Loading...
02/14/1985CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - FEBRUARY 14, 1985 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order at the Terrace View Elementary School, 22731 Grand Terrace Road, Grand Terrace, California, on February 14, 1985, at 6:09 p.m. PRESENT: Hugh J. Grant, Mayor Byron Matteson, Mayor Pro Tempore Tony Petta, Councilman Barbara Pfennighausen, Councilwoman Dennis L. Evans, Councilman Seth Armstead, City Manager Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney Joe Kicak, City Engineer Ilene Dughman, Deputy City Clerk ABSENT: Myrna Erway, City Clerk The meeting was opened with invocation by Councilman Petta, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, led by Ilene Dughman. Item Added - Item 9E - An Urgency Ordinance Amending the Municipal Code to c ange the Council meeting place. Item Deleted - Item 9A - "No Parking" Designation - Civic Center CIVIC CENTER CONSTRUCTION BRIEFING Mayor Grant noted Field Report Nos. 49 and 50 were provided. City Manager Armstead stated the move into the Civic Center will begin the next day with February 19 planned for beneficial occupancy. MINUTES (1/24/85) CC-85-26 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Councilman Evans, ALL AYES, to approve the Minutes of January 24, 1985, as presented. CONSENT CALENDAR Item 4A was removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. CC-85-27 Motion by Councilman Evans, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to approve the following Items on the Consent Calendar: B. Ratification of February 14, 1985 CRA action. C. Authorize execution by the City Engineer and the filing of the "Order to Construct" application with the Public Utilities Commission for the Vivienda Avenue Overhead Bridge Project. Page 1 - 2/14/85 D. To approve the following projects, make the findings, adopt the Negative Declarations, and instruct the City Clerk to issue Notices of Determination: (1) Proposed Mini -Warehouse at 21999 Van Buren (James L. Harber) (SA 84-6) (2) Setback Variance for Project to Construct Industrial Buildings N/o Barton Rd. E/o Southern Pacific Railroad (Jim Goode) (CUP 84-11) (3) Proposal to Construct 2-Story, 12,504 Sq. Ft. Office Building at 22545 Barton Rd.(Renee J. Jacober) (SA 85-1) (See below for additional discussion relative to the above item.) CHECK REGISTER NO. 021485 Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, referencing Warrant Nos. 12858 and 12887, questioned: (1) Cost of purchasing versus renting copiers; and (2) purchasing supplies from Wattenbarger's Office Supply since Perry's Stationery & Office Supply is closer and the owner lives in Grand Terrace; requested Perry's be given an opportunity. Finance Director Schwab felt advanced technology made purchasing copiers impractical; is considering another copier at this time; would investigate lease/purchase as well; stated the City has no policy for giving preference to purchasing in Grand Terrace or Colton; purchases are based on competitive pricing; advised Wattenbarger delivers to Grand Terrace regardless of the amount purchased; would review and request bids again to see whether Perry's prices would be comparable. CC-85-28 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to approve Check Register No. 021485 as submitted. Councilman Petta stated he had made note to disqualify himself from voting on Item 4D regarding the proposed Mini -Warehouse at 21999 Van Buren; he inadvertently overlooked it in time; questioned how to resolve that. City Attorney Hopkins stated Council could reconsider that item. Councilman Evans requested the action remain as is. Motion No. CC-85-28 remains as stated. COMMISSION/COMMITTEE REPORTS Mayor Grant advised Council had been furnished the Minutes of the January 7, 1985 Planning Commission meeting and the January 7, 1985 Parks & Recreation Committee meeting. Crime Prevention Committee Report - Mayor Grant advised the January 7, 1985, Minutes had been provided. CC-85-29 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Mayor Grant, ALL AYES, to accept the resignation of Gary Carnes, with regret, whose term expires June 30, 1986, and to so notify him. CC-85-30 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Councilman Evans, ALL AYES, to reappoint Larry Williams to fill his unexpired term to expire June 30, 1986. 0 Page 2 - 2/14/85 CC-85-31 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to appoint Dr. Murray Taylor to fill the unexpired term of John LeMay to expire June 30, 1986. Historical & Cultural Activities Committee - The February 4, 1985 Minutes were provided; the Committee wi hold its monthly meetings in the new Civic Center effective March 4, 1985. Emer ency Operations Committee - Councilwoman Pfennighausen reported the following: The ommittee is awaiting information to enable the City's Emergency Operations Plan to be coordinated with the County's; (2) The Committee felt the new Civic Center EOC/Lounge is not workable for the Committee to function in case of an emergency; therefore, the Committee will be requesting to occupy the entire Building No. 3, with CCS and the Chamber relocating to Building No. 2. POLICE CHIEF REPORT: Councilman Evans stated he was advised residents on Brentwood were cited at 6:20 a.m. on