Loading...
06/08/1989CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 8, 1989 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 June 8, 1989, at 6:00 p.m. PRESENT: Byron Matteson, Mayor Hugh J. Grant, Mayor Pro Tem Barbara Pfennighausen, Councilmember Jim Singley, Councilmember Gene Carlstrom, Councilmember Thomas J. Schwab, City Manager/Finance Director Randall Anstine, Assistant City Manager Alan R. Burns, Deputy City Attorney David Sawyer, Community Development Director Juanita Brown, Deputy City Clerk Joe Kicak, City Engineer ABSENT: John Harper, City Attorney The meeting was opened with invocation by Pastor Salim Elias, Azure Hills Seventh-Day Adventist Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilmember Pfennighausen. Mayor Matteson convened City Council meeting at 6:05 p.m. Mayor Matteson reconvened City Council meeting at 6:10 p.m. ITEMS TO DELETE None. SPECIAL PRESENTATION Mayor Matteson presented Parks & Recreation scholar- ships to Monica Taylor and Henri Moser. CONSENT CALENDAR CC-89-86 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar with the removal of Items A and F. B. RATIFY 6/08/89 CRA ACTION C. WAIVE FULL READING OF ORDINANCES ON AGENDA Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 2 ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION D. APPROVE 5/25/89 MINUTES E. RENEWAL OF BINGO LICENSE - LION'S CLUB G. REJECTION OF GTLC-89-02 3A. Approve Check Register No. 060889 Councilmember Pfenni hausen, noted that the Planning Commissioners stipends have been back -logged and asked that they are paid in a timely manner in the future. 3F. Resolution of the Citx Council of the City of Grand Terrace Appointing Alan R. Burns as Deputy City Attorney Councilmember Pfenni hausen, asked if the fee will be the same or two attorneys from the same firm and if one will be covering in the absence of the other. City Manager Schwab, replied that the fee would be the same and Alan would act in John's absence. CC-89-87 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, CARRIED 5-0, to approve Consent Calendar Items A & F. PUBLIC COMMENT Dick Rollins, 22700 DeBerry St., Grand Terrace; pointed out a problem exiting the City parking lot on Palm Ave. and asked Council to consider designating the area between the City driveway and the adjacent driveway a no parking zone; he requested that Council consider reviving the Grand Terrace Clean Community System; and reported a problem with a soccer team from out of the area using the park on DeBerry. Gene McMeans, 2025 Glenwood St., Colton, expressed concern regarding the Circulation Plan proposed by the City of Colton. He felt the plan would affect the City of Grand Terrace and suggested that Council review the Plan. Bill Addington, 12055 Westwood Ln., Grand Terrace; indicated that if the Plan proposed by the City of Colton passed, it would be extremely dangerous because there is no way to widen the connecting street. City Engineer Kicak, reported that it would be very difficult for the City of Colton to connect the street without our permission. Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 3 ORAL REPORTS Mayor Matteson, directed staff to make contact and make sure we ave an opportunity to comment. 5A. COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. Historical & Cultural Committee (a) Council accepted Minutes of 5/1/89. 2. Parks & Recreation Committee (a) Council accepted Minutes of 4/3/89. 5B. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Pfennighausen, commented that she felt it is a good idea to bring back the Clean Community System and would like to see it happen; she felt that the driveway exiting the City parking lot on Palm is not safe; she indicated that the safety of people in our park being jeopardized is intolerable and hoped that the problem is taken care of immediately; she requested the status of the mobile home storage facility at I-215 and LaCrosse, asking how long they will be stored there and what benefit the City is getting from them; she indicated that the Emergency Plan should be processed and put on the agenda for approval and Ordinance 10 needs to be reviewed and updated, which will require that the City Attorney is familiar with the Emergency Plan; she reported that some storm drains have been plugged up and they need to be cleared properly. Community Development Director Sawyer, reported that the owners of the trailers stored at I-215 and LaCrosse have been notified and they should be moved immediately. He indicated that the City will receive the sales tax from the sale of the trailers. Councillmember Singley, commended the Community Services Officer and the Crime Prevention Committee for doing a good job on the Safety Fair this year. He commended the Sun Telegram and ComCast for their coverage of the event. Councilmember Grant, asked for the status of the lighting district report. City Manager Schwab, reported that staff is presently reviewing the options available to the City and a report will be presented at the next meeting. Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 4 PUBLIC HEARING Ma or Matteson, reported that an animal vaccination clinic will be held June 15th at the elementary school from 6:00 to 8:00. 6A. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace California ap2roving Zoning Amendment Z-89-TF, amending C apter 8. 