Loading...
07/13/2006CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - JULY 13, 2006 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order in the Council Chambers, Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on July 13, 2006, at 6:00 p.m. PRESENT: Maryetta Ferrd, Mayor Bea Cortes, Mayor Pro Tern Herman Hilkey, Councilmember Lee Ann Garcia, Councilmember Jim Miller, Councilmember Tom Schwab, City Manager Tracey Martinez, Deputy City Clerk Gary Koontz, Community Development Director Richard Shields, Building & Safety Director Lt. Hector Guerra, Sheriff's Department John Harper, City Attorney ABSENT: Steve Berry, Assistant City Manager Larry Ronnow, Finance Director The City Council meeting was opened with Invocation by Pat Bower, Calvary, The Brook Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilman Herman Hilkey. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ITEMS TO DELETE City Manager Schwab indicated that Robert Bidney was out of town and that item 2A. Commendation - Robert Bidney, Outgoing Planning Commissioner will brought back at a later date when he will be able to attend the meeting. He also stated that he would like to add 2B. Thomas Wellman, Valley Division Chief - CSA-38 Pico Fire Incident Report to the agenda. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 2B. Thomas Wellman, Valley Division Chief - CSA-38 Pico Fire incident Report Thomas Wellman, Valley Division Chief - CSA-38, gave a brief overview of the Pico Fire 0 Incident. He indicated that the source of the fire is still undetermined. Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 2 CONSENT CALENDAR CC-2006-77 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the following Consent Calendar Items with the removal of Items 3B., 3E. and 3F.: 3A. Approve Check Register Dated July 13, 2006 3C. Approval of 06-22.2006 Minutes 3D. Approval of Final Tract Map No. 16624 ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR 3B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda 3E. Transfer of Property from the City to the Community Redevelopment Agency 3F. Resolution - Summary Vacation of Portion of Pico Street, E-06-10 Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan, expressed her concern with item 3F. She feels that this item is related to projects that are being challenged in court and it bothers her to close off an important street without having the appropriate circulation plan agreed upon that addresses everything. 0 Councilmember Hilke , clarified that item 3E. and 3F. are related and are for the construction of the new high school. City Manager Schwab, responded that the piece of property in item 3E. is owned by the City and is being transferred to the Redevelopment Agency, which has already agreed to sell the land to the Colton Joint Unified School District for the new high school. The City has agreed in the current escrow to abandon Pico Street so the high school can have ball fields. It is two separate parcels, one is an old right-of-way piece and the other is actually Pico Street itself. Community Development Director Koontz, explained the two items and indicated that both actions need to be taken in order to close the sale of the land. Councilmember Garcia, expressed her concern with parking on Pico. Communi1y Development Director Koontz, responded that all of the school parking is accessible. He stated that we will have a joint use agreement with the District and staff will discuss the parking issue with them. Mayor Pro Tem Cartes, questioned what will happen if Council does not approve these two items. 0 Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 3 City Manager Schwab, responded that we have an agreement that is contingent upon vacating the street. He stated that if the Agency does not sale the land voluntarily, the District would proceed with eminent domain just as they are doing with Inland Timber. CC-2006-78 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the following Consent Calendar items that were removed for discussion: 3B. Waive Full Reading of Ordinance on Agenda 3E. Transfer ofProperty from the City to the Community Redevelopment Agency 3F. Resolution - Summary Vacation of a Portion of Pico Street, E-06-10 PUBLIC COMMENT Denis Kidd, 22874 Pico, feels that the time has come to ban fireworks in Grand Terrace. He feels that the Pico fire was a result of fireworks. He also feels that it would be cheaper for the City to give the local leagues money instead of paying for enforcement and fire fighting. He feels that even safe and sane fireworks are not safe. He stated that there are many surrounding cities and counties that ban fireworks. He provided the following information from the National Fire Protection Association: From 1998 to 2002, eight people per year, on average, were killed in fires started by fireworks. Six people per year, on average, were killed directly by fireworks. In 2003, fires started by fireworks caused $58 million indirect property damage to structures. He indicated that sparklers can reach 1800 degrees at the tip ... they are not safe for children, whether legal or not. He feels that Colton should ban fireworks too. Emma Burk, 12086 La Cadena Drive, stated that the only other time she has spoke at a meeting Iike this was when she fought for the right to belong to Grand Terrace. When LAFCO decided that her area west of La Cadena, East of Baustic, North of Palm and South of Litton had to go to Colton or Grand Terrace she and her husband felt closer to Grand Terrace. For the past ten years