The URL can be used to link to this page

03/10/1988j- COUNTER COPY - PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE - FROM LIBRARY COUNTER!! 22795 BARTON ROAD & GRAND TERRACE, CA 92324-5295 • CIVIC CENTER - (714) 824-6621 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS GRAND TERRACE CIVIC CENTER 22795 Barton Road * Call to Order * Invocation - * Pledge of Allegiance * Roll Call March 10, 1988 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS COUNCIL ACTION CONVENE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1. Approval of Minutes 2/25/88 Approve 2. Budget Review ADJOURN COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONVENE CITY COUNCIL 1. Items to Delete 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS A. Proclamation - Girl Scout Week March 6-12, 1988 3. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine & non -controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. Any Council Member, Staff Member or Citizen may request removal of an item from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Approve A. Approve Check Register No. 031088 B. Ratify 3/10/88 CRA Action C. Waive Full Reading of Ordinances on Agenda D. Approve Minutes of 2/11/88 & 2/25/88 Approve n COUNCIL AGENDA 03//10/88- Page 2 of 2 E. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 84-34. F. Reject Grand Terrace Liability Claim No. 88-1 (Benitez). 4. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 15. ORAL REPORTS A. Committee Reports 1. Report by Crime Services Officer 2. Crime Prevention Committee (a) Candidates for Membership on the Crime Prevention Committee. (b) Report by Committee Chairman 3. Parks & Recreation Committee (a) Minutes of 1/4/88 I6. PUBLIC HEARINGS - 6:30 P.M. A. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ESTABLISHING A LOITERING ORDINANCE (SECOND READING). 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. SA-87-14 - A Request to Construct a Recreational Vehicle Park & Commercial Center (Keeney). B. SA-87-11 - Appeal of Planning Commission Approval (MS Partnership). 8. NEW BUSINESS A. Mid -Year Budget Review. B. TPM-87-9 - A Request for Exemption From Residential Moratorium (Fox). (ADJOURN THE NEXT REGULAR CRA/CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WILL BE HELD THURSDAY, MARCH 24, 1988 AT 5:30 P.M. -------------------------------------------------- AGENDA ITEM REQUESTS FOR THE 3/24/88 MEETING MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BY NOON ON 3/16/88. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Adopt Reject Adopt Uphold Planning Commission Decision COUNCIL ACTION r CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - FEBRUARY 25, 1988 A regular meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency, City of Grand Terrace, was held in the Council Chambers, Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on February 25, 1988, at 5:30 p.m. PRESENT: Byron Matteson, Chairman Hugh J. Grant, Agency Member Susan Shirley, Agency Member Thomas J. Schwab, Executive Director Juanita Brown, Secretary Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney Joe Kicak, City Engineer ABSENT: Barbara Pfennighausen, Vice Chairman Dennis L. Evans, Agency Member Randy Anstine, Assistant City Manager David Sawyer, Planning Director APPROVAL OF JANUARY 28, 1988 & FEBRUARY 11, 1988 CRA MINUTES CRA-88-06 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER SHIRLEY, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER GRANT, CARRIES 3-2' (VICE CHAIRMAN PFENNIGHAUSEN AND AGENCY MEMBER EVANS BEING ABSENT), to approve January 28, 1988 and February 11, 1988 CRA Minutes. APPROVAL OF CHECK REGISTER NO. CRA022588 CRA-88-07 MOTION BY AGENCY MEMBER SHIRLEY, SECOND BY AGENCY MEMBER GRANT, CARRIED 3-2 (VICE CHAIRMAN PFENNIGHAUSEN AND AGENCY MEMBER EVANS BEING ABSENT), to approve Check Register No. CRA022588. Chairman Matteson adjourned the CRA Meeting at 5:35 p.m. until the next regular meeting which will be held Thursday, March 10, 1988 at 5:30 p.m. CHAIRMAN of the City of Grand Terrace SECRETARY of the City of Grand Terrace CRA - ,, -- DATE: Mar 4, 1988 S T A F F R E P O R T CRA ITEM (xx) COUNCIL ITEM ( ) MEETING DATE: Mar 10, 1988 4, SUBJECT: -------------------------------- CRA BUDGET REVIEW --------------------------------- FUNDING REQUIRED xx NO FUNDING REQUIRED Two items within the Community Redevelopment Budget requires adjustment. As Council will recall, staff conducted a residual cash sale on the 1981 housing bond issue that resulted in a revenue to the Agency of $413,750. 16 The Agency is aware of the obligation to provide sprinkler irrigation systems per our agreement with the School District. The original low bid was to Sorian Landscaping for $38,500. The contractor, however, has been unable to provide the necessary bonds for construction and the award has now been given to the second lowest bidder, Mark Levi Landscaping, for $41,000. Staff, therefore, needs to increase the sprinkler budget line item 32-947-255 from the approved $38,500 amd will need an additional appropriation of $2,500. STAFF RECOMMENDS: 1. COUNCIL APPROVE THE ADJUSTMENT REVENUE FOR THE RESIDUAL CASH SALE ON THE BOND ISSUE LINE ITEM 32-700-04 IN THE AMOUNT OF $413,750. 