01/28/1982CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING -JANUARY 28, 1982
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 January 28, 1982, at 6:11 p.m.
PRESENT: Thomas A. Tillinghast, Mayor
Hugh J. Grant, Mayor Pro Tempore
Tony Petta, Councilman
Roy W. Nix, Councilman
Jim Rigley, Councilman
Seth Armstead, City Manager
Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney
Brian Esgate, Engineering Staff
Myrna Erway, City Clerk
ABSENT: Joe Kicak, City Engineer
The meeting was opened with invocation by Councilman Nix, followed by the Pledge
of Allegiance, led by Boy Scout Jim Griffin, in attendance to attain his merit
badge.
ITEMS DELETED FROM AGENDA
6A - Landscaping Master Plan.
ITEMS ADDED TO AGENDA
6A - Building Moratorium - Jerry Mathews, owner of U-Store.
Presentations - Proclamation - American Heart Month, February, 1982.
Proclamation - Emmett & Bertha Coonis Day,
January 31, 1982.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - (January 14, 1982
CC-82-17 Motion by Councilman Rigley, Second by Councilman Petta, to approve
the Minutes of January 14, 1982, as presented, carried 4-0, with
Councilman Grant abstaining.
CONSENT CALENDAR
CC-82-18 Motion by Councilman Grant, Second by Councilman Nix, ALL AYES, to
approve the following items on the Consent Calendar:
Page one -
1/28/82
A. Approval of Check Register No. 012882.
B. Approve release of subdivision bonds and accept maintenance on
Tract 9625 as follows: 0
Bond No. Amount
10041 Landscaping $39,333.80
101631 Street Improvements 20,000.00
10163A Street Improvments, Labor & Material 10,000.00
101952 On -site Water Maintenance 3,900.00
C. Approve Street Sweeping Contract, GTC #82-01, with Inland Power
Sweeping, and authorize execution by Mayor, to be effective
1/28/82 through 6/30/82.
PROCLAMATION - AMERICAN HEART MONTH - FEBRUARY. 1982
Mayor Tillinghast read and presented a Proclamation proclaiming the
month of February, 1982, as "American Heart Month" to Jan Allen,
Program Director for the San Bernardino Chapter of the American
Heart Association.
PROCLAMATION - EMMETT AND BERTHA COONIS DAY - JANUARY 31, 1982
Mayor Tillinghast read a Proclamation proclaiming January 31, 1982,
as "Emmett and Bertha Coonis Day" in honor of the celebration of
that couple's 75th Wedding Anniversary on that date.
COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS
PLANNING COMMISSION
Commissioner John McDowell reported that, during the presentation at
the joint meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency, the
Planning Commission, and the Economic Development Advisory Committee
on January 25, the City Manager of Duarte outlined the fact that the
Planning Commission, the City Council, and the citizens of Duarte
were in a partnership, and feels our City is also.
PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE
Chairman Dick Rollins reported the following: (1) Requested staff
to investigate acquisition of an easement through the necessary
property for establishment of a motocross site; (2) The Committee is
reviewing goals and priorities for FY 1982-83.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Chairman John McDowell stated that the Duarte City Manager, in his
presentation on January 25, outlined the funding of that City's
development. Stated that the City of Duarte had four usable square
miles, with a population of 17,000, and has been able to obtain
Page two -
1/28/82
$134,000,000 in bonds in a period of five years; urged Council to
strive for similar achievements.
ZONE CHANGE NO. 82-01
In staff presentation, Planning Director Virginia Farmer advised
Council the Planning Commission has recommended adoption of the Zone
Change and the Tentative Tract Map. The Development Plan is an
18-lot subdivision on Blue Mountain which is to be developed in two
phases, with eight lots to be developed in the first phase. The
purpose of the Zone Change is to place a PUD over the existing
zone. The lots on the steepest part of this subdivision.are sited
from quarry cuts. There is emergency access as well as private road
access; the roads will be private. The Subdivision Committee has
reviewed the Development Plan, and a focused EIR was conducted.
Mayor Tillinghast opened public hearing regarding Zone Change 82-01.
