Loading...
05/11/2010v� D CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MAY 11, 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 May 11, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. PRESENT: Maryetta Ferrd, Mayor Lee Ann Garcia, Mayor Pro Tem Bea Cortes, Councilmember Walt Stanckiewitz, Councilmember Betsy M. Adams, City Manager Brenda Mesa, City Clerk Bernard Simon, Finance Director Richard Shields, Building & Safety Director John Harper, City Attorney Sgt. Espinoza, San Bernardino County Sheriff s Department John Salvate, San Bernardino County Fire Department ABSENT: Joyce Powers, Community & Economic Development Director CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 6:00 P.M. The City Council meeting was opened with Invocation by Elder Kevin Woodbridge, Calvary, the Brook Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Pro Tern Lee Ann Garcia. ITEMS TO ADD/DELETE - None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS A. Water Awareness Poster Contest Winners - Terrace View Elementary School Rachael Malatesta. Assistant Principal, introduced the winners of the Water Awareness Poster Contest. Dr. Joseph Adeyemo, Principal. Terrace View Elemen= School, thanked the Council for the invitation and recognition. They appreciate the support of the Council and the families. John Salvate, Division Chief, San Bernardino County Fire, introduced Battalion Chief Rick McClintock who will be taking over his position. He thanked the Council and Staff for a great working relationship over the past two years. Council Minutes 05A I/2010 Page ? Rick McClintock, Battalion Chief, gave a brief overview of his history with County Fire. CONSENT CALENDAR CC-2010-39 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 3-0-0-1 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES ABSTAINED), to approve the following Consent Calendar Items with the removal of ITEM 3A.: 3B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda 3C. Approval of 04-27-2010 Minutes 3D. Historical & Cultural Activities Committee Minutes of April 5, 2010 3E. Emergency Operations Committee Minutes of April 6, 2010 3F. Community Emergency Response Team (C.E.R.T.) Minutes of March 2, 2010 and April 6, 2010 ITEM REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR 3A. Approve Check Register Dated-5-11-2010 Debra Hurst, 22950 Orangewood Court, indicated that she was going through the Check Register and has a couple of questions regarding the following vouchers: 65205 - Lease for the GMC Tahoe - What is that for and who drives it? 65218 - City of San Bernardino for February and March Animal Services - What is that for? 65243 - City of Colton Animal Control Services - What months did that cover? She questioned why we are still paying for insurance for Steve Berry. City Manager Betsy Adams, indicated that staff has pulled voucher number 65229. They need to verify that some work was properly completed by the vendor. She responded that the payment for the GMC Vehicle is the vehicle that is used in Code Enforcement and is used by City Staff for Code Enforcement purposes. The payments to the City of San Bernardino was for just animal housing services. The payment that was made to the City of Colton was for the field services of Animal Control. Now all animal care and control services are being handled by the City of San Bernardino. The insurance payments on the former Acting City Manager is part of a settlement agreement. City Attorney Harper, Steve Berry, as well as any employee that terminates service is entitled to Federal Law Cobra by paying their own insurance premium. Finance Director Bernie Simon, stated that Mr. Berry is continuing under the COBRA Council Minutes 05? 11::20 10 Page 3 subsidy which is funded about 65% by the stimulus packaged for COBRA that is being funded by the Federal Government. Whether Mr. Berry is employed or not doesn't make a difference. CC-2010-40 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, SECOND BY MAYOR FERRE, CARRIED 3-0-0-1 (COUNCILMEMBER CORTES ABSTAINED), to approve Check Register dated May 11, 2010 with the removal of Voucher # 65229. PUBLIC COMMENT Charles Hornsby, 22656 Brentwood Street, reported that a couple of weeks ago we re -signed with the Redevelopment Agency. He feels that most people that are against that link, and he is one of them, but understand why you did it. You are between a rock and a hard place. As many fish will do, they will grow to the size of their environment and for many years we were using redevelopment money to grow bigger than we are. We have gotten to the point where we can't function as a City without the Redevelopment Agency. The big question now is what is the game plan. He stated that he believes that it expires in 2017 so it will come to an end and the City will be in a position where you won't be able to pay for the day to day expenses with redevelopment money and it is going to be hard to do that unless some plans are made. A lot of the salaries of City Employees are being paid for by Redevelopment Money. Are we going to be able to afford police, fire, paramedics and street maintenance. How much of all of that was paid for by redevelopment money. Most people in town don't know. This is a nice city hall for a town this size, the library that is being talked about, parks, basic maintenance like street cleaning, street lights. These are all things that people are wondering if we are going to be able to afford.. It would be nice if there was a true workshop where people could ask questions. A couple weeks ago Jeffrey McConnell spoke out and said that we should sign up so Grand Terrace doesn't go bankrupt. He missed the big picture. The big picture is we have to be more concerned with