they have felt like step children, living on the wrong side of the railroad tracks. On July 11 th there was a meeting to discuss the closure of Palm at La Cadena due to the signal construction. Attending the meeting was the Mayor, City Engineer, Councilmember from Colton, a representative from the Colton Police Department, and a representative from County Fire. It was pointed out that no one was there to represent Grand Terrace. They indicated that the Council was invited to attend this meeting but declined. Now the residents know that the City does not care about them. There has never been a safe way to bike or walk to Stater Bros. or the library or the parks from La Cadena. They were told in the late 1980's that improvements have been planned. She dares the Council to walk west of LaCadena one-half mile up Barton Road to Michigan to see the safety issues. She questioned why the City won't just swap the land with Colton. She understands that there Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 4 is an area of land that Colton would like to give to Grand Terrace and they would like to go to Colton. The residents of the forgotten west of La Cadena would be better served by Colton. Bill Hays, 22114 DeBerry Street, stated that he respectfully requested the following documents under the open records act on June 15, 2006: the most recent employment contract between the City of Grand Terrace and Thomas J. Schwab, because past requests of Mr. Schwab's employment contract did not contain the details of the car allowance. He wanted copies of the details agreed to between the City Council and Mr. Schwab past and present. He stated that since the City Attorney, John Harper represents Mr. Schwab in negotiations, it is his profound belief that these details were not just verbally agreed to. An attorney would not negotiate any contract for Mr. Schwab without the benefits being in written form on the contract. These details were not released to the public in the contract copies that he has requested over the past few years and he would like a written explanation as to why these details were not made public. He feels that they are a matter ofpublic record. He also made a request for the disposition of the vehicles that were replaced with the new vehicles that the City buys Mr. Schwab. He was told that there are no documents to tell him what happened to the vehicles so apparently a 1996 Ford Crown Victoria disappeared because there is no documentation on it. Also, the details as to the car agreement between the City and Mr. Schwab were not given to him with the contract either. He stated that the contract dated for the year 2000 has no expiration date and he has been led to believe that if there is no expiration date then there is no legal contract. Robert Stewart, 11677 Mt. Vernon, reported that this past Tuesday, around 1:00 p.m., an employee of Riverside Highland Water Co. came to his home to let them know that their water was going to be shut off. The contractor working on the senior project had broken a water main. He walked over to see what had happened. They had been using a back hoe to dig a trench for the temporary sewer line. He reported that they had no shoring around the trench and that it is against the law not to have shoring and feels that the City needs to be aware of the contractors short -comings. Patricia_ Farley, 12513 Michigan, read the following letter: I want to read a reply to a long awaited response regarding compliance with conditions of approval under CUP-99-01 for the Swertfeger site at 12438 Michigan Street approved in Jan. 2001. This response very clearly states there are many conditions where not all requirements or improvements have been made yet in 2006 and there even is "outright" non-compliance. Our zoning states that a conditional use permit can be revoked on even one violation. Mr. Swertfeger has been allowed to expand next to residential from two acres to six acres Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 5 with extensions beyond normal and time limits regarding conditions disregarded and is now in final plan check with a 12,000 sq. ft. building as of July 2006. He even had traffic circulation fees of $41,500 waived in 2004 although all capital fees are collected at the time of issuance of a building permit and he already had signed an agreement to pay them and comply with ordinance 190 in 2001. In our zoning it also states that a nonconforming property cannot expand and the previous Planning Director verifies that in a memorandum dated in July 1998. He was also allowed to continue to repair vehicles in a zone where he was not permitted for some time and activities are still being performed outside in violation of the management practices for NPDES as stated in Planning Minutes of Jan. 2006. There is also major concern over this business not being in an AQMD-listed facilities chart regarding pollution which was in the Environmental study for the new High School. This business was required to comply with all permitting requirement of the South Coast Air Quality Management District in a Negative Declaration in 2001 because it is manufacturing and repair facility. It appears they may never have got them and are not being monitored at all and putting residents at risk. Even though everything has increased including truck traffic, employees, truck repair, hazardous materials, and pollution since 2001, there will be no additional studies done and Mr. Swertzfeger will only be made to comply with some of the original conditions in 