Loading...
09/22/1988CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - SEPTEMBER 22, 1988 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 September 22, 1988, at 6:00 p.m. PRESENT: Byron Matteson, Mayor Barbara Pfennighausen, Mayor Pro Tem Hugh J. Grant, Councilmember Dennis Evans, Councilmember ABSENT: The meeting was Fellowship Church, Pfennighausen. ITEMS TO DELETE Thomas J. Schwab, City Manager/Finance Director Randy Anstine, Assistant City Manager David Sawyer, Community Development Director Juanita Brown, Deputy City Clerk John Harper, City Attorney Joe Kicak, City Engineer None opened with invocation by Pastor Larry Wilson, Praise followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Pro Tem SPECIAL PRESENTATION Mayor Matteson convened City Council at 6:15 p.m. Mayor Matteson read Councilmember Shirley's letter of resignation, which becomes effective September 19, 1988, and requested that a proclamation be sent to her. He requested the vacant seat be placed on the next Agenda. City Attorney Harper pointed out that there are two ways to go about filling the vacant seat. (1) majority of Council appoint someone within 30 days, (2) special election, which would be held around March, 1989. None. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen read a Proclamation and proclaimed "Red Ribbon Week," October 23-30, 1988. Mayor Matteson read and presented a Proclamation to Edith Evans and Arthena Cox, proclaiming September 17-23, 1988 as "Constitution Week." CONSENT CALENDAR CC-88-184 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM PFENNIGHAUSEN, CARRIED 4-0, to accept the following Consent Calendar. A. APPROVE CHECK REGISTER NO. 092288 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION B. RATIFY 9/22/88 CRA ACTION C. WAIVE FULL READING OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS ON AGENDA D. APPROVE AUGUST 25, 1988 AND SEPTEMBER 8, 1988 MINUTES Dick Rollins, 22700 DeBerry Street, G.T., gave an update on what was happening with the Crime Prevention Committee and shared his views regarding the abatement Ordinance. Ed St. Germain, 12600 Warbler Avenue, G.T., asked City Attorney Harper if the City Council authorized someone to go out and do something in the name of the City and they went out and did something entirely different, was the City bound by what they did? He reported an incident that had taken place in August regarding the signing of entirely different documents by Mayor Matteson after the Council had already approved the purchase of a piece of real estate. He listed the approved real estate price, down payment and monthly payment and questioned if the Mayor had the authority to do that. City Attorney Harper replied that under some circumstances the City would be bound and in some they would not be bound. Regarding the type of negotiation of signing something different from what the City Council has approved, an agent or Mayor does not have the ability to agree to something different from what's been approved. Mr. Germain, asked City Manager Schwab if he or anyone else from the City dealt directly with the seller and had face to face negotiations? City Manager Schwab replied there was no face to face negotiations and that it was dealt through the City's representative, Mr. Petta, who was assigned this parcel by the committee and he took care of all of the communications back and forth. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 2 Mr. Germain, stated that after looking through the escrow files, he did not find any Agency Disclosure Statement of Listing Agreements from Mr. Petta. City Manager Schwab stated that he had spoken to the individual who held the escrow, indicated that in this case, if it wasn't listed with any broker there was no agent. Mr. Germain, had lengthy discussions and questions with City Attorney Harper regarding Miller & Seller, real estate law, middleman in the sense of real estate, feeling that Mr. Petta acted as an agent rather than a middleman. City Attorney Harper felt Mr. Germain misunderstood what City Manager Schwab had said or that he did. He then explained the Code and what was permissible for a representative of a public body, feeling to his knowledge, Mr Petta did act as a middleman who only passed information between the parties. Mr. Germain, asked City Attorney Harper if he had reviewed the past Minutes? City Attorney Harper replied, he had not, but did know that the City did not enter into a brokerage agreement with a licensed real estate agent, with Mr. Petta or otherwise. Mr. Germain, discussed, questioned and shared his feelings regarding the City Manager's Monthly Status Report to the Mayor and City Council regarding the difference in the percentage (7.92 percent interest vs. 8.15 percent interest) and questioned the reason for the justification in the interest rate by the City Manager. City Manager Schwab explained that his monthly reports were to keep Council updated on Staff's activities. He stated that this particular authorization came from Council came in three parts. To make that offer, put down $40,000.00, and to carry it at $3,000.00 per month for about 12 years. The Municipal Leasing was for five years which made the payment about $80,000.00 a year for five years. The obligation for the structure of the Municipal Leasing Financing Agreement regarding a tax exempt lease would be Mr. Roberts', not the City's, and would not cost the City one cent. Mayor Matteson expressed his feelings regarding Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen and Councilmember Evans stating Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 3 that they have always been against this parkland purchase and are constantly trying to sabotage Mr. Petta. He shared his feelings regarding Mr. St. Germain's article about Councilmember Grant's feeling about apartments in last week's newspaper. He pointed out that Councilmember Grant was and has been against apartments ever since he (Mayor Matteson) had been a member of the Council. Councilmember Evans took objection to Mayor Matteson's comments, explaining that Councilmember Grant laid the foundation prior to his (Evans) being seated on Council by voting for the General Plan, the land use, an Inducement Resolution for the apartments, the Master Conceptual Plan for the whole area. He (Grant) voted for bonding and voted for all the projects. Ed St. Germain, explained that he has never come out or or against this particular park site, but was against City Government acting far beyond their authority in agreeing to terms that cost the City money. Mayor Matteson explained that the transaction he signed