California going bankrupt than a little town like Grand Terrace. California is the seventh largest economy in the world and if California goes it could be hell to pay for the Nation. Doug Wilson,12168 Observation, several months ago the Terrace View Elementary School parking problem was brought to light at a Council Meeting. The Mayor and Council challenged members of the Colton Joint Unified School District or someone in the audience to cure the circulation and parking problem that has existed for at least 25 years. He has provided the Council with photos, taken this afternoon, that show upwards of 100 cars parked on private property on both sides of Grand Terrace Road and all over the place creating a safety hazard for pedestrians and vehicles and making it nearly impossible for emergency vehicles to pass. When he asked for this issue to be agendized, he was informed that Colton Joint Unified School District has completed a preliminary plan to increase parking spaces on site by 25 spaces. They are also considering adding 5 spaces along Brentwood and opening up an on -site pick-up area. No one has seen the plan, we already Council Minutes 05i 11 12010 Page 4 know that what is being considered is not nearly enough. For the time being the City is doing what it can by having its traffic officer spend more time in the area at appropriate times. For those of you who may not have children that attend Terrace View, he can provide first hand knowledge of the condition because his 10 year old granddaughter is a student at Terrace View. He submits, although the relationship between the Colton Joint Unified School District and the City of Grand Terrace has historical been one of mutual cooperation, district facilities exist and function within city limits courtesy of the City of Grand Terrace not the other way around. Today the City of Grand Terrace has a problem that our public streets unsafe and a public liability. It should not be necessary for Grand Terrace to hold the Calton Joint Unified School District's feet to the fire but it is more than 25 years and nothing concrete has been accomplished. Perhaps it would be appropriate for the Council to forward a resolution to the District that squarely identifies the problem and shifts the moral as well as legal liability to cure onto the District where it belongs. Maybe if you threaten their pocket book they will finally do something. Whatever works you have my support. Debra Hurst, 22950 Orangewood Court, brought two items to the Council. She stated that she still sees the buses running in the City and questioned if any kind of resolution has been made. She stated that several months ago she brought to the Council's attention about not having a paramedic in Grand Terrace. We have an EMT but we do not have a paramedic. She asked Mr. Salvate to get her the number to add a paramedic to the station. The current budget for the fire station is approximately $830,000.00 per year. To add one paramedic on a 2417 shift would be $1, 304,839.00 which is about $401,000.00 difference. They would have to stock the station with the items which would be $26,000.00. She stated that she believes we are the only City in Riverside and San Bernardino County that does not have a paramedic in our services. Those minutes that it takes to get a paramedic in town could be the matter of life or death. She knows that the City is strapped and so are the surrounding cities and counties but she feels that instead of putting pretty things up we should take care of our citizen's health and safety and one of the ways to do that is to have a fully staffed fire station with a paramedic. Patricia Farlev,12513 Michigan Street, wanted to talk about violations of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code and California State Law. The following statement of facts have been pointed out to some of the past and present city staff and officials many times in the past few years and almost everything have been ignored. Major Ordinance are being violated and large amounts of revenue has been lost because a lot of things are not being done right or enforced properly. Zoning is being changed illegally without ordinance on maps and on property records without any required noticing or a public hearing. Hundreds of businesses have been operating in our city for many years and continue to go unlicensed and also some are in violation of zoning. Council Minutes 05.1 L-2010 Page 5 All Developer Impact Fees have not been paid on many projects that have received building permits and fees were never waived by council. Many property owners have also not paid their fair share in property taxes for years and it has only been looked into in the last few months. The Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) is who we had to first seek approval from to become an incorporated city, which is supposed to govern itself in a responsible way. It appears that some of our city staff and officials are unaware that an incorporated city will remain so only its citizens do not vote to abolish the municipality or consolidate it with some other city and major things should not be ignored. At the last Council Meeting you voted to certify the General Plan in spite of the fact that there were significant inaccuracies, in many places. For instance, the high school wasn't even on it. The high school is a major impact on this city. For any decisions, for planning, for traffic and to send that around to agencies and pretend that it's not there is, in her opinion, highly negligent. When you certify something, she believes that you are saying it is true. You had plenty of evidence that it had major problems and it is not acceptable, in her view, to certify it. It is not accurate at