Supporting Testimony:
Dennis Stafford, Ludwig Engineering, San Bernardino, stated this
development is located south of the Honey Hill area; the pads are
being located to make the least amount of cut possible. A new
reservoir will be added. The proposal was reviewed by the P'lanning
Commission and staff, and received unanimous approval.
Terry MacRae, Post Office Box 252, Orinda, California, a Blue
Mountain property owner, stated he had comments relative to the Zone
Change and to the Tract, and stated his comments would probably be
more appropriate at the time the Tract Map is discussed. Would not
be sure whether for or against the Zone Change until the Tract Map
has been reviewed.
There being no opposing testimony, Mayor Tillinghast closed public
hearing regarding the Zone Change.
CC-82-19 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Mayor Tillinghast, ALL AYES,
to adopt the focused EIR, pursuant to the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act, and to approve the findings
for Zone Change No. 82-01 as follows: (A) That the approval of the
Zone Change will not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals,
comfort, or general welfare of the persons residing or working
within the neighborhood of the proposed amendment or within the
City; or (B) That the approval of the Zone Change will not be
injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or within
the City; (C) The proposed amendment will be consistent with the
latest adopted General Plan.
ORDINANCE NO. (First Reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ZONE CHANGE FROM A-1-5 AND R-1 TO PUD ON
LOCATION GENERALLY AT THE S/E CORNER OF HONEY HILL DRIVE AND PALM
` AVENUE, ZONE CHANGE NO. 82-01.
Page three -
1/28/82
CC-82-20
Motion by Councilman Grant, Second by Councilman Nix, to introduce,
by title only, the first reading of the Zone Change Ordinance.
Following reading of the title of the Ordinance by the City
Attorney, the Motion carried unanimously.
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 10969
Terry MacRae, a Blue Mountain property owner, stated his family had
owned the property on the top of Blue Mountain for 20 years, and has
always used the north end of the mountain for access when visiting
that property several times a year; his property is not conducive to
develop a housing tract; voiced concern regarding the Tract Map, and
possibly the Zone Change, regarding access to his property being
eliminated due to the planned development; requested consideration
be given to the fact that there is no deeded access in the form of a
grant deed. Access has been a privilege for 20 years, feels
prescriptive easement has been established and would like to make
certain that whenever the Tract Map is adopted, that consideration
be given to his need for access, since there is no other way to
reach that property. There is a possiblity a telecommunications
facility could be established on his property in the future which
would help improve communications throughout the entire Inland
Empire. If development on the north side of the mountain prevents
access for service, the value of his property would be worthless.
Requested the Council provide him access as a condition of approving
the Tract Map.
Council questioned the possibility of access from other areas of the
mountain and whether Mr. MacRae had attempted to negotiate entry
with the property owners, feeling that the City should not become
involved in providing access or negotiating with the property
owners.
City Attorney Hopkins stated if there is a prescriptive easement the
City cannot injure Mr. MacRae's rights. That prescriptive easement
would continue to exist. As to whether or not the City can require
access for adjoining properties, should the City Council determine
the property should not be landlocked, it could require some access
be provided as a necessary condition of approval; stated Southern
Pacific Communications Company has a site in that area and has
expressed a concern in this regard.
City Manager Armstead recommended that Council consider the rights
of ingress and egress for the City's benefit, due to Cable TV sites
now being placed on Blue Mountain.
Mike Stewart, 23376 Westwood Drive, the Developer, stated there
would be restricted entry to the development, with the gates locked,
since the roads will never be dedicated and will be owned and
maintained by the homeowners association; entry has been restricted
since he purchased his property three years ago. Feels there is no
prescriptive easement on the property for any owners beyond his
property, and he is not required to grant any easement. Not
Page four -
1/28/82
intentionally trying to landlock any owners. The utility
companies will not be restricted, but it will be closed to the
general public. Stated he has a temporary easement with Southern
California Edison for Teleprompter TV which will become a permanent
easement. The previous owner established an easement with Riverside
Cable TV Company which will expire in six years. It will then be up
to the homeowners association as to continuance of that easement.