was not costing the City any more money than what was approved by Council. Ed St. Germain, questioned City Manager Schwab about his September 21, 1988 Memo, regarding the tax exempt status portion and financing. City Manager Schwab explained that the amount of financing is $2,000.00 more by going with Mr. Roberts, but we did have to pay $2,000.00 in expenses for issuing an issue, so it's exactly even. Councilmember Grant shared his feelings regarding Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, Councilmember Evans and Mr. St. Germain. Councilmember Evans shared his feelings regarding this particular site, the offer of Mr. Petta to become an agent for this particular park site, matter regarding one Councilmember moving out of the area. He explained that Council did authorize Staff to enter into a Municipal Lease Agreement, that was not done and terms were renegotiated. He questioned who negotiated it and why. Mayor Matteson explained that the land was appraised by a professional appraiser who came in with an exact price. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 4 Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen questioned the haste to purchase Roberts' parcel, indicating there was no one else interested in that piece of land, feeling Council should have taken time to negotiate and allow necessary changes, if any. She questioned to whom the checks would be made out to for Roberts' property. City Manager Schwab replied that they would be made out to Mr. Roberts. Mayor Matteson stated that Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen addressed the rush issue, we've been working on this for almost four years, I don't see any rush issue. He explained that it was the Parks & Recreation Committee who kept pushing Council, asking when are we going to get some land. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen questioned the 30-day escrow. Mayor Matteson explained that one was not needed. He asked City Attorney Harper for his opinion after hearing the discussion tonight. City Attorney Harper felt that since the terms were the same and the authorization was to either sell or purchase directly from Mr. Roberts or purchase through the Municipal Leasing Plan, it appeared that the final arrangement was within the authority provided by Council. Ed St. Germain, felt they had missed his main point which was that Mayor Matteson had signed a legal document in the middle of escrow changing the terms to terms that have never been approved by Council. He wondered if the City has purchased or owned anything at this point. Dick Rollins, 22700 DeBerry Street, G.T., shared his and the Parks & Recreation Committee feelings and desires regarding potential parks and questioned the amount of this new acquired City owned land. City Manager Schwab replied that 4.6 acres for $345,000.00. Mr. Rollins, questioned the use of the City owned triangle piece of property across the street from this land. He share some of the residents feelings regarding parks. City Manager Schwab felt it was up to the committee, as far as, what would be done with the land. i Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 5 ORAL REPORTS Linda Idsten, 11893 Mt. Vernon Avenue, G.T., explained that she was one who spoke to Councilmember Grant regarding the speed bumps in the alley and shared her concerns and fears of possible accidents to children and asked Council to reconsider the issue. Stan Har rave, had questions regarding this leasing agreement feeling to protect the City and City Council from a risk management standpoint, that the City Attorney or a representative of the City should write a letter to Mr. Roberts explaining that it is not the intent of the City for this to be a tax exempt transaction. City Manager Schwab felt that if it did get structured as a tax exempt issue, there would probably be a trustee, but felt it was a good idea to write the letter to Mr. Roberts. He explained that the first interest payment goes out October 2, 1988. City Attorney Harper concurred with Mr. Hargrave. Tony Petta, 11875 Eton Drive, G.T., explained that he made no commitment to Mr. Roberts of any kind and he felt no need to give him tax advice. He stated that the City has made no commitment what -so -ever to this. 5A. Committee Reports 1. Introduction of Citizen Patrol Members Harold Lord, 22855 Minona Drive, introduced the following new members of the Citizen Patrol: Lynn Duke, Bea Todd & Mike Todd. Mayor Matteson explained that the car the Citizen Patrol was driving was donated by L.J. Ford. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated that the Citizen Patrol has really made an impact on the community asking for more volunteers to come out and join the Citizen Patrol. Mayor Matteson stated that the City appreciated their services. 2. Historical & Cultural Activities Committee Council accepted the Minutes of August 1, 1988. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 6 3. Appointment of Harold Lord & Mark Walters to the Crime Prevention Committee CC-88-185 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GRANT, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM PFENNIGHAUSEN, CARRIED 4-0, to appoint Harold Lord & Mark Walters to the Crime Prevention Committee. PUBLIC HEARING 6A. Second Reading of the City Council of the City of Grand errace Repealing Existing Chapter 8.04 and Re-enacting Chapter 8.04 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code Pertaining to Nuisance Abatement. Community Development Director Sawyer explained that this is the second reading of the Nuisance Abatement Ordinance, Staff recommends that Council hold the scheduled public hearing and approve this ordinance with its second reading. Dick Rollins, 22700 DeBerry St., G.T., had the following questions regarding the Nuisance Ordinance: if this Ordinance will be re-enacted and be in effect; how Council felt about enforcement; was there any way the Ordinance could be published and sent out to make the public aware of this Ordinance; where the hearing would be held, and does the resident have to send in a written letter to get complaints taken care of. City Manager Schwab explained the difference between the two Ordinances stating that this Ordinance will replace the old Nuisance Ordinance and if it is adopted by Council tonight it will be enforced in 30 days. He explained that the complaint did not have to be in writing, they can be phoned in. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen explained what the Nuisance Ordinance meant, indicating having some very serious problems within the City and needed the rules that can be enforced. Bob Buffin, 22838 Minona Drive, G.T., stated that within the last year he has called in about three complaints regarding abandoned cars in the front yard, RV parked almost on the street at that same location for approximately 3 1/2 years and nothing has been done about it. Councilmember Evans felt this Ordinance was not necessary to take care of this problem because it sounds as if it's a health hazard. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 7 Mayor Matteson requested the City Manager to contact Mr. Buffin tomorrow, September 23, 1988. Bernard Verwiel, 22837 Minona, G.T., concurred with Mr. Buffin, stating that he has called in several times about this same location, adding that a trailer have been there for 30 years on City property. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen explained that the lady who lives at the mentioned location is ill and unable to take care of her property, feeling that those making the complaints should band together and see if they can be of help to her. Mr. Verwiel, explained that he would very happy to go over and offer his help, but from experience, felt it might offend the neighbor(s). He stated that he found it is better to go to the proper authorities, questioning if she has been ill for the past 30 years that the trailer has been there. Mayor Matteson concurred that the property owner should take care of their own property. He inquired if there was anymore public participation, being none, he turned it back to Council. Councilmember Evans stated for clarification, after reading Item 4 on Page 3, felt it meant you didn't have to have a dilapidated type condition. He questioned if someone had something that complied with the zoning Ordinance previous to the City's incorporation, would they have to come back and comply with these standards. City Attorney Harper replied, "no," they have certain rights under the law, they are basically non-conformance uses. He felt that Councilmember Evans was correct, it's not dilapidated, it means if someone builds a building without a permit and did not put the plumbing or electricity in correctly, this gives the City the ability to cite them. He felt a need to insert "the intention of the City is not to go out and cite people criminally or otherwise" in the Ordinance. Councilmember Evans questioned the parking of a RV vehicle or fifth -wheel trailer in the driveway or side yard. Community Development Director Sawyer explained the current Code vs. the new Code. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 8 CC-88-186 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER EVANS, SECOND BY MAYOR MATTESON, carried 4-0, to approve the Second Reading of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace repealing existing Chapter 8.04 and re-enacting Chapter 8.04 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code pertaining to Nuisance Abatement. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen and Mr. Verwiel shared their feelings regarding reaching out and helping neighbors. B. Revision of Sections A B, and C of Item 13 Ordinance No. 108 Planning, Engineering and Building & Safety Fees Second Reading). Community Development Director Sawyer read his Staff Report and recommended that the City Council conduct the second reading of the revision to Sections A, B, & C of Item 13, Ordinance No. 108. Mayor Matteson opened this discussion up for public hearing, being none, he turned it back to Council. CC-88-187 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER GRANT, CARRIED 4-0, to approve the second reading Sections A, B, & C of Item 13, Ordinance No. 108. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Recessed at 7:37 p.m. Reconvened at 7:52 p.m. 7A. Additional Analysis of the City's General Plan by Wildan & Associates. For the record, comments regarding the circulation element have been received by Council from the Colton Joint Unified School District. Community Development Director Sawyer read his Staff Report and then introduced Mr. Ross Geller. Ross Geller, Wildan & Associates, reported that at the last Council meeting he attended, land use alternatives were selected, particularly for the southwest area. The question was asked whether the environmental information that was contained in the MEA and EIR was still relevant based on the changes in the land use pattern. He explained that the traffic analysis provides supplemental information to the EIR and provides Council with the information required by California Environmental Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 9 Quality Agency (CEQA) to make a determination as to whether or not this is a feasible alternative in that area. He introduced Mr. Barry Dee who prepared the traffic study. Barry Dee, Wildan & Associates, gave a presentation of his traffic study and summarized the five following alternatives: (1) Designating Barton Road as the major highway instead of the dividing major highway, (2) Commerce Way terminating at Pico, Van Buren or De Berry instead of having a continuous arterial running south to Main Street, (3) Circulation analysis - Make Commerce Way a continuous road, (4) Do not make Commerce Way a continuous roadway and (5) Adopt a fifth Master Plan Designation (6-lane roadway section with left-hand signalization) which would provide 78 ft. curb to curb within 100 ft. right-of-way with a reduced parkway area. Mayor Matteson asked why he was projecting that it should go all the way to Main Street as a continuous roadway? Mr. Dee, explained that their traffic analysis showed, in order to provide both access to Commerce and to accommodate the traffic volume associated with the commercial uses and be able to access to and from the City, it would need to be a continuous roadway. If not, that traffic would be diverted to Michigan Street and would add additional traffic volume to Michigan. He indicated there were two options, (1) put the traffic on Michigan or (2) have a continuous roadway on Commerce that would take the traffic associated with the Land Use Designation. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Dan Green, 745 S. Oak Knoll, Pasadena, had questions regarding how the traffic volume numbers were determined and when would they become relevant. He expressed his objection to the extension of Commerce Way because it would go through his property that presently is up for sale. Councilmember Evans questioned Mr. Geller on the following: if Staff was still going with what was originally proposed, running through Mr. Green's property; Mr. Geller's professional opinion on alignment of Commerce Way; if Mr. Geller was going with what's on this Land Use before Council and 7 A Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 10 what he proposed on the General Plan earlier this year; if he was leaving the decision up to the Council. i Mr. Geller, stated that at the last meeting when the land use was put together, one of Council's actions was relative to a specific alignment study being done showing exactly where that road would go. He explained that this is a conceptual design, Commerce Way needs to be somewhat extended from Michigan southerly. He felt that Council will have to make the final decision. He stated that they have not pinpointed the exact center line of that road on that very small scale map. I Councilmember Evans again asked Mr. Geller for his professional opinion, as to how far that street should run. Mr. Geller, pointed out that they recently prepared a study that has three options and they did not even know how far that street is going to run at this point. That is one of the decisions that Council needs to make. Community Development Director Sawyer explained that at the last meeting, much of the area that Edison now owns was previously recommended by Staff and the Consultant to be a business park concept and it's now industrial. He explained the reason for Staff's original recommendation for Commerce Way to come all the way down Main Street, feeling that Commerce Way still needs to swing down into the alignment, as originally recommended, to Van Buren Street. He stated that the Consultant was presenting the alternatives of bringing it down further. Council should consider the land use changes that Staff recommended. Bringing Commerce Way in further would affect the other roads in that area. Mr. Green, stated it was his understanding at the last meeting on this subject, that Council approved Commerce Way to come to DeBerry and no further and that it was up to the Consultant then to bring Council additional input as to traffic. He felt Council should look into the traffic count. Mayor Matteson asked how they came up with the traffic count figure? Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 11 Mr. Dee, explained that the trip generations come from transportation engineers who have done extensive research on the amount of vehicle trips that are generated by different types of land uses. What we are looking at is the ultimate buildout of the City, indicating not saying when these traffic volumes would occur, approximately twenty years from now, depending on how much the City has built out. Mayor Matteson questioned the noted traffic count of 27,435 vehicles traveling in the northerly direction on Commerce Way each day. He questioned the proposed 6-lane roadway on Barton, feeling it was not necessary to have so many lanes. Mr. Dee, explained that the figures are daily two-way traffic volumes when you have commercial uses, you will draw a significant amount of traffic off the freeway. He stated that Barton Road has freeway access and will get some through traffic, feeling Barton Road has the ability to carry traffic from outside of the City. Councilmember Evans asked if another Consultant firm was brought in, would they come up with the same figures. The response was, "yes." Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen felt Grand Terrace would never have use for that type of volume. She felt nothing was going to be developed between Van Buren and Pico because Edison has a specific reason for having that property in there. Mayor Matteson informed Mr. Green that if the City were to put a street through his property, he would be compensated for it at the fair market value. Mr. Green, explained why he was unable to sell his property to three different parties, feeling if the City was going to develop Commerce Way, do it, if not, then clear the air. Councilmember Evans asked City Attorney Harper, in light of some of the recent decisions that has been coming down from the courts and what Mr. Green has shared with us this evening, if we were to accept this designation, would the City be opening itself up for possibly taking and would have to compensate to this gentleman immediately upon this adoption? Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 12 City Attorney Harper stated that, "no," there are a lot of cases that say that mere planning is a form of the General Plan or Traffic Circulation Plan. Since it's required that the City do it, it doesn't constitute inverse condemnation. Councilmember Evans asked if Mr. Green were to submit a project to planning and if this was to be adopted for approval, would he be granted approval and allowed to build? City Attorney Harper stated probably not, it depends on the circumstances. Councilmember Evans stated, so Mr. Green can't do anything with his property but let it sit there. City Attorney Harper replied, you are right, but it's not inverse condemnation. Mayor Matteson asked what affect would it have if the alignment was moved further west? Mr. Dee, stated there is a need to do a precise alignment study and in doing so, you can do a lot to avoid pieces of property, explaining ways to do this. Mayor Matteson stated as far as the Consultant's study was concerned, it makes no difference whether the street is moved east or west. Mr. Dee, replied it makes no difference, it just needs to be a secondary roadway that is continuous. Councilmember Evans asked Mr. Dee why didn't he give Council some alternatives that would have the least impact for everyone in the surrounding areas, that is what was asked of them earlier. Mr. Dee, stated that you have two choices as they are outlined in their report. (1) If you do not build Commerce Way continuously from Michigan to Main Street, you are going to have the traffic impact. (2) You should upgrade Michigan to a secondary from a collector. The study did not get into particular alignment or where the street should go exactly, only that there is a necessity for it. It could be aligned as much as 200 ft. east and west of what is graphically shown in this figure. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 13 Mayor Matteson asked if he was saying, we should have that street running through there, but they did not care where it is? The response was, "that's right." Mr. Green, felt that the traffic study and traffic count are unrealistic based on the present ownership in the area and the lack of proposed development. Councilmember Evans question the need to designate all of that to Main Street instead of to DeBerry, indicating that when development came into the area they would show what the configuration of that street should be. He questioned the best configuration if we were to go east or west. Community Development Director Sawyer stated they indicated in their recommendation that the general alignment of Commerce Way does go through to Main Street and that a precise alignment study be done. He stated that has not been done to date and the Consultants were not directed to do it. Councilmember Evans questioned why they didn't show the street over more toward the railroad tracks? Community Development Director Sawyer replied, because of the General Land Use decisions that were made, they looked at those existing ones and .... Councilmember Evans stated so land use didn't play a part, they tried to utilized the land in the circulation element. Community Development Director Sawyer stated that this alignment was established with the land use pattern that was recommended by the Consultant. When those land use patterns were changed, the Consultants were directed to come back with how those land uses would affect the distance that Commerce Way would be brought down. They are saying that the precise alignment which could vary from 100 to 200 ft. should be looked at in a precise study. Councilmember Evans stated that in 1984, the Consultants said the streets west of Michigan would have to be widened to four lanes. The Plan before us with the old General Plan said it can go down to a collector which is two lanes, are you saying that 0 Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 14 you disagree with the 1984 Plan and that they don't have to be widened to 4 lanes, that they can stay at two lanes. Mr. Geller, stated that Mr. Hauss voiced his concerns relative to the traffic study that was done in 1984 and that the numbers were significantly lower and he had some real problems with those numbers. He believed that was the first statement that he made relative to this area. Councilmember Evans, asked for clarification, if the same manual was being used, why the differences? He indicated being back to the general Commerce designation over on that side of town. Mr. Dee, explained that traffic would increase significantly on some of those east west streets and the volume will not rise, in their opinion, to a level to necessitate four lanes. He explained it would have level of services less than Level Services A & B, some of it would go down to level service D, the recommended minimum level services in the City by the General Plan. He reported on the significant changes between 1984 and 1988 in the reissued updated Transportation, Engineering Trip Manual. They also have a traffic study done by SANBAG, indicating that these things can change and can affect the final results of the traffic analysis that was done four or five years ago. Councilmember Evans stated, if he understood the reason, in 1984, the trip generation factors that were before that traffic engineer have since been changed and decreased. Therefore, the amount of traffic is not as severe as what they took a look at, it is going down instead of up. Mr. Dee, stated the he has not reviewed the previous traffic study, but felt they hadn't changed that much. He felt what influenced traffic volume on some of these roadways are two things: (1) Regional distribution of the traffic as we took it from the SANBAG Regional Model. (2) The most attractive roadway, in their opinion was Barton, feeling people would choose to get on Barton as soon as they can to use it to travel the City east and west. He indicated not knowing if that's the same assumption that the previous traffic engineer and traffic study put forth. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 15 Mayor Matteson asked City Engineer Kicak his opinion on alignment of Commerce Way. City Engineer Kicak felt that when there's a proposed development in an area, the General Plan would probably, in the absence of a Specific Plan, dictate the location of the center line of that roadway, especially when it is shown on a property line. He felt when there are parcels in the area where you've indicated the center line is going to be, a Specific Plan should be adopted through a public hearing process involving all of the property owners that are affected by that alignment. He felt that the Consultant had addressed that issue by saying, you need a Specific Plan to determine where that location should be. He pointed out that this is an important issue that needs to be clear, explaining his reason for this statement. City Attorney Harper stated that under normal circumstances the General Plan will show alignments without specific alignments along traffic lines, because it's anticipated that when roads are developed, property owners on either side contribute equally to the development of the road. He stated the general way of doing it differently, is as the Consultant suggested, doing a study of the specific alignment. Mr. Dee, stated that once this decision has been made, it would require updating the General Plan and the EIR that goes along with the General Plan. One mitigation measure that could be included in the EIR is the fact of the requirement to do some kind of specific alignment study. Tom Thompson, Inland Lumber Company, shared his views regarding stopping this project on DeBerry. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen felt there was no way to widen Taylor Street all the way to the west. On the west side is Highgrove's Generating Station, just to the east of Taylor Street is the railroad tracks that services the Edison Company. She stated that Taylor Street was the alternative in the 1984 Plan, it was a bad idea then and it is still a bad idea. She shared her ideas regarding extension of Commerce Way to Main Street, feeling it should stop at DeBerry. Mayor Matteson asked for suggestions. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 16 Councilmember Evans suggested giving it back to the Consultants. He referenced Mr. Geller's comments on June 23, 1988, after the decision had been made to change the land use. Mr. Geller indicated that he needed to take another look at the Environmental Impact Report with the major changes before he knew whether or not Commerce Way needed to go past DeBerry at this point. A little further on, Mr. Geller said he did not even know if a road was needed there. He asked Mr. Geller if he felt a road was needed there and to tell Council what they should do. Mr. Geller, explained they prepared the traffic analysis based on those land uses in that area. He listed the following alternatives: Commerce Way to continue to Main Street; to impact all the residents that are currently along Main Street; widen Main Street to show that as a collector street from Main Street all the way up to Commerce Way and then arterial past that. He felt there is a need for the road, but if Council chooses not to build the road and to terminate it at DeBerry, there will be a significant impact of traffic along Michigan. He stated they prepared the analysis CEQA set up to provide the decision makers with the proper tools to make the proper decisions. Council can disregard the information in terms of impaction on Michigan or choose not to widen Michigan, then what is known as a Statement of Overriding the Consideration can be done. It means that Council had information that showed that if we terminate Commerce Way at DeBerry, or terminated it any where else along the line, there's going to be an offsetting impact on Michigan and Council have listened to the discussion, understands the discussion. However, Council still does not see a need or you find some other compelling reason not to mitigate that significant impact in terms of amending the circulation element to show Michigan now as a secondary highway, that's where we can go with it. If you decide to use a scenario, what you would do is not show Commerce Way south of DeBerry, we'll take it off the map, we have this information included in the EIR, we'll call out the traffic impacts as the significant impact that can't be mitigated. Councilmember Evans shared his ideas regarding the alignment. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 17 Councilmember Grant shared his ideas regarding the alignment. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated that she is opposed to the alignment. Mayor Matteson asked City Manager Schwab to look into Specific Alignment and come back to Council with recommendations. City Manager Schwab indicated having City Engineer Kicak to take a look at it. City Engineer Kicak stated approximately a year and a half ago, Staff did about nine different alternatives of that whole area. He stated Staff would pull them for Council to review. Mayor Matteson asked if Staff had pictures such as Mr. Thompson had to give Council an aerial view of the land? City Engineer Kicak explained that they are the same pictures that Council was reviewing, except they can be reproduced in the form of a blue line. He indicated also having contour maps with the property lines drawn to give a general idea of how the individual properties are impacted by any alignments that were considered in the past or could be considered in the future. He felt before going into a precise alignment, he would like to get the feeling of Council and the general terms as to which way Council wanted that precise alignment. He informed that prior to the incorporation of this City, San Bernardino prepared a precise alignment, which he had a copy of, that were computed to a thousandth of a foot. He suggested having a workshop to go over the alignment. Community Development Director Sawyer suggested not holding up the entire General Plan on this particular area of the City, explaining the way to do it is to bring Commerce Way down to DeBerry and end there. Council can then direct Staff to prepare the Specific Plan that's necessary to come up with the alignment for Commerce Way. If Council adopts the Statement of Overriding Consideration, that would wrap up the General Plan. Staff could come back with another amendment to the General Plan to adopt the circulation of Commerce Way as a separate element. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 18 11 Mayor Matteson questioned the status of the General Plan? Community Development Director Sawyer reported that Council has made decisions regarding land uses and covered all of the different areas with the exception of the circulation element. He felt what was needed now, was the determination regarding Commerce Way. Council should direct Staff as a mitigation measure, to either prepare the Specific Plan or adopt a Statement Overriding of Consideration. He explained what the traffic element was going to do to Michigan and that a study will be done and addressed at a separate time so that it does not hold up the General Plan. Councilmember Grant stated he wanted to make it understood to everyone that Council is in no way going to conclude this thing at DeBerry Street. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen made reference to the statement under the Impact of Commerce Way Circulation Alternatives (Michigan being north of Barton Road), explaining that Michigan stops on the southside. Gene Carlstrom, 22833 Palm, suggested stopping Commerce Way a little bit further and draw in as it now exists and leave it until it is decided exactly what will be done there. Councilmember Evans asked if he felt this way because of his plans with Mr. Snow and their project? Mr. Carlstrom, replied yes, that had some bearing on it. However, there are no concrete plans submitted on that, but it has been indicated there might be a need to realign Commerce Way at that point. Mayor Matteson indicated hearing the completion in two weeks. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen felt a deadline should be set for Council to act on the General Plan. If indeed Council cannot resolve this deadlock over whats going to happen with Commerce Way, it should be set aside and dealt with at some later date so that the General Plan can be firmed up and voted on at the next meeting. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 19 Mayor Matteson requested this item to be put on the next Agenda. Councilmember Grant pointed out that was the date City Engineer Kicak will bring in his information. City Manager Schwab asked the Mayor if he wanted that in two parts. The response was, "yes." City Engineer Kicak, for clarification, explained Staff did some alignment studies for the street system and that with Commerce Way coming through, he would like to bring the alternatives to Council that were presented previously for Councils' review and see if they have any modifications as to what they wanted. Mayor Matteson suggested Council should try to work it out from that, if not, adopt what they have and postpone the balance of it. Councilmember Evans, for point of clarification, asked City Engineer Kicak if he was saying he was going to bring back to Council the nine alternatives. The response was, "that's correct." Councilmember Grant asked if he was going to provide Council with alignments block by block? City Engineer Kicak replied, "yes." City Attorney Harper stated that he may have misunderstood the discussion since he was not involved in the initial things