9 in relation to the City s zonin districts and map and its associated negative declaration to the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace. Community Development Director Sawyer, gave his staff report pointing out proposed changes on the map for Chapter 18.09, in relation to the City's Zoning Districts and Map. Mayor Matteson opened discussion to the public. Barney Karger, 11668 Bernardo Way, Grand Terrace; stated that he and other residents in area 8 want that area to be Rural Residential 20,000. He indicated that he has had several residents in the Vista Grande Way, Grand Terrace Rd. area sign a petition supporting this. Chance Eller, 23100 Vista Grande Way, Grand Terrace; felt that area 8 is too large to have a 20,000 sq. ft. minimum and would like to see that reconsidered. Tony Petta, 11875 Eaton Dr., Grand Terrace; agreed that area 8 is too large to be included in one particular zone. He pointed out specific areas to demonstrate the point. He recommended that the areas surrounded by 7,200 sq. ft. lots should be 10,000 sq. ft. minimum. Clifford Hood, 480 Capricorn, Brea; stated that he is the ice Prest ent of Coast Construction Co., who owns the easterly 80 acres of parcel 9. He indicated that they are in the process of developing that property and plan to have approximately 85 lots on the property which requires them to have lots that have paths in the vacinity of 7,000 sq. ft. and lots that would be slightly larger. He stated that they would like the opportunity to develop the property with the flexability that is provided with zoning that averages a density of 80 or 85 lots as opposed to a rigid R1-40 zone. Bill Addington, 12055 Westwood Ln., Grand Terrace; indicated that the Honey Hills area is rugged, steep property and the average lot size is 40,000 sq. ft. Section 9 is more rugged and should be developed consistent with Honey Hills. He indicated that the area has steep hillsides and should not be zoned anything less than what staff has proposed. Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 5 Mayor Matteson returned discussion to Council. Councilmember Pfennighausen, indicated that she felt the hillside area should not have specific lot sizes and she does not want to see houses any higher on the hills. She suggested that area 8 be split into two categories with one section being north-west of Barton Road and the other section being south-east of Barton Road, since the two areas are not the same. She felt that sections 7, 10, 11, 12, 13 and the section north-west of Barton Road in section 8 should have an agricultural overlay. CC-89-88 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, CARRIED 5-0, to approve sections 1-7 as recommended. Deputy City Attorney Burns, asked Community Development Director Sawyer if the agricultural overlay concept has been referred to the Planning Commission for report to the City Council. Community Development Director Sawyer, indicated that it as been considered. Community Development Director Sawyer, pointed out proposed changes in section 8, indicating that area 8A is a rolling hills type of environment with some agricultural use and larger lots than other areas. He indicated that R1-20 is proposed for the area. Councilmember Pfennighausen, indicated that that is the area with the Edison easement, which is 300-feet wide and, therefore, that property is taken out of consideration for anything that they can build on even though they own the property and pay taxes on it. That is why my recommendation is R1-10 with an agricultural overlay. Community Develo ment Director Sawyer, stated that the agricultural overlay would work or an R1-10 zoning but very minimally because if you were to divide the property up into 10,000 sq. ft. areas, you would only have enough square footage on there for one horse, and most people who have one horse would like to have two. Councilmember Singley, felt that the R1-10 would allow the people to do what they want with their property more so than the R1-20, which is the average lot size. He felt that is what the people want in that area with an agricultural overlay. He felt that the people who do have 20,000 sq. ft. lots don't have to subdivide but it allows people to subdivide and use their lots the way they want to. Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 6 Councilmember Carlstrom, agreed with the R1-10 agricultural because there are lotTsmaller than 10,000 sq. ft. in that area that would be buildable. He felt that the trend today is to provide land for people to develop into homes and 10,000 sq. ft. would be more reasonable than 20,000 sq. ft. because it would be easier to take care of. CC-89-89 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT, CARRIED 5-0, to approve the area designated 8A, R1-10. Community Development Director Sawyer, reported that area 8B is recommended to go to R1-20 and it is the steeper area called Honey Hills. We have recommended R1-20 because of the existing development that is up there in that average or larger size lot. CC-89-90 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, CARRIED 5-0, to designate area 8B, R1-20. Community Development Director Sawyer, reported that Coast Construction has control over the majority of area 9. Currently it has the PUD zone, we are removing that and the entire area is going to R1-40 based on the hillside designation in the general plan and the densities that we would be looking at. Mayor Matteson, indicated that he would like to stick with the R -40 and whenever a plan comes up for development, it could be discussed by the Planning Commission and City Council at that time. CC-89-91 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, FAILED 2-3 (MAYOR MATTESON AND COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY VOTED