Was approached by Southern Pacific Communications Company regarding
placement of a site for telephone transmission. They also contacted
Mr. Kidd and Mr. MacRae. Feels no further development will be
established beyond his property.
John Hills, Southern Pacific Communications Company, Burlingame,
California, stated his Company has a lease option with Mr. MacRae to
establish a telecommunications site. Stated he had contacted Mr.
MacRae, Mr. Kidd, and Mr. Stewart regarding access to the site. His
Company is a public utility providing long distance telephone
service to San Bernardino and Riverside, and the purpose is to
improve that service which will go towards Palm Springs and
Phoenix. Not getting the Blue Mountain site would cause a
hardship. Believes prescriptive right has been established to the
property. Mr. Kidd has a parcel, but there is no access.
Questioned if provision for access could be put in the homeowpers
plan, or as a provision in granting the right to Mr. Stewart to
develop the property. ,
Denis Kidd, on Pico Street, Grand Terrace, stated he owns the
TV is located. The
property on which Riverside Cable present.access
lease expires in six years and, if not renewed, the Company would,
have to move all its equipment and find another site.
Mayor Tillinghast asked Mr. MacRae if it would satisfy his
objections if Mr. Stewart would offer personal access to the
property owners. Mr. MacRae said that it would not be
satisfactory. The property is worthless without the ability to
locate something up there. Would like to establish limited access.
Stated his knowledge of cable TV companies is they would only need
occasional access. Stated his request is to require the homeowners
association or a condition of the Tract Map approval a provision to
ensure his property will not be landocked and that he will not be
denied the benefits of his property.
Mr. Stewart stated he feels there is considerable traffic involved
in granting access to the cable TV companies. Problems have been
encountered, with gates not being locked and vandalism. Stated he
feels there is no prescriptive easement and, therefore, feels legal
access does not exist. Therefore, if Mr. MacRae feels it does
exist, it becomes a legal question.
City Attorney Hopkins stated that it is not Council's responsibility
to decide what the existing rights are. Council should decide what
is felt to be in the best interest of the community regarding the
adjacent properties and, should Council feel that some accommodation
should be made for those adjacent properties, they should refer the
Page five -
1/28/82
matter back to the Planning Commission and direct that they resolve
this problem and establish the appropriate conditions prior to
referring the matter back to Council.
Planning Director Virginia Farmer stated, when this matter was heard
at Planning Commission, there was no testimony presented regarding
an access problem.
CC-82-21 Following further discussion, Motion by Councilman Nix, Second by
Mayor Tillinghast, to continue this matter for two weeks and direct
staff to intervene and bring back a recommendation for resolution of
the problem at the City Council meeting of February 11, 1982. This
will allow staff the opportunity to see that the affected property
owners meet and negotiate on this matter.
Following discussion and clarification that the intent of the Motion
is not to place a road block that would require either party to give
concessions to the other, but that it is being directed back to
staff to allow two weeks for investigation of possible alternatives
and solutions for presentation of a recommendation to Council at the
meeting of February 11, Motion No. CC-82-21 carried unanimously.
Recess was called at 7:30 p.m. and reconvened at 7:43 p.m., with all
members present.
BUILDING MORATORIUM
Mr. Jerry Mathews, 3624 Military Avenue, Los Angeles, stated he is
one of the co -owners of the U-Store Company, which has property
located on DeBerry consisting of less than five acres, a portion of
which is still undeveloped. Questioned if notification was given
regarding the extension of this moratorium; questioned the length of
the moratorium and requested that his name and address be
corrected. Stated his understanding is that the moratorium will
prevent him from building any further development on that property
and would also prevent a future owner from further developing that
site. Should a shopping center be located in that vicinity,
questioned the status of the present property owners relative to
determination of value and requirements to vacate the property. The
business is self -storage and would require notification to those
individuals presently using that property for storage. Questioned
if his Company would be restricted regarding building further
storage units on that property and if there would be a zone change
which would prevent further development. Stated the moratorium
could be a hardship.
City Attorney Hopkins stated that the Community Redevelopment Agency
waived the power of condemnation, and would therefore be required to
negotiate with the property owners for mutual agreement of price and
access. Regarding relocation, this would also be part of the
agreement to purchase, since there is no power of condemnation.