a street sweeping day; it angered them since the street sweeper is never there that early; questioned procedures for issuing citations; Captain Bradford responded their policy is to cite vehicles that have obviously obstructed the street sweeper; confusion by that particular Deputy has been resolved. Following Council discussion of concerns expressed at a Senior Citizen meeting regarding vehicles speeding on Mt. Vernon and Barton Road and large trucks parking on Michigan and Mt. Vernon, City Attorney Hopkins read Section 10.16.010 of the Municipal Code dealing with any vehicle parked over 72 hours and Section 10.16.020 dealing with commercial vehicles. Questioned whether Council desired amending the Code. Councilman Evans recommended restricting commercial vehicles from parking in any residential area, with enforcement officer discretion. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson objected to the number of commercial vehicles being parked and worked on for lengthy periods on Michigan - questioned how eight -hour parking limit can be enforced, since one side is commercial and the other residential; questioned restricting commercial parking to the main thoroughfares. Captain Jim Bradford expressed concern for limiting commerical parking in certain commercial areas; felt, with Councilwoman Pfennighausen concurring, the City has an adequate ordinance to enforce this issue; would pursue resolving the problem in the residential area. Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Mayor Grant, to restrict commercial vehicles from parking over eight hours in commercial and residential areas within the City. Councilman Evans stated, for the record, he could not support the Motion; felt residential areas are the major problem; therefore, would favor restricting commercial vehicles from parking in residential areas; felt commercial vehicles would park less than eight hours in commercial areas. Councilman Petta felt there is a need for some control; however, did not want to discourage business; felt this matter should be given more consideration. Page 3 - 2/14/85 The Motion failed, 3-2, with NOES by Councilmembers Petta, Pfennighausen, and Evans. Mayor Grant directed staff to return a recommendation for Council consideration. 0 CITY ATTORNEY REPORT: City Attorney Hopkins reported he received a complaint that the Historical & Cultural Activities Committee conducted meetings not open to the public; felt others could also be violating the Brown Act and possibly not complying with State and City Conflict of Interest Codes, specifically the Planning Commission. Will be providing them with procedures and requirements. Sign Code Amendment - City Attorney Hopkins advised he met with the Chamber Committee regarding input for the proposed sign code amendment - the Chamber will be requesting the following: (1) Eliminating the proposed Section 18.72.380 D. that would allow a permit process to extend abatement of noncompliance signs for two years; (2) Including a provision for temporary banners around model homes in subdivisions for a limited period of time; (3) That limited variances be granted to Greg's Market, Red Carpet Realty, Ross' Liquor Store, and Terrace Hills Junior High School; (4) Waiving of fees for the Terrace Hills Junior High School sign . Council directed the proposed sign code amendment be changed accordingly and returned for first reading. Councilman Petta advised he was questioned at the Senior Citizen meeting what was being done regarding a Cardinal Street residence cited for junk vehicles in the front yard. Councilwoman Pfenni hausen reported the following: (1) A Southern a i ornia oint owers insurance Authority meeting attended by her and Councilman Evans was very informative; felt the City is fortunate to particpate in that type of insurance; however, can expect higher costs for the next several years. Recommended the City and citizens contact legislators; (2) Animal Control - Recommended the Sheriff's Department monitor the Park, citing two pit bulls allowed by owners to roam and do destruction; felt there is a need to control such dogs. City Manager Armstead advised a letter has been drafted for Council consideration regarding legislation pertaining to errors and omissions and the deep pocket theory. Would contact Animal Control relative to complaints they are not responding to calls on the weekend. Mayor Grant directed that staff investigate and provide Council with what services the Animal Control Contract should be providing. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson reported the following: (1) Questioned the matter of funds for Mod control, which was brought up at the Senior Citizens February 8 meeting. Discussion on this matter was deferred until later, when a resolution transferring a portion of the private activity bond allocation of the City of Grand Terrace would be Page 4 - 2/14/85 considered; (2) Noted legislation is pending to permit cross -county annexation. Mayor Grant regretted he was unable to attend the February Senior Citizen meeting due to illness. PALM AVENUE REALIGNMENT CONTRACT AWARD - (GTC 85-01) City Engineer Kicak advised plans were prepared and requests for bids circulated for the Palm Avenue Realignment Project, as directed by Council. Four bids were received; the low bidder withdrew his bid of $14,446 because he could not obtain bonding. DeArmond Construction was the second lowest bidder at $18,136. The Engineer's Construction Estimate was $17,500 including $4,500 for staking and inspection. Recommended including the Alternate "A" Addendum to include paving to trim the gutter lip along the Civic Center, for which DeArmond Construction submitted a proposal of $360.00. Advised Architect Larry Wolff had requested this be done on a Change Order at a cost of $594.50. Recommended awarding the Project to DeArmond Construction for the amount of $18,136, to negotiate the Alternate "A" Addendum for $360, and authorize transfering $5,500 from from Gas Tax Fund 16 to the Palm Avenue Realignment Project to cover the total approximate cost of $239000. CC-85-32 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Mayor Grant, to: (1) Authorize the transfer of $5,500.00 from Gas Tax Fund 16 to the Palm Avenue Realignment Project; and (2) Award the Palm Avenue Realignment Construction Contract in the amount of $18,136.00 and Alternate "A" Addendum in the amount of $360 to DeArmond Construction. Councilwoman Pfennighausen stated she would support Alternate "A" for the asphalt along the Civic Center frontage; opposed the Realignment Project, feeling it is too expensive and unnecessary; noted the Sheriff's Department had stated the project would not accomplish what was intended. It was indicated that the Contractor would not do the Civic Center portion at $360 without the total contract. Responding to Councilman Evans' questions, City Engineer Kicak advised five alternatives had previously been submitted for Council consideration; this Project, Alternative "E", was recommended by staff and the Traffic Safety Engineer; clarified that a total of approximately $23,000 would be expended on the proposed realignment - $4,500 was allocated for staking and inspection, and the City has already incurred some of that cost pursuant to Council direction; the additional $5,500 is needed for the construction bid, which was originally estimated at $13,000. Councilman Evans, for the record, voiced opposition, feeling the cost is too expensive for a City this size; felt it is not a safety factor and has no useful purpose; cited Minutes indicating the Sheriff's Department and the staff had stated the present situation is not a problem. Questioned and was advised there has been no traffic accidents since Council requested installation of safety precautions Page 5 - 2/14/85 in March, 1984. Felt personally its intent is only to increase property values. City Engineer Kicak stated his staff and the Sheriff's Department initially felt the curve could possibly be too sharp; however, based on the accident reports, felt, if conditions remain the same, the actual traffic conditions at that intersection would not be materially altered. Council later reconsidered the matter and directed staff to proceed with Alternate "E" based on the Traffic Safety Engineer's recommendation, feeling there may be some benefit to the realignment since the curve would be easier to negotiate. Councilman Petta questioned why there are raised markers in the middle of the road if the intersection is safe; personally experiences difficulty in negotiating safely; felt the intersection will have increased traffic. In view of the Traffic Safety Engineer's recommendations, questioned justifiction for not realigning in event there is another accident. Mayor Grant felt the accident at the intersection was a result of excessive speed; however, felt, since the curve is deceptive, the Project is worth the cost. Motion No. CC-84-32 carried, 3-2, with Councilmembers Pfennighausen and Evans voting NOE. (See Page 9 for further discussion on this matter). Recess was called at 7:14 p.m. and reconvened at 7:33 with all members present. ORDINANCE NO. 86 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY.COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE AMENDMENTS, IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE OF APRIL 26, 1984, FROM R-R TO R-3, AREA 11 (ZC 85-01) (Second Reading) City Attorney Hopkins read the title of the Ordinance. Planning Director Kicak outlined Area 11, which is presently zoned R-R; the General Plan designation is Medium Density Residential, which would correspond to R-3 zoning. Through a review process by an Architectural Review Committee, up to a maximum of nine units per acre would be permitted. The General Plan allows up to a maximum of 20 units per acre; however, a Specific Plan is required by the General Plan for any development of 16 units or more per acre and a Conditional Use Permit for any development over nine units per acre. Staff recommends Council conduct a Public Hearing, approve first reading of the proposed Ordinance waiving full reading, and adopt the Ordinance by title only. Mayor Grant opened Public Hearing. Supporting Testimony Barney Karger, 11668 Bernardo Way, stated the General Plan designates Area 11 as R-3 and the adjacent properties are already zoned R-3, A-P, Page 6 - 2/14/85 C-1 and C-2; thus felt Area 11 has to be R-3. Stated the property owners could sue for specific performance, which could cost the City approximately $100,000 in legal costs. Citing "Regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission," stated when City Council members specify no low income housing, they are in direct violation by giving the wrong connotations to that Commission. Suggested Council question the City Attorney regarding legal rights. Al Trevino, 1015 Madison Place, Laguna Beach, gave a slide presentation illustrating their development during the past two decades and showing how they have approached complex land use problems. Opposing Testimony Sanford Collins, 22697 Brentwood, concurred Council should seek its legal counsel; noted it has as much legal right to revert the General Plan back to R-1 in that Area as to rezone it R-3, which is what the Planning Commission would have done if returned. Stated the reason for this whole process is because the Planning Commission, through the zoning ordinance, allowed a Conditional Use Permit for 12 units per acre in that Area; felt the General Plan Update was hurried and it would be in the best interest of the City to eventually change it as far as maximum usage per acre. Felt the issue this evening is not R-3 zoning - noted the Planning Commission recommended this Area as R-3 because of the need for additional multi -family home areas. The problem here is density and traffic congestion - most Specific Plans so far do not adequately address the Circulation Element; felt the City will eventually be required to install traffic signals at all the intersections. Felt Council should specify to the audience what it feels the density should be because the first project that comes before the Planning Commission is going to be returned to Council on a density appeal. Bud Howell, 11821 Mt. Vernon, felt there was a lack of public announcement regarding the Public Hearing, resulting in a small turnout. Stated the traffic problems have not been examined to determine the impact in this area. Stated density, traffic, and crime are concerns of most residents in that area. Felt noise will also be an environmental problem. Cleophos Mims, 11743 Mt. Vernon, questioned the developer relative tc density and traffic problems. Mr. Trevino stated it would be dealt with in the Specific Plan process; stated there are less trips per unit with apartments than single-family units; noted the City's Traffic Study Report states Mt. Vernon is capable of handling the City's traffic upon build -out, which includes hillside development. Has recommended a signal at the intersection of Canal and Mt. Vernon, and speed should be controlled on Mt. Vernon. Dr. Jack Booker, 11785 Mt. Vernon, felt density is the issue; voiced concern for increased social and traffic problems. Has never been opposed to R-3 connotation for the area with a maximum of 12 units per acre. Felt if developed as proposed, Mt. Vernon must be widened to its maximum capacity from Barton Road to Canal Street and Grand Page 7 - 2/14/85 Terrace Road. Requested consideration of freeway onramps at the area of the Newport overpass. Charly Martin, 11939 Pascal, opposed the zone change. Norman DeLaby 11966 Arliss Drive, felt there had not been proper notification of the Public Hearing. Felt the development would overcrowd schools and streets; concerned for increased crime. Rebuttal to Opposing Testimony Barney Karger, 11668 Bernardo Way, disagreed the General Plan Update was hurried; stated it took approximately two years. Noted the State stipulated the least maximum density of 26 units for this area - the City succeeded in lowering it to 20. Stated the number of units per acre will be determined by the Planning Commission. Felt the realistic number of units, if 20 per acre, would be around 800 units, which would bring revenue. Rebuttal to Suaaortina Testimon Sanford Collins, 22697 Brentwood, stated the County Planning Department advised him there has never been a lawsuit in the State regarding time in which to rezone for compliance with the General Plan. Advised the Planning Commission presently has a Specific Plan before it for 187 units, which indicates 800 additional entries and exits onto Barton Road and Mt. Vernon per day, and the developer indicates that as no problem. Bud Howell, 11821 Mt. Vernon, agreed with widening Mt. Vernon to four lanes; however, questioned how two lanes of traffic stopped at a proposed signal at Grand Terrace Road and Mt. Vernon could travel down the hill. Charly Martin, 11939 Pascal, advised he was present when Council previously voted against this zone change; felt with fewer people in attendance Council will approve it. Norman DeLaby, 11966 Arliss Drive, indicated concurrence. Mayor Grant closed Public Hearing. Councilman Evans stated he is fully aware of the situation; has concerns for traffic problems and school impaction; however, concurs with Mr. Karger that this is not the proper forum to address those problems. Will be monitoring the matter closely. Felt, from a legal basis, Council has to grant rezoning. Councilwoman Pfennighausen stated the issue under consideration is zoning; felt there has been repeated discussion relative to land use, rather than zoning. The questions cannot be answered until there is a specific project. As long as points have been made, would address those problems: Colton Joint Unified School District has not been able to provide information about present or anticipated school impaction - felt the builder has to address that problem; several traffic studies have been conducted on Mt. Vernon since she has been on the Council plus an extensive Circulation Element study for the General Plan; felt Page 8 - 2/14/85 the crime problems come from within the City - recommended dealing with the reason. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson stated people have expressed opposition to high density; noted the proposed zone change was defeated prior to the election; concerned it would be approved now. Felt the major -problem is traffic; concurs crime is here, but concerned it would increase. Stated the School District expressed concern for school impaction that could result from the proposed 176 Chapparal Pine units - concerned for further impaction resulting from a potential 1,000 additional units; concerned about exceeding the City's sewer capacity. Felt the entire City is affected and should have received notices of the Hearing. Stated Council is not compelled to approve this zone change - but can do what it sees fit; the General Plan can be amended. Councilman Petta requested the City's legal position be restated. City Attorney Hopkins advised that the City is legally required to bring its zoning and General Plan into compliance. Law provides a means whereby property owners may institute actions to force such consistency, which could cost the City legal fees. The City can amend its General Plan; however, the property owners could implement action prior to that. Councilman Petta stated he also has concerns about high density in that area; he, too, liked the way Grand Terrace used to be; however, also likes some of the developments and improvements. Noted objection is for high density that could result, not the R-3 zoning. Stated faith must be placed in the Planning Commission and then in this Council - would not support anything that does not have good planning and would be concerned about 1,000 units in that Area. Felt R-3 zoning is proper and the issue at hand is to stay legal. Mayor Grant felt it difficult to separate the zoning issue from the problem of density; expressed concern for traffic and crime. Felt comfortable with R-3 zoning, since it would not take control of density away from the City, feeling this Council will not allow high density. Felt, legally, the City has little choice. Was not sure how he would vote at that time. City Attorney Hopkins advised there was an error of omission on the notices sent to residents by not stating the time of the Hearing; the notice was not a legal requirement; therefore, would have no affect on the Hearing. CC-85-33 Motion by Councilman Evans, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to approve the second reading of the Ordinance by title only, waiving full reading. CC-85-34 Motion by Councilman Evans, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, to adopt Ordinance No. 86 by title only, carried 3-2, with Mayor Grant and Mayor Pro Tem Matteson voting NOE. PALM AVENUE REALIGNMENT CONTRACT AWARD (GTC 85-01) (Continued Discussion from Page Larry Halstead, 22675 Barton Road, advised he was not present earlier that evening when this item was discussed. Noted he has previously Page 9 - 2/14/85 voiced concern for traffic safety at that intersection; has studied the plans and sees no justification for the realignment - felt it will increase speed of traffic on Palm approaching the intersection, since traffic would not have to slow down for the natural curve that exists. Felt visibility is good both directions on Barton Road from Palm; felt the distance between signals at Mt. Vernon and Preston creates excessive speed making it difficult to enter. Felt installation of the indicators has resolved problems; questioned spending that amount of money; requested Council reconsider action taken earlier that evening. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson requested the City Engineer to clarify the corrections, the benefits, and what instigated the project. Mr. Kicak stated Palm Avenue would be widened to provide more turning room and a smoother curve for approximately 180 feet from the intersection easterly toward Observation Drive; would have to refer to the benefits given in the Traffic Safety Engineers's Report; advised that Council directed investigation of the matter following two accidents occurring in a short period of time. Councilwoman Pfennighausen felt the supporting vote was based on the Traffic Safety Engineer's Report; questioned whether he recognized this intersection as a problem prior to being requested to look at it; recommended rescinding action taken earlier until the Community Services Director can provide information on that Report. Mr. Kicak stated Community Services Director Anstine advised the Traffic Safety Engineer, who was contracted at that time for the Traffic Control Device Inventory Project, of the proposals to improve the intersection; Mr. Anstine requested he look at the intersection and give his advice on the five proposals; Mr. Kicak noted Council rejected all five proposals the first time presented, and a Councilmember later requested it be returned for consideration. Councilman Evans, referencing Minutes of March 8, 1984, stated an accident report was apparently submitted to Council by Mr. Halstead and brought the matter to a head; could not find in the Minutes any statements that the correction would increase the safety. Felt the accidents resulted from driver error; felt the matter should be tabled and the previous action be rescinded. Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilman Evans, to rescind action taken relative to the Palm Avenue Realignment Contract Award. Following Councilman Petta's request, City Engineer Kicak outlined to Council the proposed realignment. Councilman Petta felt widening the Palm entrance would alleviate a blind spot caused by the planter. Councilman Evans voiced disagreement. The Motion failed 2-3, with NOE votes by Mayor Grant, Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, and Councilman Petta. Page 10 - 2/14/85 Ll FIRE PROTECTION - VIVIENDA/BURNS BRIDGE REPLACEMENT - VIVIENDA AVENUE/WEST BARTON ROAD/SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD City Engineer Kicak stated Council directed staff to investigate the possibility of increasing fire protection in the northwest portion of the City. He met with Riverside Highland Water Company regarding improvements and the cost of their participation to provide this protection. They will be installing an eight -inch line in conjunction with the Vivienda Bridge construction, and have agreed to extend that line to tie into the existing 30 inch line at the intersection of Vivienda and Grand Terrace Road and to extend it westerly to tie into the existing and/or proposed water system that would be constructed by the City. Noted a map provided which showed the proposed new line and four fire hydrants, which should provide adequate protection in the area. Any potential new development would require construction of an eight -inch line to be tied into the four -inch line at Walnut and tying into the intersection of Burns and Vivienda. The flow is estimated to exceed the requirement for residential type fires. Mr. Kicak advised $52,000 is estimated as the City's portion of the cost. Gave the following alternatives for funding: (1) Establishment of an assessment district, which would cost each of the estimated 26 parcels in that area approximately $2,000. Those residents now getting water from a two-inch line would benefit. (2) Request County Supervisor Riordan to utilize some of her discretionary funding; (3) Use the City's HCD funding estimated at approximately $30,000 a year for the next three years. HCD indicated willingness to fund a single project early in a three-year period to utilize all of the funds. Mr. Kicak stated Council could consider potential use of HCD funding if it decides to replace the bridge west of Barton Road over Southern Pacific Railroad. Requested direction. Responding to questions, Mr. Kicak felt the bridge was placed on a replacement program list prior to incorporation - will require some protection but problems are not significant enough for immediate replacement. Since the Barton Road Bridge Replacement is a joint project with the City of Colton and the project is not in Colton's targeted area for HCD funding, it must be determined whether Colton can utililize HCD funding. Concurred it would be more practical to replace with a four -lane bridge; however, that would require right-of-way acquisition involving an environmental impact report, and the deadline would not be met; suggested proceeding with two lane replacement and expand if there is enough funding. Councilwoman Pfennighausen felt Supervisor Riordan may not be willing to fund the entire amount for the fire protection improvement; therefore, suggested a three-way split, requesting her to fund one-third, with the City and the residents funding the rest. Felt this project is needed. Councilman Evans and Councilman Petta indicated concurrence. It was felt removal of the curve at Stater Bros. Warehouse was related to these projects and utilization of HCD funds should be explored in addition to coordinating the fire protection project with citizens. Page 11 - 2/14/85 citizens. Support was indicated for long-range planning for a four -lane bridge replacement. CC-85-36 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Councilman Evans, to direct staff to prepare a plan for Council consideration for a three-way split of the $52,000 Fire Protection Project outlined in the Staff Report dated February 5, 1985, Subject: Fire Protection in the Vicinity of Vivienda Avenue, Burns, Maple and Walnut Avenue; one-third to be paid for by the residents, one-third by the City, and one-third by the Third District Supervisor's discretionary funds. Councilman Petta suggested also preparing an alternative plan; Mr. Kicak felt all possibilities had been explored; suggested a Council person approach Supervisor Riordan if Council does request her funding. Councilwoman Pfennighausen expressed willingness. Motion No. CC-85-36 carried, ALL AYES. BARTON ROAD RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT - FAU FUNDING EXHCHANGE City Engineer Kicak stated the Federal Highway Administration and Caltrans are concerned that large amounts of unobligated FAU Funds could reduce or eliminate