2001 after the building is built. This is all after he has shown a past history of non-compliance and City Staff has had a past history of not enforcing the law and special treatment being given to him and his business. Not only are City guidelines not being followed, State Laws are being violated regarding Zoning and Environmental issues, etc. This is all unacceptable and since there has already been ample time given to do the right thing by the staff and our City Officials, everything will be going to the proper authorities. Charles Hornsby, 22656 Brentwood Street, stated that he was at a meeting about a month ago and the prime focus of discussion that night was the development above Kingfisher Street. He stated that you find out a lot about people when you hear what they say in an unrehearsed fashion or a candid remark. There were a number of issues that were discussed and there was a question and answer period with the Engineer in charge of the project. The difference being a 15 house development versus a 20 house development and the issues of safety and drainage, and a number of other issues. Early on, Mr. Miller seem to raise the only voice of reason or at least questioning. He said how did we get from 15 to 20 and that gave away that the original plan was for 15 homes. He believes that 15 homes was what the residents Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 6 expected. He referred to some papers that he provided the Council showing the difference between 15 homes and 20 homes. He stated that after Mr. Miller questioned how they got from 15 to 20 no one responded as if it wasn't a question worth addressing. The developer had answered all of the questions and did a good job, whether true or not. Later in the Meeting the Mayor made the statement if everything is equal, what is the difference between 15 and 20. He stated that you can see the difference. Councilmember Garcia echoed the same remarks by saying if all of the issues are dealt with what difference does it make if it is 15 or 20. He feels that it is a huge difference. He feels that it is something to think about when a Mayor and a Councilmember says what difference does it make if it is 15 or 20 houses, it makes you wonder about qualifications and feels that they need to re-examine the issue. Virginia Harford, 11825 Arliss Way, read the following letter that was addressed to the Mayor and Councilmembers: Among the subject of this discourse is the proposed Grand Terrace Senior Citizen Complex and other concerns. The senior complex plans have apparently come under fire by some of those residents that live on Brentwood Street. I understand that a lawful protest was brought before a judge who approved the complete stoppage of the construction. He apparently felt that an environmental impact study was necessary to be able to continue with the work. He also apparently did not understand what a tremendous benefit this complex would be for the seniors it is being built to house and help. He also seems not to care to hear the other side of the story. That side is this: Grand Terrace is a very small city. We have approximately 13,000 plus or minus citizens and there is a great need in Grand Terrace for a complex such as the one proposed. I happen to know of one family that is eager to place a relative in the unit when it is habitable. I myself am interested in the living quarters in case I may someday need them. Why would that judge not ask to hear the other side of the story? I was under the impression that the designers of the complex for the seniors had changed the plans to accommodate the residents so that they would not lose their view. My question to you as a City Council that is supposed to be doing the job that the rest of us cannot do is why did you not anticipate that such a study needed to be done before you approved the job? I have been watching the move of the old senior center building which is getting very near completion but the rest of the area is fenced and covered so that one cannot watch the progress of the construction. I was physically run out of the place a couple of weeks ago because I wanted to see what was happening. A lot of dirt was being moved around and it Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 7 was obvious that construction was beginning to take place. All of that work suddenly stopped. Now I see there are signs saying "Keep out, private property." I beg to differ with who ever placed those signs there. That is not private property, it is mine and yours and any other citizen that lives in, pays taxes and votes you into your position and who may live there someday. It is us the taxpayers who have been directly and indirectly responsible for the job being considered in the first place. There are times when I am almost convinced that you as a Council are not in the slightest interested in what we have to say. I feel that you think you have approved this forum for us to express our views but you don't seem to care one way or another how we think. Looks to me like you think this is a pacifier and we will grow weary and give up. Your position should be to know what we think, what we want and you should be doing what we feel is necessary and useful. Your ideas should be built around that end, to satisfy the majority of the residents of this city. You will never make all of us happy. But what city does? You complained for years about the utility tax that we soundly defeated but I haven't noticed you listening to what we have to say now. You can hear me can't