Stated that since no determinations have been made at this time,
recommended that Mr. Mathews meet with the Economic Development
Advisory Committee. 0
Page six -
1/28/82
Council recommended Mr. Mathews attend the next Economic Development
Advisory Committee meeting, which will be held Tuesday, February 2,
to learn more about the specific plans for that area and the
possibility of establishing a mutually satisfactory agreement.
ORDINANCE NO. (First Reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE,
CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING PORTIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 1, SECTIONS 61.011
THROUGH 61.0223 INCLUSIVE, AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO; RESCINDING
ORDINANCE NO.S. 27, 34, 46, AND 50; AND ADOPTING A ZONE CODE AND
OFFICIAL ZONE MAP.
CC-82-22 Following reading of the title by City Attorney Hopkins, Motion by
Councilman Petta, Second by Mayor Tillinghast, ALL AYES, to adopt
the negative declaration prepared for the Zone Ordinance pursuant to
the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, and
pursuant to the following findings:
1. Proposed Zone Ordinance is consistent with the
General Plan.
2. Proposed Zone Ordinance is being adopted for
clarification of the Zone Code and to meet the needs
of the City of Grand Terrace government.
3. All interested parties were given the opportunity to
be heard.
4. Proposed Zone Ordinance will not be detrimental to
the health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of
persons residing or working within the City, or
injurious to property or improvements in the City.
Planning Director Virginia Farmer identified the amendments to the
proposed Zone Ordinance, including the addition of a provision to
add conditional uses for neighborhood Commercial in the AP zone,
with a procedure for Planning Commission review, to control strip
zoning and allow flexibility.
CC-82-23 Motion by Councilman Grant, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES, to
introduce the first reading of the Zone Ordinance, by title only,
and to set second reading and public hearing for February 11, 1982.
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION OF APRIL 13, 1982 - PROPOSED MEASURES
Councilman Rigley recommended rescinding Resolution Nos. 82-04 and
82-05, which were adopted at the January 14 meeting. Felt time was
not allowed for sufficient consideration, since they were added
Agenda Items.
Relative to the election of a Mayor, Councilman Rigley feels that in
our City the position of Mayor is an honorary title. The Council
Members are highly qualified to elect a Mayor to preside at the
meetings, ceremonies and for public relations; the Mayor is first
and foremost a Council Member, with one equal vote. The present
method of selecting the Mayor has been in effect since incorporation
Page seven -
1/28/82
of the City, and has been successful. Stated the possibility of
having an elected Mayor with a two-year term could be a detriment,
feeling qualified individuals might choose to run for a Council term
of four years, rather than Mayor, and the Mayor would be campaigning
every year and a half.
Relative to Consolidation of the Elections - Councilman Rigley
stated Council previously voted to have the elections remain as they
are. Noted that the Council terms will be extended by seven months
in November of even years and by 19 months in November of odd years;
is opposed to asking the voters to extend his term; feels the
present system of having the General Municipal Elections in April is
satisfactory, and sees no reason to change it. Voiced concern that
the voters would not be aware they are extending the terms of the
Council Members in voting on this advisory measure.
Councilman Petta stated he had initially been in favor of electing a
Mayor; however, upon further consideration, concurs with Councilman
Rigley, since it is possible that qualified individuals would choose
not to run for Mayor, should it be every two years; campaigning is
expensive; might leave the position open to individuals who may want
that position for glorification.
Councilman Petta favored consolidating with the state-wide general
elections to allow greater voter participation, noting that the 1978
Election had an 80% turnout.
Councilmen Grant and Nix concurred with the concerns raised
regarding the possible two-year Mayoral term. 0
Mayor Tillinghast opened the meeting to public participation. Bob
Yeates, 12888 Fremontia, disagreed with placing either measure on
the ballot, since the community has not indicated dissatisfaction
with the present methods; feels presentation of these issues to the
people could be confusing, and is Council's responsiblity to make
decisions. The public will let Council know if they are unhappy
with its decisions.