related to the adoption of the General Plan, but it sounds as if Council will have to make some decisions, or give some directions to the engineering staff in order to correctly draft the environmental document, at least. They either need to bring you something which will show Commerce Way as it's proposed presently or if it's going to stop short of DeBerry or anyplace else. That and the requisite impact on the environmental document. You have to give some directions even if you plan on changing that sometime in the future. Mayor Matteson asked if they needed it now? Mr. Geller, replied, they needed a decision. City Attorney Harper explained there wasn't a problem when this was going to be continued for two Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 20 weeks, but as soon as you put something that you can adopt on the Agenda in two weeks as well, it's going to have to be based upon something. Council needs to make their decision tonight, because it has to be noticed and drafted in the EIR. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked if it was needed so that Wildan can go ahead and do the MEA EIR? If Council could vote on the General Plan and set this aside and act as an amendment. City Attorney Harper replied, "yes," explaining that the alternative is to continue it two weeks, and based upon the input Council received in two weeks, make a final decision that isn't going to require an amendment, then two weeks later, bring back the General Plan .... Mr. Geller, stated there was no way they could have City Engineer Kicak's information next week, make a decision and adopt a plan unless they are going to adopt the Minutes of all of the hearings. The technical change hasn't been made either, so they need sometime in between to adopt it. City Attorney Harper explained Council could either make a decision tonight about what Council wanted the General Plan to reflect, recognizing it might be temporary or alternatively. To just continue the whole thing and make a decision two weeks from now regarding what would be in the General Plan. Community Development Director Sawyer felt it may be beneficial for Council to allow Staff to come back in two weeks. Staff can present to Council a presentation with exactly what has been discussed to this date; the land use decision and where we are at in the process; City Engineer's input on the width and alignment and then Council can make a decision as to where to draw the line. That will give Wildan the information they need to prepare the environmental document and bring it before Council at the following meeting. Mayor Matteson asked the Consultants what they needed tonight? Mr. Geller, replied for Council to make a decision at the next meeting. City Attorney Harper explained that the first action, Council continued to reach without any Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 21 NEW BUSINESS decision tonight, that was the effect, you would just come back and go through the scenario basis. It was when Council said to put the General Plan on the Agenda in two weeks as well, to vote on it, is when it became a problem. 8A. Correspondence from Terrace Pines Apartments regarding occupancy permits. City Manager Schwab reported that Staff has been working with Terrace Pines and, as outlined in their letter, specifically all of the conditions have been met and they have also complied with several items that were negotiated. One item that was brought to Staff's attention after the initial certificate of occupancy, was that the CC&R should have been approved by the City Attorney as condition in the original project. That now has been done and reviewed by Council. He indicated that Mr. Mauerhan was present wishing to discuss this with the Council and to request that Lot 10-13 also be released for Certificate of Occupancy. City Attorney Harper stated that he has been in constant communication with Mr. Mauerhan's attorney over the past couple of weeks drafting language which meets the Council and Planning Commissions desires with regard to the issues that are presented and in addition the maintenance of Gage Canal. He stated they decided that the most effective way of doing that, although, presently the CC&R's were conditioned, was the formation of a landscaping district just covering that single project, and giving Mr. Mauerhan a petition to begin that process. Hopefully, it will be back two weeks, or at the most, two meetings from now. That will enable us to levy the actual cost of doing the maintenance on those properties or doing it ourselves. In addition, although we haven't discussed it with them, probably include the Highland Project, as well as, roughly 40 ft. of Gage Canal, which is not today planning on being developed. We can develop and maintain it and spread the assessments over the two properties, feeling it is a better approch than what's been discussed up to this point. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen explained that she was the one who put a stop to Mr. Mauerhan's project because she had some concerns with the project, Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 22 regarding the conditions being met that was set by the Planning Commission and City Council. She stated if all conditions have been met, based on her stand with the project, she would have no reason to hold the Occupancy Permit up. She stated �- since the project does not have recreational facilities and the children will have no place to play except the streets, she would like to see both sides of Britton Way going through that project posted as "No Parking". Bill Mauerhan, 1601 Dove Street, Newport Beach, indicated having approximately 60 percent of their 3-bedroom units leased to date. They have six children in the entire project, three of which are infants. Mayor Matteson asked for the issuing of "No Parking" on both sides of the street on Britton through Mr. Mauerhans' project. 