-215 Council Minutes 04P27/2010 Page 16 - Construction of a new baseball field, the dog park, and other amenities - Michigan Street improvements - Affordable family housing - Correction of drainage deficiencies throughout the City - Continuing efforts to correct and prevent future deferred maintenance, for commercial and residential areas, and infrastructure that may not yet be evident To address the City's future needs and lack of funding, the Community Redevelopment Agency (Agency) has taken a number of steps toward amending the Redevelopment Plan (Plan). The basis of the Amendment recommendations is the Agency's $70 million revenue limit will be reached in approximately two years, and funds no longer will be received for capital projects (roads, facilities, and parks), economic and community enhancement programs or housing projects and programs. The existing limitations in the Redevelopment Plan, if not amended, would force the Agency to now shift its financial focus to repaying debt service on outstanding bonds, rather than funding new and ongoing projects and programs. Exacerbating the funding shortfall issue is the fact that the Agency cannot now collect its maximum allowable revenue due to minimal outstanding debt, which is needed to justify revenue collection. Recommended actions include extending the length of time during which the Agency can continue collecting revenue to meet the Agency's and City's goals. There will be no increase in taxes, just a longer period of revenue collection, which would increase the total amount collected over the entire life of the plan. Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan would accomplish the following: 1. Increase the cumulative tax increment revenue limit in the Redevelopment Plan from $70 million (net of payments made to certain taxing entities) to approximately $225 million (net of payments made to certain taxing entities) 2. Increase the limit on the amount of bonded debt that may be outstanding at any one time in the redevelopment plan from $15 million to approximately $75 million (this does not approve a bond issue) 3. Extend the effectiveness of the redevelopment plan and time limit to collect tax increment revenue by the following time frames: a. Original Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area ("Original Area") extend plan effectiveness from July 15, 2017, to September 27, 2022, and time limit to collect tax increment from July 15, 2027, to September 27, 2032 b. Area added by the first amendment to the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area ("Added Area") extend plan effectiveness from July 15, 2017 to July 15, 2024 and time limit to collect tax increment from July 15, 2027 to July 15, 2034 4. Rescind the Agency's authority to commence eminent domain within the Project Council Minutes 04-27:2010 Page 17 Area, effective immediately following the effectiveness of the ordinance adopting Amendment No. 6 5. Replace the description of land uses in the redevelopment plan with language that directly refers to the City's General Plan, zoning ordinance, and other applicable land use policies and standards, as they exist today or are hereafter amended; and 6. Amend and restate the redevelopment plan to incorporate the prior amendments into a single document. To date; the Redevelopment Agency has approved and circulated several documents for public review, including the Draft Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan prepared in connection with Amendment No. 6, the Preliminary Report, the Draft Amended Owner Participation Rules for Property Owners, Owners of Businesses, and Business Tenants, and the Report to City Council. The documents also have been provided to affected taxing agencies. In addition to posting and publishing public notices, the Agency is required by State Law to notify individual parties that may be affected by the Amendment. Because the entire City is within the Redevelopment Project Area, 5,320 notices were sent by mail to individual addressed. As a result of the mailing, staff received ten requests for additional information. Each caller indicated that he or she was not familiar with the Redevelopment Project and were unsure as to why they would receive such a notice. No calls were received indicating an objection to the Plan Amendment or Project. As previously stated, further redevelopment is necessary to address the remaining blight within the Project area, such as improvements to Michigan Street and construction of new public facilities. Also, a lack of necessary office and commercial facilities in the Project Area requires residents to travel outside the City to purchase needed goods and services. The lack of needed businesses also has a negative effect on general fund sales tax revenues. Vacant property in the southwestern portion of the Project Area remains undeveloped due to inadequate public infrastructure and other physical conditions that hinder development. The Agency may correct drainage deficiencies, for example, to render site more developable. Also, deterioration over time has caused some buildings in the Project Area to be unsafe or unfit for use, which must either be cleared or rehabilitated. The presence of a higher rate of crime in certain portions of the project Area creates a burden on the rest of the community by demanding a disproportionate share of police and code enforcement resources. It is estimated that the Agency will reach the current tax increment limit of $70 million in fiscal year 2010-13, and will have no ability to collect additional tax increment without an amendment to the Redevelopment Plan. The estimated costs to complete the Project and meet the goals of the original Redevelopment Plan, are estimated (at today's construction costs) to be between $30 and $40 million. Because the Agency has already collected approximately $62.4 million since 1980, the Agency may only collect approximately $7.6 Council Minutes 04 '27/2010 Page 20 City Attorney John Harper, it