Steve Kiacz, 11809 Holly Street, disagreed with putting the issue of
electing a Mayor on the ballot, feeling the general public is not
aware of who performs well as Mayor, and feels that Council is
better qualified to elect the Mayor.
Dick Rollins, 22700 DeBerry, stated he feels Council desires to
change the election dates to produce a larger voter turnout.
John Lotspeich stated he does not feel the general public is aware
of all the issues and the strengths and the weaknesses of the
individual members; feels Council should select the Mayor, who must
be a leader, a parliamentarian, and must do considerable homework.
Feels, if the election of Mayor were left to the people, it would be
a popularity contest.
Page eight -
1/28/82
CC-82-24 Motion by Councilman
to rescind Resolution
a Mayor on the ballot
13, 1982.
Rigley, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES,
No. 82-05 regarding placing a measure to elect
for the General Municipal Election of April
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION, APRIL 13, 1982 - CONSOLIDATION MEASURE
AMENDMENT
Council discussed amending the measure as stated in Resolution No.
82-04 relating to the consolidation of elections to clearly state on
the ballot that consolidating with the November election of
even -numbered years would extend the terms of office by seven
months. Consolidation of the election in November of odd -numbered
years would extend the terms of office by nineteen months and
includes the Colton Joint Unified School District election.
Mayor Tillinghast opened the meeting to public participation - Bob
Yeates, 12888 Fremontia, voiced concern that consolidation of the
elections with San Bernardino County would result in the City losing
control of the cost to run an election, since the County would be
billing the City for its share of the election cost. Also
recommended that Council consider not having the consolidation of
the elections take effect for three elections, so the present
Council Members' terms of office would not be affected. Mayor
Tillinghast stated he does not feel there will be a significant
change in the election costs if the elections are consolidated.
Stated Assembly Bill 1743 (Ryan) is presently being considered, and
passage would ensure that the County could not charge more than the
actual related costs to the service provided.
City Attorney Hopkins summarized the amendments to the measure
regarding consolidation of elections and to the impartial analysis
as follows:
Measure A (2) will include the statement that the Uniform District
Election currently includes the Colton Joint Unified School District
Election, and that the effect of this would be to extend the terms
of office of the elected officers for a period of nineteen months.
Measure A (3) will reflect that the terms of office of the elected
officers will be extended for a period of seven months. The
impartial analysis which accompanies Measure "A" will also clearly
state that the terms of office will be lengthened, and will also
specify that it would extend the terms of office of three current
Council Members and of the two Council Members who will be elected
at this election on another ballot measure. Council concurred with
the amendments to the Measure and to the Impartial Analysis.
TEMPORARY CITY COUNCIL FACILITY
Council discussed the merits of considering this item prior to
receiving a financial analysis from staff and the fact that a new
proposal has been submitted by the owners of the Travelers Building.
Page nine -
1/ 28/82
CC-82-25 Motion by Councilman Nix, Second by Mayor Tillinghast, ALL
postpone consideration of a temporary City Council facility
the Council meeting of February 25, 1982, to allow time for
preparation of the financial layout and cash flow analysis
RESOLUTION NO. 82-07
CC-82-26
Page ten -
1/28/82
AYES, to
until
by staff.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MAP SHOWING THE MASTER PLAN OF BIKEWAYS FOR
THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE.
Brian Esgate, Engineering Staff, stated that the purpose of adoption
of this Resolution is to continue processing of the grant
application through the State.
Motion by Mayor Tillinghast, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES,
to approve Resolution No. 82-07, with the understanding that the
Master Plan of Bikeways can be amended at a later date.
PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT LOCATION
Mayor Tillinghast stated that certain problems had been presented in
the newspaper regarding the placement of the playground equipment at
the park site, and opened the meeting to public participation.
Gale Drews, 22740 DeBerry, presented a signed petition to Council,
stating six of the eight homeowners adjacent to the park site had
signed the petition in opposition to the location of the playground
equipment. Stated he has been a resident for 18 years, has always
been opposed to the park site, and feels that prime property should
have been used for a project which would gain tax dollars, rather
than tax expenditures. Disagreed with the equipment being placed
110 feet from his property, stating the noise is disruptive, feels
his property value has been lowered, and will prohibit the sale to
individuals with no children or grown children. Disagreed with
placement of the equipment in that location for security purposes,
feeling security is no problem in this City. Requested the
equipment be relocated to the south end near the parking lot.
