Loading...
06/25/1987CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 25, 1987 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 25, 1987, at 5:35 p.m. PRESENT: Byron Matteson, Mayor Barbara Pfennighausen, Mayor Pro Tem Dennis L. Evans, Councilman Susan Crawford, Councilwoman Hugh J. Grant, Councilman Thomas J. Schwab, City Manager/Finance Director Randy Anstine, Assistant City Manager/Community Service Director Loretta Thompson, City Clerk Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney Joe Kicak, City Engineer David Sawyer, Planning Director ABSENT: NONE The meeting was opened with an invocation by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen and by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilman Grant. ITEMS TO DELETE Mayor Matteson asked if there were any items to be deleted from the agenda. The City Manager asked that the Item 2(I) -- Approve appropriation of $1,096.00 from the General Fund Balance for the installation of a security and monitoring system for the Grand Terrace Civic Center -- be deleted from the agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Matteson asked if anyone wished to have any items deleted from the Consent Calendar. Councilman Evans requested that item 2(F) -- A resolution of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, CA, supporting AB 1637 providing for county election on half -cent transportation sales tax -- be withdrawn from the Consent Calendar. CC-87-135 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, second by Councilwoman Crawford, ALL AYES, that the following Consent Calendar items be approved: Item A - Approve check register No. 062587 Item B - Ratify June 25, 1987 CRA action Item C - Waive full reading of ordinances and resolution on agenda Item D - Approve minutes: (1) May 28, 1987; (2) June 11, 1987 Item E - Approve and authorize the Mayor to execute renewal of contract (GTC86-10) for street sweeping with Dickson Company in the amount of $60.02 per hour. Item G - Approve attendance of Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, Councilman Grant, Councilman Evans, and Councilwoman Crawford at the Mayors' and Councilmembers' Executive Forum, July 22-24, 1987 in Monterey. Item H - Approve and authorize final year-end budget adjustments. Item F Councilman Evans stated he understands this resolution only supports placing this issue on the ballot in November 1987 to allow the citizens of the county an opportunity to vote on it. Councilman Evans noted he will support the resolution to place this issue on the ballot. However, this does not mean he is supporting the half -cent sales tax. Councilman Grant stated this is the position he took when SANBAG endorsed AB 1637. He emphasized his support of this resolution does not necessarily mean he supports the one half -cent sales tax. It simply means he supports getting the issue on the ballot. CC-87-136 Motion by Councilman Evans, second Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, that a resolution of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, CA, supporting AB 1637 providing for County Election on half -cent transportation sales tax be approved. Mayor Matteson indicated he will not be voting in favor of this motion as he does not support tax increases of any nature. Therefore, he is not prepared to vote in favor of putting this issue before the citizens on a ballot. Motion CC-87-136 carried with Mayor Matteson voting NOE. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Mayor Matteson opened the meeting for public participation. No one signified a wish to speak to Council at this time. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 2 ORAL REPORTS Parks and Mayor Matteson noted that a Parks and Recreation Committee Recreation report was submitted requesting that Council consider Committee appropriation of an established financial purchase schedule for future park(s). Mayor Matteson asked Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen to comment on this matter. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen noted that, in reviewing the discussion regarding this matter at the last Council meeting, she found that no action had been taken on the Parks and Recreation Committee's report. Council should officially accept the Committee's report and act on one of the three alternatives presented. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen suggested there was some confusion with regards to what the next step should be in this process. In order for staff to take any action on this matter, Council must officially accept the recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Committee. CC-87-137 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, second by Councilman Evans, that Council accept the Parks and Recreation Committee report and recommendation to appropriate with an established financial purchase schedule for future parks. Councilwoman Crawford asked if there was a specific site recommended. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated that a general area was designated but no specific site recommended. At the direction of Council, the Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Committee was to meet with the City Manager and the Director of Planning, in accordance with the procedure established, to provide information to the consultant doing the General Plan update. In order for the City to take some positive action on the Parks and Recreation Committee's recommendation, it is necessary for Council to act on this report. Councilwoman Crawford indicated she would prefer to accept the report, advised the Committee Council has established a reserve for future parks and delay any further decision until the consultant has submitted his report on the General Plan update. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated Councilwoman Crawford had repeated her previous comments. The Parks and Recreation Committee recommends that Council consider appropriation with an established financial purchase schedule for future parks. The recommendation did not include a suggested location or amount. Because of Grand Terrace's limited land size and the rapid development in the area, Council cannot afford to wait for another ten years before taking action on this matter. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 3 Councilwoman Crawford agreed with Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen's comments regarding the park(s). However, she maintained Council should proceed with the consultant's recommendation. Councilman Grant noted that, at the last Council meeting, Council voted against targeting specific sites for future parks within the area designated by the Parks and Recreation Committee. Council also suggested the Parks and Recreation Committee work with the Director of Planning and the City Manager to provide input to the consultant doing the General Plan update with regards to the need for parks in the community. This supports Councilwoman Crawfords comments. While agreeing with the need to own parkland, in addition to possibly leasing parkland from the Edison Company, Councilman Grant feels Council should wait for the consultant's recommendation. Councilman Grant indicated he was content with the area designated by the Parks and Recreation Committee. There are numerous factors that must be taken into consideration. One factor to consider is the residents of the mobile home park. He is aware that Councilmembers Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen and Councilman Evans met with these residents from time to time, but Council has never come up with a specific proposal. The anticipated development on Barton Road will also affect the residents of the mobile home park. Councilman Grant stated that, as much as he supports the potential development on Barton Road, he will not support it if it adversely affects the residents of the mobile home park. Councilman Grant anticipates that Council can find a location within the area designated by the Parks and Recreation Committee for a future park site. However, Council made it clear to the Parks and Recreation Committee that Council wanted the Committee to work with the Director of Planning and the consultant. Further, Councilman Grant questioned how Council could appropriate money for a park since Council does not know how large the potential park will be or what it will cost. Councilman Grant stated that he has supported parks since the City of Grand Terrace was incorporated. However, in his opinion, Council should not make a decision until they have received the consultant's recommendation. Mayor Matteson asked Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen to repeat the motion. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated the motion is to appropriate with an established financial purchase schedule for future parks. The resolution does not designate any specific site. It simply suggests Council establish a schedule so that staff can proceed to review potential park sites, with the consultant and the Director of Planning, in accordance with the General Plan update, and set a time -line to begin to acquire land for a future park site. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 4 Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated that, if there is grant money available for purchase of park sites, it will be necessary to have a specific site in mind. Therefore, she feels it is necessary to officially adopt the Parks and Recreation recommendation. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen reiterated that she is not stipulating any monetary amounts or specific locations. Councilman Evans noted it was interesting that Councilman grant mentioned the mobile home park. When potential development within the City of Grand Terrace was first considered, it was recognized that the needs of the residents of the mobile home park could not be disregarded. The entire City has been reviewed to determine where the mobile home park could best be relocated. It appears that the most acceptable location is the southwest portion of the City. Councilman Evans stated it is very crucial to consider the matter of the mobile home park when looking at the issue of parks. He and Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen are not ignoring the residents of the mobile home park in their support of additional parkland. Councilman Evans said every factor must be considered when encouraging development or seeking additional parkland. For instance, one factor that must be considered is the school impaction problem in Grand Terrace. Councilman Evans stated he and Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen have arrived at a tentative plan which he feels is viable and will be confirmed when the consultant's recommendations are received. Councilman Evans stated he supports Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen's recommendation that Council approve the Parks and Recreation Committee's report. However, he suggested the Committee should begin to identify potential areas within the boundaries they designated, identify what will be needed within that facility, how large they feel the facility should be, and obtain cost estimates for the facility excluding land acquisition. Councilman Evans stated Council cannot wait for the General Plan consultant to make a recommendation in this regard. In fact, the consultant probably wants Council to tell him what the city wants. The Parks and Recreation Committee, through the Director of Planning, the City Manager, and the consultant can certainly begin to provide this input. Mayor Matteson stated he does not see how Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen's motion differs from the position taken by Councilman Grant and Councilwoman Crawford. The motion does not state where or what the cost of the park will be. Councilman Grant indicated the significant difference between the motion and his position is that the motion, as worded, includes the entire report of the Parks and Recreation Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 5 Committee. The report implies certain areas for parks within the area designated. He reiterated that, if Council accepts this Committee report, they are, in effect, making economic decisions before planning decisions have been reached. Councilman Evans has stated that Council supports parks but, at the same time, Council is not allowing the Committee to provide input to the consultant which Councilman Evans feel the consultant wants. Councilman Grant felt that, to allow the Committee access to the consultant, as Councilman Evans is suggesting, we are telling the consultant how to draft his recommendation. He expressed his dissatisfaction with this procedure. Mayor Matteson asked Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen to clarify her motion suggesting that Councilman Grant feels a particular park site is being specified. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated no specific site is mentioned in the motion. The motion is that Council is making a commitment and establishing a time -line for the acquisition of parkland. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen did say the only area that appears to be big enough for a park site is the area east of the freeway and west of Michigan. However, a specific site is not included in the motion. With regard to advising the consultant of what the City wants, Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated the consultant needs to know what Council feels the community requires so that he can review the entire community and include these needs in the appropriate location. Councilwoman Crawford indicated she had the same concerns expressed by Councilman Grant. However, Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen has clarified her intent. As she concurred with this intent, Councilwoman Crawford called for the question. Motion CC-87-137 carried with Councilman Grant voting NOE. Historical and Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen noted that, in the minutes of Cultural June 1, 1987 meeting of the Historical and Cultural Activities Activities Committee, there was a paragraph dealing with the showcase for the lobby. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen read the paragraph concerning the showcase in which mention was made that Viola will ask Council for a plaque for the showcase showing it was donated by the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated that donations come from individuals or groups of individuals. With this in mind, she thought that perhaps the members of the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee had made this showcase a gift to the City. She found that the Committee had recommended the purchase of the showcase and Council had authorized the expenditures. The showcase was not donated by the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee. Therefore, Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated that a plaque is not in order to honor a donation. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 6 �71 I Councilman Grant noted he had discussed this with Mrs. Gratson, Chairman of the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee, and this wording appears to be an error. The Committee is aware who appropriated the money for the showcase. What was being said was that the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee put in a lot of hours with little recognition and what the Chairman was asking for was something on the showcase to recognize the Committee's hard work. Councilman Grant stated he would support a plaque thanking this hardworking Committee for their dedication. Councilman Grant expressed his appreciation for the thorough reports Council is receiving from Committees. He felt the minutes from the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee illustrated the type of thorough report being received. His comments included all committees that do not have city staff to provide services as does, for instance, the Planning Commission. COUNCIL REPORT Barton Road Councilwoman Crawford asked the Assistant City Manager when the and Palm light in the triangle at Barton Road and Palm would be replaced? The Assistant City Manager advised the light that was in that location is being re -ordered. National Council Councilwoman Crawford indicated she had attended a National for Urban Council for Urban Economic Development Workshop on developer's fees. The workshop was very educational. She will be Economic preparing a report on the workshop for distribution to Council Development and staff at a later date. Minutes Councilman Grant stated he is increasingly happy with the minutes prepared by the City Clerk. He noted he made some rough criticisms of the City Clerk's initial minutes. However, the minutes that were approved at this meeting were excellent. Southern Councilman Grant stated he was honored when Council appointed California him as their representative to the Southern California Joint Joint Power Power Insurance Authority. However, he has not attended any of Insurance their meetings as they meet in La Palma, California. He does not intend to drive to this particular location to attend the Authority meetings. He questioned the value of attending the meetings of this organization as he feels this organization concentrates their efforts on the activities of the Los Angeles/Orange County area. Therefore, Councilman Grant submitted his resignation from the Southern California Joint Powers Insurance Authority. Arliss Drive On overhearing Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen's comments with Curbs regard to a disaster area in Grand Terrace to the north of Barton Road and to the east of Mt. Vernon, Councilman Grant Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 7 stated he had inspected the area. He saw a tremendous amount of mud. A closer examination of both sides of that street, particularly between Barton Road and Minona Drive, reveals that the street has been resurfaced several times. As a result, there has been an accumulation of materials along the curb, especially in the gutter area. This has consequently diminished the curb height. On certain portions of that curb, the curb itself slopes down. Councilman Grant expressed his concerns about this situation. He asked staff to review the situation and determine what action can be taken to eliminate the problem. Graffiti Councilman Grant stated that Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen had mentioned, several months ago, the graffiti in the city, particularly in the southern part of the City. Councilman Grant advised he had investigated this matter and found Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen was correct. This graffiti was atrocious. He suggested that whenever the City constructs fences and walls, graffiti is being invited. The people who commit this type of crime are only hurting themselves and the beauty of this city. Pit Bulldogs Councilman Grant indicated that in this morning's paper there was an article about Pit Bulldogs. He suggested that other communities have passed legislation prohibiting the animal and questioned why the City of Grand Terrace could not legislate prohibition of Pit Bulldogs, as well. Councilman Grant requested that staff look into this possibility. Arliss Drive Mayor Matteson asked the City Engineer to prepare a report on Arliss Drive with suggestions on what can be done to improve the curb and gutter situation on Arliss Drive. Councilman Evans suggested this report will encompass the complete grading of that street, the laying of new asphalt, and the construction costs. He questioned whether Arliss Drive was one of the streets designated for an overlay in 1987. The City Engineer indicated he did not believe Arliss Drive was included in the schedule for an overlay in 1987. He further stated he did not believe there has been an overlay done on Arliss Drive since the incorporation of the City. The curbs, as they exist now, are probably an accumulation of the overlay done before the incorporation of the City. The only thing the City of Grand Terrace has done in that area is a slurry seal about four years ago. The Community Services Director stated that, when the City of Grand Terrace does any overlay work, they require the contract to "feather in" with the existing curb or match the gutter grade. In those areas where the AC is above the gutter flow line, the City grinds it down so that it does meet flush. I Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 8 The City Engineer suggested that, in this area, there may not be much gutter. It is likely there is just a gutter and asphalt that was laid against that curb. The roughness of that "flow line" along the gutter line is the result of high velocity water eroding the asphalt. He believes Council is asking what is necessary to bring these streets to a standard the City now finds acceptable. Mayor Matteson agreed that is what Council is requesting. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated she believed the standard street number height on the curb is 3 inches and asked if this was correct. The City Engineer indicated that the normal numbers height, with a frame, would be greater than 4 inches. One of the pictures Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen circulated shows the curb is so shallow that half of the numbers are laying on top of the curb and half are laying on the face of the curb. At a maximum, that curb is 1 1/2 to 2 inches high. Where the driveways come down, in many driveways, the asphalt rises 3/4 of an inch to 1 1/2 inch above the driveway entrance. The water is trapped there and cannot go any place. She asked if the City Engineer will have the report for Council at the next meeting. The City Engineer indicated he would. Michigan and Councilman Evans mentioned there are potholes at the Pico intersection of Michigan and Pico. He asked that this be remedied. I-215/Barton Rd. Councilman Evans indicated that earlier this year he had asked Interchange the City Engineer to contact Caltran to request an update on their participation on the Barton Road/I-215 interchange. He asked if any further studies had been completed pertinent to that. The City Engineer advised there has been no response to his last request. Councilman Evans asked the City Engineer to follow up with Caltrans to determine what action has been taken in this regard. Beautification Councilman Grant mentioned that a month or so ago he raised the of the Freeway issue of beautification of the freeway area by Caltrans. He Area asked what the chances were of getting some kind of shrubbery added to the plants which are already there. The same question should be raised with Caltran with regards to the population sign. The present signs are not accurate and Councilman Grant would like the people coming up Barton Road to know that the population is the same as coming in from Riverside. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 9 Council Meeting Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen suggested that Council needs to Date give consideration to changing the date of the last Council meeting in July due to the Mayor's and Councilmember's Executive Forum being held in Monterey, July 22-24, 1987. Council concurred that the July 23rd Council meeting will be postponed until July 30, 1987. Mobile home Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated she had a call from Mrs. Park Mendes who lives in the mobile home park on Michigan. Mrs. Mendes advised there is a tan or beige Ford pickup parked in front of the mobile home park which has been there for three weeks. The vehicle is inoperable. A tenant owns the vehicle and Mrs. Mendes has asked them to remove the vehicle. They refused to do so. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked if Lt. Reynosa would investigate this and take the necessary action. Skating Rink Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated problems are beginning to occur at the skating rink again. These problems have a direct impact on the residents of the mobile home park across the street. With the warmer weather and the longer evenings, the kids at the skating rink tend to get rowdy and to wander to the front area of the mobile home park. She asked that Lt. Reynosa look into this matter. Planning Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she is greatly concerned Commission about the Planning Commission's Minute book not being Minutes maintained adequately. To prepare for this meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated she checked the Planning Commission Minute book to do some research. She found that the last set of minutes in the book were dated January 19, 1987. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she becomes upset when information is not available when she wishes to do research. More importantly, the Planning Commission Minutes are legal records of the action of the Planning Commission. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked that the Planning Commission Minute book be brought up-to-date within the next two weeks. America Lung Mayor Matteson advised he had attended the American Lung Association Association meeting held June 24, 1987. During that meeting Mayor Matteson accepted a proclamation on behalf of the City of Grand Terrace for passing their smoking ordinance. Gene McMeans Mayor Matteson congratulated Mr. Gene McMeans for being named citizen of the year for the City of Colton. Jim Goode The City Manager advised that a request had been received from 21800 Barton Rd. Mr. Goode, owner of the Barton Business Plaza, 21800 Barton Business Plaza Road, for special consideration in the M-R area where his building is located. Mr. Goode received a conditional -use permit for the development of the Barton Business Plaza. For every tenant that Mr. Goode wishes to locate in this building, Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 10 he must obtain a separate conditional -use permit. This requires paying the required fee and having a public hearing on the application. Staff requested that during the interim period, while Title 18 is being reviewed, the Director of Planning be allowed to have discretion in issuing conditions on the conditional -use permit for this particular development with a fee to be set at one hundred ($100.00) dollars. The Director of Planning would be allowed the discretionary powers until the Title 18 Review is completed and a possible recommendation for change to the M-R zone is submitted. Councilman Evans indicated this is not a new problem. It has been in existence since before the building was constructed. the staff's proposal is realistic. CC-87-138 Motion by Councilman Evans, second Councilman Grant, ALL AYES, that Council approve and authorize the City to enter into an agreement with Mr. Jim Goode, 21800 Barton Road, Barton Business Plaza with terms as outlined in the staff report. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated that this situation could have been prevented. When this project was considered originally, she called this possibility to the attention of Council. Council, at that time, indicated that there would be no problem. Councilwoman Crawford stated she finds it disturbing that a businessman has to go through this procedure just to lease a building. She questioned whether there was some other way Council could get around this problem and avoid re-creating problems in the future. Councilwoman Crawford feels Council has to make Grand Terrace a pleasant place in which to live and do business. Otherwise businesses will not be attracted to Grand Terrace. Motion CC-87-138 carried ALL AYES. The City Attorney advised that the action taken tonight would satisfy this particular problem. If there is a particular problem with a proposed use, the Director of Planning would then require a conditional -use permit for that one use. It is the staff's intent that the zoning ordinance be amended, in this particular regard, to eliminate future problems. The City Manager advised that the zoning ordinance is being reviewed in all zones to make it more friendly. Jaeger Mayor Matteson advised a request had been received from Jaeger Development Development Company for authorization to expand classroom Company operation (ITT) at 22365 Barton Road. The City Manager noted that, currently, in a C-2 zone, a school is not permitted. Staff has attempted to work with Jaeger Development and ITT to Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 11 initiate an amendment to Title 18 for consideration during the Title 18 review. The proposed amendment would facilitate a school in a C-2 zone with a conditional -use permit. The City Manager reviewed the process which began in February 1987 when the staff found that a school was in operation at this location. It appeared that ITT was unaware that a school was not a permitted use in a C-2 zone. An agreement was worked out with ITT to complete their current semester. The agreement terminates on July 5, 1987. The present request is for a six month extension of this agreement. Staff feels that a ninety day extension would be sufficient to go through the Title 18 revision process to determine if a school would be an allowable use in a C-2 zone. The City Manager advised that the staff recommendation is to allow non -enforcement to continue for a period of ninety days and that no expansion of the school facilities be made at this time. Councilwoman Crawford indicated that, considering ITT is a business and, if this request is not approved, ITT will need to relocate, she does not feel their request for six months is excessive. If their request is refused, ITT will need time to plan a relocation. The City Manger advised that six months would put ITT into their fall semester and ITT would, probably, request a further extension in order to complete the fall semester. He advised that ITT is preparing a proposal on that site for Council's consideration. They will be asking Council for a limited use of four classrooms, until Title 18 can be revised. It appears there will be a solution to this problem before the end of July. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she has a real problem with this particular issue and the way it started. Council tried to be accommodating by allowing ITT to complete their term. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated she had attended the Planning Commission meeting where the Commission dealt with this request. While she could not quote any specific action of the Planning Commission because the minutes were not available, she recalled that parking was not the only concern. The Planning Commission was also concerned about circulation in and out of that site. ITT was supposed to provide more information regarding vehicular access, but they did not do so. However, Council let ITT proceed so as not to impact their students for the term. Now Council is going to allow them to continue into another term at the end of which a request for a further extension may well be presented. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 12 Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she did not feel this was a good site for a school. The problems discussed at the Planning Commission were valid. The parking solutions are horrendous. One proposed solution was to purchase a lot on Barton Road and turn it into a parking lot. This site would not be adjacent to the school. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen questioned whether students would park in a parking lot not adjacent to the school if parking was available closer to the facility. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen advised that when ITT originally located in Grand Terrace their intent was to build a new building that would enhance the community. Council can effectively eliminate this possibility of a new building being constructed by allowing this illegal use to continue. If ITT proposed to build a building in Grand Terrace, she would be in favor of giving them a limited extension. Councilman Evans asked if the current zoning ordinance would allow technical or vocational school use in C-2 zones. The City Attorney advised that current C-2 zones will not allow schools as a permitted use. Councilman Evans asked what procedure would have to be followed to allow a school in a C-2 zone. The City Attorney advised that the school would have to request a zoning ordinance amendment which would allow school usage in a C-2 Zone. Councilman Evans questioned whether they would be able to get a conditional use or variance to allow them to locate in a C-2 zone. The City Attorney advised the school could request a variance but the variance would not solve the problem. Councilman Evans questioned whether Jaeger Development or ITT sought to have an amendment to the zoning ordinance. The City Attorney advised that, at one time, such an amendment was scheduled to come before the Planning Commission. The applicant requested that the request be taken off the Planning Commission agenda. Councilman Evans asked when that took place. The City Attorney advised this action took place in March 1987. Councilman Evans asked when ITT occupied the building. Mr. McNeil of Jaeger Development indicated he believed ITT occupied the building in February 1987. For clarification, Councilman Evans questioned whether ITT had occupied the building before Jaeger Development initiated the amendment to the Title 18. Mr. McNeil confirmed this understanding. After ITT moved in Jaeger Development found ITT would not be granted a business license to operate in this location. His firm approached the City Attorney who explained that an amendment to the C-2 zoning would be required. As of that time, Council was planning to go through a Title 18 Review. Jaeger Development decided to ask Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 13 to be included in this review and were advised that the Title 18 Review would take place in April or May of 1987. This review has still not taken place. That is the main reason Jaeger Development is requesting this extension. Councilman Evans re -stated the situation and asked the City Attorney whether ITT was located in the building illegally. The City Attorney advised ITT was cited for being an illegal use. Councilman Evans asked Mr. McNeil what Jaeger Development has done to attempt to rectify this problem other than the proposal before Council at this time. Mr. McNeil advised they had filed, through the City Attorney, a request that Jaeger Development be included in the Title 18 Review. Once the C-2 area was amended, Jaeger Development planned to apply for a conditional -use permit. The City Attorney advised that, after citing ITT and Jaeger Development Company for the illegal use of the facility, they were notified they would have to request an amendment to the zoning ordinance. It was suggested that proceeding through the title 18 Committee would probably take too long because of the hearing requirements and the length of time it would take. It was suggested that Jaeger's application for an amendment to Title 18 should be made separately. The proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance was then scheduled as a separate item before the Planning Commission and then removed at the request of the applicant. Because the City wished to assist ITT, the City staff have not recited ITT even though they continued to be in violation of the zoning ordinance. Staff agreed to allow ITT to complete the semester with the agreement terminating July 5, 1987. The City Attorney advised that is why this issue is before Council at this time. If Council chooses to continue with non -enforcement, that is their decision. Councilman Evans echoed Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen's concern on this issue. He was also present at the Planning Commission meeting where this issue was discussed. While parking was an issue, circulation in and out of that facility was also a major concern. Whether or not the C-2 zone is amended as requested, there will always be a problem at this location. Councilman Evans' major concern was allowing an operation to begin without obtaining all the necessary permits. Allowing this to continue would simply perpetrate the problem. Councilman Evans stated he could not support the request. Mr. McNeil advised their original agreement with ITT was for one hundred and twenty days to try to satisfy the requirements of the Planning Commission. This time -frame was based on when it was anticipated the zoning ordinance would be reviewed. He originally understood the review would be undertaken sometime Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 14 in April. Now it looks like it will be the end of July or sometime in August before the review will be done. Jaeger Development is requesting enough time to bring a formal proposal before Council. He felt this could be done in ninety days. Mayor Matteson indicated he would support Staff's recommendation for several reasons. This building is hard to rent and a large number of vacancies in the city is not conducive to attracting developers to Grand Terrace. Councilman Grant expressed concern about what seems to be a non -resolvable parking problem. He stated he would be opposed to the proposal for parking. There is land along Barton Road that will, ultimately, be used to improve a very tenuous tax base in this community. He could not see using this property to park cars to provide space for students who, while spending some of their money in this community, are not going to be creating the revenue this community needs as compared to other developments that could go into the same space. Councilman Grant noted that he would support the staff recommendation merely to see what would be proposed. However, he did emphasis he has grave reservations about the parking problem. CC-87-139 Motion by Mayor Matteson, second by Councilwoman Crawford, carried with Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen and Councilman Evans voting NOE, that Council authorize the non -enforcement for a period of ninety days and allow operations to continue at the current level of activity with no expansion of school activities. PUBLIC HEARING Determination The City Attorney advised this is an appeal of a decision of of use the Planning Commission regarding the language and the Robert Keeney determination of use made by the Planning Commission. The Northwest corner applicant is Robert Keeney. The Planning Director provided the Barton/La Crosse staff report and advised that staff recommends that Council uphold the Planning Commission's determination that a recreational vehicle park is not a permitted use in the City's C-2 zone. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Mayor Matteson opened the public hearing at 6:45 p.m. He invited those who wish to speak in favor of the appeal to make their presentation at this time. Mayor Matteson advised he had received two letters with regards to this issue. One letter came from Mr. and Mrs. Glen Clark, who opposed the proposed land project, and the other letter was from the Grand Terrace Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee, who supported the project. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 15 Mr. Robert Mr. Keeney stated he wished to appeal the Planning Commission Keeney decision regarding the determination of use in a C-2 zone for a recreational vehicle park. Mr. Keeney emphasized he is requesting a determination of use and not requesting approval for a specific project. However, the project needs to be discussed because the determination of use specifies that this project or similar projects will not be approved without a conditional -use permit. Several factors are involved that lend themselves to the use of this property for a multi -use project. First the property is approximately two hundred seventy five (275) feet on Barton Road and over a thousand (1000) feet the other way. The front one third (1/3) of the property is ideally suited for a commercial project, and it has good exposure to Barton Road and fairly good exposure to the freeway. However, farther back, there is no exposure and retail development would not succeed in that area. Secondly, the surrounding uses are compatible to commercial uses and a recreational vehicle park. Directly to the east of this property, there is an older commercial center tentatively scheduled for renovation and a vacant piece of C-2 property and to the west there is an older mobile home park in need of renovation and to the north there is an R-3 zone on which there has been a great deal of discussion and a moratorium has been placed. The proposed project would not be effected or affect this R-3 property. Mr. Keeney pointed out that it is almost three hundred (300) feet from this property to any R-1 zone. Mr. Keeney suggested that, because of the limited amount of money being invested in the project, the recreational vehicle park could be demolished and a major development constructed. Mr. Keeney stated the intent is to put a showcase on this corner that would be the guideline for the architectural development of that area. Another reason he feels a recreational vehicle park would be an appropriate use for that area is that the class of people using recreational vehicles is usually middle class or upper class who can afford a thirty to fifty thousand ($30,000.00 - $50,000.00) dollar vehicle. Mr. Keeney discussed the type of people who would be frequenting a recreational vehicle camp with representatives of Camping World to get an idea of what could be expected. The owner of Camping World indicated that the majority of the people will, likely, be fifty or fifty-five years old or older. He has never seen a noise problem in a recreational vehicle park. Mr. Keeney stated that, if this project is approved, a six (6) feet block fence will be constructed around their project. This fence will be more for aesthetics than for noise control. He stressed the recreational vehicle park will bring in people who are very affluent and who will be spending money in Grand Terrace. However, they will not tax any of the City's social services. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 16 Mr. Keeney stated he understands there are legitimate concerns by the neighbors of the proposed project. He is prepared to attempt to mitigate these concerns as much as possible. Traffic is always a problem with any type of development. The proposed recreational vehicle park has a hundred seventeen (117) spaces and the average stay is three (3) days. Mr. Keeney suggested that if these vehicles left and returned each day, there would be only two hundred and forty trips a day or about ten (10) an hour. Mr. Keeney noted most of the traffic generated by the recreational vehicle park will be after the City's peak traffic hours. Locating the recreational vehicle park close to the freeway may possibly limit the recreational vehicle traffic within the City itself. One of his major concern is that, if the commercial area is developed to the front of the property and nothing to the back, there will be nothing there to draw people to the commercial center. The commercial retail center will definitely benefit from the recreational vehicle park and the recreational vehicle park will benefit from the commercial retail center. Mr. Keeney stated that by putting their recreational vehicle park there, the process of cleaning up the front entrance to Grand Terrace will begin and, hopefully, this will generate additional renovation and construction in this area. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated that, while the discussion is not project specific, it is difficult not to be project specific when you know there is a particular project L planned for that area. She stated she has received numerous comments with regards to the possibility of developing an recreational vehicle park in this area. The comments deal with the possibility of the recreational vehicle park creating a noise problem and becoming an eyesore. She indicated that in all the recreational vehicle parks that she had patronized, there were curfews which were strictly enforced by on -site twenty-four (24) hour management. She asked Mr. Keeney if he plans to have management on -site twenty-four (24) hours a day.Mr. Keeney advised that he did. She suggested the average person using the recreational vehicle park, as long as the length of stay was restricted, would be acceptable. She further indicated she felt that the length of stay would have to be established and rigidly enforced. She suggested a seven (7) day limit. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated her other concern is the access to the recreational vehicle park. She suggested that the turning radius for some of the larger recreational vehicles would make it difficult to safely enter the park as proposed. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked the City Engineer whether, from the point the recreational vehicle leaves the freeway and Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 17 enters Barton Road to where they intend to enter the recreational vehicle park, the large recreational vehicles would have problems making this turn. The City Engineer advised that, presently, they would. He suggested the driveway would have to be widened considerably to provide the turning radius for a 5th wheeler. It could be done, but it would restrict the parking on the northerly side of Barton Road between the entrance of the driveway and some distance beyond that. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked whether, if the parking on the northerly side of Barton Road was restricted, a fair amount of property would be required to provide adequate access into the recreational vehicle park. The City Engineer indicated the width of the driveway will be the deciding factor. He feels that a twenty (20) foot driveway (a commercial driveway) will provide adequate turning space for a 5th wheeler. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated her concern was not,specifically, with the volume of traffic but with a recreational vehicle's ability to make the turn into the recreational vehicle park. Mr. Keeney indicated Stater Bros trucks used this road everyday. They have a commercial driveway and they do not appear to have trouble making the turn. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated that the Stater Bros trucks do not have to come off the freeway onto Barton Road and immediately make a turn into a driveway. Mr. Keeney indicated there is almost two hundred fifty (250) feet before the entrance into the proposed recreational vehicle park. While Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen understood what Mr. Keeney was saying, she still had concerns about the entrance into the proposed recreational vehicle park. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated that, since this determination of use was first suggested, it has been stressed it is not project specific. However, she feels, in a City the size of Grand Terrace, it is understood that a proposed recreational vehicle park will go into this area only and no other area in the City of Grand Terrace. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she can see a recreational vehicle park as a use similar to a motel. She stated she would be in favor of an recreational vehicle park on this particular location. However, she would not be in favor of an recreational vehicle park in any other C-2 property within the City of Grand Terrace. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 18 Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated that, while she has no personal objection to this as a project, she would have to be assured that the commercial project would be completed before the recreational vehicle park is developed. She further stated she has received nothing but negative feedback from the people adjacent to the site. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated her preference would be for the property in this area to be assembled and a meaningful project developed. She also suggested that a good deal of money is going to have to be spent to get this project underway, and the City will probably be asked to forgive various fees. She is not prepared to waive a lot of fees later. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen emphasized again that she does not see a recreational vehicle park as an acceptable use in all C-2 zones in Grand Terrace and she would not support that. Councilwoman Crawford agreed it is necessary to be project specific in discussing this proposal. She further suggested that Mr. Keeney has addressed the Director of Planning's major concern which is that the developer has indicated a willingness to demolish this development if another development is proposed that would better benefit the City. Councilwoman Crawford stated that she would like to see both the recreational vehicle park and the commercial development open at the same time. Her reason for this was that, if a commercial was put in before the recreational vehicle park they may have difficulty becoming established. If both the recreational vehicle park and the commercial center opened at one time, it would be more logical from a business point of view. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen said she could agree with this position. Councilwoman Crawford stated she did not feel she could support a recreational vehicle park in any C-2 zone other than the site suggested. Personally, she feels that the proposed site for the recreational vehicle park is an excellent location and that the recreational vehicle park is a good interim use for this property. Councilman Grant asked Mr. Keeney what he saw as the traffic flow onto Grand Terrace Road by way of the east/west land connecting with Grand Terrace Road. Mr. Keeney advised that he owns the property and sees no traffic flow from that lane onto Grand Terrace Road. The intention is to have property available for emergency vehicles only. There will be no recreational vehicle traffic out of the park onto Grand Terrace Road. Mr. Keeney indicated this piece of property will be gated to ensure that no traffic leaves the recreational vehicle park onto Grand Terrace Road. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 19 Councilman Evans indicated he understood that Mr. Keeney had a U-store approved for this location at one time. Mr. Keeney indicated that was correct. Councilman Evans asked why the building was not constructed. Mr. Keeney advised, that by the time he received approval for this development, there were two similar stores in the area and he did not feel it was economically feasible to proceed with the development. Dick Yost Mr. Yost stated that the Chamber of Commerce Economic Chairman of Development Committee prepared a letter to Council in support Grand Terrace of this project. He read the letter for Council's Chamber of information. Mr. Yost indicated the Chamber of Commerce Commerce Economic Economic Development Committee would like to see the Development determination of use for this property approved so that the Committee project can proceed to the next stage. In his opinion, this development would be a good project for the entrance to Grand Terrace. Mayor Matteson asked Mr. Keeney what type of uses were being considered for the commercial center. Mr. Keeney advised that, at this time, they have no tenants. He plans to construct a laundry that would be used by both the recreational vehicle park and the general public. Camping World has indicated they are prepared to establish a small store in this recreational vehicle park. Mr. Keeney has also been talking to a hardware store. Mayor Matteson asked if they had considered the inclusion of a restaurant in this commercial area. Mr. Keeney indicated they are considering a restaurant. He suggested that one of the reasons there is a problem in getting a restaurant in the area is that there is nothing there to attract people to the area. If a project is developed in this area, Mr. Keeney feels they will be able to attract a restaurant and other commercial uses into the area. Mayor Matteson invited those who wished to speak in opposition to the project to do so at this time. Ken McClellan Mr. McClellan indicated he is not opposed to this proposal. In 21882 Grand fact, the proposal could be a lot better than many things that Terrace Road could be put into this area. Mr. McClellan is opposed to the change in the zoning. It appears that everytime there is something done with the zoning there is a need for a variance or a conditional use permit. Since the City is presently in the process of a General Plan revision, Mr. McClellan suggested the decision on this matter be held in abeyance until the revision is completed and include this possible use in the General Plan if that is Counci l's wishes. Mr. McClellan feels that a zoning ordinance should list all the uses that can be included in a particular zone and then adhere to those rules. 0 Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 20 He reiterated that he is opposed to changes in the zoning ordinance but not to the specific project, providing it is constructed in the manner described. Marie Stauber Ms.-Stauber indicated she agreed with Mr. McClellan. There is 21945 Grand a General Plan revision under way. This area is the first area Terrace Road being considered in the General Plan revision. Ms. Stauber indicated she feels uncomfortable with all the changes to the zoning ordinance. She recommended that this matter be held in abeyance pending the completion of the General Plan Update. Once the General Plan and the zoning ordinance have been updated, Ms. Stauber suggested they be adhered to. Lois Pierce Ms. Pierce indicated she would have no objection to a Mobile Home Park recreational vehicle park if it was adequately supervised. This would be one means of bringing additional businesses to the City of Grand Terrace. Mr. Keeney indicated he wants to be a good neighbor. There is no way the project will succeed if it is poorly planned or poorly managed. The public hearing adjourned at 7:25 p.m. Councilman Evans stated his position always has been that the City of Grand Terrace has neglected sound, comprehensive planning since incorporation. In his opinion, we are seeing r i the beginning of good planning with the General Plan revision. He suggested that the point was well taken that we wait for the General Plan consultant's recommendations before making a decision in this regard. Councilman Evans recognizes we are discussing whether or not a recreational vehicle park is a compatible use in a C-2 zone, not the project itself. However, we have to be project specific when we look at that area. Councilman Evans stated that the best utilization of the area is to assemble several parcels for a large development. He further indicated that traffic will be a horrendous problem. Councilman Evans stated he could not support the request tonight. He believes the Planning Commission was very pointed in their concerns. Vice Chairman Hawkinson made a valid point when he stated he did not feel a recreational vehicle park is a project that he would like to see in any C-2 zone in Grand Terrace. In his opinion, Councilman Evans stated a recreational vehicle park is not a compatible use for this area. He suggested the upgrading of the interchange would have to be investigated and further that the entrance into the proposed recreational vehicle park would have to be review in detail. CC-87-140 Motion by Councilman Evans, second by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, that Council take no action on Mr. Keeney's appeal pending the General Plan Update. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 21 The Director of Planning advised that the portion of the General Plan that will be considered in July will concern the General Plan and the zoning for that area. It will not concern revising C-2 zones itself. The M-2 portion of that lot may be changed to C-2 destination. The C-2 zoning may be changed or it may remain depending on the recommendation from the consultant. However, the consultant will not be looking at the C-2 zoning to be able to say that a recreational vehicle park would be a permitted use. The consultant will be looking at the residential zones and not the commercial zones. That decision will not come about until about September. Mayor Matteson indicated that what is being considered is whether a recreational vehicle park would be a permitted use with a conditional use permit. Council is not looking at actually approving the proposed development at this time. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked, if the Planning Commission approved Mr. Keeney's development and Mr. Keeney constructed the proposed recreational vehicle park, meeting all the conditions as established by the Planning Commission, and another developer came in with a proposal for a recreational vehicle park, and was prepared to meet all the conditions required of Mr. Keeney, could the second proposal for a conditional -use permit be denied. She asked how the recent Supreme Court decision would affect the City of Grand Terrace in this regard. The City Attorney indicated he did not believe this decision would affect the City of Grand Terrace at all in this particular situation. However, Council's decision this evening would have a direct, precedent setting affect in that Council would have made the determination that this use was an allowed use in a C-2 zone. He advised that conditional -use permits are meant to address specific projects and to protect the City, neighborhood, and community from particular projects by imposing conditions. Council's decision would have a precedent setting affect for future recreational vehicle parks that might be located in Grand Terrace. However, each project will have to stand on its own merits when it comes to conditional -use permits. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen restated her question by saying that, given two similar pieces of property and identical developments, could Council refuse a second request for a recreational vehicle park in any C-2 zone in the City of Grand Terrace, providing Mr. Keeney's project is approved and in place at the time? The City Attorney advised that, given similar circumstances, Council will not be able to refuse a conditional -use permit for a second recreational vehicle park. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 22 Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated this was her concern with regards to this request for the determination of use. She suggested that if the determination of use is made in favor of the proposal being considered at this time, Council would be in a position of having to continually support their position that this project is good for this particular site but not for any other C-2 site in the City. While not opposing the proposed project, Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen indicated she has a lot of concerns with regard to it and is against making it an allowable use in a C-2 zone. Councilman Grant indicated several concerns mentioned were very valid. One being that the commercial center not be developed before the recreational vehicle park is developed. His concern was that once the determination of use is given in favor of the developer, how much control could be exercise over what is placed in the development. Councilman Grant stated he liked the proposal submitted by Mr. Keeney. However, he would not like the project if the recreational vehicle portion was emphasized to the detriment of the commercial portion of the project. He also agreed that the commercial portion of this project would benefit the City. He agreed that the City of Grand Terrace does have the reputation for changing zoning relatively frequently. However, he feels this will be addressed with the revision to the General Plan. He is concerned about the possible precedent being established here. He emphasized he does not have some of the concerns expressed by Councilman Evans and Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen with regards to access to the recreational vehicle park. Councilman Grant indicated he feels it is very important no decision is made on this issue until the consultant's report with regards to the General Plan Update has been received. Councilman Grant indicated that, while he fully supports the project, particularly if the emphasis is given to the commercial portion of the project, he cannot support any action at this time pending the results of the General Plan Review. Councilwoman Crawford indicated that, in general, there does not appear to be any opposition to this particular project except opening up the zoning to this type of project. She indicated there was a problem with the use of the area and requested that staff come back to Council with a recommendation that will solve the problem. Councilman Grant suggested that, if the motion before Council passes, he wishes to make it clear that his position may reverse once he has the consultant's report in this regard. The City Attorney suggested that one way of handling this situation is by granting a variance, which would mean going back to the Planning Commission and holding hearings. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 23 In that way, it would not be decides to do this, the City be fair to waive the fee for precedent setting. If Council Attorney suggested it would only applying for variance. Mayor Matteson indicated that when a developer comes into a city and proposes a development, Council does not support the proposal. The area to be developed is the gateway to the City. Council has an opportunity for a nice development in this area. However, it appears that Council is going to discourage this project as well. Councilwoman Crawford requested that the motion be re -stated. Mayor Matteson indicated that the motion was to deny the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Councilman Grant indicated he understood the motion was to sustain the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Councilman Evans, maker of the motion, agreed that the intent of the motion was to sustain the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, who seconded the motion, agreed. Councilwoman Crawford asked the City Attorney, if Council does sustain the Planning Commission decision, could the developer apply for a variance. The City Attorney advised they could. Councilwoman Crawford asked if the City Attorney was positive. The City Attorney advised all the Planning Commission has said is that they do not feel that, within the meaning of the City zoning ordinance, in a C-2 zone a recreational vehicle parks is an allowable use. And obviously, if it was, it would require a conditional -use permit. If the Planning Commission's recommendation is upheld, Council is just accepting with their interpretation. The applicant could then approach the Commission with a request for a variance. Councilwoman Crawford questioned whether this would make Council's position and the Planning Commission's position stronger if a similar proposal was submitted in the future that was not desired. The City Attorney agreed that is correct. Motion CC-87-140 carried with Mayor Matteson voting NOE. CC-87-141 Motion by Mayor Matteson, second Councilman Grant, carried with Councilman Evans voting NOE, that Council waive the variance fee if the developer chooses to apply for a variance. El 11 Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 24 The meeting adjourned Council meeting which 5:30 p.m. Council Minutes - 6/25/87 Page 25 at 7:45 p.m. until the next regular City will be held Thursday, July 9, 1987 at Respectfully submitted: ril -!yM I Te Mr? - APPROVED: Mayo