01/06/2011 - SP FILE COPY
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
NOTICE AND CALL OF
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE AND
TO THE CITY CLERK:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Special Meeting of the City Council of the City
of Grand Terrace is hereby called to be held on Thursday, January 13, 2011 at 6:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers, located in the Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road,
Grand Terrace, California.
Said Special Meeting shall be for.
See Attached Agenda.
Dated: January 6, 2011
WALT STANCKIEWITZ, MAYOR
CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS January 13,2011
GRAND TERRACE CIVIC CENTER 6:00 p.m.
22795 Barton Road
THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMPLIES WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990. IF YOU
REQUIRE SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING,PLEASE CALL THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT
(909)824-6621 AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
IF YOU DESIRE TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL DURING THE MEETING,PLEASE COMPLETE A REQUEST TO
SPEAK FORM AVAILABLE AT THE ENTRANCE AND PRESENT IT TO THE CITY CLERK. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED
UPON BY THE MAYOR AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
ANY DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO A MAJORITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING ANY ITEM ON THIS AGENDA
WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AT CITY HALL LOCATED AT
22795 BARTON ROAD DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. IN ADDITION,SUCH DOCUMENTS WILL BE POSTED ON
THE CITY'S WEBSITE AT WWW.CITYOFGRANDTERRACE.ORG
* Call to Order-
* Invocation-
* Pledge of Allegiance-
* Roll Call-
STAFF COUNCIL
AGENDA ITEMS RECOMMENDATION ACTION
CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
1. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the opportunity for members of the public to comment on any
items not appearing on the regular agenda. Because of restrictions
contained in California Law,the City Council may not discuss or act
on any item not on the agenda,but may briefly respond to statements
made or ask a question for clarification. The Mayor may also
request a brief response from staff to questions raised during public
comment or may request a matter be agendized fora future meeting.
2. Public Workshop on the State Department of Parks and Discuss
Recreation Grant for a New Park
ADJOURN
THE NEXT CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE HELD ON
TUESDAY,JANUARY 25,2011 AT 6:00 P.M.
AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS MUST BE SUBMITTED IN
WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE NO LATER THAN 14
CALENDAR DAYS PRECEDING THE MEETING.
ihLIF01lYlA
WORKSHOP AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 13, 2011 Council Item ( X ) CRA Item ( )
TITLE: State Department of Parks and Recreation Grant for a New Park
PREPARED BY: Joyce Powers, Community and Economic Development Director
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council discuss the proposed park with
the community and provide direction to staff.
BACKGROUND:
On February 23, 2010, the City Council authorized staff to apply for a State Park Grant to
develop a new park in the neighborhood west of I-215 and north of Barton Road, which qualified
as an underserved community. At that time, the Council approved Resolution 2010-04, in
support of the grant application. The Resolution authorized the City Manager to conduct all
negotiations, sign and submit all documents, including, but not limited to applications,
agreements, amendments, and payment requests necessary for the completion of the grant scope.
The staff report and Resolution are attached(Attachment 1).
In May, 2010, staff was requested to provide additional application information, and the final
application, dated June 9, 2010, is also attached (Attachment 2). In November 2010, the State
notified the City that the application was selected for funding in the amount of$2,130,636. The
City's application was selected based on a rating system established by the State, which is
described in the February 23, 2010 staff report. Due to the detailed instructions provided in the
State's guide book, City staff was able to directly maximize the points needed for a high rating.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has notified the residents in the area surrounding the proposed park site of the workshop
and asked that they provide their comments to assist staff and the Council in determining the
next steps. The conceptual park plan, which is Attachment 3 and also part of the application
package, was prepared based on comments received during eight community meetings. Before
proceeding with implementation, staff is requesting additional comments from the community
and that the Council provide further direction.
Based on the Council's direction, potential next steps would include: l) return the signed grant
-agreement to the State; '_) have the property ;appraised; and. 3) i"ue a Request for Proposals to
design the project for public bidding.
COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM NO.
1
Staff is investigating methods to reduce maintenance costs and will provide greater detail during
the workshop. Only a very minimal turf area was included in the conceptual plan because the
project criteria required sustainable materials and techniques. This can be revised to only require
drip irrigation for low-water plants and ground-cover, if desired. In addition, staff recommends
eliminating the restrooms to reduce maintenance costs, including graffiti removal. Block wall
fencing was not included due to the potential for graffiti vandalism.
To open and close the park and empty the trash cans, annual costs would be approximately
$9,000, unless the Council determines to not lock the park site. Staff has estimated the cost of
water at approximately $1,200 per year by comparing the size of the irrigated area at the Gwenn
Karger Pocket Park and its water cost to the proposed park. Karger Park was used because it is
irrigated by a drip system only. Staff has also discussed methods to minimize water usage with
Riverside Highland Water and would continue to incorporate their suggestions throughout the
design phase and after completion.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with the workshop discussion. Staff time and any
subsequent costs can be charged to the grant up to the completion date. The grant would fund all
property acquisition, project design, construction and equipment, and no local match is required.
Subsequent maintenance of the park would be a City expense and is estimated at approximately
$10,200 per year as described above, plus staff time for other necessary maintenance, such as
trimming plants and repairing any damage. The latter costs will be discussed in greater detail
during the workshop.
Respectfully submitted,
Jo ce Po ers
Community and Economic Development Director
Manager Approval:
Betsy,M. Adams
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff report dated February 23, 2010 and Resolution 10-04
2. Grant Application
3. Conceptual park plan submitted with the application
UN P43TI A0W i JA 1131AUOO
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
February 23, 2010 Staff Report
Resolution 10-04
j- 0
AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: February 23, 2010 Council Item( X ) CRA Item ( )
TITLE: State Department of Parks and Recreation Grant Opportunity for a
New Park
PRESENTED BY: Joyce Powers,Community and Economic Development Director
PREPARED BY: Katherine Chamberlain,CED Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution in support of the grant proposal.
BACKGROUND:
In 2006 the voters of California approved Proposition 84, referred to as the Safe Drinking Water,
Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act. Through this
bond measure the Statewide Park Program has been allocated$368 million in grant monies. The
State Office of Grants and Local Services (OGLS) is now accepting applications for the
Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program of 2008 (Statewide Park
Program). Applications are due March I, 2010.
The Statewide Park Program will award grants, on a competitive basis, for the creation of new
parks and new recreation opportunities in proximity to critically underserved communities.
According to the Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) an underserved community is
defined as a community with less than 3 acres of usable park space per 1,000 residents, and the
City of Grand Terrace meets this criteria.
The maximum grant request is $5 million, to be used for site acquisition, development costs and
construction costs. Project applications must address six eligibility requirements in order to be
considered for funding. The review rating system is primarily based on the applicant's success in
addressing the criteria, as follows:
• Critical lack of park space or significant poverty(highest achievable points)
• Type of project(new or expansion of park)
• Safe public use
• Sustainable techniques
+ Funding to complete the project
• Fees and hours of operation
Along with these basic requirements, there are Project selection criteria with which the Office of
Grants and Local Services (OGLS) will evaluate, score and rank the application package. Grant
award decisions will be announced approximately six months after the application deadline.