is something that seems obvious to City people and Stag but maybe not to the public. The City does not have the legal ability to leverage its money. The City can not issue general obligations bonds, it is against the law. The only way a City can issue debt is by going to the ballot but it requires the raising of taxes. The Redevelopment Agency does not raise taxes and it has the ability to leverage that money. Community and Economic Development Director Powers, stated that notice of this hearing was provided by the following actions: (1) publication of the notice of joint public hearing in the San Bernardino Sun on March 29, April 5, April 12 and April 19, 2010; (2) mailing approximately 5,320 notices to all property owners, businesses and residents in the project area via first class mail in the Project Areas that the Agency could identify; and (3) mailing notices to all affected taxing entities via certified mail. She has provided proofs of those mailings and publication and all that is required to the City Clerk's office for the record. She stated that she received 10 phone calls. Everyone of the phone calls were requesting additional information about exactly what the City was doing and were unaware that they were in the redevelopment area. They also only received one phone call from the Community College District and they were just clarifying that the amendment would not change their pass through. Mayor Ferrd requested that the City Clerk summarize any written correspondence received on the Amended Plan. City Clerk Brenda Mesa, reported that she received 5 letters regarding the amendment and that copies were provided to each of the Councilmembers. All letters were in favor of the amendment. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, requested some examples of "correct site deficiency to make underutilized land desirable for development". Community and Economic Development Director Powers, responded that the most significant example that comes to mind in the City of Grand Terrace is the southwestern portion of the City where you have looked at projects such as the Outdoor Adventures Center and Grand Crossings. We are talking about 100 acres there that could be developed. Today it is severely impacted by poor drainage and topography that would make it impossible in terms of financial feasibility to develop and that is where a redevelopment agency could come in. The developer would have to build roads for ingress and egress. The other thing that they look at is there any contamination on the property small parcels that are so small that they can not be develop even although they may be zoned commercial they are only 50 feet wide. Sylvia Robles, 23008 Orangewood Court, did a power point presentation, stating that we are proposing $25 million in new debt, $17 million of that will be in interest payments. $1.7 Council Minutes 04/27/2010 Page 21 million in administrative costs. There are no projects for youth, recreation, sports fields or libraries. All costs are to support future development. The health and safety code requires an explanation of why the elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the project area can not reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone or by the legislative body's use of financing alternatives other than tax increment financing. Why do we need our public funds to do this. We have not proven that the entire city of Grand Terrace is blighted. We have not proven that using property tax revenues to fund private investment in commercial/retail development is beneficial to the City. To make the case that investing in private enterprise will increase the City tax base is really not working. We are down 11 % in our revenues and real estate values are plunging. There is no lack of grocery stores, banks or retail establishments, in fact we have two failed grocery stores in a one mile radius, a former AlbertsonsNons, we have had bank failures but yet we have two banks. Crime is one of the lowest in the County and the privately funded Walgreens and Fresh n Easy have been put on hold due to the lack of consumer demand. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code the burden has to be proven that it can not reasonably be expected to be reversed by private and/or governmental action without redevelopment. The City has to provide alternative funding that could be used in lieu of tax increment financing. We built the City Hall, the parks, and the Child Care Center. Her concern is that why are we doing properties that should be done by private capital. This is again a very little known part of government of debt. This is a global policy issue, she has no problem with the things that directly benefit the residents. It is not the City's fault that we have in a State with this kind of local fiscal relationship. It is something that we have to globally address and her recommendation would be to ask the State for some of the RDA money to be put back into our coughers. That way we can do bonds and we can vote for them directly. We can issue general obligation bonds but we must vote on them. When a RDA does this citizens do not have a chance to determine where that money goes. Cynthia Bidney, 12219 Pascal, discussed elements of blight. The Health and Safety Code describes physical conditions that cause blight which are buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. Conditions that prevent or substantially hinder the viable use or capacity of buildings or lots. The report photographs private properties that the owners could fix under code enforcement, this does need to be paid for by RDA via tax payers money. In this economy with the current vacancy level and people losing their jobs we will not pay back $44 million in her lifetime or her children's lifetime. Taxpayers money should be spent on projects that benefit its citizens and not developers, bond agents, and attorneys. Let the people vote. City Council Members making decisions as the Redevelopment