the Federal -Aid Program; Caltrans encourages agencies to sell or exchange its FAU dollars with other agencies for general funds, gas tax dollars, etc., which would allow agencies without projects meeting Federal requirements to utilize FAU funding on other projects. Has determined funding in addition to FAU funds will be required for finalization of the Barton Road Reconstruction Project. The City of Rialto is considering selling the City $100,000.00 of its FAU funds in exchange for $85,000.00 of Gas Tax Monies. Requested (1) Authorization to negotiate with the City of Rialto; if an agreement is reached, (2) Authorize the City Manager to execute an Exchange of FAU Dollars Agreement; and (3) Authorization for the exchange of $85,000.00 from Gas Tax funding and transfer the Rialto FAU Dollars in the amount of $100,000.00 into the City's FAU Budget Account No. 20-4930-255, increasing the balance to $450,000.00. Responding to questions, Mr. Kicak advised the $100,000.00 would be utilized totally for the Barton Road Reconstruction Project and clarified the improvements involved; advised there are no present plans for Barton Road improvements west of Mt. Vernon; noted Barney Karger had stated certain property owners on Barton Road had indicated willingness to put in improvements if the City does paving and relocates utility poles, for which there would be no cost to the City, one time only, if it is a public works project - this does not include cost to put utilities underground; noted the Rule 20A requires utility companies to put aside certain funds annually, which could be utilized for undergrounding utilities; however, felt those funds were not nearly sufficient at this time. Relative to source of funding for improvements to entice Barton Road economic development, Mr. Kicak advised it would require next year's funds if only restricted funding is utilized. Councilman Evans felt, with Councilwoman Pfennighasuen concurring, the Palm Avenue Realignment funds would have been better utilized for Barton Road improvements west of Mt. Vernon. Felt a coordinated Page 12 - 2/14/85 effort is needed to meet the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee's target date of December 1. City Manager Armstead recommended investigating use of Industrial Development Bonds. Mayor Pro Tem Matteson felt having the improvements does not determine acquiring development; felt it is going to take time. Councilwoman Pfennighausen felt, as an inducement for development, widening Barton Road to its maximum needs to be discussed; favored underground utilities; felt property owners, the City, and utility companies should be encouraged to put in improvements, not the developer. CC-85-37 Motion by Councilman Evans, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to authorize staff to initiate negotiations with the City of Rialto for the exchange of $85,000.00 of City of Grand Terrace Gas Tax Funds for the City of Rialto's $100,000.00 in FAU Funds CC-85-38 Motion by Councilman Evans, Second by Mayor Grant, ALL AYES, that if agreement is reached relative to Motion No. CC-85-37, (1) to authorize the City Manager to execute an Exchange of FAU Dollars Agreement with the City of Rialto; and (2) authorize the exchange of $85,000.00 from Gas Tax Funding and transfer the Rialto FAU Dollars in the amount of $100,000.00 into the City's FAU Budget Account No. 20-4030-255, increasing the balance to $450,000.00. RESOLUTION NO. 85-02 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF hGRAND TERRACE,A ORNIA, TRANSFERRING A PORTION OF THE PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND ALLOCATION OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE. City Manager Armstead advised the County of San Bernardino and various cities have been requested to participate in a Waste -to -Energy facility for the valley - such financing will require issuance of approximate $200-$250 Million of 1984 Private Activity Bonds. Staff recommends Council adopt the Resolution approving the loan of Grand Terrace's 1984 allocation of $502,000 for the purpose of benefitting the County's Waste -to -Energy Project. It was clarified the City cannot utilize this allocation; it is unlikely storm drains could be acquired out of these bond allocations. Mr. Armstead felt this action would build goodwill and, sometime in the future, the City may reacquirethese funds. CC-85-39 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Matteson, Second by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to Adopt Resolution No. 85-02. ORDINANCE NO. 87 - AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND T RRACE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 2.04.010 OF THE GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE DEALING WITH THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING PLACE. City Attorney Hopkins read the title of the Ordinance. Page 13 - 2/14/85 CC-85-40 Motion by Councilwoman Pfennighausen, Second by Mayor Grant, ALL AYES, to adopt Ordinance No. 87 by title only. ADJOURN - the Regular Meeting adjourned at 10:46 p.m. The next Regular Meeting will be held February 28, 1985, in the Grand Terrace Council Chambers, 22795 Barton Road. Respectfully submitted, Deputy City CIe7 APPROVED: Mayor Page 14 - 2/14/85 11