all. This City has to stop violating ordinances and mismanaging money. And the very basic management skills of numbering pages and dating and documenting has not happened for years in this City. City Manager Betsy M. Adams, responded that Mr. Wilson is correct in terms with what the City is doing with regards to the parking and traffic challenges at Terrace View Elementary School. We do have additional Law Enforcement in the area trying to do what we can. The parking issue is something that would be the District's to resolve. Schools when they are allowed to build in any community, they don't go through the City, they go through the State and so some times there are challenges that are created, which is what we have here. Whether Council wants staff to research doing a resolution or not we would be glad to do so. With regard to fire, we are part of a fire district. We do not directly fund fire, although we do provide the fire station and so how we would add additional services might be something that would be better to have discussions with the County versus Staff making recommendations for services that we do not directly provide. She stated that at the prior meeting Mr. Hornsby mentioned a parcel that is on Barton and Mt. Vernon that is fenced and has weeds. Staff has had conversation with the property owner, the property owner has selected a contractor to do the weed abatement and it is scheduled to be completed before the end of the month. COUNCIL REPORTS Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, thanked all of the residents that came out and commented. She appreciates the updates from Staff regarding the property on the corner of Mt. Vernon and Barton Road. She is concerned with the long term outlook on the finances of the City. She Council Minutes 05.11 +2010 Page 6 feels that this year is going to be one of the most challenging years in the history of our City and possibly for all cities. She feels that it is important as we have the time to start looking at the long range financial planning of the City and find out where the money is going and how it works. Her goal as a representative of the people has always been to work towards sustainability. The more we can create our own revenue the better. She feels that it is important to show the residents where the money is going to give them that confidence level. We may not be able to move forward and do the nice things in the community but the essentials that we all rely on to have a quality of life here will always be maintained because of the revenue. The scary thing is you never know what the State Lawmakers will do. They can change laws and mess with the revenue streams that go to local government. She stated that she heard about the parking spaces at Terrace View. She feels that the spaces are not enough and that there probably needs to be some more options. She stated that she has had discussions with the fire department regarding adding service to our fire department and the only way to make this happen is to have the people pay a tax by creating a paramedic tax. She is unsure that all residents would be willing to tax themselves. She realizes that Ms. Farley has great frustration with the way things have been handled at the City and that she is uncomfortable with the advice that they receive. She stated that the Council doesn't want the information and maps to be inaccurate, given the time and resources that we have that we do the best that we can. Some of the things that Ms. Farley wants to be absolutely accurate, to be quite honest, we don't have the resources in the City. She requested that the City Attorney make a comment with regards to that. " City Attorney John Harper, the purpose of the General Plan is to show what properties exist in the City and how they are zoned. Obviously property use within those zones changes on an on -going basis. There is no General Plan in any City that is "Up-to-date" in the sense that each and every parcel, every time it changes use, is some how reflected in the General Plan. That is not what the General Plan does. The General Plan provides a general overview of the types of uses which may be permitted in particular areas of the City then you adopt a Zoning Plan, which takes the general guidelines from the General Plan, which was amended at the Council Meeting, and applies them to specific areas within the City. The zones just need to comply with the overall General Plan requirement. Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, stated that if any resident in our community has a question about Zoning all they have to do is come to the Planning Counter and staff will let you know what a specific area is zoned for and what the permitted uses are. Government is constantly moving and it is impossible to keep up-to-date maps at all times. City Attorney Harper, feels that the discussion is really about the environmental impact report related to the General Plan. The purpose of the environmental impact report is to show worst case scenarios in each of those General Plan areas. Mayor Pro Tem Garcia, again thanked the residents for coming out and sharing their Council Minutes 0Sl11l2010 Page 7 comments. As a Council and Staff we try to the best of our abilities to meet the concerns. It is confirmed that the RTA (Riverside Transit Authority) will continue the route 25 bus through September. Right now Omnitrans is working with RTA on a transition plan. They will be voting for it in June. Omnitrans will be coming out to meet with City Staff to go over the proposal. There is some discussion about having increased service for our Seniors. Right now anyone who has needs for bus service, RTA will be providing service through September. The hope is that