Agency is a conflict of interest because the RDA depends on using taxpayer money without tax payers vote regarding private development. Amendment No. b should be put on the ballot for November in order to avoid a conflict. A complete accountability should be included. More elements of blight include: Adjacent or nearby incompatible land uses that prevent the development of those parcels or other portions of the project area. The existence of subdivided lots that are in multiple ownership and whose physical development Council Minutes 0412712010 Page 22 has been impaired by their irregular shapes and inadequate sizes, given present planning and zoning standards and present market conditions. This subdivision describes economic conditions that cause blight: Depreciated or stagnant property values. Impaired property values due in significant part, to hazardous waste on property. Is it governments job to be a real estate agent for the private developer? Elements of blight continued: Abnormally high business vacancies, abnormally low lease rates or an abnormally high number of abandoned buildings. A serious lack of necessary commercial facilities that are normally found in neighborhoods including grocery stores, drug stores, and banks and other lending institutions all of which we have. Serious residential overcrowding which has resulted in significant public health or safety problems. An excess of bars, liquor stores, or adult -oriented businesses that has resulted in significant public health, safety, or welfare problems. A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. We don't have overcrowded bars or liquor stores, but the City approved an adult -oriented tattoo parlor. We do have Space for lease at the town center, a closed out of business Hollywood Video Center, a stalled Walgreens/ Fresh n Easy site that is privately funded, an empty Starbucks in Grand Terrace, Vacant office space in Grand Terrace, failed Albertsons in Cooley Ranch, failed Voris in Cooley Ranch, failed pharmacy in Cooley Ranch, failed Kmart, $12 million RDA funds in Cooley Ranch. Grand Terrace empty medical office space and empty store fronts in Grand Terrace Center. You may resolve your RDA problem but you will create more blight because you can't fill all of this space that you want to build. Denis Kidd, 22874 Pico Street, feels that the property taxes generated in Grand Terrace should be spent in Grand Terrace not in Needles or Chino or some other part of the County therefor he supports Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan. 1oAnn Johnson,12723 Mt. Vernon Avenue, this is a huge project and she certainly feels that Grand Terrace would be significantly better off to approve the Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan. Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan Street, stated that it is important to note at this time that developer impact fees that were established in order to accommodate future growth capital projects, which are needed, have been done wrong for many years and everyone did not pay their fair share. It appears that these fees were never waived by the City Council and it is a violation of the Municipal Code if they are not paid. This should mean that these fees, which amount to a large amount of revenue are still owed regardless of how they were done. This could help eliminate some major problems that we have right now in our City. These fees are not paid by the RDA and help fund general government facilities, public meeting facilities, storm drainage facilities, traffic signal improvements, street improvements, park lands and open space. Collect that money instead of getting more. It is a fact that RDA has created blight in designated project areas in the City of Grand Terrace such as the Town Center, Barton Road and Grand Crossings. Preventing property owners from doing anything with their property for years. Property in any designated project areas should never have Council Minutes 04i27 22010 Page 33 been sold to any developer or any developer given unlimited amounts of time until they can prove that they can follow through and adequately. Adequate access should never be your last consideration, which it often is. Wasting huge amounts of time and money that should have been used to process an honest accurate General Plan. Do you realize that you just certified a plan that doesn't consider the high school. She doesn't believe that it is a slight error. To expect that she is going to trust you to mitigate all of the problems that you have caused when the law requires that you completely screen from not only residents but the public. Things like the trucking business on Michigan, you have illegal use on land and you are passing it to agencies telling them that this land is allowed for this and you are hurting us terribly. Essco is not on the map, a tatto parlor in the middle of town, things are out of control and because you were so negligent in the way you've processed the General Plan now you say now forget it we don't care if it is accurate just throw a few million dollars there. You have had the chance to correct this stuff and to collect fees, which our City has not collected for years, and process paper work properly. She does not believe for one minute that with the negligence about the high school that you won't run a road right through her property to make up for your negligence. She is so insulted and offended by the lack of accurate information that is presented constantly at these meetings. B.J. Ghuman, 23186 Glendora Drive, feels that the City should progress and that the Council 11 should adopt the Redevelopment Amendment. Charles Hornsby, 22656 Brentwood Street, stated that the proposal that is before the Council tonight is to set yourself up so that you can borrow more money from a State that doesn't have it to lend. If you think that is a good idea, by all means go ahead. If you do so, you are using bad judgement and at the very least you should forfeit the right to