Staff has prepared a draft grant application package to submit to OGLS, which is attached for
your consideration.
DISCUSSION:
After a citywide search for an appropriate site, staff is recommending that a new park be
constructed on approximately three acres of land located in the northwest portion of the City
identified as 21945 Grand Terrace Road (See Attachment A). Included in the grant application
package are "willing seller" letters signed by the owners of the subject parcels. Acquisition and
land clearing costs would be approximately$870,000.
Staff worked extensively with the residents of the City, particularly the residents of the subject
neighborhood, on the amenities they would like to see incorporated into the new park. Eight
community meetings were held at various times of the day to reach as many residents as
possible. During the meetings,staff presented the park concept and requested input.
The new park is intended to be usable open space accessible to all resident-. to meet their
recreational, cultural, social, and educational needs. Each section of the application is awarded a
maximum amount of points, and staff has thoughtfully assembled the application package to
include items that will maximize the application "score" with OGLS. The project selection
criteria and values are as follows:
Selection Criteria Possible Points Staffs estimate of points
earned
Critical lack of park space I8 18
Significant Poverty 18 * 18
Type of Project 12 12
Community Based Planning 18 18
Sustainable Techniques I I I I
Project Funding 0 0
Fees and Hours of Operation 5 5
Youth Outdoor Learning 3 3
Employment or Volunteer
Opportunities
Community Challenges and 15 15
Project Benefits
*This rating is provided by the State based on area incomes.
The park design will have a water efficiency theme running throughout, and applicants were
encouraged to include techniques for sustainability. The sustainable techniques planned for the
new park include:
• Water efficient irrigation systems and other low water fixtures
• Use of pervious surfaces and on-site water recycling
• Use of at least 10% recycled materials for construction
• Native and drought tolerant landscaping
• Use of shade trees to aid in cooling of the restroom structure
• Use of bio-swales to filter runoff water
There will also be a large emphasis on education, culture and art at the proposed park. Some of
the planned activities for the new park are as follows:
• Native Garden Education Activity
• Annual "Chalk Art in the Park"Day
Park Naming Contest
• Logo or Design Contest
The grant application package is being submitted without the design and construction cost
analysis completed. Staff worked with the Program's project manager, who agreed to provide
additional time to complete the cost estimate, which will likely be about $350,000-$450,000.
The application package requires a resolution from the City Council in support of the application
and staff recommends approval. Applicants will be notified of grant approvals in approximately
six months.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is a fiscal impact of approximately $6,000 associated with submitting the grant
application, which can be funded by the Redevelopment Agency. The grant would fund all
project design, construction and equipment, and no local match is required. Maintenance of the
park would be a City expense and is estimated at$50,000 per year.
Respectfully submitted,
Joyce Powers
Community and Economic Development Director
Manager Approval:
Betsy M. Adams
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Site Map
B. Resolution
C. Application Package
RESOLUTION NO. 2010-m
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
APPLICATION FOR STATEWIDE PARK PROGRAM GRANT
FUNDS
WHEREAS, the State Department of Parks and Recreation has been delegated the
responsibility by the Legislature of the State of California for the administration of the
Statewide Park Program, setting up necessary procedures governing the Application;
and
WHERAS, said procedures established by the State Department of Parks and
Recreation require the applicant to certify by resolution the approval of application
before submission of said application to the State; and
WHEREAS, the applicant will enter into a contract with the State of California to
complete the grant scope project;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby:
Approves the filing of an application for the Westside Park, and
1. Certifies that said applicant has of will have available, prior to commencement of
any work on the project included in this application, the sufficient funds to
complete the project; and
2. Certifies that the applicant has or will have sufficient funds to operate and
maintain the project, and
3. Certifies that the applicant has reviewed, understands, and agrees to the General
Provisions contained in the contract shown in the Grant Administration Guide;
and
4. Delegates the authority to the City Manager to conduct all negotiations, sign and
submit all documents, including, but not limited to applications, agreements,
amendments, and payment requests, which may be necessary for the completion
of the grant scope; and
7
5. Agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances,
rules, regulations and guidelines.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 230 day of February, 2010.
May rfma City of Grand Terrace
Attest:
C
City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace
I, BRENDA MESA, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 20107 04 was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Grand Terrace held on the 23rd day of February, 2010, by the
following vote:
AYES: CoancLUnubera Cortee. Miller and Staackiasit:; Mayor pro Tee Gareis
and Mayor Farm
NOES: None
ABSENT: song
ABSTAIN: time
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
t.Brenda Mae.city crerk of tns city of orand
Tewace. County of San Bernardino. State of
Ca*nw 4mby cB*the foregoing hWUn *
,A�,6 to be a kA.true and corred cWY of the origVA
now on life in aW offke.
City Attorney U DAM, Z -Z.S--lo
c
s
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
Grant Application
Stab at Callforale-The Rmmraw Ago"
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program of 2008
Project Application Form
PROJECT NAME Requested GRANT Amount $2,130,636.00
West Side Park Other Funding Sources
PROJECT PHYSICAL ADDRESS(including zip code) Estimated TOTAL PROJECT COST $2.130.ffa.00
21945 Grand Terrace Road Nearest cross Street County of Project Location
APN #0275-231-17
APN #027S-231-48 THROUGH 027S-231-66 Barton Road San Bernardino
GRANT APPLICANT(entity applying for the grant) GRANT APPLrAues Mailing Address
City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace, CA 92313
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AS SHOWN IN RESOLUTION OR CERTIFICATION LETTER
Betsy M. Adams, City Manager badlams@cityofgrandterrace.ora (909) 430-224S
Name(typed or printed)and Title Email address Phone
DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT/CEO
Joyce Powers, Director, CEDD ipowellOcityofaranciterrace.OrO (909)430-222S
Name(typed or pAnted)and Title Email address Phone
DAY-TODAY CONTACT for ADMINISTRATION of the GRANT Cd dlfffsrerrt hwrt AUTHOiRr M REPRI:SENTATNE)
Katie Chamberlain Man. Analyst kchamberlain@-citvofgrandterrace.ors (909) 430-2247
Name(typed orprinted)and Title Email address Phone
For ACOuisnmN: For DEVEI.OPMENT:
Tote!land acquired will be 3.07 acres Total acreage of the PARK will be 3.07
3.07 Acres to be acquired in fee simple by Applicant (include land to be acquired if applicable)
Acres to be acquired in other than fee simple Acres owned in fee simple by Applicant
(attach explanation) Acres available under a year lease or
easement.
GRANT SCOPE: I represent and wanant that this APPLcATION PACKET describes the intended use of the requested
GRANT to complete the RECREATION FEATURES and MAJOR SUPPORT AMENITIES listed in the attached GRANT SCOPE/Cost
Estimate Form. I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California, that the information
conta' in th APPLICATION PACKET,including required attachments, i8 accurate.