you? You allow people like that Jacobsen fellow and others to spend inordinate amounts of time trying to convince someone that his or her proposal has merit but you don't want to listed to a 41 year resident of Grand Terrace say things that many are concerned about but too busy or if the truth is known feel that it would be futile to try to talk to you. I know several people who feel that attending these meetings is a waste of their time. Haven't you had enough discord in the recent past to turn this situation around and see if you can listen and actually hear what is being said by the people who are organized and who can come before you in a respectful manner? How about not spending more time and effort on appeasement and giving us some answers. Many of us are very disappointed that we do not have the Lowes that was promised and the new Stater Bros. Market including a new Miguel's and several other small businesses. You have allowed Jo Stringfield to upset that apple cart thoroughly. Why? You and I both know that her bank account will probably wind up very much like the statistic about most lottery winners. Do you know that 70% of those who have won large amounts are broke in five years? Most people are not capable of handling that kind of money intelligently. Jo Stringfield may be one of them. Now, she can do whatever she want to do with her money. I would probably be stubborn about giving up my property easily if I were in her shoes. But I don't believe she really realizes what a small amount of capital she will be left with after all the costs of her campaign. What has happened to your grand idea of an outdoor adventure center? Are you or are you not trying to change the off ramp into Grand Terrace? Please do not put us off on these things any longer. Give us some answers that we can understand. Give us some answers that show that you care about what we need and want. Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 8 She also indicated that she has written a letter to Kim Hathaway regarding fireworks. She feels that no fireworks are safe and sane. City Manager Schwab, apologized to Ms. Burke, he heard that there was a traffic meeting in Colton that was going to deal with the issues of no longer having the ability to make a left hand turn off of La Cadena onto Palm. That happened to be the same night that Grand Terrace had a traffic committee meeting and Assistant City Manager Berry was not able to attend. He stated that staff did not invite the Council. The staff from Colton invited staff from Grand Terrace and never indicated that they would like the Council to attend. The Council did not know about the meeting. One of the challenges at that intersection is that it is an off -set intersection where Barton Road does not go straight into Palm. He believes that it has been understood that it is a dangerous intersection and has been something that the City of Colton, the City of Grand Terrace and the County of San Bernardino have all struggled with in trying to come up with a solution to provide a safe way for vehicles to get through that intersection. There should be a signal light project starting there soon. The project is being done by the City of Colton, they are the lead in the project, the County of San Bernardino is paying 50% and the City of Colton and Grand Terrace are each paying 25%. In order to make a safe transition across there they needed to eliminate the left turn ability into Palm. He agrees that it does create a situation for residents that are use to crossing there. Staff has been in contact with Colton and was informed on what transpired at the meeting. There is not going to be a way to cross that off -set safely. The bridge needs to be replaced and straightened out. Staff realizes that it is a problem and they are working with the City of Colton to come up with a way to mitigate the problem. He understands the frustrations, the traffic engineer's simply don't have a solution right now. He reported that Mr. Hays did make a public information request for public records. A public information request is a request for a document that he would like to have produced. He asked for documents relating to the City vehicles that the City has purchased. Staff provided the purchase order for a vehicle purchased from LJ Snow Ford in 1996 and also provided him a copy of the check as well as a purchase order for the vehicle purchased in 2001 from Temecula Dodge. He asked for any contract or contract amendment that dealt with the benefit of the City vehicle. The original contract allowed for a car allowance, however, it 1996 the City chose not to provide a car allowance but to provide a vehicle, which they have done for the last ten years. There is no amendment and there is no mention in the existing contract. REPORTS 5A. Committee Reports i . Crime Prevention Committee a. Minutes of April 10, 2006 CC-2006-79 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY COUNCILMEM 3ER Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 9 GARCIA, CARRIED 5-0, to accept the April 10, 2006 Minutes of the Crime Prevention Committee 2. Historical and Cultural Activities Committee a. Minutes of June 5, 2006 CC-2006-80 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES, CARRIED 5-0, to accept the June 5, 2006 Minutes of the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee 5B. Council Reports Councilmember Garcia, requested that the continents of Denis Kidd and Virginia Harford be given to the Fireworks Ad -Hoc Committee that will be meeting in August. She