2. THE AGENCY APPROPRIATE AN ADDITIONAL $2,500 TO LINE ITEM 32-470-255 FOR THE SCHOOL SPRINKLER UPGRADE FOR A TOTAL APPROPRIATION OF $41,000. TS:bt CRA AUEi'dDA 11 EM NO. CL til a ti-011 GIRL SCOUT WEEK MARCH 6-12, 1988 WHEREAS, Girl Scouts of the U.S.A. recognizes that today's girls will be tomorrow's leaders; and WHEREAS, Girl Scouts of the U.S.A. is the largest voluntary organization for girls in the world and draws upon a large resource of positive adult role models; and WHEREAS, the Girl Scout Movement continues to emphasize leadership and personal and career develop- ment for girls; and WHEREAS, our community and world will be the direct beneficiaries of the skilled young women who are Girl Scouts: NOW, THEREFCRE, I, Byron R. Matteson, Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace, on behalf of the City Council, do urge the citizens of Grand Terrace to support the Girl Scouts in their endeavors; I now proclaim this week, March 6-12, 1988, as: "GIRL SCOUT WEEK" Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof. This 10th day of March, 1988. CITY OF(AND TERRACE DATE: MARCH Io, 19HA CHECK REGISTER NO: 031088 CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF: MARCH 10. 1988 _ NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT P5531 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 2/19/88 $ 251.70 P5532 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 2/19/88 197.78 P5533 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 2/22/88 136.26 P5534 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 2/22/88 272.07 P5535 TED MULLER PRINT FLYERS FOR CRIMEBUSTERS 33.00 P5536 PADDEN COMPANY LEASE ON MAILING MACHINE AND OLYMPIA FOR TWO MONTHS 358.34 P5537 WORDPERFECT CORPORATION WORDPERFECT UPDATE FOR COMPUTER 50.00 P5538 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 2/24/88 74.75 P5539 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 2/24/88 73.79 P5540 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY ELECTRIC FOR ONE SIGNAL AND THREE CITY BUILDINGS 212.61 P5541 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY GAS FOR CIVIC CENTER AND THREE CITY BUILDINGS 986.05 P5542 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 2/26/88 273.35 P5543 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 2/26/88 92.83 P5544 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 2/29/88 132.54 P5545 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 2/29/88 144.30 P5546 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO RELEASE LIENS ON TWO PROPERTIES 18.00 P5547 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 3/2/88 264.37 P5548 SOUTHERN CA GAS COMPANY CASH PAYMENTS, 3/2/88 130.01 18028 DISNEYLAND RECREATION EXCURSION 540.00 �r 18029 ADELE HARGRAVE REFUND ON RECREATION EXCURSION 28.50 18030 JACK HARPER WASTEWATER DISPOSAL REFUND 4.80 a 18031 GARY PAPROCKI WASTEWATER DISPOSAL REFUND 5.60 18032 KATHLEEN FITZGERALD WASTEWATER DISPOSAL REFUND 5.87 10833 ACCENT PRINT AND DESIGN REPRINTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN 91.58 10834 AMATEUR ELECTRONIC SUPPLY SUPPLIES FOR EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER 1,580.07 1 CHECK NUMBER VENDOR 10835 AMERICAL GROUP 10836 AT&T INFORMATION SYSTEMS 10837 BASTANCHURY BOTTLED WATER 10838 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 10839 CITY OF COLTON 10840 BARBARA CONLEY 10841 DICK SMITH ELECTRONICS 10842 EWING IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 10843 FOOTHILL JOURNAL 10844 FRITZ'S LAWNMOWER REPAIR 10845 G.T. MAILERS 10846 HELMAN'S DEPARTMENT STORE 10847 SUSAN KAUFFMAN 10848 KLEEN-LINE CORPORATION 10849 LOMA LINDA DISPOSAL 10850 MOTRON ELECTRONICS 10851 JEAN MYERS 10852 NCR CORPORATION 10853 NORTH CENTRAL SOFTWARE 10854 OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY 10855 PACIFIC BELL 10856 PETRA ENTERPRISES CITY OFAND TERRACE DATE: C CH 10. 1988 OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF: DESCRIPTION CHECfREGISTER NO: 031088 MARCH 10, 1988 DISKS FOR COMPUTER AND OFFICE SUPPLIES RENT PHONE FOR EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER RENT COOLERS AND BOTTLED WATER FOR DAY CARE AND CIVIC CENTER MAINTENANCE AND ENERGY FOR LIGHTS AT BARTON/215 12/87 WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SERVICES FOR MARCH, 1988 RECREATION CONFERENCE, LONG BEACH TELEPHONES FOR EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER IRRIGATION SUPPLIES FOR PARK CITY NEWS, 2/25/88 MAINTENANCE/REPAIR LAWNMOWERS INSERT RECREATION BROCHURES IN CHAMBER NEWSLETTER SOFTBALL BASES LOW IMPACT AEROBICS INSTRUCTOR JANITORIAL SUPPLIES FOR CIVIC CENTER TRASH PICK-UP FOR CIVIC CENTER AND PARK, MARCH, 1988 EQUIPMENT FOR EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER CROSSING GUARD, 2/13-2/26/88 SOFTWEAR SUPPORT, 1/19-4/l/88 DISK FOR SIGN INVENTORY MAINTENANCE ON ELEVATOR, MARCH, 1988 TELEPHONE FOR CIVIC CENTER, EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER, AND DAY CARE RECREATION SPRING BROCHURES, NOTICE OF GENERAL PLAN MEETING AMOUNT $ 108.12 4.35 96.30 235.71 20,008.12 350.66 124.90 64.52 250.00 45.00 100.00 127.14 84.75 82.05 76.70 92.95 114.48 109.39 22.40 193.88 910.69 1,026.93 r CITY r GRAND TERRACE c DATE: MARCH 10, 1988 CHECK REGISTER NO: CHECK OUTSTANDING DEMANDS AS OF: MARCH 10. 