-7/d
Signat e A RIZED REPRESENTATIVE as shown in Resolution Date
Print Name Betsy M. Adams
Title Oily Manager
Nonprofit Requirements
The City of Grand Terrace is a nonprofit organization. The City of Grand Terrace is a
government agency.
RESOLUTION NO. 2010-M
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GRAND TERRACE. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
APPLICATION FOR STATEWIDE PARK PROGRAM GRANT
FUNDS
WHEREAS, the State Department of Parks and Recreation has been delegated the
responsibility by the Legislature of the State of California for the administration of the
Statewide Park Program, setting up necessary procedures governing the Application;
and
WHERAS, said procedures established by the State Department of Parks and
Recreation require the applicant to certify by resolution the approval of application
before submission of said application to the State; and
WHEREAS, the applicant will enter into a contract with the State of California to
complete the grant scope project;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby:
Approves the filing of an application for the Westside Park, and
1. Certifies that said applicant has of will have available, prior to commencement of
any work on the project included in this application, the sufficient funds to
complete the project; and
2. Certifies that the applicant has or will have sufficient funds to operate and
maintain the project, and
3. Certifies that the applicant has reviewed, understands, and agrees to the General
Provisions contained in the contract shown in the Grant Administration Guide;
and
4. Delegates the authority to the City Manager to conduct all negotiations, sign and
submit all documents, including, but not limited to applications, agreements,
amendments, and payment requests, which may be necessary for the completion
of the grant scope; and
1:
5. Agrees to comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances,
rules, regulations and guidelines.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23'd day of February, 2010.
May r o f e City of Grand Terrace
Attest:
City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace
I, BRENDA MESA, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 2010- 04 was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Grand Terrace held on the 23'd day of February, 2010, by the
following vote:
AYES: Council—bers Cortes. Buller and Staackiewits; Mayor Pro Ten Garcia
and Bltyor Perm
NOES: none
ABSENT: aoIIe
ABSTAIN: None
G
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
I.Brands Mesa.City Clerk of the City of GnVW
Terrace. County of San Bernardino, State of
CaMonv&hereby certify the loregc6V
2�:3 to be a full,true and coned Copy of the origind,
now on file in my office.
City Attorney U DAM Z
c
l3
Grant Scope/Cost Estimate Form
GRANT SCOPE ITEMS: ESTIMATED COST
Property Acquisition $ 870,000
Grading $40,000
Erosion Control $ 32,199
Parkin Lot $ 13 400
Native Garden $ 100,000
Playground Area $ 182,000
Restroom/Drinking Fountain $ 86,160
Tennis Court $ 83,000
Artificial Turf Area $ 103,600
Paver WalLa a $ 16,000
Site Fencing $ 54 000
Underground Utilities $25 465
Decomposed Granite $ 112 133
Project Management $ 176 085
Contingency $ 193,694
Design & Onsite Documents $ 43 900
Total Estimated Cost for the Recreation Features $ 637,160
and Major Support Amenities
Total Estimated Pre-Construction Cost $43,900
Total Project Cost $2,130,636.00
Requested Grant Amount $ 2,130,636.00
The applicant understand that this form will be used to establish the expected grant
deliverables, and that all the recreation features and major support amenities listed on
this form must be completed and open to the public before final grant payment is
processed as specified in the "Grant Process— End of Grant Performance Period"
section found in the Grant Administrative Guide.The applicant also understands that no
more than 25%of the grant amount may be spent on pre-construction costs. See
eligible costs charts starting on page 55 before creating a cost estimate.
40ct
App icanrs Authorized Representative Signature Date
1
Funding Sources Form
Funding Source Date Amount
COMMMMO
Statewide Park Program GRANT Request $ 2,130,636.00
5
S
S
S
S
S
Grand Total All Funding Sources
(Estimated TOTAL PROJECT COST) � ���30,B36.00
The APPLICANT understands that the PROJECT cannot be funded unless the requested
GRANT equals the estimated cost needed to complete the PROJECT, or, the requested
GRANT plus the total amount of additional coMMiTTED FUNDS equals the estimated cost of
the PROJECT. The PROJECT must be completed and open to the public before final GRANT
payment is processed.
(Z614,4e, &,ZLe,� -to --to
APPLICAFWS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Signature Date
Statewide Palk Development and Funding Sources Forth
Communhy Revitalization
is
i
.. City of Grand Terrace
Draft Environmental Initial Study
1. Project title: Westside Park
2. Lead agency name and address: City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand
Terrace, California 92313
3. Contact person and phone number: Joyce Powers, Community and Economic
Development Director(909)430-2225
4. Project location: 21945 Grand Terrace Road Grand Terrace, California 92313
5. Project sponsor's name and address: City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand
Terrace, California 92313
6. General Plan designation: Medium Density Residential
7. Zoning: R2 - Low Medium Density Residential
8, Description of project: The project description will be refined upon award of contract.
The City of Grand Terrace proposes to construct an approximately 3 acre active park on
two adjacent parcels. One parcel is 2.5 acres vacant land, and the second parcel is 0.5
acre containing a single family residence. The single family residence will be
demolished and the existing sewer and utilities would be utilized to serve the park and
support utilities, such as a restroom structure, a storage structure for maintenance
materials and pedestrian lighting. The park will be developed using pervious surfaces for
Lhe parking lot area. Pervious and recycled materials will be utilized as much as possible
for all sidewalks, paths, playground areas, and sports courts. A walking area will be
included that will be landscaped with native plant species which will require little to no
water. The park will be designed and graded to capture runoff from on-site and off-site
sources in a bio-swale or other filtration system. The off site improvements will be in
accordance with the City engineers' specifications and will include curb, gutter, sidewalk
and street light installation. Decorative fencing will be installed along the perimeter of the
park and the park will be closed daily at dusk and reopened at 7:00 a.m. the following
day.
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: The project site has residential uses to the north,
iouth, east and west. An approximately 66 space mobile home park is to the south of the
project site, while single family residences are developed to the north, east and west.
There are two parcels to the southeast that are designated general commercial. One of the
commercially designated parcels is developed with a commercial use and the other is
�,acant.
1�
.nvironmental Checklisv Initial Study
Proposed We,,tside Park
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agriculture Resources ❑ Air Quality
❑ Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources (3 Geology/Soils
❑ Hazards & Hazardous ❑ Hydrology/ Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning
Materials
❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing
❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑Trans ortation/Traffic
❑ Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ 1 find that the project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
D I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
etTect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and ?) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
❑ I rind that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and
N have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
17
Proposed Westside Park
oyce owers Date
Community and Economic Development
Director
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
tr
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a leaf agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A"No Impact"answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simpff does not apply to pJ;6jfcts like the one
involved (e.g., the project falls outside a felt,rupture zone). A "No " answer
should be explained where it is based on prtllect-specific factors as as general
standards (e.g., the project will not expose send g �reoep�ors to poll ts, based on a
project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved. including off-site as well as
on-site, cumulative as well as project level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as
well as operational impacts..
