Loading...
10/08/1987CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 08, 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 October 08, 1987, at 5:30 p.m. PRESENT: Byron Matteson, Mayor Barbara Pfennighausen, Mayor Pro Tem Hugh J. Grant, Councilmember Dennis L. Evans, Councilmember Susan Shirley, Councilmember Randy Anstine, Assistant City Manager Juanita Brown, Deputy City Clerk Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney David Sawyer, Planning Director ABSENT Thomas J. Schwab, City Manager/Finance Director Joe Kicak, City Engineer The meeting was opened with invocation by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilmember Evans, Mayor Matteson convened City Council meeting at 5:35 p.m. ITEMS DELETED FROM THE AGENDA Mayor Matteson asked if there were any items to be deleted from the agenda. The Assistant City Manager asked the Mayor if he wanted to address the request from T.J. Austyn. The Mayor stated the request of T.J. Austyn asking to have their public hearing continued to the next Council Meeting - Item 6(C) -- T.J. Austyn - Tentative Tract Map 13050. Mayor Matteson asked if there were any other items to be SPECIAL deleted. The Assistant City Manager replied, none. PRESENTATION Proclamation Councilmember Grant presented a proclamation proclaiming "Red Ribbon Drug & Alcohol Abuse Prevention Week," October 25-31, 1987, with the Crime Prevention Officer, Sharon Korgan receiving the proclamation. Proclamation Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen presented a proclamation proclaiming "Water Awareness Week," October 19-24, 1987. NS Proclamation Councilmember Evans presented a proclamation proclaiming "Crime Prevention Month," October 1987, with Sharon Korgan receiving the proclamation. Proclamation Councilmember Shirley presented a proclamation proclaiming "Colonial Heritage Week," October 4-10, 1987. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Matteson asked Council if there were any items on the Consent Calendar to be removed for discussion. Councilmember Shirley requested Item D(3) -- Approve September 24, 1987 Minutes. Councilmember Grant requested Items A -- Approve Check Register No. 100887, D(1) -- Approve September 10, 1987 Minutes and D(3) -- Approve September 24, 1987 Minutes. CC-87-188 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, second by Councilmember Evans, ALL AYES, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Item B - Ratify October 08, 1987 CRA Action Item C - Waive Full Reading of Ordinances and Resolutions on Agenda Item D(2) - Approve September 15, 1987 Minutes. Item E - Renewal of Entitlement Agreement with San Bernardino County Housing & Community Development Department. Councilmember Grant stated on page 1, Voucher No. P5282, Peat Marwick Main & Company MEET. B/P, D/E, Growth Control $200.00 and asked what the abbreviation and initials say? Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen addressed Councilmember Grant stating it was a Conference in Ontario on Growth Control and two Councilmembers attended. Councilmember Grant asked Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen if she was informed about this from the Reading Box. She replied "yes " CC-87-189 Motion by Councilmember Grant, second by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to approve Check Register No. P5282. Councilmember Grant stated that in reference to Item D(1), Minutes of September 10, 1987, page 2, he had a few questions. He questioned the way the procedure is when there is a vote with an abstention? It should read 4-0-1. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 2 CC-87-190 Motion by Councilmember Grant, second by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to approve Minutes of September 10, 1987. Councilmember Shirley stated in reference to Item D(3), since she was not present, she pulled the Minutes for a separate vote. Councilmember Grant stated in reference to Item D(3), pages 12 and 14, that the word "or not" should be taken out since it was a choice he was making and requested that the Minutes be modified. CC-87-191 Motion by Councilmember Grant, second by Councilmember Evans, ALL AYES, to approve Minutes of September 24, 1987. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Mayor Matteson opened the meeting for public participation. Ed O'Neal Mr. O'Neal spoke in favor of Fieldcrest Homes. He feels it is 22608 Minona Dr. a neat, clean construction operation and hoped others would join him in applauding Fieldcrest for being such good neighbors. Robert Faries Mr. Faries stated he has nothing against progress and all they 12391 Oriole have ever asked of Fieldcrest is to comply with the ordinances. He stated they have been doing a good job lately, but he will not join in applauding them because they are good neighbors, they are neat, but that is about all. Bill Dodge Mr. Dodge presented to Council his update on Fieldcrest Homes 22887 Finch St. and stated they have made an effort to comply. ORAL REPORTS Phylis Forbes Ms. Forbes reminded Council about the Installation Dinner on Grand Terrace October 24, 1987 at Shandin Hills Golf Club and the Ribbon Chamber of Cutting Ceremony on October 16, 1987 at 1:30 p.m. She stated Commerce that the Chamber of Commerce is asking for help in selecting the "Citizen of the Year," indicating that Chamber has forms in their office. �J Virginia Harford Ms. Harford stated the Foothill Journal received a letter from 11825 Arliss Way Gary Meckling of Fieldcrest Homes in defense of the problems and asked Council if they would like her to go and get it. Mayor Matteson asked her to give a copy to the Assistant City Clerk and she would get copies to Council. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 3 COMMITTEE REPORTS Crime Prevention Ms. Korgan stated the Crime Prevention Committee had a meeting Sharon Korgan Monday and discussed problems that the Parks and Recreation Crime Prevention Committee have with vandalism in the park. The Crime Officer Prevention Committee is trying to assist the Parks and Recreation Committee with this problem. She believes when they put a Citizen's Patrol into force, it will help with the problems. Citizen Patrol Mayor Matteson asked if they had a date for the Citizen's Patrol? Ms. Korgan replied, no, because there are many things that will have to take place, like the donation of the car, training, et cetera, it will probably take several months. CC-87-192 Motion by Councilmember Grant, second by Councilmember Evans, ALL AYES, to appoint Bea Gigandent to the Crime Prevention Committee. Councilmember Grant felt Ms. Gigandent would do an outstanding job on the Committee as she watches out and gets involved. He felt she would be a great asset to the Committee. Councilmember Evans concurred with Councilman Grant, that she will bring, as a Senior Citizen, a different facet to the Committee, which he feels is a very viable Committee in our community. Parks and Ms. Conley, Chairman of the Parks and Recreation Committee, Recreation stated she had no comments on the minutes. She stated that Committee they did receive a letter from the Consultant stating that he, Barbara Conley in general, agreed with the Committee, but they felt they 22285 Dove St. should have either been told that it was not necessary for him to get back to the Committee or that the Committee should know what is in the General Plan Update prior to it reaching the public. Mayor Matteson concurred with that and asked Council what was their desire. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated at the last Council Meeting when this was discussed, a comment was made by Councilmember Grant that this Committee nor any citizens of any other Committee had not been prohibited from meeting specifically with the General Plan Consultant and that led in a Minute search. A motion was adopted, which was made by Mayor Matteson, second by Councilmember Grant, that all communication with the Consultant procedurally would go to the Planning Director and/or to the City Manager, then be transmitted to the Committee and no direct contact was going to be allowed. She stated she and Councilmember Evans felt this was an unnecessary restraint of citizens from a service of which they were paying for. They lost in that vote 3-2, the Motion was to establish 0 Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 4 the chain of command. The Consultant was to be insulated and all communications had to go by an avenue set by the Council on a 3-2 vote - that is a matter of Minutes record. Mayor Matteson stated he still agreed with that motion and felt it is a viable situation. Councilmember Grant read specific parts of the past Minutes stating that the comments by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen were incorrect; they had never said this Committee or any other Committee, could not be involved with the Consultant; all they have ever asked for was to involve the Planning Director and City Manager. He stated no one has responded to this Committee's request for input. It is not because the Committee has not asked for it, it is because this Consultant has independently failed to respond to them. Councilmember Shirley stated her position has been fiscal. She feels if they open up the Consultant to talking to all the different interest groups, the bill is going to be astronomical since he was hired for a certain number of hours, and that is the reason she voted that Council go through the Planning Director and City Manager. Councilmember Evans asked the Parks and Recreation Chairman if he understood her concerns, that she has made efforts to go through the Planning Director and the City Manager to get the Consultant to give them input. Ms. Conley replied they understood it to mean that whatever communication they had for the Consultant was to be given to the Planning Director and he would forward it onto the Consultant. At no time were they to have direct access, to the Consultant. Councilmember Evans asked Ms. Conley if she had received any correspondence with any suggested position of the Consultant, except for the memorandum that was submitted to you on Monday? She replied "no." Councilmember Evans asked, so you have made efforts and have not been responded to adequately in your opinion? Ms. Conley replied she felt they had not set up proper channels on how the Committees were to be responded to. They sent a report to the Consultant and have no idea as to what stage he is at. She assumes he will be forwarding something onto Council and the City. She felt the Committee should be able to look at it prior to it going to the City. She stated their argument was not that they could not talk to the Consultant; it was that, if they sent something through the proper channels, they would like to get responded to before the fact, not after the fact. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 5 Councilmember Evans stated he felt the intent of the policy was not to stifle the Committee or Committees that were interested in the different aspects that go into the document. Mayor Matteson stated he and the Planning Director met with the Consultant in San Francisco and asked him about pinpointing a park site. He stated with the new State laws, they cannot say a particular area can be taken as a park site. He can designate an area as a desirable location. He stated the Parks and Recreation Committee had a fine suggestion, which was denied by Council, when they wanted to go out and find a piece of property and bring it back to Council. He stated that would be an excellent idea, there is no commitment. They would find a piece of property and bring the proposal before Council and Council would make the decision. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she felt it is an outstanding suggestion, but does not satisfy the Committees' frustrations. The vote was 3-2, it was a vote unanimously in favor of allowing a meeting to occur once that policy had been set and, therefore, the policy is set, the meeting never took place and now the document is ready to come to Council, and the Committee is frustrated because they have not had any input. She felt what they really would like to have the opportunity to do was to address the Consultant and say these are our concerns and needs, do you have any area within our City that you would recommend. She asked Ms. Conley if she understood their request, that would be a viable way to get to their request. Ms. Conley replied, with the exception of speaking directly with the Consultant, they understood they would not have direct contact with the Consultant. The Committee would like to have seen his proposal in the General Plan as it relates to parks. Councilmember Evans read a portion of the letter giving the boundaries and the desires of the Committee that the Parks and Recreation Committee sent to the Consultant. He read a letter from Willdan & Associates, dated October 2, 1987, that was submitted to the Parks and Recreation Committee regarding future park needs. Councilmember Grant stated he wanted to make it clear that Council wanted to involve the prime participants, the Planning Director and the City Manager, they did want this participation. Councilmember Evans stated the Committee report suggested that they act on accepting Alternative No. 1. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 6 j CC-87-193 Motion by Councilmember Evans, second by Councilmember Grant, ALL AYES, that the Consultant allow the Parks and Recreation Committee the opportunity to review the General Plan as it relates to parks prior to community perusal. Councilmember Evans directed to the Planning Director, as a follow-up, to get with the Parks and Recreation Committee to set up a meeting date, whether the Consultant attend or whether there is correspondence which is removed from the General Plan, for the Committee to review and that be done immediately. Councilmember Grant stated as a second to that, he would assume that the City Manager and he should be aware of this meeting and if they feel they should be involved, then do so. Mayor Matteson asked Ms. Conley to go onto Item C - Acceptance and Development of the proposed T.J. Austyn Park. Item C Ms. Conley stated the Committee was given a landscape concept Acceptance & plan relating to the T.J. Austyn Park. They were told that it Development of complied with all the requirements that Council stipulated to the proposed the T.J. Austyn developer. She stated their concerns were they T.J. Austyn Park did not feel there are enough items, such as park benches, tot area, et cetera. She stated they want Council to be aware that additional items will have to go in and funds appropriated from some source to do this. Mayor Matteson questioned the size of the property. The Assistant City Manager stated it will all total a little over an acre. Mayor Matteson asked what was Council's desire. Councilmember Evans stated, after reviewing the staff report and the Committee's report, he felt the problem is that staff has shown them that if they view this as a viable park site with a useable tot lot, the City will have to provide playground equipment. His concern is that if we develop those three -strip parcels, staff is estimating it is going to cost $34,000.00, and in a community of this size, that is a lot of money. Staff does report that $27,000.00 will be generated in park development fees, but that still does not pay for what they had in mind. Staff also made the statement that Council should be aware of the fact that, if this park is developed, staff may approach Council with a request for hiring additional maintenance personnel. He stated he is concerned with spending that much money to develop a strip park. He would rather take the money and put it on Pico Park or apply it to possible park acquisition and put it towards maintenance personnel for the upkeep of those facilities and the existing facilities. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 7 Mayor Matteson stated he felt the City was going to be stuck with that property whatever they end up doing with it. Councilmember Shirley stated she felt it is a viable greenbelt within the City, and stated they would not have to put in the playground equipment. The area could still be utilized by the people in the community for recreation. Ms. Conley stated she felt the question there was, is it being utilized by the people in the area or is it being utilized by the people surrounding the areas only. Councilmember Shirley stated even if it is being utilized by the surrounding people, it is still a benefit for the residents living in Grand Terrace, indicating we need parkland. We obviously are going to need to hire more people, but if we say we are not going to do this and not going to do that, we are not going to get anywhere; therefore, she is in favor of it. Councilmember Grant stated he is in favor of staff's recommendation, we need more greenbelts and parkland, including this. Councilmember Evans stated he felt this plan is not a good sound plan. When you have a strip of land that is divided by two residential streets, that is not good planning and would be a safety hazard. He requested staff to prepare: (1) The current cost of the Griffin Park Site indicating the actual size of that park as it correlates to this particular parcel, and (2) The estimated cost staff feels it would take to maintain this particular site and if we were to assume it, the cost figures for an additional maintenance man. Mayor Matteson asked Councilmember Evans what would be his alternative to accepting this as a park? Councilmember Evans replied, "as it currently stands? I wouldn't." He felt the emphasis should be placed on developing Pico or other park acquisition and felt that is where our money should be directed, not into a small parcel. Mayor Matteson asked the Assistant City Manager if we have accepted this park from T.J. Austyn. The Assistant City Manager stated "no sir, not as of yet." The stipulation by Council was that, when the developer was prepared to start construction, the construction plans for the park site would be approved by the Assistant City Manager and the City Engineer - no construction documents have been submitted to them other than the design concept. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 8 Mayor Matteson asked why are they splitting it into two sections; one for design concept and one for dedication? The Acting City Manager replied mainly because if Council had a problem with this, it would be unreasonable to have the contractor's landscape architect do a full set of construction documents and then turn around and have to change them all. Mayor Matteson asked the Acting City Manager what his opinion was on the design concept, as it is. The Acting City Manager stated it is unfortunate that the strip is bifurcated by so many streets. He would have to concur with Councilmember Evans and stated the main concern staff has is that some definite costs will have to be addressed before accepting this park site. Councilmember Evans stated, assuming the City accepts this park site, staff needs to get with the Parks and Recreation Committee as to what their reservations are as to the minimum amount of