8B. Correspondence from Mr. Bob Keeney regarding CUP-87-7 RV Parking and Commercial Center City Manager Schwab stated that a condition was placed on the developer to install a signal head that would sequent with the light that is at Barton and LaCrosse. He explained that one of the primary concerns at the time that was placed was due to the fact of having an RV Park there, that light would allow some protection for the RV's to get onto Barton Road in order to turn into the RV Park. He explained that the project that is coming in now is strictly for the retail, which is up front. He reported receiving a letter from Caltrans, met with them on the site and they indicated not caring if there was a signal head there or not. Mr. Keeney has requested that requirement be waived and was told that it was a requirement placed by the City Council and Staff does not have any authority to waive any requirements placed by the City Council. Therefore, this issue was placed on the Agenda tonight for Council to take input from Mr. Keeney and make a decision. Bob Keeney, 12139 Mt. Vernon, G.T., stated Caltrans became involved in this project because they were notified something was happening there. He stated they received a letter from Caltrans indicating they did not like our entry way, but was later recinded. However, to mitigate that with Caltrans, it was decided to put a stop light in there. He Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 23 stated CG Engineering felt a stop sign would be adequate there instead of a signal light. Caltrans pointed out that their main concern was that the island coming south on the freeway, getting off of LaCrosse, continuing south on LaCrosse across Barton Road, those islands in the center line of LaCrosse on the southside of Barton Road did not line up. Caltrans suggested to make the right turn; widen Barton Road so that the through traffic from Barton Road did not conflict with the people turning right; put a stop sign there; and move the island over to the left, if you are facing south. Dennis, CG Engineering, pointed out the diagrams on Mr. Keeney's proposal on the board. Mayor Matteson asked City Engineer Kicak if he had seen this proposal? City Engineer Kicak explained, this was the first time he had seen the proposal just presented, indicating having some concerns and questions regarding Mr. Keeney's proposal of handling the southerly bound traffic on LaCrosse and across Barton Road and the prevention of blockage of traffic on Barton Road. Dennis, CG Engineering, explained that the new alignment would be a straight shot across and it would lineup with the traffic. 0 Mayor Matteson questioned the value of the right -hand -turn lane, heading south, and why didn't they allow a right -hand -turn lane onto Barton Road? Dennis, CG Engineering, replied he did not recall the reasons why. Councilmember Evans, stated if he understands the existing island there will be cut in half and the left side of the island will be moved east. He questioned why the island could not be moved south and then back north and align it with the curb line. Dennis, CG Engineering, replied if you take this now and move it back, you're going to have to move the signal back and put in a longer arm. Mayor Matteson asked City Engineer Kicak for his opinion. Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 24 City Engineer Kicak stated he will have to see where those existing facilities are, indicating that not only a new relocated traffic signal with a longer mast arm, but even a controller may need to be relocated at that point. He questioned with the L present configurations if it was possible to stop the traffic that's traveling easterly on Barton Road before it gets to the northbound intersection of LaCrosse; if it was possible to stop the traffic on the westerly side of LaCrosse as it comes in from the south so that the intersection is not blocked. Dennis, CG Engineering, felt in doing that, distance would have to be looked at from the existing signal now. If that distance exceeds what is generally an accepted factor, it may require another signal mast arm at this point in order to accomplish that. He also felt to clear that intersection, a longer yellow timing pattern might be needed. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked City Engineer Kicak if he would like a couple of weeks to take a look at this proposal. City Engineer Kicak indicated that he did not want to be the one to hold up the project, but felt a need to see some dimensions; see how this lines up; what the impacts are that we are discussing regarding the location of the existing traffic signal on the northerly side of Barton Road that controls the traffic; the practicality of putting a stop bar on the westerly side of LaCrosse and maintain the same traffic signals that we have. After lengthy discussion, Council directed Staff to review this proposal and bring their recomendations back to Council. CC-88-188 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM PFENNIGHAUSEN, CARRIED 4-0, to make this proposal a Staff approved item. 5B. Council Report Councilmember Grant, reported on his attendance to the Local Agency Formation Commission meeting on September 21, 1988 where they discussed annexation and attachment from Bloomington Park District. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, gave a report on her attendance to the September meeting of the I Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 25 CLOSED SESSION Emergency Operations Committee, stating she was requested to bring the following requests back to Council: (1) The Committee is having difficulty in getting emergency frequency information for their communication section; request assistance in getting needed assistant from the County EOC in getting the emergency operating frequent. (2) Council to review Ordinance 10 (Ordinance what our procedures would be in the event of a disaster) for possible revision. (4) City Manager Schwabs' support and regular attendance at their meetings now through the completion of the plan since he will have to implement the plan. (4) Committee has two vacancies to fill. (5) Appointment of standby officers, they need that in their emergency plan. She stated that the Committee is sending out letters (resource survey) to the community and then explained what the letter meant and that responses were needed back from the community. She also commented on the statement made regarding campaign ethics and the voting records on apartments. Mayor Matteson , indicating having three letters, one from Mr. Steve Kaicz objecting to the residential parking of the disel trucks. A letter from Mr. & Mrs. Stromwell opposing any widening of Michigan Street; a call from Mrs. Mendez on Michigan regarding being in favor of widening Michigan Street; and a letter from Mr. & Mrs. Stanley Macklin expressing opposition to any auto dealership coming into Grand Terrace. City Attorney Harper stated they are going into closed session to discuss T.J. Austyn vs. the City of Grand Terrace. Mayor Matteson adjourned the City Council meeting at 11:00 p.m. until the next regular City Council meeting which is scheduled to be held on Thursday, October 13, 1988 at 6:00 p.m. P Y CITY L o t e City Grand Terrace MAYO of the City o Grand errace Council Minutes - 09/22/88 Page 26