Judy Rinderhagen, Crime Prevention Committee Chairperson, stated
that meetings were held with the City Manager and the Parks &
Recreation Committee regarding the placement of the playground
equipment prior to its establishment. This matter was studied by
Sgt. Curry, San Bernardino Crime Prevention Unit, and, for safety
purposes, the playground equipment is located in the proper place.
The same consideration is also being given to the placement of the
restrooms for the children's safety.
Dick Rollins, Parks & Recreation Committee Chairman, stated the park
site consists of less than 13,000 feet. Stated the Parks &
Recreation Committee, the Crime Prevention Committee, the
Engineering Department, the Sheriff's Department, and the Community
Services Director worked together to plan what he feels is a good
layout. During the Parks & Recreation Committee meetings, the site
layout was discussed and, according to the Sheriff's Department and
information derived from the Vandalism and Crime Prevention
1 Workshop, one of the most important things that was stated regarding
school or park areas was that children's playground equipment should
not be concealed or be located near restroom facilities. This was
the first consideration of the Crime Prevention Committee. Feels
the primary responsibility is to the citizens and the children of
the community overall. Stated he contacted Mr. Drews and advised
him that children's playground equipment, a picnic facility, and
barbeques were going to be placed on the park site, and Mr. Drews
voiced objection to the picnic area being near his home.
Recommended considering placement of a fence for safety and planting
trees to buffer noise; however, the trees could block the view of
the site. The Lions Club has tentatively offered to pay for the
fencing at a later date. Disagreed with relocating the playground
equipment, stating it would be totally against everything which has
been planned.
John Lotspeich, a member of the Parks & Recreation Committee, voiced
objection to this matter being brought before the City Council
rather than the Parks & Recreation Committee. Stated Committee
Agendas are posted twice monthly as well as numerous newpaper
articles publicizing action being taken at the meetings. Feels the
crime element must be given consideration. Recommended this matter
be referred to the Parks & Recreation Committee for further
consideration.
Barbara Pfennighausen, 12364 Pascal, stated one of her concerns is
that, as we get older, we forget about the noise childrn make and,
due to the fact that the Drews have a son who was raised at the same
time as her son was raised here in the Terrace, both of those boys
rode motorcycles, and is certain that the noise was disturbing.
Stated she visited the park site, the playground was full of kids,
and it was happy noise - the kind of noise she would like to hear in
Grand Terrace.
Doug Erway,
22629 Desoto, stated he uses the park frequently, is
pleased with
the appearance of the equipment because it looks like
it fits and
is functional. Agreed with the location of the
equipment for
purposes of park security. Stated that those
individuals
which had gone to Scottsdale would remember that park
security was
a big item in that City. Placement of that equipment
and the investment
we have put in it should be protected. Feels
that having
this equipment close to the street where the law
enforcement
officers can get to it quickly if called was a wise
choice. Our
greatest asset is young people, and feels it does not
hurt to have
our law enforcement looking in, but more important that
we have some
adult eyes and ears listening to what is going on and,
if the gentle
noises suddenly change, wants people to hear those
things. Feels
it is an asset to the community and urged the Council
to keep the
present location of the equipment.
Page eleven -
1/28/82
John McDowell, 22690 Cardinal, stated he has always objected to the
location of the park site, and voiced objections to horses and
motorcycles in that area recently. Feels the homes in the vicinity
of the park site will have lower property values. Feels the park
site is too small, and objected to this area not being developed
with homes which would have provided more tax funds. Stated the
park site has cost over $340,000 and is not yet complete.
Complained of the drainage. Recommended considering purchase of a
ten -acre parcel adjacent to Inland Lumber Company for a park.
Judy Rinderhagen, 12738 Wilmac, stated as a parent she has lived
here 13 years. There have always been kids on mtorcycles, kids
making noise, and this will continue, since this is a
family -oriented community. Feels the park is beautiful and is
pleased that she and other families now do not have to take their
children to other cities to play. Stated the motorcycles have no
relevance to the placement of the playground equipment.