AYE), to approve R1-40 in area 9. Councilmember Pfennighausen, felt that this is an area that we need to set aside because giving it a particular square footage designation is a trap and something we shouldn't do. She felt that there must be some kind of designation that we can give this area that makes it necessary to review it on a case -by -case basis. She felt that area 9 and 10 are two areas that we need to give a different designation than square footage. She indicated that as long as they are going to designate square footage requirements in both those areas, she will consistently vote no. Councilmember Singley, indicated that he would agree to a special designation such as R1-hillside, which would require a specific plan. That doesn't specifically make a size, it allows the Planning Commission to review it on a case -by -case basis. Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 7 f i Mayor Pro Tem Grant, indicated that because of what exists in the Honey Hills area, he agreed with Councilmember Pfennighausen and Councilmember Singley. Councilmember Carlstrom, agreed as well. Mayor Matteson, asked Community Development Director Sawyer if it i—possible to have zoning where it is open zoned where you have to have a specific plan before any kind of development is done. Community Development Director Sawyer, indicated that it sounds like we are talking about creating a new zone, which is fine, but a no vote tonight to change to either 20 or 40 will leave it at 7,200 sq. ft. lots. Councilmember Si nql e�, asked if a motion could be made to abe it as -hillside and require a specific plan on a case -by -case issue tonight. Community Development Director Sawyer, I hate to call it a specific plan on a case -by -case issue because one or two lots are not a specific plan, but an individual design guideline for that. That is what the hillside overlay zone was all about. It got waylayed in that type of direction that we were going so we decided to try to redo that. We haven't brought that back to the Planning Commission yet. If that's what we want to do, not an overlay zone but as a hillside zone without any underlying zoning, we can develop that and bring it back to the Planning Commission. If that is the direction, I would suggest that in the meantime we change it to either R1-20 or R1-40, my recommendation being 40 until that zone is adopted because there is no zone right now. Planning Commission has not considered that and I have nothing to show what you would be voting on. I recommend 40 because it gives the City more control. Deputy City Attorney Burns, indicated that it may be possible to adopt an interim study Ordinance if the Council thinks it needs more time, but wants to prevent anybody from applying and getting the right to build then you could explore ideas such as hillside overlays or development that would require a specific plan, although, we're using the term specific plan in a lose sense. A specific plan is generally something just slightly less deferential than a general plan and zoning would be consistent with that. He suggested adopting an interim zoning study Ordinance to allow no further development until the issue can be studied. CC-89-92 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, SECOND BY COU14CILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, to adopt an interim zoning study Ordinance to allow no further development in section 9 and 10. Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 8 Deputy City Attorne Burns, recommended continuing action until he can check the statute. Mayor Matteson recessed City Council meeting at 8:15 p.m. Mayor Matteson reconvened City Council meeting at 8:27 p.m. Deputy City Attorney Burns, reported that if Council chose to do so tonight, it could adopt an interim zoning Ordinance as an urgency measure to protect the public health, safety and welfare if you are contemplating a specific plan or a zoning proposal, which you have not had time to fully consider nor to have the Planning Commission or Planning Department study. That urgency measure must pass by a 4/5 vote of the City Council. It will be of no further force in effect 45 days from its date of adoption unless you then renotice it and conduct a public hearing in which case you may extend it for another 10 months and 15 days and also requires a 4/5 vote. It may be extended 2 times. If you do take that action you must make a finding tonight that there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare by the possible approval of additional subdivision before you had the chance to study the issue and that you are adopting this because of that threat to the public health, safety and welfare. Ten days prior to the expiration of the interim Ordinance, the legislative body must issue a report describing the measures taken to alleviate the conditions, namely, the results of the study. Mayor Matteson, asked what kind of urgency zoning it is. Deputy City Attorney Burns, indicated that it would be an urgency to prohibit development within Zone 9 and 10, to give the Planning Commission or Planning Department the opportunity to study the issue and you would be enacting it tonight to prevent a threat to the public health, safety and welfare by the approval of subdivision before you had a chance to fully consider the new idea that you have. MOTION CC-89-92 CARRIED 5-0. Mayor Matteson, directed staff to develop a plan and take it to the Panning Commission level. Community Development Director Sawyer, pointed out areas 11, 12 and 13 on the map. He indicated that area 11 in most of the cases are continuous properties that go into the hillside area. The zoning he recommended was that it go from the Al to R1-20 zoning, which will increase the density that is allowable on those pieces of property by two. Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 9 Mayor Matteson, asked what the density is on Al. Community Development Director Sawyer, indicated that the Al is minimum one -acre lot size. The Al zone is for agricultural uses. You can have one home on the acre but it is secondary to the orchards. What this does is place a residential as the primary use of the property and if you would like to put the overlay zone on area 11, that would allow them to have the agricultural as a secondary use. Area 12 and 13 are being recommended to go to the R1-20 the same as 11. The only difference is that they used to be R1-72, which is the smaller lot sizes so the density is allowing fewer homes to be built than previously. CC-89-93 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY MAYOR MATTESON, CARRIED 4-1 (COUNCILMEMBER CARLSTROM VOTED NOE), to designate areas 11, 12 and 13 R1-20, as recommended. CC-89-94 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, CARRIED 5-0, that areas 8A, 11, 12, 13 and 7 be designated with an agricultural overlay. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONING AMENDMENT Z-89-1B AMENDIN CHAPTER 18.12 IN RELATION TO THE CITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ND ITS ASSOCIATED NE ATIVE DECLARATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERR CE. Community Development Director Sawyer, explained that the Ordinance explains the permitted uses that go into the residential areas, site development standards, lot sizes, setbacks, and various items that are delt with when a project comes in to the area. He explained some changes to the ratios for the R2 and R3 zoning, as directed by Council. Mayor Matteson opened discussion to the public. Barney Karger, 11668 Bernardo Way, Grand Terrace; felt that the residential R1-40 should be changed to an average of 40 with a minimum of 20,000 sq. ft. Mayor Matteson returned discussion to Council. Because of errors in the document, as presented, Mayor Matteson continued Chapter 18.12, in relation to the City's Residential Districts, to the next meeting. Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 10 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONING AMENDMENT -89-1C AMENDING CHAPTER 18.60 IN RELATION TO THE C TY S OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENT AND ITS ASSOCIATED NEGATIVE 6EMPA'TION 0 ] HE MY COUNCIL OF THE TERRACE. Community Development Director Sawyer, reported that this section includes residential Tarking, commercial parking and industrial parking. Mayor Matteson opened discussion to the public. BarneyKar, er, 11668 Bernardo Way, Grand Terrace; stated t at parking should not be based on gross floor area, he felt it should be based on net usable area. For motel/hotel parking, he felt that two spaces per each employee was too high. Bill Darwin, 23172 Palm Ave., Grand Terrace; felt that a highly restrictive Ordinance restricts business and discourages development. He suggested relating the required number of parking spaces to the amount of usable public space, not the kitchens, restrooms or storage areas. He also suggested building into the Ordinance a variation of up to 30% if it can be shown that it is reasonable in an individual case. He felt that flexability should be built into the Ordinance so that we can deal with the future. Kathryn Harmon, 11834 Kingston St., Grand Terrace; requested a flexible structure on parking because it is so crucial to the economic structure for a developer. Francis Carter, 11938 Arliss Dr., Grand Terrace; indicated that it has been agreed by people in Grand Terrace, that we should try to encourage commercial development. She stated that with overly stringent parking requirements, potential developers will go to a neighboring city. She pointed out that, as it stands, our Code encourages variences which are costly. She compared our Code to a neighboring city and pointed out that most developers would go to the neighboring City. Mayor Matteson returned discussion to Council. Councilmember Pfenni hausen, stated that gross square ootage is unrealistic, it creates excessive pavement. From an environmental standpoint, she was concerned about covering more and more of our ground with concrete and asphalt. She suggested that the parking ratio should be relative to public use areas, and storage areas should not Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 11 be included in the calculation. She expressed concern about parking for hospital employees, requirements for bicycle parking and the width required for parking spaces. She expressed her opinion that the law should be witten so variences are not required. Councilmember Carlstrom, indicated that with limited space, we are going to ave to be careful how we design our commercial structures, and we will have to relax on some of the parking requirements. He recommended that flexability be built into the Code. Mayor Matteson, indicated that he thought that you can run into a problem with business density by crowding too much into a small space. He stated that parking is essential to the businesses and we have to accomodate the residents in the City. He felt that the more parking we have, the more spread out our businesses are, the better it is for the City. Councilmember Singley, indicated that there are some problems, but there is a section