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then
the checklist answers must Indicate whethef the impact is potentially significant, less than
significant witlik initigadorm�r less than srgpiScant. "Potentially Significant impact" is
appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there arc
one or more "Potentially.Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an
EIR is requires
4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies
wheaw the incorporatiob of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially
Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact". The lead agency must describe
the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than
significant level (mitigation measures from"Earlier Analyses," as described in(5) below,
may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(ex3XD). In this case,a brief discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify the state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
1�
Environmental Checklist/initial Study
Proposed Westside Park
c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were
incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they
address site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference
to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used
or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
S. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats;
however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are
relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance,
SQ
Environmental Checklist/initial Study
Proposed Westside Park
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact with Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
1. AESTHETICS—Would the project: �
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
scenic vista?
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,T❑ ❑ ❑ ' L3
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic hia.h!y4 ?
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
d. Create a new source of substantial light ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
or glare which would adversely affect day
or nighttime views in the area?
11. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: in determining whether impacts to agricultural resources
are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of`
conservation as an optional model used in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would
the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique ❑ ; ❑ ❑ ryf-- .❑.,._....
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b. Conflict with existing coning for ❑ ❑ ❑
agricultural use, or a Williamson .act
contract?
e. Involve other changes to the existing ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
B
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
r Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
M. AIR QUALITY—Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air
quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
of the applicable air quality plan?
b. Violate any air quality standard or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quali!y violation?
c. Result in cumulatively considerable net ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozoneprecursors)?
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
_pollutant concentrations?
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
substantial number of eo le?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES—Would theproject:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, regulations or
by the Cal Dept. of Fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the Cal
Dept. of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect can ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
federally protected wetlands as defined b
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act I
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
d. interfere substantially with the ❑ ❑ ; ❑ ❑
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with i
established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursefy sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ❑ ❑ ; ❑ ❑
ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
F Conflict with the provisions of an ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservationplan?
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
the significance of a historical resource as
defined in ' 15064.5?
�b. Cause a substantial adverse change in ❑ �❑ ❑ ❑
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
�—cDi-rectly or indirectly destroy a unique ❑ ❑ ❑ C
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
d. Disturb any human remains, including ❑ ❑ ❑ I ❑
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS .. Would the project:
. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse eftects, including the risk of loss
i!Jury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of Mines
and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
including liquefaction?
iv. Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
loss of topsoil?
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
is unstable, or that would become unstable
as a result of the project, and potentially
result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994), creating substantial risks to
I i fe or property?
e. Have soils incapable of adequately ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS— Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c:. Emit hazardous emissions or handle ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on ❑ ❑ ❑
a list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 1
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e. For a project located within an airport ❑ ❑ ❑
land use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public {
airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
�f. For a project within the vicinity of a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
private airstrip, would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or
�working in the project area?
' g. Impair implementation of a physically `: ❑ ❑ ❑
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
lan? _.
h. Expose people or structures to a ❑ ❑ El ❑
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas
or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or ❑ T❑ ' ❑ ❑
waste discharge requirements?
b. Substantially deplete groundwater ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or
a lowering of the local groundwater table
level {e.g., the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses
or planned uses for which permits have
been ranted)?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage ❑ ❑ I ❑
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would
result in a substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site?
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on-
or off-site?
e. Create or contribute runoff water which ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff.
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
quality?
g. Place housing within a 100-year flood ❑ f ❑ ;❑
hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate k +
Map or other flood hazard delineation
map? i
h. Place within 100-year flood hazard area ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows?
i. Expose people or structures to a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or 1 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
mud low? i
1X. LAND USE AND PLANNING—Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
rcommunit ?
b. Conflict with any applicable land use ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
plan, policy, or regulation of an agency
with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program,
or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
C. Conflict with any applicable habitat ❑ ❑ �❑ ❑
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
X. MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of the
state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
: locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general
plan, specific plan or other land useplan?
XI. NOISE —Would the project result in:
a. Exposure of persons to or generation of ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or .
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
b. Exposure of persons to or generation of ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
excessive groundboume vibration or
roundboume noise levels?
c. A substantial permanent increase in ❑ ❑ ❑ r ❑
2#
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the pio'ect?
T-
d. A substantial temporary or periodic ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing
without theproject?
e. For a project located within an airport ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
land use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
f. For a project within the vicinity of a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
private airstrip, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING— Would the project:
a. Include substantial population growth in ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
an area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
c. Displace substantial numbers of people, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
necessitating the construction of
re lacement housing elsewhere?
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for
any of the public services:
i. Fireprotection? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
ii. Policeprotection'? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
iii. Schools'? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
iv. Parks? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
v. Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
XIV. RECREATION
a. Would the project increase the use of ❑ ❑ ❑ l]
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
i b. Does the project include recreational ❑ ❑ ❑
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
XV. TRANSPORATIONITRAFFIC—Would the project:
a. Cause an increase in traffic which is ❑ ❑ ❑ �
substantial in relation to the existing traffic
load and capacity of the street system (i.e.,
result in a substantial increase in either the
number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at s
intersections)!
b. Exceed, either individually or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the county congestion
management agency for the designated I
roads or highways?
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a ' ❑ ❑ C1 a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm a uiment)?
f e. Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ I ❑
f. Result in inadequate parking capacity'? I ❑ ❑ ❑ I 0
2
g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)?
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS— Would the project:
a. Exceed wastewater treatment ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
requirements of the applicable Regional
Water ual ity Board?
b. Require or result in the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c. Require or result in the construction of ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d. Have sufficient water supplies available ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
to serve the project from existing
entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
e. Result in a determination by the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
permitted capacity to accommodate the
roject's solid waste disposal needs?
g. Comply with federal, state, and local ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
XVII. iNIANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
7�
a. Does the project have a potential to ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining .
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant of animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of
r1h, ia histo or rp ehistor +?
the project have impacts that are ❑ ❑ ❑ LI
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future
ro'ects ?
c. Does the project have environmental ❑ ❑ ❑
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirect) ?
3
CEQA Timeline for Compliance
February 9, 2010— Request for Proposals issued to Environmental consultants.
February 23, 2010 — Responses received from consultants.
March 1, 2010— Application submitted with incomplete CEQA status.
August 30, 2010 — Grant Award (or Denial) letter to be received.
September 28, 2010 —The City enters into a contract with an Environmental Consultant.
February 1, 2011 — Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration circulated.
April 30, 2011 — Initial study/Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted.
May 15, 2011 — City files the Notice of Determination.
Estimated Cost
The City estimates the cost for the consultant to be $15,000 - $20,000.
Possible Obstacles
The City does not anticipate any obstacles; however, some possible challenges would
be the completion of the environmental studies (that is, the Water Quality Management
Plan, Greenhouse Gas Analysis, Noise Study, etc.) The only other possible obstacle
would be a legal challenge.