complain about the fiscal irresponsibility that Sacramento shows. Cities, towns and communities state-wide need to come to grips with the fact with whatever money you spend in the name of redevelopment only serves to increase California's debt load and makes it more expensive for the State to borrow, which it does on a regular basis. This is a simple fact of life in our State and we are inching ever closer to being at junk bond level. Look at what happened in Greece, they are bankrupt. Don't think for a minute that it can't happen here. Perhaps the more important issue, that just came up tonight, is the built in conflict of interest that is present in our town. This is not a reflection on current City Staff but Council on a regular basis takes advice if not direction from the Redevelopment Agency and very much from the City Manager. The simple fact of the matter is, much of the City Manager's salary comes from redevelopment money. He doesn't know you can expect an unbiased opinion from a City Manager on a proposed redevelopment project when a great deal of the City Manager's salary comes from redevelopment money itself. Joyce showed you some pictures. Those were nothing more than pictures of life in a small town. Mr. Harper makes a good point, the City can't generate funds very easily but what he doesn't say is those funds still have to come from somewhere. There is only so much money in the State. If the City doesn't generate the funds the State has to generate the funds. It's not an honest statement that he made, it's just Council Minutes 04.2T2010 Page 24 one side of it. He has lived here for 18 years now and he does not see that the City is any better or any worse really than it was when he moved here. A lot of effort has gone into redevelopment and he doesn't see any pay-off. It's still a nice city to live in just like it was before. Wayne Whipple, 12090 Rosedale Avenue, stated that the Redevelopment Agency is not a perfect thing, we are human and we make mistakes but he feels that all in all if you go out into other cities and you tell them where you live they will say what a nice City Grand Terrace is. We are a gem amongst all cities and he feels that we should keep moving in this direction and continue with the Redevelopment Agency. Jeffrey McConnell, 21758 Walnut Avenue, appreciates the explanation of the Amendment. He stated that the Redevelopment money comes from taxes that the property owners in town already pay. If we don't use it, we lose it. Let's use it. If we don't use it San Bernardino County will use it somewhere where we would never see it. If we don't have the money here for aging infrastructure when the time comes and we need it then we can pass a bond but we can't pass a bond to raise money for every two years and then there is no guarantee that it will pass. The economic times are still hard they are not going to vote to raise taxes, they don't have the money. He says to keep the redevelopment money here. The empty buildings is very typical of a down economy. He saw it when he first came here in 2000. Part of the problem is that we are geographically boxed in by La Loma Hills, the terrace as well as blue mountain. What we need is to develop the 123 acres for a large retail or other business that brings in money that draws from a very large demographic area. If it requires the redevelopment agency money to help us to do that then it accomplishes that Grand Terrace can draw from that and remain Grand Terrace. I believe most of us do not want to be County again. As Mr. Hornsby says, Greece is going bankrupt, he agrees he does not want Grand Terrace to go bankrupt. If we don't have the RDA money the chances of us going bankrupt is high. What is the RDA payoff for Grand Terrace, Grand Terrace is a nice place to live and it still is because we have been utilizing redevelopment money to make Grand Terrace a beautiful place to live. Bobbie Forbes, 11850 Burns Avenue, stated that she lives on one of the blighted streets in the town. She does not want sidewalks in front of her home. She has not thought it out like some of the other speakers tonight. She stated that she sells real estate in Grand Terrace and everyone wants to live here. We need to keep our money in town and spend our money in our community and not let anyone else get it. We have things that need to be addressed, whether they be in your neighborhood or mine. The house that Joyce showed a picture of on Burns Avenue is an empty house. It is a house that was built in a walnut grove in the early 1900's. It belongs to someone that lives up on Miriam Way. It is just sitting there. They have tried to sell it, unfortunately he turned down $335,000.00 on the property when the market was really high and probably couldn't get $100,000.00 now. It does look bad but it is just going to sit there for long time until someone comes in or develops that property. Council Minutes 0427 2010 Page 25 Her home is one of the newer homes in her neighborhood. She has a field across from her that she has been maintaining for twelve years so she doesn't have to go to the vet and pay $500.00 fox tail bill for one of her cats or dogs. She can't wait for the County or City to take care of it, it's not worth it for her. It's an area that is big lots and it's hard to keep up especially in the spring and right now it looks blighted. She loves where she lives, please don't put in street lights or sidewalks but please fix the road and Grand Terrace Road. Please keep our money here and please spend it in our community and don't let them take it. Mayor Ferre closed the public hearing and returned the discussion to the Council. Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, stated that so much has been presented here this evening and that she appreciates all of the comments and letters. At this point she is still trying to process everything that she just heard. Feels that there is one group of people that want to keep the City going in the same direction and there is another group that has concerns about taking on more than we can handle. It comes down to looking at the future and how we see the City. She stated that economic development is something that you do continually. Some of the things that are going on in the City is due to the economy and out of our control. She questioned as we are addressing the blighted areas and created new things how are we going to ensure we maintain the integrity of a lot of these vacancies and filling what our existing stock is? Communily and Economic Development Director Powers, responded that as we all know a lot of tenants will have a tendency to move to the nicer newer facility and that is the reason that she has been such a proponent of the rehab programs commercial and residential. We could probably name a couple of centers that are really in need of rehab, which goes directly back to keeping them occupied. No one starting a new business wants to be in a run down center and that is where our programs can help in making sure that those stay filled. Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, stated that when people think of redevelopment it's not just creating new it's maintaining and taking care of what we have. The important thing for her as we move forward is that the Redevelopment Plan will look at the City as a whole and that there will be a focus on maintaining our City integrity as a quality place to live. She stated that she feels that if you Iet infrastructure go it will cost ten times more when you have to fix it so she feels that it is important to maintain it. Councilmember Walt Stanckiewitz, stated that all of the Councilmembers received a thorough letter from Darcy McNaboe that laid out her impression of where we are and where we are going with redevelopment. As he read through it he found himself agreeing with her. She touched on some things that he wanted to share. The first thing she talked about was local elected officials can be held accountable to local constituents more effectively then elected officials with no ties to the community. If he messes up, he is out. The people make that decision. If someone in the County messes up you are a few thousand votes out of Council Minutes 04.27+2010 Page 26 hundreds of thousands of votes. Having the Redevelopment money in Grand Terrace and Council making the decisions, the Council will be accountable for it. Mistakes have been made in the past and money may have been wasted but hopefully we have learned and hopefully we are going to go forward and we are going to do the right things. He would like to see the community involved more. He is glad there has been public participation this evening. As the Redevelopment Agency goes forward, if they approve it, that public participation needs to continue. They need to hear from everyone what is important to them. How much benefit a neighborhood can realize from the Redevelopment Plan is focused on the specific needs of that neighborhood. Who better can tell what they want than the people that live there. Bonds are taking on debt but it is long term debt that is not credit card interest rate type debt and it's not necessarily coming from the State but if we don't take on debt then we can't take care of business and he is not talking about taking care of commercial business. He is talking about taking care of business infrastructure and drainage. He has seen the rivers coming off of blue mountain and something needs to be done and we are not going to be able to do that without redevelopment. If we don't have this we will be competing with larger cities for the money that we chose not to go get. He stated that every dollar of redevelopment agency spending generates 13 dollars of economic activity, jobs and tax revenue. You take the whole big picture and there is benefit to this. Yes there is a cost and yes we are going to incur debt but if you take the picture, in the end we should come out ahead. He does not want to revert to a piece of unincorporated San Bernardino County and that is his fear if we do not approve this. Mayor Marvetta Ferrd, believes that it was a miracle that the City of Grand Terrace became a City 30 plus years ago. She is aware that this City could not have remained a City without the Redevelopment Agency and at this point if we do not continue with the Redevelopment Agency she fears greatly for the success of this City in the future. She feels that this is a very important point in the life of the City of Grand Terrace and she believes that it rests on the Redevelopment Agency. Mayor Ferrd requested that the City Attorney advised the Council on how to proceed based on the comments received. City Attorney Harper indicated that the Public Hearing is Closed and that the Council can proceed if there is a motion. CC-2010-37 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS ABSENT), to approve a Resolution Certifying the Final Program Environmental Impact Report Prepared for Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Revised Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Applicable City -Wide. CC•2010-38 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER STANCKIEWITZ, SECOND BY MAYOR Council Minutes 04I2712010 Page 27 FERRE, CARRIED 3-0-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES WAS ABSENT), to approve the first reading of an Ordinance Adopting Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area. CLOSED SESSION 9A. Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation - CG 54956.9 (b)(2) and GC54956.9 (c) Mayor Ferrd announced that the Council met in Closed Session to have a Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation CG 54956.9 (b)(2) and GC54956.9 (c) and that there was no reportable action taken. Mayor Ferrd adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m., until the next City Council Meeting which is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. i 4MAYOrofthe5kilyof Grand Terrace U l CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace 0