apologized to Emma Burke for feeling that the City is not looking out for the residents on the other side of La Cadena. She requested that staff let Colton know that Council and Staff want to be involved in any meetings with residents on the other side of La Cadena. She reported that in the Inland Empire Magazine there is a Metro Business section and was happy to see that the Grand Terrace Chamber of Commerce is listed in it. There are a lot of agencies out there that are doing good studies and referred to an article and indicated that it would be available to the public if anyone is interested in reading it. She reminded the Council about the AB1234 requirement that requires ethics training by all City officials by January 1, 2007 and every two years thereafter. The League of California Cities has some programs that are related to that. She stated that the library has wonderful programs. On Fridays at 4:00 p.m. they have therapy dogs there. She reported that the CERT training has been canceled due to the local big fires. She encouraged residents to participate. Councilmember Miller, reported that the Traffic Mitigation Committee has been meeting and that they are going through to determine which streets and areas have a need for improvements and how these improvements can be accomplished. They will bring recommendations to the Council at a later time. He reported that the next meeting will be held on August 31, 2006 and that anyone can attend. Mayor Pro Tem Cortes, concurred with Councilmember Garcia with regards to making sure that the Fireworks Ad -Hoc Committee receives the comments that were made by Denis Kidd and Virginia Harford. She questioned if there can be some type of procedure set so that there is a contact person from the Fire Department that notifies City Staff when there are incidents in Grand Terrace so that Council can be notified in a timely manner and are able to answer questions that residents may have. Thomas Wellman, Valley Division Chief, responded that he made contact with City Manager Schwab during the course of the fire. They can pre -determine ways to Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 10 communicate with the City Manager and Council for all types of incidents that may impact the community. Mayor Pro Tern Cortes, indicated that she would like some type of procedure set up. She thanked Mr. Nunez for doing a good job and asked him if he wanted to give an update on the investigation. Dave Nunez, Battalion Chief, responded that the investigation is still on -going and that they are working with the Sheriff's Department. The cause is still undetermined. He reported that on the 4th of July the Fire Department during their patrol issued several citations and made one felony arrest for an explosive device. They compensated several pounds of fireworks. Mayor Pro Tern Cortes, reported that she had spoke to staff with regards to La Cadena earlier and questioned if there was anything staff would like to add to what City Manager stated. Building and Safety/Public Works Director Shields, responded that Assistant City Manager Berry has been in contact with staff at the City of Colton and he has compiled a list of concerns that he will get responses to so that he can inform the affected residents. He has also appointed Craig Neustaedter, the City Traffic Engineer, to review that intersection and look at other possible solutions. Mayor Pro Tern Cortes, apologized to Ms. Burke. She indicated that Council was not aware of the meeting that was held and that Grand Terrace does care about the citizens on the other side of La Cadena. She reported that there was graffiti on the fencing at the Senior Center site, however, it appears to have been taken care of. She requested that the City Manager look into the comments made by Mr. Stewart regarding the safety issues at the Senior Center site. She reminded everyone that the CERT class was canceled. Councilmember Hilltey, stated that on the east side of town there is a large amount of vacant property. One piece is in Grand Terrace off of Westwood and the other piece is in a valley between Grand Terrace and Colton. There is a project that is being brought before the Colton Planning Commission on July 25th. Iron Horse Development is the name of the Developer. They have met with the residents of Mohave Drive and Grand Terrace and through months ofnegotiations, the developer has adjusted that development to match what the community wants, which is basically 2 acre lots. The number of homes has been decreased from 250 to 187 and the residents thought everything was fine. Colton City Staff now wants to put in lit soccer fields and lit baseball fields in the valley between the two towns. Mr. Yost has been going door to door in both Grand Terrace and Colton asking them to attend the Planning Commission Meeting to oppose the lit fields. He encouraged residents Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 11 to attend the meeting. Mayor Ferre, stated that if she would have known about the meeting in Colton she would have been there. It won't happen again. She stated that she did not say that there is no difference between 15 and 20, what she did say was the concerns of those residents who were at the meeting on June 8th were drainage etc., and it didn't seem to make a difference if it was 15 or 20 homes, their concerns were the same. PUBLIC HEARING 6A. Zone Change Case No. 06-01 (ZC-06-01), Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01 (TTM-06-0 I /County No. 18071) and Environmental Review Case No. 06-03 (E-06-03) to Change the Existing RI-20 Zoning to RI-10 Zoning on a 8.26 Acre Parcel and to Subdivide the Property into 20 Single Family Lots. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace Approving Zone Change No. 06-01 (Z-06-01) to Change the Existing R1-20 Zoning to R1-10 and Delete the AG Overlay Zone for an 8.26 Acre Parcel Located on the Northerly Side of Pico Street Starting Approximately 150 Feet Easterly of the Intersection of Pico Street and Kingfisher Road and Environmental Case No. 06-03 (E-06-03) - Mitigated Negative Declaration as Provided by the California Environmental Quality Act Resolution by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, State of California, Approving Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01 (County No. TTM 18071) for a 20 Lot Single Family Residential Development on a 8.26 Acre Parcel Located on the North Side of Pico Street 150 East KingfisherRoad in the City of Grand Terrace, California John Lampe, Planner, reported that this project was heard and considered by the City Council at the meeting of the June 8, 2006; it was continued in order to allow the Developer to meet with the Kingfisher residents to discuss their concerns. A meeting between the developer and the residents was scheduled for July 12th. He indicated that he feels that it would be appropriate to have the developer report on the outcome of that meeting. Jason Kar, er, Developer, reported that he met with the homeowners as requested by the City Council. They discussed the following issues: 1. Put up block -wall 2. Pave access road 3. shorten the cull -de -sac by 10 feet He feels that he can address all of the issues. Although, they were agreeable with the items that he addressed, they want 15 homes not 20. He feels that this project is a Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 12 win -win situation. Mayor Ferre opened the Public Hearing for discussion. Colleen Sumner,12680 Kingfisher, indicated that she is opposed to the zone change. She feels that single story homes on large lots would be more desirable and would increase property values. Todd Campbell, 12625 Kingfisher, stated that the residents want 15 lots. He feels that the developer is pushing for 20 homes for profit. He requested that the developer compromise on the number of lots. He has concerns with a car coming down the street into his backyard. He feels that 5 more homes would be a distraction to Blue Mountain. He would really like to see the zoning stay at 15-20,000 sq. foot lots. He feels that 3 minutes is not long enough to discuss their issues. Robert Vasquez,12635 Kingfisher Road, indicated that he would like the cull -de -sac removed or at least shortened more than 10 feet. He would like the zoning to remain at 15 lots. He would like to be able to speak for more than 3 minutes. Charles Kan, 12645 Kingfisher Road, would like the cull -de -sac to be shortened. Although he understands wanting to make profits, he feels that the current zoning is good. He thanked Jason Karger for meeting with the residents and for addressing some of their issues. Mark Roberts, 12665 Kingfisher Road, thanked the developer for meeting with the residents. He feels that there is a precedent for luxury homes in Grand Terrace and that it would not take a lot to have a vision to make this project happen. He is thankful for the compromise, however, he still prefers 15 lots with single story homes. He expressed concern with the grading of the property ruining the pools in the area. He recommends denial of the zone change. Doug McColeman, 12675 Kingfisher Road, appreciated the fact that the developer met with the residents and addressed some of the issues. He has a concern with extra traffic that will be generated. He feels that changing the zoning will set a precedent of instead of building Iuxury homes they will be packing in homes. He feels that Grand Terrace is better than that. He would like to see the homes in the east end on larger lots. He feels that Mr. Karger is trying but is still out to make money. He feels that he can build 15 homes and still make a profit. Bill Kazaltzes, 22855 Pico Street, stated that he built a home on Pico. He stated that he was told that luxury homes would be built across the street. He stated that he has concerns with the number of lots. 0 Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 13 Charles Homsb , 22656 Brentwood Street, stated that if the Developer is a good developer he should be able to work within the current zoning laws. He stated that it shouldn't be about money. He stated that a crowded neighborhood is not a good neighborhood. He feels that Council gives into developer too often. Mayor Ferre closed the Public Hearing and returned discussion to Council. Councilmember Hilke , questioned if the cull -de -sac issue has been addressed. Community & Economic Development Director Koontz, responded that it was shortened slightly with a barrier at the end. Planner Lampe, stated that the Developer agreed to place a barrier at the end of the cull -de -sac as well as shortening it, however staff hasn't seen any plans. Councilmember Hilkev, questioned where they stand on the wall issue. Planner Lampe, stated that the wooden fence would be replaced. Jason _Karger, stated that there will be a 6 foot high block wall around the property. Councilmember Hi lkey, question what they would be doing about the drainage issues that were brought up. Jason Karger, stated that the drainage would be dealt with by the developer on their