�7
Land Tenure Requirement
The City intends to acquire the subject project site by simple fee; therefore a Land
Tenure Agreement in not applicable.
3
Ptn. Resub. of Grand Terrace Tract city of Grand Terrace 0275— 23
R.S. 33 Tax Rate Area
16001
1
1
Y �,111u.f 11 -.Par-F•5 I
! ;gilt 33
-P Par..'�.r
leiair
Pur.-~ _11-9�1y3 ,11,I IS13 `•.
j �•_' _�?.h5�'M a ,�= _ � �,
r o,air 17br r �' qq�
:. 1i1M Slrr ' kL I)
t (�i
�7rgT15
9 5,;, I
4 12 Flll rl'��1-.L�r
B(r)
Oj to
r L L g q •rho rt` �,
2
,8.11 Ac.M ...
v}r
2.11 Ac. 2 3 2
r+ 2.11 AC. 111
1
�1 i, � 1�. 1 24
1.12 Ac,
+ 2.1 Ac.
116V 1167' 1167' Il rl:;i
I ai:15rtr I,� udp uu {s�:, r" u si�S9•bY 14 Y3 Assessorrs Map Uir:�r.z
-01,• u.,r u,i 5199• F.II r is Book 0275 Page 23
San Bernardino County
N
JACOPirm
T
HlOiLmW
February 2, 2010
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Grand Terrace
22795 Barton Road
Grand Terrace.CA 92313
Subs Sale of Property on Grand Terrace Road.APN 0275-231-48 through 68
Dear Mayor and City Council;
This Is to notify you that the property listed above owned by Douglas and Monfaue
Is available for sale fbr$600.000. 1 understand that
the City has an interest in the property for a park site pending a state park grant for
property acquisition and park constructIon.
Co
I believe an active park Is a great use of this site and Is needed In this neighborhood.
The use for which I originally purchased this property Is not feasible now. and I am very
willing to sell the property to the City for this project. I have attached a map of the
property to confirm its location.
J
Sincerely. rn
oobsen
AM er Member
3
oa�eic�-eau,o Lin M.a
AQ
IV VACANT Lq
4,0
13
iS
Sub-Leases or Agreements
The City intends to acquire the subject project site; therefore there are no sub-leases or
agreements associated with this application.
31
3 - fIFtorage
•q 5 -.4} `4• _Jr � tau r ti` f ��'.if��r• -���'K' ,�-' � �
Building
0 IL
�. � � �Lam+#I�'=� 5 �tP '7�•/ � »��' � •Y 'N
a'
r�
V
'Iwoi
�219
„■
5 40
i, -
Picnic Areas
Exercise Stations
Al
' ` Ir
e i
Ll
3
t - .���� • 'f� .ram.. • ,�� �*�»a+ # � �'��l r�":-
NNE
Wi
1: ,� ,'. 4 ''♦ ; yam` f F �� +`
.'� i• � y7' F ++' i � •r � ,i1���7��f } + ' 7i r�,,' .t-.:��� ri r 1
• �� i'f � •.ice f W'��, �� �� rr��,c yl
t 1
i � � f .fir •Y y m�' �' ���' i' 1,��
}'
RW
jr
fr ♦ O at Jki�iif�+' . 'f. f - r4+�5 •r `!f
'` ►i r - f �� ��.�' ,;•�""~Y+551 ,� rr � -. :r �r -:.fir::, _.,r;#�
PlIff
r
. x`#'tS,'�'� *s1r ,�• _.xr .4
i 4Z,�,
' ' M '} �• '� .r 4_ ti �"+�,'� : w w .�-Jliy�'`. ..i.F'I{ryP}�'C:- j,,,L-1'�7�4' ' ' -y�Y � ' '�� t _
°)► ."-rt: `ti ',i• t� .,{ y S3iF''1��*_�1���5' �!iY '`iy.y; y4- y '.4•��C, `J, - !' k J
R"'sue
4
u ?M1+? r ,F F h�'1'"f�tri= :`'� «'�' Y.4.+� '1' , , -■ '' '�•-��''• _
'l F'' ♦ -�y,'- I�..,,�F..A".._ �..�f¢'�x.>;: � Pik{:'. `+-` _ • '
Im
�Y . v
r
ZL
Looking North .-.,sow R.
+ •,1 ,_ r fy++1 . _ PLC �„ — + y F
y.six { :47 r..•..' w,� rfSiJ<!SiS+ r 4.,_,�y�-y {'. f 'r; - 3r',
.•r -rrlClT .�a'y'2�7a�s.k. .�r�Y_�a�i.+`r *.�+�' -fit,�.i'� •�SKJLJ�ti
.�� �- i^S'S'�ij.,'-�, ' �;'-; s-' /�S.��j {;x,,,:•:°� L' ; r_��w�'+.F}y �:�i#lY.i=•-'•x xJa�' _
��. r` �^;V�.�s`.-�.�.'.•'4� j•'., a�,'r�',.�.fi<`�.ti ..,,1.�, �„�:ti`~� :.-..ti���c'�, M�i'� l'' S,rr:'•r_'.L�. L #1 b�;r_Si`tl�.�:�.
i4 L i ;•f;.x +r,t J�yr-r3_`d,4�r.d., ,.,.-. 1R••f.„ r : t •s.:r4."r:! t`� •n}• Y.:} {�r�4 .++ +rt,�±,��,► cr
t "'.`\ JeAtSxv'•4f r i..t7l �s .h - _ a+ ,'l,�,ti,l.`:ri�S.,f`=t'f.•�rF+'_L` 'r'+ '4-3�t,-r.7,6; i�x,1•- #.
x' � `'.�'+i'r` -wL 4J�'�ft:s'✓-� _� ." �..x'i�� •.-.� �. .:t.ih^�I,'�i,�:.�4+' rii'k'µ.�r.�,i4t �cL�' k4.���^� �+
r` #j'rK t* i"A'# ',ti5>,„
r Y w
�� ��e.Ct�a:, ,r�.+a, • 1 .:
/ L� . t r,l1 .rye-/ J'-+,a ?y ti: ;'- •.i it :l.r• _'>?: 'st[ t�JILy* )r. �+. �+ ley.. ;.'•, �'1.'Ai ..
!''* '.�`�7�A �.•y'.! iSif K� i 'Y�i y+lh t .;j {�„F..r
.iC ! 7 r 4+n+� '",�',• 'ZriFr K�►'yif: t +•}{i'}� !cflkii i'. .T.+ ,:`�� y +r.i n++lrr►
-; '1 -4-Y.S• 'f. 1 s''�^ r• L/�4`'..i• -- i e•� ii r .,# 'r9r�-,7+r 1I r., .t +ra My•'f�•-
S'yJ,i� P; _� i!ir.,.w.".f"f. •fY isi.Hf7�~, � �S. r. rr•ii� b*''�=:+17",..� *Sax' Yt 7, r��tt,,,,,,�� 1f.._.,T'�""i..i�.