Omnitrans will then provide service. Councilmember Bea Cortes, reported that she attended the Market Night on Monday, which was well attended. She indicated that she has been ill and thanked the residents for their concern and support. She requested that the meeting be adjourned in memory and honor of Doug Wilson's father who passed away. Councilmember Walt Stanckiewitz, reported that this is week seven for no response from Corporation for Better Housing regarding his letter on the furniture and other issues at the Senior Center. His contacts with the School District sent him an e-mail giving him a heads up that on the Agenda for Thursday evening, the School Board will be talking about investigating the possibility of a parcel tax measure feasibility study, which they want to spend $40,000.00 today to see if it is feasible to raise our property taxes to raise more revenue to pay for teachers and salary personnel. He doesn't speak for the rest of the Council but he can say that he personally would like to see more community involvement as we move forward with this new amendment to decide what the priorities are of the City and what the priorities are of the residents. It is his intention to work in that direction so that it becomes a community effort so that we all can buy into what we agree upon before we run out and develop a giant plan and run up debt. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6A. Resolution - Swertfegr Equipment - Modification or Revocation of Conditional Use Permit 99-01, 99-01 A2 and 99-01 A3, Located at 12438 Michigan Street Sandra Molina, Senior Planner, indicated that the Planning Commission originally adopted a CUP for Swertfeger Equipment in 2001 to allow truck repair and trailer manufacturing and sales subject to certain conditions. Since 2001 the Commission has approved some extensions to allow the completion of some site work and the construction of a 12,000 square foot building. On March 14, 2010 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider either revocation or modification of the conditional use permit. In conducting that public hearing the Commission voted to modify the conditions of approval. The Resolution with the modified conditions were provided to the Council. The Council was scheduled to hold a public hearing to consider the Planning Commissions recommendations on April 13, 2010, however, that hearing was continued to this evening. Since the March 4 Planning Commission Meeting the property owner has made further progress and compliance with Council Minutes 0511i2010 Page 8 the conditions of approval. A Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for the 12,000 square foot building and the building permit is expected to be finaled soon, pending the completion of some work. Because of the work that has been done, and as a result of on -going discussions with the applicants representative, the conditions that are contained in the City Resolution differ from what was adopted in the Planning Commissions Resolution, specifically, Condition Number 5 has been modified and Condition Number 6, which the Commission had approved has been deleted from the resolution for consideration by the Council this evening. A Staff Report was provided to the Commission on May 6 to apprise them of these changes. The Planning Commission considered the changes and voted to forward some recommendation to the City Council. The Commission is in agreement with Condition Number 5 but they did not agree with the deletion of Condition Number 6 and voted to direct staff to forward the recommendation to keep that condition. Condition Number 6 required the applicant to submit building plans to the fire department and a site plan to the fire department for approval. They have done that. The Staff was recommending removal of that condition because it had been substantially complied with, however, the Commission indicated that in the past with conditions, even though they have been completed, they still remain on file and as part of the application and the conditions. Also, Mr. Frank Tetley, Legal Counsel for the applicant had provided an e-mail to the Commission and a copy was provided to the Council. Mr. Tetley raised four points in his e-mail. The Commission considered those items and recommended a modification to Condition Number 4 to revise the second sentence to add the words "involving equipment" so that is would read "No work involving equipment shall be done on the property on Sundays." Staff requests that the City Council conduct a public hearing and in adopting the Resolution that is before them that they consider the Planning Commissions recommendations with respect to Condition Number 4 and Condition Number 6. Mayor Ferre opened the Public Hearing. Steve Kenda11,12373 Michigan Street, stated that he didn't abject to this company years ago when they first sent out letters indicating what they were proposing to do. They didn't have the information on there about all of the noise and machinery that they currently have on site. He feels that this company has been given an inch and they are taking a mile. If they get another inch they will take two more miles. Those trucks go in and out of there. He lives across the street from the water company and there is a lot of truck noise from them. He knows that they say they only operate during certain hours, however, they operate during non authorized hours. He feels that this business does not belong in Grand Terrace. Laura Austin,12356 Michigan Street, referred to Mr. Tetley's comments stating that she has had several meetings with City Staff regarding Swertfeger Equipment and there have been dozens of complaints over the years. She stated that the 46 signatures that were received were of individuals that do not live on Michigan. She feels that there should be big regulations for Mr. Swertfeger's business since it was placed in a residential area. No matter Council Minutes 05? 