property and that it would not affect the current lots. Councilmember Hilk y, confirmed that Council has not seen the revised drainage plan. He questioned how the drainage system will be maintained. Jason Karger, responded that they will more than likely propose a HOA to maintain that and all of the common areas. They are still considering making it a gated community. Councilmember_Hilkex, questioned if Council approves the zoning, they have a thought on what this project is going to look like but no control. He questioned if Council can have control over the architectural design of the homes. City Manager Schwab, responded that Jason is trying to get a preliminary design because he has a major obstacle before him to go to the State Water Resources Board because the California Aqueduct runs along one of the streets. He needs to have preliminary design to go to the State and try to negotiate the ability to put a street over the top of that water feature. We have been able to put streets over the top of Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 14 it, however, the State has become more restrictive in allowing that. Normally when there is a subdivision that comes before Council there is something that is called site and architectural review that comes back to the Planning Commission for their review. This is a 20 unit tract being proposed which is very similar to what is on Kingfisher now. Council will be given the opportunity to look at it. Councilmember Garcia, appreciates the comments of the residents and sees this as a first step. She feels that it is important that those who are impacted have the opportunity to have their say in a forum that is not restricted to 3 minutes. She indicated that she received an e-mail from one of the residents that brought up some good suggestions. She indicated that she thought that all of the issues would be addressed at the meeting that was held between the developer and the affected residents. She wants to see a free flow of ideas. She questioned if this item is continued can the Council have discussions regarding this item. Cijy Attorney Ha er, responded that there needs to be due process of the public hearing. He stated that staff, residents and developer can work out the issues. Councilmember Garcia, feels that there is dialogue that needs to happen and she would like it on record that the reason the Council is not participating in the meetings with the residents is because it is a public hearing that needs due process. She requested that City Manager Schwab participate in the meetings. She would like to see this item continued and to direct staff and the developer to meet with the residents to discuss all issues. She thanked the residents for all of their comments. She can see where 15 lots would make more sense but still would like all issues to be discussed between the developer, residents and staff. Councilmember Miller, stated that he agrees with Councilmember Garcia on some issues. He can see where residents and the developer are trying to come to some agreement. He realizes that if there are 20 homes more money will be made, however, he feels that luxury homes would be worth more. He suggested looking at the possibility of building 17 or 18 homes. He expressed his concern with the wall at the base of the hill. He also indicated that water will come down faster on a paved road as opposed to dirt. He stated that there will be more traffic with 20 homes and has some concerns with that. He would like to see the developer look at the possibility of making one of the lots a joint park with the Kingfisher properties. He would like to see a smaller amount of homes, possibly 17 or 18. He also indicated that he would also like to see what is going to happen with the water that is coming off of the hills. Mayor Pro Tern Cortes, thanked the developer for meeting with the residents .It sounds like, to her, that the residents will agree to everything if the developer lowers the number of lots from 20 to possibility 17 or 18. She would also like to see this Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 15 item continued and suggested that the developer bring back another proposal with a smaller number of lots. Mayor Ferre, stated that 8 residents spoke expressing their concerns. She stated that she would not be opposed to table this item in order for the staff, residents, and the developer to have a meeting to discuss all of the issues. Councilmember Garcia, stated that the Council is not allowed to talk to the Developer or the Residents with regards to this project. CC-2006-81 MOTION M BY COUNCILMEMBER GARCIA, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, CARRIED 5-0, to continue the Public Hearing - Zone Change Case No. 06-01 (ZC-06-01), Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01 (TTM-06-01/County No. 18071) and Environmental Review Case No. 06-03 (E-06-03) to Change the Existing R1-20 Zoning to RI.10 Zoning on a 8.26 Acre Parcel and to Subdivide the Property into 20 SingIe Family Lots; and an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace Approving Zone Change No. 06-01 (Z-06-01) to Change the Existing RI -20 Zoning to R1-10 and Delete the AG Overlay Zone for an 8.26 Acre Parcel Located on the Northerly Side of Pico Street Starting Approximately 150 Feet Easterly of the Intersection of Pico Street and Kingfisher Road and Environmental Case No. 06-03 (E-06-03) - Mitigated Negative Declaration as Provided by the California Environmental Quality Act; and a Resolution by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, State of California, Approving Tentative Tract Map No. 06-01 (County No. TTM 18071) for a 20 Lot Single Family Residential Development on a 8.26 Acre Parcel Located on the North Side of Pico Street 150 East Kingfisher Road in the City of Grand Terrace, California to August 10, 2006 and direct City Manager Schwab and the Planning Staff to meet with the Developer and the Residents to discuss all of the issues. 