that allows the Planning Director to make variences. He felt that basically we have a good Ordinance and it should be passed. CC-89-95 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, to pass the Ordinance, in relation to the City's off-street parking requirements, as recommended. Councilmember Pfenni hausen, indicated that she is not going to vote for the Ordinance. She felt that reference to gross square footage should be changed to public use or public access areas. Community Development Director Sawyer, explained that the gross floor area is easier to work with than the net floor area because the use of a structure may change over the years. The gross floor area allows us to look at the potential of a building, and set parking according to that. Mayor Matteson, asked Community Development Director Sawyer if the section on bicycles, where it says "bicycles shall be in a designated location in the parking lot," could be changed to "in a designated location." Community Development Director Saw er, indicated that it can be changed, and explained that it was written that way I to keep bicycle traffic out of the pedestrian area. Mayor Matteson, asked the City Engineer to explain the process for parking stall widths. Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 12 City Engineer Kicak, suggested that we define how we measure a parking stall width. Communit Development Director Sawyer, indicated that in The Parking ordinance there is a diagram that deals with 90° parking and he can add an additional diagram that deals with 45° parking. He stated that it would explain the measurments. Mayor Matteson, asked Community Development Director Sawyer to explain the employee parking requirements. Community Development Director Sawyer, explained that the additional parking spaces a owed or motel/hotel employees would accomodate visitors who are looking at the facilities and do not have a room. Mayor Matteson amended his motion to read: CC-89-95 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, to approve the Ordinance, in relation to the City's off-street parking requirements, with the deletion of "parking area" in 4A-1. Second concurred. MOTION CC-89-95 PASSED 3-1-1-0 (COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN VOTED NOE AND MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT WAS ABSENT). 6B. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND E R-CALIFORNIA RESCIND N ORDINANCE 108 AND ESTABLISHING A CoMP H N IVE SCHEDULE MR SERVICES FEES,TAXES, AND FINES FOR PERMITS, LICENSES, OICE FACILITIES, N ACTIVITIES FROVIDED BY THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE. City Manager Schwab, reported that this is a request to rescind the Fee Urdinance No. 108 and adopt a new Fee Ordinance as an Urgency Ordinance. He indicated that the majority of the fees within the new Ordinance are consistent with what was in Ordinance 108 and pointed out the major changes that were made. Mayor Matteson opened discussion to the public. BarneyKar, er, 11668 Bernardo Way, Grand Terrace; felt that there is no need to require a permit for a garden wall, indicating that the County does not require one. Mayor Matteson returned discussion to Council. Councilmember Sin le , in Mayor Pro Tem Grant's absence, reported that Mayor Pro Tem Grant has indicated that the $500 annual fee per side for billboards is not enough and would like to see it increased. 11 Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 13 Councilmember Carlstrom, mentioned that if you were to rent a billboard, the montFTy rental amounts to about $2,000 per month. He felt that an annual fee of $500 is low. CC-89-96 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SINGLEY, SECOND BY MAYOR MATTESON, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT ABSENT), to increase the business license tax for billboards to $1,000 per side. CC-89-97 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER PFENNIGHAUSEN, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT ABSENT), to rescind Fee Ordinance No. 108 and adopt the new Ordinance as an Urgency Ordinance establishing a comprehensive schedule for fees, with the stated corrections. 7A. Draina4e at Mirado CitX Manager Schwab, gave his staff report indicating that statt has been exp oring the possibility of constructing a permanent drainage facility in the area adjacent to the Gage Canal, west of Mirado Ave. He explained that the current drainage facility causes areas that are lower in level to create stagnant water. He recommended that Council authorize staff to go out to bid and include as an alternative bid the provision of an asphalt channel versus L concrete, at potentially one-third the price of concrete. Councilmember Pfennighausen, felt that the asphalt channel should not be a consideration, because of past problems with asphalt. Councilmember Carlstrom, had concern whether or not the diversion wall is hig enough. City En ineer Kicak, reported that it is for the protection of the Gage ana acilities, and they feel it is adequate and have approved the plans. CC-89-98 MOTION BY MAYOR MATTESON, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER CARLSTROM, CARRIED 4-0-1-0 (MAYOR PRO TEM GRANT ABSENT), to authorize staff to go out to bid. Council Minutes - 06/08/89 Page 14 ORDER OF ADJOURNMENT Mayor Matteson adjourned the City Council meeting at 10:05 p.m., until the adjourned regular City Council/CRA budget session, which is scheduled to be held Monday, June 12, 1989 at 6:00 p.m. �jGC�ilL �GZ-vy th City f Grand Terra e. 1 v 4� �� - t e , y o rand lerrace.