1 U2010 Page 9 what conditions or regulations that are set forth, he will bend them. You are suppose to go home to your home for peace and quiet and to relax, however, they can't do it. They can't spend an afternoon out there because of the noise and the fumes. Those people who don't live in the vicinity have no idea what those who do experience. If he doesn't want complaints and he wants to change his hours then he needs to move to a commercial area. She said she doesn't want red curbing. She would like to have signs posted that says no trucks and no parking, etc. Please listen to the residents for a change and help the residents. He would like the hours to be changed to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday only. Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan Street, a Public Hearing on the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Swertfegers Equipment (L & G Swertfeger LLQ regarding this project Approval was warranted because of numerous violations, expirations, and outright non-compliance of conditions of approval. It was requested many times for over the last five years by nearby residents and they were ignored. The Planning Commission violated the rights of many citizens by only considering modification of this CUP when in fact they should have considered revoking it. The original approval of this CUP was done illegally. According to State Law, Mr. Swertfeger was in violation of codes and ordinances in 1999 before he started this business. This business started in1984. Neither businesses were suppose to be in the areas where they are. Stacey West, his daughter, has summed it up a couple of times when she has made statements. They had opportunities for business and they needed to meet deadlines. For years, the history of this company is extension, extension, excuses, excuses, ignoring the rights of everyone around them and the City has ignored their rights, blatantly. Land and the new industrial building at 12438 Michigan Street are being used in violation of many sections of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code and it can not exist on any land use map as industrial if it was not done legally according to State Law and it was not. This is what you have allowed and certified. There are two reasons under the law to revoke a Conditional Use Permit and only one can cause it to be revoked. First any violation of a conditional use permit's required condition of approval and second any Federal, state or local law or ordinance is violated in connection with a conditionally permitted use both of which have occurred. She would like to point out that the law states specifically that no buildings or structures shall be erected, reconstructed or structurally altered in any manner nor shall any building or land use for any purpose other than as permitted in conformance with this title and all other ordinances, laws, maps referred to. Charles Hornsby, 22656 Brentwood Street, over the years you can't help but get the feeling and come to know that the Swertfeger's have gotten away with things that they shouldn't have. They have been doing a lot of things that are against the municipal code. The simple fact of the matter is even if there is something wrong and it is repeated and repeated over the course of a long period of time people get use to it. It just becomes status quo. It is important when the Council makes their decision that they take that into account. If somebody has been doing something wrong for ten years, it is just as wrong the first day they Council Minutes 0511 V2010 Page 10 did it, and that is what he feels the case is here. The Council needs to take an objective look at this situation and judge it as if it has just come up. You can't let a long track record influence you. People have been complaining about this for years and at the very least the City should have taken a stance on it one way or another. You have ignored it for years so the time has come to judge it on the merits of the case. If they are in violation of city codes then nail them for it and if not then come out and say so and have the code book in front of you. Frank Tetlev, indicated that he has provided the Council with six exhibits. The first is a petition with 48 signatures. The second is a list of what they believe to be the top employers in the City, indicating that 19 families are employed by Swertfeger. Number 3 is a signed verification and stated that these law suits have cost the City over $150,000.00. Number 4 is a color plat map of the area and went over it. Number 5 is an aerial photograph of the area and this is where reality steps in. Number 6 is common decibel readings for talking, music, etc. One of his main jobs in representing them is to ensure that they have been given their rights of due process and exercising your power and balancing the rights of the public for safety etc against the rights of the individual land owner. These are important matters. He believes that his client should be treated the same as anybody else, no better, no worse. The restrictions on work on Sundays should be uniform. He questioned if there are other conditional use permits in that area that have those same restrictions, they think not. The definition of work needs to be addressed. Is it noise or favoritism of one religion over another. In these economic times 19 families who would benefit why shouldn't his client be able to offer a trailer that is already there the right to stay there, you call that storage. They do not operate at 3:00 a.m., they do not have back up alarms. Back-up alarms are on the trucks owned by the water company. They are talking about possibly working on Sunday 3 or 4 times a year. When presented to the Planning Commission the quote was "Any work done on Sunday would be within the enclosed building from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m." Mayor Ferre closed the Public Hearing and returned discussion to the Council. Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, as the residents were speaking a good neighbor policy came to mind. One of the things that we try to do every time there is a disagreement among individuals is to try and figure out a way to work together. As long as she has been on Council Swertfeger issues have been heard. There have been complaints made. This is an item that is going to have a lot of discussion. She questioned why this type of business was approved for a residential area in the first place. City Attorney Harper, responded that his recollection is that there was question at the time about whether or not any permit was required at all. Whether or not it was a pre-existing non -conforming use whether the County had issued a CUP. The Council and Swertfeger felt that it was appropriate to address some of the issues and to apply for a Conditional Use Permit. The first Condition Use Permit was done in 1999. There were conditions and phases Council Minutes 05111,2010 Page 11 that were never complied with. It went back to the Planning Commission quite a number of times. The requirements for the Conditional Use Permit were changed or continued. Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, stated that conditional use permit is saying that yes you can be there with these following conditions. It has been fairly heavily conditioned. Throughout the years they sometimes were in violation. City Attomev Harper, when they didn't comply with the conditional use permit requirements complaints were received, staff took a position that they weren't in compliance, staff went to the Planning Commission, there were hearings held and the Planning Commission, after weighing all of the facts continued or modified the conditions on a number of occasions, essentially giving them more time to complete what they were required or changing some of their requirements. He stated that there was litigation filed against the City on whether or not the City had the ability to allow the conditional use permit to continue and the court said yes we do. Councilmember Bea Cortes, questioned what the litigation was for. City Attorney Harper, responded that it was to get the City to set aside its decision to approve the extension of the conditional use permit and the City prevailed. He stated that the litigation and the conclusion of that litigation doesn't have anything to do with what is being presented tonight or with the Planning Commission. The City has the ability to require that it be complied with. The City in this case also has the ability to consider modifications. The past has nothing to do with what is before the Council today. Councilmember Cortes, questioned if the Planning Commission found any violations of the Municipal Code. Senior Planner Molina, responded that she has not attended all of the hearings, however, the Commission did find that there was reason to hold a public hearing on this item to determine whether the conditional use permit should be revoked or the conditions modified. They found that they weren't in compliance with the conditions that were set on the project. Ultimately during that public hearing process they decided that revocation wasn't appropriate rather that the conditions should be modified, which is what they adopted in the resolution and recommend to the Council. Councilmember Cortes, she feels that the Council doesn't have the right to tell them that they can't work on Sundays. City Attorney Harper, stated that he believes the condition is to address working with equipment that is noise oriented on Sunday as opposed to office work. Council Minutes 05!112010 Page 12 Councilmember Stanckiewitz, questioned if equipment needs to be defined. Senior Planner Molina, responded that the way the condition reads is "noise from operations including truck idling, ingress and egress shall not be heard from adjacent properties before 7:00 a.m. or after 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday" it also states "no work involving equipment shall be done on the property on Sundays." She feels that it is reasonable to conclude that the intent is to regulate and limit the noise from truck idling and truck movement equipment. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, questioned if equipment constituted a hammer banging on a trailer. Senior Planner Molina, responded in the affirmative because it is noise from operations. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, questioned if that should be spelled out. Senior Planner Molina, stated that they may. Building and Safety/Public Works Director Richard Shields, stated that the Swertfeger's constructed a 12,000 square foot building out of masonry fully grouted building that you can walk inside and take large equipment that you work on inside there and not even hear that from the outside and feels that the Council should consider that as another option. Senior Planner Molina, stated that the Planning Commission had this same discussion. They felt that because of where the business is located in relation to surrounding neighbors and residents that even though work can be done inside their concern is that they don't want to have staff monitoring Sunday work activities. City Attorney Harper, suggested the wording be the only work allowed on a Sunday will be office related and contained within the office complex and not generate noise to the outside. Councilmember Cortes, she feels that government shouldn't be controlling every business and we don't want to lose businesses. We don't want our 19 residents not to have employment. Maybe we can make an allowance that if it is an emergency on a Sunday that they work only inside and no noise. She questioned if the building was air conditioned. Mr. Tetley, responded that based upon the testing that was done today it is very quiet and the noise will not carry to the neighbors. Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, stated that the Council did a field trip out to the property for a visit. She suggested that the Council take a field trip once again. Council wants to help the businesses to be successful and they want to mitigate to the best of their ability the impacts Council Minutes 05?11l2010 Page 13 to the residents around them. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, stated that he is not ready to make a decision at this point. He feels that maybe a professional noise study should be done so the Council can see the results of that. Senior Planner Molina. responded that staff is unaware whether or not a professional noise study has been. One may have been done but it has not been shared with staff. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, he agrees that Council should take a walk on the property so that they can better understand it and he would like the Planning Commission to do a little bit more work on the wording on some of the conditions that are being laid out, specifically Condition Number 4 and work on Sundays. He would like to see that spelled out clearer. He wants to make sure that we are doing this right and that we are taking into consideration the concerns of the residents who live around there and that we are not rolling over for the sake of Swertfeger. He suggested that this item be continued. City Attorney Harper, stated that Mr. Tetley had requested the start time of 6:00 a.m. as opposed to 7:00 a.m. Mr. Tetley, stated that people need to come onto the property to get things started for the day, however, no heavy equipment or trucks will be moved onto the facility until after 7:00 a.m. Senior Planner Molina, indicated that the Planning Commission discussed the start time as well. The Commission was concerned that if they changed the start time to 6:00 a.m. that employees will come to the job site a little earlier and instead will be showing up at 5:30 or 5:45 a.m. and given the residential area, they did not recommend any change to that condition. City Attorney Harper, stated that red striping curbs was raised. The applicant had indicated that the trucks parking on the street weren't theirs and that they would be happy to have the curbs red striped. He stated that this is not impossible, however, the process is different than a CUP. The vehicle code requires a public hearing be held. Mayor Pro Tern Garcia, questioned if we are allowed to request a site visit. City Attorney Harper, responded in the affirmative. He stated that if all of the Council Members do a site visit at the same time they would have to hold a special meeting. Mayor Pro Tem_Garcia, she would like to see this item continued and that a site visit be allowed for the Council, that this goes back to the Planning Commission for review. Council Minutes 05'A 112010 Page 14 Mayor Pro Tem Cortes, questioned if the doors are installed. Senior Planner Molina, responded in the affirmative. She indicated that the items that are outstanding were the fire signage and clearance of the fire lanes and installation of some slag. Building and Safety/Public works Director_ Shields, confirmed that there is a sign that needs to be installed and some slag installed at the back of the lot that they are working on. They are mobilizing equipment into the building, which is going to take a week or so to accomplish. City Attorney Harper, stated that the Council wants to send this item back to the Planning Commission and at some time have a joint meeting with the Planning Commission on site. Senior Planner Molina, requested clarification on whether or not Councilmember Stanckiewitz wanted staff to verify that the noise study was done by an actual noise consultant. Councilmember Stanckiewitz, responded in the affirmative. CC-201041 MOTION BY MAYOR FERRY, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GARCIA, CARRIED 4-0, to table this item and to send it back to the Planning Commission. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7A. Second Reading of an Ordinance Adopting Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area CC-2010-41 MOTION BY MAYOR FERR , SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER STANCKIEWITZ, CARRIED 4-0, to approve the Second Reading of an Ordinance Adopting Amendment No. 6 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Grand Terrace Community Redevelopment Project Area NEW BUSINESS - None CLOSED SESSION 9A. Labor Negotiations (GC 54957.6) Conference with Labor Negotiator - Betsy M. Adams Representing Unrepresented Employees 9B. Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation - CG 54956.9 (b)(2) and GC54956.9 (c) Council Minutes 05.11.;2010 Page 15 Mayor Ferrd announced that the Council met in Closed Session to discuss Labor Negotiations (GC 54957.6) Conference with Labor Negotiator - Betsy M. Adams Representing Unrepresented Employees and 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 9:00 p.m., until the next City Council Meeting which is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, May 25, 2010 at 4:30 p.m. CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace LEI