equipment. The Committee will need to make a recommendation as to what they fill would be the necessary equipment and then forward that information onto the developer. The Acting City Manager replied it has been done. There was a color rendering that was submitted to the Committee and all of the items that the Committee would have liked to have seen was forewarded to the landscape architect, who, in turn, met with the developer's architect. The developer, Mr. Austyn, refused•it. Mr. Austyn felt they were unreasonable demands. Councilmember Evans stated, so this is the best we are going to get. The Acting City Manager stated if you review the conditions of approval as they were layed down by Council, the developer has met the conditions of approval. Councilmember Evans stated this is where we get a into a problem of interpretation. The developer interprets the conditions one way and the Committee and staff interprets the conditions another way. He stated if this is it and they are not going to do anymore, then we either accept it or reject it when this project starts to be developed. The Acting City Manager asked to make a clarification, that if Council does choose to reject this proposed park, it will not be a maintenance problem for the City. The land is being proposed to be dedicated as a park, and if we reject that dedication, that remains the ownership of the property owner and will be theirs to maintain. Mayor Matteson stated he felt the greenery would look better than a dry barren spot. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 9 Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked the Assistant City Manager what T.J. Austyn stated they would put there specifically. The Assistant City Manager replied giving a rundown out of the design concept. 0 Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked if T.J. Austyn was going to be responsible for installing water meters on each piece of property? The Assistant City Manager replied, "yes." Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she would have no problem with this at this point, she does not want to see dirt. She indicated they are going to have to hire additional personnel when they open up additional park sites anyway, but she is opposed to anything additional to what the developer has proposed and will have to make the best of it as it is. She is also opposed to any additional funds being allocated to this area out of City Funds that could be better used for other park sites within our area. CC-87-194 Motion by Mayor Matteson, second by Councilmember Shirley, to accept the proposed park site and design concept only. Motion carried with Councilmember Evans voting NOE. Item E Mayor Matteson asked Ms. Conley to continue with Item E -- Commissioners Commissioner's Resignations. Ms. Conley stated it is Resignations self-explanatory. CC-87-195 Motion by Councilmember Grant, second by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to to accept, with regret, the Parks and Recreation Committee resignations and allow these positions to be refilled with dedicated residents with an interest in Parks and Recreation. Councilmember Grant requested that traditional letters of appreciation be sent. Item F Ms. Conley gave an update on the snack bar stating that a local Snack Bar contractor by the name of Chuck Bahovek had volunteered to complete the snack bar. He has come up with a cost estimate of approximately $2,600 to $3,900 to complete this, with the exception of the commercial appliances that were required and the three -hole sink for the inside that he did not have a cost on. She stated the Committee elected to give Chuck the opportunity to complete the snack bar and stated he will probably start the week after next and estimates anywhere from 4 to 6 weeks to complete, depending on whether he can get materials donated and volunteer labor, et cetera. She did not feel he will need any additional funds in the next few weeks. Ms. Conley checked with the Lions Club to see if they are still going to donate the previously allocated amount of $4,000. They told her if they see some progress, it probably will be there for them. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 10 Councilmember Evans asked Ms. Conley how long will it take to complete the snack bar? Ms. Conley replied approximately 30 days, but she is not sure what 30 days means. Councilmember Evans asked the City Attorney if there was any type of agreement that they could have him sign in order to have the snack bar completed in a certain length of time. The City Attorney replied they could work something out. Councilmember Evans asked Ms. Conley if she felt there would be any problem in this individual signing such an agreement. Ms. Conley replied, in her opinion, since he was donating his time to do this, and under those conditions, she was not sure if they could request him to finish it in a certain period of time. Councilmember Evans stated it is a matter then that they feel he would in good faith, finish it in a timely manner. Ms. Conley replied yes, the same faith they put in the last two. Item D Ms. Conley stated they have many questions relating to the Pico Pico Park Site Park Site such as the varying costs and the varying time -frame. The cost has spiraled way out of recognition. She stated the Assistant City Manager presented them with a design concept at the Committee Meeting on Monday. The Committee did agree it was a viable plan that could be started in phases. The issue is, if they are going to take the Pico Park Site, they need to decide what they are going to do on this land, what do they phase in first. The $50,000 that was appropriated for this year, would it develop one entire field, or do they have to prep the entire land before they can do one section. Councilmember Evans presented a plan to the public and Council showing the layout of the Pico Park Site. CC-87-196 Motion by Mayor Matteson, second by Councilmember Grant, ALL AYES, to develop this land with the agreed faith in time -line as dedicated by available funds. Councilmember Evans stated if he can't do it in the form of a motion, he would ask for concurrence of this Council that if this plan is accepted conceptually by Southern California Edison, that the Parks and Recreation Committee be instructed to advise staff specifically from this plan as to what they would like to see developed first. Based on the Committee's recommendations, that staff prepare cost factors regarding a parking lot, one ball diamond, possibly tennis courts, and prepare a financial time -table for the first phase to be on-line no later than June 30, 1988. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 11 .. The City Attorney stated he could make that in the form of a motion. CC-87-197 Motion by Councilmember Evans, second by Councilmember Grant, ALL AYES. Mayor Matteson asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak on this matter. John Hanneman Mr. Hanneman stated he is fully against Pico Park, that the 12620 Garden residents were never notified about a park going in there. He Avenue said he felt putting $50,000 on a piece of borrowed land is ridiculous. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated her concern is that the amount is not $50,000, the cost has escalated some place between a half million dollars to a three quarters million dollars just to develop this to a part-time day -use facility and that is the way it is going to remain forever, and she is not sure she wants to see it started. She stated they need to look into the cost if they do that; make a partially functional park realizing that it is the way it has to stay forever; to give particular consideration to the residents that are living and bordering that piece of property as to how the arrangement is going to be for the facilities that are going to be put on the land that will have the least impact on them; the least expenditure of park funds so that we can maximize the money that we have to permanent facilities that belong specifically to us, and that is purchased parkland. Ed O'Neal Mr. O'Neal stated every nation has police action and he would 22608 Minona Dr. hate to think that he would turn the greenery over to the criminals and live behind bars. He felt that is an issue that needs to be solved. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated additional concerns that need to be expressed are, they can never put any permanent facilities on this land. Councilmember Evans stated he hoped it was clear that his motion did not mean the actual construction at this particular moment. The motion is going to bring out cost factors. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked Councilmember Evans if she understood that the motion is not getting their approval for the development of that first phase, it is just requesting that staff get the figures and time -line and come back to them for their decision at that time. Councilmember Evans replied, "that is correct." Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 12 Emergency Mr. Hodder stated the base plan has been run through a Operations screening process and compared against County and State only a Committee guidelines. He stated he is happy to report, there are Ji_ couple of minor areas that still need work and stated they are , Chairman overall confident that they have got the plan in such a state `— 22253 Van Buren that it now complies and follows the guidelines set by County and State organizations. He stated the next regular meeting will be on October 19, 1987 and there will be a special speaker by the name of Steve Hurst who is with the California Department of Housing and a resident of Grand Terrace. He will speak on procedures and methods to report damage assessment to State and County authorities. Councilmember Evans stated that on October 20, 1987, through the Crime Prevention Officer, there will be an earthquake preparedness meeting and felt everyone should try and attend that meeting. He asked Mr. Hodder if he was aware of the exercise coming up? Mr. Hodder replied yes, and thanked Councilmember Evans for the plug. Council recessed at 7:15 p.m. and reconvened at 7:26 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING The Planning Director read his staff report regarding the Planning Commission's decision on denying SA-87-8, COS Engineering, and made reference to the drawings at Council's left and right showing the layout of the project. Mayor Matteson asked the Planning Director to approach the drawings and explain it. The Planning Director started with the Site Plan and pointed out the different areas relating to the project. Mayor Matteson asked COS Engineering if they wanted to present their proposal on this. Michael Palmer Mr. Palmer stated he is with COS Engineering and asked the 18002 Sky Park Planning Director questions relating to the options that they Circle, Irvine were given for this project. Option No. 2, stated a revised Site Plan would be to the Planning Department which provides parking for the Retirement Hotel to the south of the property and remove the commercial structure up front and stated his question was, what was to be done with the property if they were to remove this commercial structure. The Planning Director replied, they should submit a revised Site Plan to the Planning Department and reschedule the General Plan and Zoning applications to be heard along with the above -mentioned revised Site Plan. He stated that would be an Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 13 option that would be opened to them if they wished to go forward to moving the parking to the south and remove the commercial structure. They could then sit down with the Planning Department and devise a landscape plan. Mr. Palmer expressed his concerns that if they went with that plan, they would lose some land for future development on the second phase of this project and economically it would be a burden to the developer. Mayor Matteson asked Mr. Palmer to go to the Site Plan and show Council what he was talking about. Mr. Palmer approached the Site Plan and pointed out the areas relating to the proposal. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked Mr. Palmer to explain the rational of the proposed realignment of the street from the original plan. Mr. Palmer stated that the original approval had parking on both sides and the driveway came right down the middle and there was no access to the residents to get to Barton Road, as far as the pedestrian walkway which created a safety hazard. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated you are also addressing potential development to the south of the Retirement Hotel and she would assume that it will be a like -use to what presently exists there. Mr. Palmer replied yes, but it would be modernized and updated. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated in the process of updating the property and like -use, one of the reasons you are citing request for approval of the commercial building is because of the loss you are suffering by moving the parking to the back. She asked Mr. Palmer if he is planning on replacing structures in the back with structures like they are, single -stories or will he be replacing them with two-story structures? Mr. Palmer replied two-story structures. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked how many units are on the site? Mr. Palmer replied forty-five. Councilmember Evans asked if the Retirement Home property and the property to the south was owned by the same individual? Mr. Palmer replied the same individual. Councilmember Evans stated he assumes the second phase of the project that the owner is considering putting in there is a two-story apartment complex and asked Mr. Palmer if that was a safe assumption and when are they anticipating bringing that plan to the City? F1 Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 14 Mr. Palmer replied that was a safe assumption and that he had no idea since they have to finish this project first. Councilmember Evans stated since you are planning on bringing in a new project, how are the people going to get in and out? Mr. Palmer stated there will be additional accesses coming off of Reed Street. Councilmember Evans stated he had a question for the Planning Director asking would it be better to have the entrances and exits off of Reed into that future development and close off Barton Road or would it be okay to allow access off of Reed and Barton Road. The Planning Director stated, from a Planning standpoint, it would be advantageous to have entrances and exits off of Reed. He stated if you close off Barton Road, you will have all the traffic generated from that apartment building onto that single-family residential area and that is an issue the traffic analysis will have to look at. Councilmember Evans stated, if he understood, the only reason we are being asked to approve this project is because they say it is money, he could understand the developers standpoint for money, but he is also throwing in another element that has not been considered todate and that is a development south of this location. He asked the Planning Director, when the Planning Commission looked at this, was there ever any discussion of a potential commercial site presented to them. The Planning Director replied, none that he was aware of. Councilmember Evans asked if there had ever been any discussion about a potential development to the south. The Planning Director replied he believes there had been some discussion regarding a Phase II type of development back there. Councilmember Evans asked if it was discussed when it was initially brought before the Planning Commission. The Planning Director replied he did not feel he could appropriately answer that since he has not researched the records. Councilmember Evans stated he had a hard time not going along with the Planning Commission's decision, in light of the information of the potential development that will bring money into them. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 15 Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she does not consider the financial impact great enough that she would want the commercial structure on the front. She stated she appreciated the realignment of the driveway and felt it showed much better planning than was originally in place. Therefore, she does not feel the commercial structure would be a benefit to the City and was not sure that it could not be done away with in the project itself. Michael Lasley Mr. Lasley stated the revenues the City is going to get by CDS Engineering having 2 or 3 units back there is not going to be near the revenues the City is going to get with a commercial building. He stated the plan is a much cleaner plan and felt it satisfied all of the requirements. He stated the residents who have horses will have better access in getting their horse trailers through the proposed driveway. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she felt the 5,000 square foot building is not going to enhance that piece of property, and by not putting it in there is not going to damage this project that much; everything else shows greater insight than the original project. Mr. Lasley asked, then the original Conditional Use Permit could be built as is, "is that correct?" The Planning Director replied there are parking requirements that need to be met. The Planning Director stated one of his concerns, which he has told the applicant, is the fact that those entrance ways onto Reed Avenue, and also some pulling out of the existing structures that the residents are now in, may cause some problems that will cost some dollars to fix and those will be required to be fixed prior to issuance of permit. Mr. Lasley stated he felt everyone wanted to do what was beneficial to the City. He thinks it is a good plan. Councilmember Grant asked if there was anyone in the audience who lives to the west of the parking lot and west of the commercial area? Mary Fitzgerald Ms. Fitzgerald stated as far as getting in and out with their 22317 Barton horse trailer, as long as they leave enough space she has no Road problem. She stated that all the Retirement Home project has brought, has been problems. She stated one problem being the trash that is being thrown around their property and people living on the construction site in little trailers, and it is also going to bring a lot more traffic. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 16 The City Attorney stated he would suggest she call the City if she sees anyone living on the construction premises. He also directed a statement to the applicant regarding a letter that was sent from someone in the applicant's office. It was a complaint that stated the applicant will be looking for compensation from the City for a taking of property, which meant to the City Attorney, an inverse condemnation threat, because of the access of the adjoining properties, which is one of the conditions. He felt it should be clarified at this time, whether or not, the applicant intended to proceed with that claim against the City. If the City drops the condition, Ms. Fitzgerald would not have access to the property and that was the approach the applicant was taking at that time. Ms. Fitzgerald stated that they have an easement which was put in when the property was sold originally. The City Attorney stated they need to get an answer from the applicant as to what their actions are going to be. Mr. Lasley stated that the applicant would not come back to the City for compensation. He stated that was probably a comment made in a heated situation when someone was upset with the way things had gone one. The City Attorney stated, never -the -less, the City is going to require some type of waiver before they approve this project. Mr. the Lasley stated Title Report should that if there is an easement on the property, say so and CDS Engineering would get back with the City after they check it out. Mayor Matteson asked if anyone else wanted to speak on this issue. No one responded. Mayor Matteson asked the Planning Director to briefly state why the Planning Commission rejected this project. The Planning Director stated the Planning Commission's concerns; the impact of traffic from the commercial structure; the project does not meet the zoning requirements regarding parking and the landscaping site layout was not approved. Council asked for clarification on the zoning requirements for parking, and the Planning Director clarified the requirements. Mayor asked what was Council's desire. Councilmember Evans asked the developer, this alignment that is being proposed tonight will not be built if this is not approved, you will go back to the original alignment that was presented in the first project, "is that not correct." Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 17 Mr. Lasley replied, he felt they would have to go back to as close to the original as they could. There would be no reason for them to eat up the property behind; they would like to have the parking as close to the Retirement facility as they could. Councilmember Evans stated that they could only take a look at how the land is going to be utilized, understanding the potential development that will go on a parcel and because of that he could not support the developers position. CC-87-198 Motion by Councilmember Evans, second by Councilmember Shirley, ALL AYES, to adopt the resolution upholding the Planning Commission's SAR board denial of SA-87-8. Mayor Matteson opened for discussion and stated his only problem was the width of the street, if it was wider, it would be a good project. Councilmember Grant stated he basically supported the idea of a small commercial development there, but unfortunately the geography is going to cause him to vote for this motion. Councilmember Shirley stated she liked the idea of putting a commercial building in the front, but a 5,000 square feet building is too large; she did not like the commercial site on the property line. Mayor Matteson said what they are trying to say to them is the way the project is presented, is not acceptable. Mr. Lasley asked if they brought this back to Council and the commercial building was smaller, "you might be willing to accept this?" Councilmember Shirley replied, "yes." The Planning Director asked for clarification regarding Planning Commission was opposed to a commercial structure and Council voting to uphold the denial of the project basically agreed with that motion. He stated, if you wish to have it come back as a revised plan without having the applicant start over again, it should be put back to the Planning Commission and not an actual denial; that would allow the Planning Commission direction. CC-87-199 Motion by Mayor Matteson, second by Councilmember Shirley, that the applicant have the opportunity to redesign the commercial part of that building and redesign that area and bring it back to the Planning Commission as a revised unit. Motion carried with Councilmember Evans and Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, voting NOE. I. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 18 PUBLIC HEARING Appeal of Councilmember Shirley stated because of a conflict of interest, Planning she would not participate in this discussion. Commission's denial of The Planning Director read the staff report regarding the TMP-87-5 Planning Commission's denial of TMP-87-5 (C.G. Engineering). (C.G. Engineering) He proceeded over to the map of the proposed parcel and pointed on the map the proposed area. David Barakian Mr. Barakian pointed out on the zoning map the proposed 2627 South parcel. He stated originally when this map was submitted to Waterman Avenue the Planning Commission, it contained 4 parcels. At that time, San Bernardino the Planning Commission, as well as the property owners, felt it was too many parcels for this piece of land and 2 would be acceptable. Upon the continuance of this item at the August 17, 1987 Planning Commission Meeting, the property owner, in an attempt to compromise on the lot size, resubmitted an application containing 3 lots. He stated the proposed grading of these 3 lots would be done in the same acceptable engineering fashion as the existing houses are on existing, already approved, subdivisions under the R-1 zoning. These subdivisions surround the property in question along the east/west street through Van Buren and other east/west streets in the City. He stated they are willing to comply with all the conditions presented to them for development of this site. Mayor Matteson asked if anyone wanted to speak on this issue. Steve Fox Mr. Fox stated he was the owner of this property and stated he 382 E.Bonnieview has owned it since 1981. He stated he had an original map in Rialto to divide this into two lots. When he entered into it, the property was zoned A-1 and he believed he was going to be able to have horses and that they were going to be able to go through the California Water Quality Control for septic tanks because of the cost of bringing up the sewer. When he actually got into it, the zoning was changed to R-1. Therefore, the cost of developing two lots was prohibited. He hoped Council would uphold the laws for the zoning. He stated the lots are not small, they are all a 1/3 of an acre or more. He stated they have tried in every way to satisfy the conditions as much as they could. Michael Stein Mr. Stein presented Council with some pictures he wanted them 12711 Blue Mt. to review. He stated the issue was grading and that is why he Court and the other neighbors on Blue Mt. Court are opposed to it. He feared the water shed. Vincent Smith Mr. Smith stated he owned the 9-acre parcel that borders this 22873 Pico St. property on Pico. He stated his concern was the density of this lot. He stated to reduce that to anything less than a split of the property is detrimental to their property. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 19 Dennis Kidd Mr. Kidd stated he is opposed to this project because he feels 22874 Pico St. it will be out -of -character with other parcels. He stated they should keep that area a low -density area because of the problems with flooding. Councilmember Grant stated he concurred with the Planning Commission about the easterly sloped lot. CC-87-200 Motion by Councilmember Grant, second by Mayor Matteson, to adopt the resolution upholding the Planning Commission's denial of this project. Motion carried with 1 abstension from Councilmember Shirley. Item 5-A.3(a) Mayor Matteson carried Council back to Item 5-A.3(a) and asked if there was any discussion regarding Minutes from the Historical and Cultural Committee. There was no discussion. COUNCIL REPORT Item 5-B Councilmember Evans stated he had a question for the Assistant Councilmember City Manager regarding the capitol improvements projects Evans time -line update and stated he had asked for that about a month ago. He asked what the status was, specifically, regarding the upgrading of the signalization at Barton Road and Mt. Vernon (turning movements). The Assistant City Manager replied he would be in communication with the City Manager tomorrow and would bring that to his attention. A representative from the City Engineer's Office stated the improvements on the signalization would start in about 30 days. The Assistant City Manager stated his biggest hang-up on that project is the right-of-way acquisition. Councilmember Evans stated he thought that was already taken care of. The Assistant City Manager replied, to the best of his knowledge, it had not been. He stated it is a matter of the City okaying the free -of -charge versus having to pay the individual for the property. He stated the last he had heard from Joe Kicak's office was that consideration was being made to dedicate it to the City free -of -charge. Councilmember Evans asked the City Attorney that, sometime back, there was some direction that if we did not get the dedication, legal action was going to be commenced. The City Attorney stated there was some discussion, not at the Council table, but individually, and in one closed session, of initiating action to take the condemnation. Ll� Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 20 Councilmember Evans asked how long are we going to wait. The City Attorney replied, if you like, we will bring it back to you at the next Council meeting to have you initiate the action to take the property. The Assistant City Manager stated, right now the property is in escrow. Mayor Matteson requested an update be brought back to the next Council meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she hated to think that they were going to sit there and wait, with the dangerous situation at the intersection, which could be alleviated with a left -turn signal and wait for potential buyers and present owners to battle this out in court. Let's get on with this. Councilmember Shirley asked if they are in litigation and we move to take it, are we going to be able to do so. The City Attorney replied, "yes." Friends of the Councilmember Grant congratulated the Friends of the Library Library for a very successful, recent, book sale at City Hall. Councilmember Councilmember Grant also congratulated the Historical and Grant Cultural Committee for the very interesting display in the foyer in this building, relating to our Sister City in Italy. He expressed his gratitude to Mrs. Ann Petta and Mrs. Viola Gratson, Chairman, of the Historical and Cultural Committee for the hard work she initiated in this display. He suggested that a letter from the Mayor to Mrs. Gratson expressing Council's appreciation should take place. He stated there should be some methodology for picking up the trash on the entrances and exits of our City, without members of Council having to approach staff to have it done. He asked if anything had been done about the filth that seems to prevail at Stater Bros. Shopping Center. He also mentioned the GTI Building and stated Council should be kept updated about the status of that building. He stated that he brought to the attention to the City Manager of the appearance of political signs in the City and stated we should make sure they are paying the required fees. Councilmember Grant stated that several years ago they discussed the possibility of having weekend staff at City Hall. He felt government should run seven -days a week. Events do not stop on Saturdays and Sundays and we should look into it. Councilmember Grant concurred with others regarding the meeting on October 20, 1987 on earthquake preparedness. And he commented regarding a possible earthquake "neighborhood watch" type of program regarding cutting off gas mains. Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 21 Councilmember Councilmember Evans stated we have a very serious problem with Evans Barton Road at the I-215 freeway. He requested staff to prepare a cost estimate as to how much it would cost if the City were to participate in widening the bridge across I-215, to be consistent with the street width of Barton Road. The Assistant City Manager replied they would be happy to. NEW BUSINESS Item 8-A The Assistant City Manager read the staff report relating to a resolution establishing a "No Parking Zone" on both sides of Grand Terrace Road. CC-87-201 Motion by Mayor Matteson, second by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to adopt the resolution establishing a "No Parking Zone" on both sides of Grand Terrace Road. Item 8-B The Assistant City Manager read a staff report relating to the Volunteer Banquet Update and asked Council to select a date. Councilmember Grant recommended October 30, 1987. Mayor Matteson asked Council if anyone had any problem with that date. Everyone concurred with October 30, 1987. The Council meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Regular scheduled meeting to be held on Thursday, October 22, 1987, at 5:30 p.m. R ectfully- fitted: e uty City Clerk APPROVED: i OW Council Minutes - 10/08/87 Page 22