J •+:{ t:' �` Y }y' °'' - { ' .. r`'.I - r 'A 4ti �` i rtr4
r, , :i.•• - 51'e„�«,y r 1' .�' pry, j`". {
_; 7•�+ r �Ld� �''$r s'J ,�} -:�`'• `N' ' {��nF `s r:r:, r �." 1 r
� '.:+m �''�''' ] a ' # in !% .4..� r� ,! r +ti �``,. ;,-i.,p�.•lr •'.#.+'rj �.��• by�.
{fir , * �-rt-`-� � �• s �, _ I`;}� a" -''1+^'al."!�".l�+�ii' .r'1-��. 7+�,�+h{�IFs
�/ '� �:'' f' t� yr. r �` �y�('��!�i1' +.#�i !''1� .s,y_f, x`1 u-. F .r •n"..wJ' '_
Y�r11+ `'i- 1 ,lr. {` �. +' IJi�i RF s'4E _}t'�x�. k _' i 1M.� +� ' r . •ice
�" k=�.�:. .,! 1' 3 (4 !s7'` •i. ' i' _ , y �, r # # iTi y": r 'r I'x'' .ram fil .J
r _ 1 r . y+SS+ 7'+ J ' + T ..
S Lf,y• r�i5y";tt •6'''Y••--•-..'� . .'.1!+ � f f # i `SJ; '.r�',: - -
All
(VA' x rr ,3 ` !' .:7i-Y+•. - '' S -5 '*v'r4i`7R
' •' 4
yrr 1 rti� iCfyrA Fff `
23
41
_ �Y f �, wV ...�r.}� - + ,,•+Yr � .-,1Y' �l�r F.� I !:�+�+I`
�:r fit ih•� ���••i,�i•`•,•.,.` ��'�.�'�+r•��"T
kr
i^.s�
j MIT
S
it� �•+.]•a.�.-y�• �w:S + -i y '•��,, ..�,+�.►J
• 0(f -
.S Yl .� • •`!I} '� rKJ� �. 4 y ,•,y5 •y a , 43 Ii y} �.` C • fy
ry ' � x"{ r• �` ++'J y� �:�`"• _ .� �LY ,� • i3. rRr#'�• f �Y j - .�� �y ii
16
IL
Looking East
1p
< } ,Y-.,�.5x '+4}W T" }, ^u.z llM •i#}j�`�*� 1¢-T�'. ?. ,�{ ' �•k'�,h tw
� Z4,[
V.
AN
_ r:
fit ' 7 ti s � m 7"
- .' �� wM% `� -T'wr .J�•;�K •-��1.r';�1�' `�- Sit�ryp a`.�xY Y
Nd
`� .;ice=�*�', 1� •- � �"r_'C�h k"e!'�:j.wt.;,� � .j,l � 421
i�.. t4. -?!�[. -[S�'" ,.4,r.;•�. :J �tom. ^c �- L �. F•!''•rr�'��„b:; �.
�Tr ��..'' h. : {�yQ�y' J�� �• -. � '' C-' ;�"`'�'�',� 54 fed,'l'
.. • _�: 'L =4 ' .. 4r7cc!��f��.lRy f'a'- " J j` ' -x' ! y }r►
rr rr�k. 4{K' `i ./-. %7TR tit. i. _ , Sw Y� l �•�- J ��,
i.l F ] li�y M•.. .yr
r'."�� ��•,, Fr '.r l"A�i�� 4�y�^'�•re`.�s'.�. =••, {•• .7'�L.�r�.-�-� 1. �}.i:xrl ��''.�� �� 1 -4k���rj�,��..
� i � a(�xAti! -�' '•x�'.� +7�����.Y � � r. _-�; _ �";3'' y��r�, y ,r. i ^a :r}�'i.�� ' ? �"Si[�
Project Selection Criteria
1. Critical Lack of Park Space
The ratio of usable park space per 1,000 residents within proximity of the project site,
according to the "California State Parks Community Fact Finder' (CSPCFF) is zero. In
proximity of the project site, 2,215 residents reside, according to the CSPCFF. The
closest active park space is approximately two miles away on the east side of Interstate
215. The Interstate acts as a physical line of separation in the City of Grand Terrace.
There are two existing parks on the east side of the Interstate and there are no parks on
the northwest side.
2. Significant Poverty
A. The median household income within proximity of the project site, according to the
CSPCFF, is $37,068. The City of Grand Terrace has two census blocks that qualify for
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding, both on the west side of
Interstate 215. The project site would serve both of the CDBG qualifying blocks and is
located within one of them.
B. The number of families living below poverty within proximity of the project site,
according to the CSPCFF, report is 322. The project site is within one-half mile of two
large mobile home communities. The Grand Terrace Mobile Home Park is adjacent to
the park site and consists of approximately 66 spaces. The Grand Royal Mobile
Estates park is significantly larger with approximately 182 spaces. The residents of
these communities would be able to walk to the project site.
3. Type of Project
A. Creating a New Park
41
The selected park site includes 20 separate parcels. One parcel (APN 0275-231-17)
contains a single family residence utilized as a rental property by the current owner.
The property owner has agreed to sell the property to the City of Grand Terrace.
The remaining 19 parcels are portions of a recorded, but undeveloped tract map. The
parcels are currently vacant. The Developer has agreed to sell the parcels to the City of
Grand Terrace.
The project property is not adjacent to any existing park. This new proposed park site
would be the first park established in the northwest portion of the City.
This active park will create open space with the incorporation of exercise stations, a
walking path, and sport courts. The park will provide recreational benefits to the
residents and meet their cultural, social, educational and environmental needs while
also revitalizing the neighborhood.
4. Community Based Planning
A.
Meeting T Meeting Type, Venue, r Time Day of� u
DatelYear
# Address am-pm Week
1 ' Grand Terrace lions Club t6:30 a.m. — Wed. 2/3/10
Community center, 22164 8:30 a.m.
Barton Rd.
2 1 Grand Terrace Chamber of
Commerce Meeting 11:30 a.m. Mon. 218/10
3 Grand Terrace Child Care 4-6 p.m. Wed. 2/10/10 r
Center, 22400 Barton rd.
4
4 Proposed Park Site 1:30-3:30 Thurs. 2/11/10
Grand Terrace Rd. P.M.
5 +Grand Terrace City Hall 5-6 p.m. Thurs. 2/11/10
22795 Barton Rd
6 Grand Terrace City Hall 11:30 a.m. Tues. 2/16/10
I
Chamber Luncheon/State of — 1:30 p.m.
the City Address, 22795 1
Barton Rd.
7 r Grand Terrace Sr. Center
22627 Grand Terrace Rd. 11:30 a.m. Wed. 2/17/10
8 Grand Terrace City Hall 5 — 7 p.m. Tues. 2/23/10
22795 Barton Rd.
Meeting locations and times were scheduled to allow residents the opportunity to attend
morning, afternoon, and/or evening meetings. Working residents had the opportunity to
attend meetings in the morning prior to going to work, on their lunch hour, and/or the
evenings after their work day. Retired and/or non-working residents had the same
opportunity to attend all meetings allowing flexibility of time and location. The various
meeting times also allowed residents with non-traditional work hours the opportunity to
attend one of several community meetings.