6B. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, California, Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract Between the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees' Retirement System City Manager Schwab, reported that during labor negotiations on June 8, 2006 the City Council agreed to amend the current PERS contract to a 2.7% at 55 formula for miscellaneous members. In order to effect the amendment, the Resolution of Intent to approve an amendment must be adopted by the City Council and in addition, an ordinance amending the contact also needs to be adopted. Staffrecommends Council adopt the resolution and hold the public hearing on the proposed ordinance and adopt the first reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace authorizing an amendment to the contract between the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees' Retirement System. Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 16 Mayor Ferre opened the Public Hearing for discussion, there being none, discussion was returned to the Council. CC-2006-82 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the first reading of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, California, Authorizing an Amendment to the Contract Between the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace and the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees' Retirement System. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7A. Council Procedures Patricia Farley, 12513 Michigan Street, indicated that she feels that 3 minutes is an inappropriate amount of time given to speak. It is not long enough. She stated that when residents are cut off they feel that the Council is not listening and they are opening themselves up for lawsuits. It was the consensus of the Council to have the following language on the Agenda under Item Number 4: Public Comment - This is the opportunity for members of the public to comment on any items not appearing on the regular agenda. Because of restrictions contained in California Law, the City Council may not discuss or act on any item not on the agenda, but may briefly respond to statements made or ask a question for clarification . The Mayor may also request a brief response from staff to questions raised during public comment or may request a matter be agendized for a future meeting. CC-2006-83 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, CARRIED 5-0, to continue Council Procedures to August 10, 2006 City Council Meeting. NEW BUSINESS A. Appoint Voting Delegate and Alternate for League of California Cities Annual Conference Bill Hays, 22114 DeBerry Street, stated that the League of California Cities opposes every bill that will protect private property rights, not only that but they oppose just compensation for property owners for impacts of state and local laws on properties. The League'ss partners are all Land Use Lawyers, Labor Unions, and Tax Bond Issuing Companies like Piper Jaffry and Best, Best and Krieger. All partners are firms that stand to profit from the taking of private property to give to developers. It is on their website. At the joint City Council and Planning Commission Meeting Council Minutes July 13, 2006 Page 17 on the Town Square Project, Councilwoman Garcia badgered Jo Stringfield to get up and speak. She indicated that she doesn't want to use eminent domain and then voted for it. Councilwoman Garcia is a Board Member for the League of California Cities for this area which is a poster child for the use of eminent domain to deprive private property owners of their property. It is ludicrous that for years, she has been charging back to the City for her travel expenses for this private corporation that stands for in -direct opposition of what the citizen's of this community feels about the use of eminent domain. Council should be voting on having Councilwoman Garcia reimbursing the City for all the travel expenses she ran up on the trips and if the community knew it they would demand it, but that would be open and honest government. The vote here should be to get out of the League of California Cities. Councilman Hilkey and Mayor Pro Tern Cortes, this issue will be an election issue and most definitely a recall issue. Councilman Miller has made opposition of the use of eminent domain and would recommend following his wise lead. Patricia Farley,12513 Michigan, stated that she is opposed and resents public money being spent on the League of California Cities. CC-2006-84 MOTION BY MAYOR PRO TEM CORTES, SECOND BY COUNCILMEM 3ER GARCIA, CARRIED 4-1-0-0 (COUNCILMEMBER HILKEY VOTED NO), to appoint Counci lmember Herman Hilkey as the Voting Delegate and Councilmember Lee Ann Garcia as the Alternate Voting Delegate at the League of California Cities Annual Conference. CLOSED SESSION - None Mayor Ferr6 adjourned the meeting at 9:17 p.m., until the next CRA/City Council Meeting which is scheduled to be held on Thursday, August 10, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. r CITY CLEkK of the City of C rand Terrace MAYOR f the City of Grand Terrace