Wilma Drews, 22740 DeBerry, stated the noise from the playground
makes it impossible to entertain in the evenings, and feels will not
be able to open the doors this summer due to the noise.
Randy Anstine, Community services Director, stated that Len Kramer,
one of the residents on DeBerry, was aware of the placement of the
playgound equipment prior to establishment and no objections were
indicated at that time. Stated measurements were taken, and that
the Drews' residence is located well over 200 feet from the
playground equipment. Tried to contact the Environmental Health
Department of San Bernardino County and was unsuccessful. Contacted
a Bioengineering Technician at Norton Air Force Base, an expert who
deals with noise readings as they affect the community around Norton
Air Force Base, and questioned him as to the noise factor should 60
children be concentrated on that equipment at one time for one hour
in a radius of 164 feet. This individual stated he felt that it
would generate 60 decibels for that hour, and would therefore
require individuals to be 20 feet apart before their conversation
would be disrupted; cars traveling on the street would far exceed
the noise of 60 decibels.
Councilman Nix stated that, as a Member of Council who was involved
in the location of the park site, recalls Mr. McDowell's position
and objections. Although the park site is only 5.3 acres, the City
really now has 16 acres as a joint site to be developed and
utilized. Feels the joint operating agreement with Colton Joint
Unified School District is moving beautifully, and utilization of
the school sites as community centers is good, common sense.
Disagreed with purchasing additional park land.
Relative to the noise at the park site, Councilman Nix stated the
bulk of the park site, the school playground area, has always been
there, has only been extended up the street a few hundred feet, and
therefore feels there is less impact there than most locations.
Page twelve -
1/28/82
Stated he was at the location on Saturday, felt it was a very
pleasant sound, and due to the fact that we have usable equipment,
we are being criticized. There will be objections regardless of
what you do when you make change. Feels all concerns were taken
into consideration. Recommended referring the matter back to the
Parks & Recreation Committee for consideration of what can be done
to best interface with all problems including noise. Disagrees with
moving the equipment, feeling it is not in the best interest of the
value of the facility, and would not be good use of the taxpayers'
money.
Councilman Rigley stated that Mr. Drews has requested the playground
equipment be relocated 50 feet away, and questioned why this issue
had not been addressed. Questioned why it was placed so close to
the street and why it couldn't be moved 50 feet.
Mayor Tillinghast recommended listing the pros and cons in a format
to be considered prior to further Council consideration.
Councilman Grant questioned how much the sound would be decreased by
moving the equipment 50 feet, stating our concern is for the
security of the children playing on the facility, and this was one
of the primary reasons for situating the equipment as close to the
street as it has been placed.
Brian Esgate, Engineering Staff, stated that, as part of the
landscaping plan, trees have been planted, and feels in two to three
years they will intercept much of the sound.
Judy Rinderhagen recommended arranging a meeting with the Crime
Prevention Committee, the Parks & Recreation Committee, staff, and
the citizens to discuss this matter prior to having it brought back
to Council.
Mayor Tillinghast directed staff, with concurrence of Council, to
organize a meeting involving the Parks & Recreation Committee, the
Crime Prevention Committee, the staff, and the citizens to discuss
this matter.
Recess was called at 9:57 p.m. and reconvened at 10:06 p.m., with
all members present.
CITY MANAGER REPORT
City Manager Armstead reported the following: (1) A proposal was
received from Mr. Keeney regarding purchase of the Travelers
Building on this date. (2) Southern California Edison has submitted
an application to the PUC requesting electricity rate increases.
(3) AB 1743 (Ryan) will be heard in Sacramento on February 3;
understands that Senator Ayala favors this Bill, and questioned if
Council wished staff to testify before the Local Senate Government
Committee regarding this matter.
Page thirteen -
1/ 28/ 82
CC-82-27 Motion by Councilman Rigley, Second by Councilman Petta, ALL AYES,
to authorize a staff member to go to Sacramento on February 3 to
testify before the Local Senate Government Committee supporting
AB 1743 (Ryan).
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilman Nix voiced concern over the drainage at the park site.