Meeting locations were selected based on their convenience to the residents.
Residents within proximity to the proposed park site were within walking distance of
some meetings or within 1-2 miles if they chose to use other transportation, such as the
bus.
In addition to specifically scheduled community meetings, City staff presented the park
proposal to community members while attending regular meetings of the Grand Terrace
Lion's Club, City Special Events Committee, Chamber of Commerce Board Meeting,
Grand Terrace Senior Center Luncheon, and City Council.
This enabled staff to include input from additional members of the community that may
not have been able to attend any of the community meetings due to schedule conflicts.
B.
Meeting Description of the method(s) Number of General description of the
# used to invite residents to this residents residents (youth, seniors,
meeting. (see page 3 for a list who families or other groups) r
of seven examples) participated. who participated.
1 Partnered with Grand Terrace
Lion's Club. Added to agenda, 40 Seniors, youth &
presentation, survey Business owners
distributed, resident questions
and input. (Breakfast served)
Partnered with Chamber of
Commerce. Added to agenda, Business representatives
survey distributed, presentation 20 and officials
and resident input. (Lunch
served)
4f
3 Partnered with another City
Dept./Service. Invite & survey 75 Youth and Families
also posted on City web site.
Ad in local newspaper. (Snacks
provided)
4 Mailed invitation to residents
within i mile of park project site 25 Families, youth and
Invite and survey also posted seniors
on City web site. Ad in local
newspaper.
5 Mailed invitation and survey to
i
residents within 1 mile of park 30 ' Youth, families, and
project site. Invite & survey also seniors
posted on City web site. Ad in
local newspaper. (Snacks
provided)
6 Partnered with Chamber of
Commerce & State of the City Seniors, business
Address. Invite & survey also 75 representatives
posted on City web site. Ad in
local newspaper. (Lunch
served)
I �
AA
7 Partnered with Grand Terrace
Sr. Center. Added to agenda, Seniors
presentation during lunch hour, 100
survey distributed and resident
input collected. (Lunch served)
8 Open forum one hour before
and during City Council
meeting. Mailed invitation to Youth, families, seniors
residents within 1 mile of park 30
I
1 project site. Posted meeting
and survey on City web site. Ad
in local newspaper. (Snacks
provided during open forum)
C. Goal 1: Selection of the Recreation Features:
City staff presented an overview of the new park grant opportunity at each community
meeting. After the presentation, a period of open discussion followed encouraging
residents to ask questions and identify their preferred park features. Residents were
given a "design your community park" worksheet. The worksheet included the new park
location, vicinity map, and a suggested list of features. Including recreational, exercise,
activities, equipment, tot lot that that have been identified as desired features in past
discussions with our residents. Additional space was provided for residents to list
others amenities and features not listed on the worksheet.
4.
Design of the Recreation Features:
Residents were given the opportunity to provide design ideas for the park site. The
"design your community park" worksheet (Attachment A) included a basic park layout
with a blank park site map that allowed residents to draw their own park design. Many
residents preferred to voice their design features rather than draw or list them on the
worksheet. Approximately, 75 worksheets were collected. Staff recorded the different
suggestions, which were;
• Install restrooms and storage building with the entrances facing south or opposite
adjacent residences.
• Install picnic tables, and park benches with anti-skateboard controls while still
providing an aesthetically pleasing appearance.
• Include a walking trail with work-out stations.
Goal 2: Location of the recreational features within the park
Residents expressed their preferences for locations of recreational features in the park
by charting the features on the map provided on the worksheet. They also expressed
their preferences during the open discussions following each presentation, both with
each other, as well as with staff. Several ideas were debated and mutually agreed upon
by members of the community through the open forum. These preferences were
documented on the worksheets and by staff. One specific request was to locate the
sport courts away from adjacent residences.
The reasons expressed for the location of park features included placement to allow
clear visibility into the open space area, ensuring easy accessibility to facilities, view of
47
park features from neighboring residences, public safety, and proximity of features to
adjoining property lines.
Goal 3: Safety and park beautification:
Residents expressed their ideas for safe public use and park beautification through
open discussion forums, at community meetings, as well as through written expression
on the worksheets. Residents listed and/or drew park designs for safe public use on the
design worksheets. Their ideas included:
• Perimeter lighting and decorative style fencing permitting a clear view into the
park area with the ability to secure the park after hours.
• Soft materials for use under the playground equipment and along the walking
path, such as mulch or decomposed granite.
• Native plant garden providing added beauty to the open space area
• Bike racks to encourage residents to keep the bikes out of the park area
preserving the landscape, walking path, and other park amenities
5. Sustainable Techniques
5-A Sustainable Technique Description
I
Water efficient irrigation system The landscaping will be designed to incorporate soil
in compliance with the Water moisture meters. This technique will keep the native
Efficient Landscape Ordinance plants from being overwatered and wasting potable
I
water. The meters will have a threshold that will
engage the irrigation system when soil moisture
levels are too low.
44
Pervious surfaces As many surfaces as possible will be pervious. All
paths, sidewalks and sport courts will be made of
pervious materials or pavers.
At least 1 D% recycled materials The use of recycled materials will be incorporated in
for construction the playground area and the restroom structure.
Recycled rubber from tire fabrication and retreading
can be used in flooring or as a base underneath the
playground equipment. Recycled plastic can be used
in many different ways including but not limited to,
non-potable water storage containers, sewer pipes,
equipment and furniture.
Native landscaping Native landscaping reduces potable water use.
Native and other drought tolerant plants require little
to no water and no inorganic fertilization. Also by
planting low maintenance landscaping the park will
3 remain sustainable for years with minimal
maintenance.
5-B Sustainable Technique Description
Skylights or solar tubes The restroom structure will use skylights and/or sky
tubes on the south facing roofline to utilize ambient
light to illuminate the inside of the structure. By using
natural lighting the interior lighting will be reduced.
49
Use of shade trees to aid in T Planting of fern pines or similar native trees to the
cooling of structure east, west and north of the restroom structure will
provide shade in the summer months. The shade will
aid in cooling the structure.
r Low flow water fixtures Low flow water fixtures will be installed in the
restroom structure. All sink, urinals and toilets will be
low flow and water efficient.
F On-site water recycling The site will be designed and constructed in such a 1
way as to collect on-site runoff and rainwater to be
used for the irrigation system. The non-potable
water will then be filtered and reused for irrigation.
Due to the and conditions of the environment, staff is
currently investigating the feasibility of such a
system.
i
Bio-swale A bio-swale will be used to collect any off-site runoff i
water. The bio-swale will filter the runoff water prior
to it entering the drainage system or the water table.