Feels something is needed on the lower side of the property, prefers
a concrete channel, and wants the matter resolved. Wants to ensure
there will be no overflow onto the school property.
Brian Esgate, Engineering Staff, stated the water overflowed onto
the school grounds because the outlet in the catch basin was clogged
with debris, and was not the fault of the drain. The catch basin
was receiving all water coming down the ditch. The contractor will
build up the bank and fill in the erosion. Mr. Zampese has offered
to do the final grading on the ditch. The proposed maintenance
contract will include a monthly cleanup of the problem area near
Mr. McDowell's property. It would cost approximately Twenty
Thousand Dollars to install a pipeline of sufficient size to carry
the entire runoff. Feels the present line is sufficient.
Councilman Petta stated he had previously questioned the City
Engineer relative to the best method of resolving the drainage
problem. Stated it would require a concrete channel. Feels this
area is a constant problem, and appears that is the only permanent
solution. Recommended presenting Council with recommendation for an
approach which would adequately do the job. Feels the present
situation is very costly to maintain.
Councilman Petta stated that, due to the urgency on the part of the
developer needing the bond funds for another project, recommended
Council approve the release of bonds on Tract 11135, the Cape
Terrace Subdivision.
BOND RELEASE - TRACT 11135
CC-82-28 Motion by Councilman Petta, Second by Councilman Grant, ALL AYES, to
approve release of the following Bonds for Tract 11135:
Performance Labor & Material Bond No.
Water - $54,000 $27,000 OSM-557-454
Road - 11,000 5,500 OSM-557-455
Landscaping, Irriga-
tion System & Walls - 90,000 45,000 OSM-557-453
Sewer - 2,000 1,000 OSM-557-452
Release of the Bonds is contingent upon the City's acceptance of a
one-year Maintenance Bond on improvements in the amount of
$15,700.
Page fourteen -
1/ 28/ 82
Councilman Petta recommended that no items be added to the Agenda,
unless absolutely necessary.
Councilman Rigley reported the following: (1) Requested that the
Fire Station Site be listed on the Agenda for discussion at the
Council meeting of February 11, 1982. (2) Voiced objection to the
addresses in the telephone book not reflecting Grand Terrace. Tom
Coyle, Administrative Assistant, stated that the new Riverside
telephone directories coming out in June will reflect Riverside,
including the City of Grand Terrace. A new employee of the
Telephone Company, who resides in Grand Terrace, will be the City's
telephone representative, and will be furnishing cards next week to
be mailed to all Grand Terrace residents requesting that they call
the Telephone Company if they wish their addresses to be changed
from Colton to Grand Terrace. The deadline for contacting the
Telephone Company in order to be printed in the June issue of the
telephone book is April. (3) Councilman Rigley questioned the
status of changing the addresses to Grand Terrace on the billings
for Southern California Edison Company and Southern California Gas
Company.
Mayor Tillinghast reported the following: (1) Received a letter
from the LAFC stating there will be three vacancies on the
Commission, and the Mayor of each city is on the City Selection
Committee. Requested copies of the letter be provided to the
Council for consideration of candidates for these vacancies.
(2) Public Use Case No. 461-W - the matter regarding the pre-release
facility will be heard at the Riverside County Board of Supervisors
at 2:00 p.m. on February 2, and indicated both Councilman Grant and
he would attend. (3) Was appointed to serve as a member of the
League of California Cities Policy Committee on Administrative
Services and, prior to accepting the appointment, requested Council
concurrence, since it will entail approximately four trips to serve
on this Committee. Council concurred.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Dick Rollins, 22700 DeBerry, stated he contacted three people who
had signed the park site petition, invited them to a meeting; two
individuals who signed the petition do not live on DeBerry Street.
ADJOURN
The regular meeting of the City Council adjourned at 10:40 p.m. The
next regular meeting will be held February 11, 1982, at the Terrace
View Elementary School, 22731 Grand Terrace Road, Grand Terrace, at
6:00 p.m. following a Public Workshop Session at 4:00 p.m.
APPROVED:
Respectfully submitted,
City Clar,06k
Page fifteen -
1/28/82