6. Project Funding
A. The project funding is expected to meet all costs needed to complete the project.
Land acquisition will be the first action required to begin development of the new active
park- All costs related to the design, development, construction, equipment purchase
and installation will utilize grant funds as soon as the funds are made available. The
5(
park will be completed and open to the public within the grant performance period. Any
additional expenses that may arise after grant approval would be paid for with funds
from the Community Redevelopment Agency.
7. Fees and Hours of Operation
A. The park will be open 7 days per week from 6 a.m. to dusk. The park will be open to
all residents regardless of income level for enjoyment of the facilities without financial
burden. The park will provide families* youth and seniors the opportunity to enjoy the
open space and be physically fit.
B. There will be no entrance or membership fee for the park to allow free access for all
to enjoy the park facilities.
8. Youth Outdoor Learning Employment or Volunteer Opportunities
Outdoor Learning Opportunity Number of Residents
Native Garden Plant Education Activity — Approximately 15-20
Youth will be invited to create labels for the
native plants and learn about each species
Annual Chalk Art in the Park— Approximately 20-30
Participants will be designated a square to
create a work of art with chalk. The artist
must follow the theme of water
conservation and "green" living. All ages
are welcome to participate. Local artists
will provide instruction, assistance and
determine the winner. The winner will
51
have their chalk art featured in the local
newspaper.
Park Naming Contest— Approximately 100
The local newspaper will run an ad asking
residents to submit suggestions for the
park name. The participants will be asked
to keep in mind the character of the park
and the emphasis on water conservation
and an active lifestyle. City Council will
announce the winner and they will be
i
featured in the local newspaper.
Logo or Design Contest— Approximately 50 {
Participants will be asked to create a logo
or design based conservation. The logo or
design can be designed using pervious
1
materials (such as tiles) or native plants.
City Council will announce the winner and
'i they will be featured in the local paper.
9. Community Challenges and Project Benefits
A. The community in proximity to the project site is faced with multiple challenges.
These challenges include a lack of an easily accessible and usable open park space,
5:
and the urgent need for a recreational area which can offer physical activities along with
some social, educational and environmental elements.
There are two parks and one playground area located on the east side of the City.
There are no park facilities located on the northwest side. Undeveloped space is limited
in the City of Grand Terrace. This park would provide nearby residents a usable open
space recreational facility in proximity to their homes.
Currently, residents from this neighborhood must travel to other park locations which
are approximately two miles from their homes. If residents were to walk or ride their
bicycles to the other parks, they must travel across Interstate 215, travel along, at least,
two major streets and cross several intersections. This poses a great safety risk for all
residents, especially seniors, youth and families with small children. The new park
would significantly improve the recreational opportunities for this severely underserved
neighborhood. The new park would provide environmentally conscious landscape,
irrigation, and lighting. The vacant parcels would be transformed into an active
neighborhood/community park allowing residents to gather together and enjoy the
recreational, social and educational opportunities.
B. The new active park will enhance the recreational opportunities in this community.
Citizens providing input to staff frequently mentioned they would like exercise stations
along a walking trail. Residents will have the opportunity to enjoy daily use of the park,
on their own schedule, which will increase physical activity thereby, providing excellent
health benefits. Residents will also receive educational amenities minutes from their
homes. The two mobile home parks within proximity to the park would have usable
open space and activities for their children. These mobile home communities currently
53
have no usable open space to work out, have picnics or play. The installation of sport
courts and picnic areas would meet the growing need for recreation and social
gatherings in the neighborhood.
Grand Terrace encourages all residents to participate in water conservation, native
gardening and other environmentally healthy activities. The park will allow residents to
recognize the beautiful native and drought tolerant environment located within their own
community. The native garden area provides additional educational opportunities for
residents. Taking a leisurely walk through the garden and reading plant description
cards provides physical and mental health benefits that are not available in other City
parks.
Building an active park in this critically underserved community will increase the
potential for a healthy mind and body, create positive emotional and social experiences
and significantly improve the quality of life.
C. The City is able to provide administrative and operational experience to complete
and maintain the project. The project team includes the Community and Economic
Development Director, Management Analyst, Senior Planner, Building and Safety/Public
Works Director, Public Works Maintenance team and the Senior Code Enforcement
Officer. This team has extensive knowledge and experience with design, planning,
building and safety, and park use. This experienced team, partnered with our design
and development consultant, landscape architect and professional contractors, ensures
the completion and success of this project.
Long-term maintenance will be overseen by the Building and Safety/Public Works
Director and Maintenance Supervisor. Our maintenance staff currently maintains two
5
park areas including multiple soccer and baseball fields. The existing parks' amenities
include tot lots, playground equipment, walking track, picnic areas, and snack bar areas
used by our youth sports organizations. The maintenance staff has experience in ball
field maintenance, playground equipment repairs, electrical and plumbing repairs, and
general landscape maintenance. The proposed park features include low maintenance
landscape, hardscape, and other sustainable techniques, minimizing required
maintenance. Staff will seek to provide additional educational opportunities such as
classes regarding exercise routines, art and maintaining a sustainable environment.
Staff s knowledge and commitment to this project will enable the City to complete the
development, construction, maintenance, sustain long-term operations and provide
educational opportunities at the new active park for this critically underserved
community.
55
CAMMMState
Parks
Community FactFin
der, Report,
AA
This is your Community FactFinder report for
the project you have defined. Please refer to
your Project ID in any future communications
about this project. {
0"
Project ID: 5532 #1 }
Date created: 3anuary 27, 2010 01A ft' a Dr
County: San Bernardino
City: Grand Terrace �.
Coordinates: 34.036871, -117.326345 _. Bait Rd - y
t
Total Population: 2,215 -
f . 7 Z. A. t
Median Household $37,068
Income:
3
Number of people 0 0.4 mi i "`V,,,.;r�A
below poverty line: 322 Project Site
Park acreage: 0.00
Park acres per 1,000 0.00
population:
All numbers above have been calculated based on a 1/2
mile radius from the point location of your project.
Demographics are figured by averaging population
numbers over selected census block groups and using
the percent of the block group within the project circle
to determine the actual counts.
Parks and park acres are based on best available source
information but may not always contain exact
boundaries or all parks in specific locations. Parks
acreage does not include major lakes or ocean. Users
can send update information to:
parkupdates@parks.ca.gov
Data Sources:
Demographics-Claritas Pop-Facts, block group level tApr. '2008)
Parks -Calif. Protected Areas Database v. 1.3 (Aug. 2009)
i Community FactFinder.% J%cr'. .Y 1 f¢fie
`�..� lit feri id Depdrtmeri'rl PJ6S and Nr[rNdWJ11
L
.V,Y IY. d1111[J OY
rr,,r,iV F, .vmJll='rrl•d
'1 lleniMtr NeNaa.
51
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
Conceptual Plan
1
.;Z�
i
} . , of
f + �
U
W
;Par
v.
�, ' • T 4 .'r :,y r •mow# �`f�:. rs� rr.z - f/
Picnic Areas
Exercise Stations