1988 NUMBER VENDOR DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 10857 CORINNE PETTIT 10858 PETTY CASH 10859 RADIO SHACK 10860 RECO REFRIGERATION COMPANY 10861 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 10862 RAELENE SEARLE 10863 SMART AND FINAL IRIS COMPANY 10864 SOUTHERN CA EDISON COMPANY 10865 SQUIRES LUMBER COMPANY 10866 TAB PRODUCTS COMPANY 10867 UNION OIL COMPANY OF CA 10868 CATALINA VARELA 10869 WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY AEROBICS INSTRUCTOR FOR DAY CARE CASSETTE TAPES AND BATTERIES REPAIR AIR CONDITIONER, CIVIC CENTER DUMPING CHARGES FOR 1/25-2/3/88 STENCILING WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR OFFICE SUPPLIES ELECTRIC FOR BALL PARK LIGHTS AND SPRINKLERS AT PARK SUPPLIES TO BOARD -UP HOUSE ON COUNTRY CLUB LANE OFFICE SUPPLIES FUEL FOR CITY TRUCK CHILD CARE CONFERENCE CALIFORNIA CODE UPDATE 134.05 174.59 74.20 316.20 10.00 180.00 35.71 328.60 50.12 137.15 52.16 20.55 nr in TOTAL: $ 31,745.94 I CERTIFY THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE AFORELISTED CHECKS FOR PAYMENT OF CITY LIABILITIES HAVE BEEN AUDITED BY ME AND ARE NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE OPERATION OF THE CITY. THOMAS SCHWAB FINANCE DIRECTOR 3 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - FEBRUARY 11, 1988 CnVrl,� r . qC A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order in the Council Chambers, Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on February 11, 1988, at 5:33 p.m. PRESENT: Byron Matteson, Mayor Barbara Pfennighausen, Mayor Pro Tem Hugh J. Grant, Councilmember Dennis L. Evans, Councilmember Susan Shirley, Councilmember ABSENT: The meeting was Baptist Church, 4 Pfennighausen. Jerry Dow MS Partnership Thomas J. Schwab, City Manager/Finance Director Randy Anstine; Assistant City Manager Juanita Brown, Deputy City Clerk Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney David Sawyer, Planning Director Joe Kicak, City Engineer NONE opened with invocation by Pastor Ray Williams, Grandview followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Pro Tem Mayor Matteson asked Council if there were any items to be deleted? The City Manager requested Item 3(D) -- January 28, 1988 Minutes since they are not ready. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen requested Item 8(D) -- Appeal of Planning Commission decision of 1/18/88 (SA-87-11) be continued until March 10, 1988. Mayor Matteson asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak on the continuance? Mr. Dow stated they were prepared to get some input from the City Council tonight, indicating they had not heard about a continuance. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated that the Planning Commission Minutes for that meeting are not ready or available to the other members of this Council. Therefore, she was requesting that this item be continued until March 10, 1988. CC-88-17 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, second by Councilmember Evans, ALL AYES, that Item 8(D) be continued until March 10, 1988. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Matteson asked Council if there were any items on the Consent Calendar to be removed for discussion. CC-88-18 Motion by Councilmember Shirley, second by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Item A - Approve Check Register No. 021188 Item B - Ratify February 11, 1988 CRA Action Item C - Waive Full Reading of Ordinances and Resolutions on Agenda. Item D - Deleted Item E - Appropriation for Eminent Domain Proceedings. ORAL REPORTS Item 5A-3a Ms. Korgan reported that the Coordinator of the Crime Community Busters Program has resigned. She introduced Mrs. Deborah Services Officer Mueller and her daughter Angela, who have volunteered their service to the Crime Busters Program. She then gave a report on the upcoming Safety Fair and the Citizens Patrol program and stated that E.J. Snow Ford donated the Citizens Patrol car and the Lion's Club has donated $2,000.00 for the Citizens Patrol training and uniforms. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Dick Yost Mr. Yost gave an update on the Chamber of Commerce's President of the current events and future events. Chamber of Commerce Gary Arnold Mr. Arnold expressed his feelings regarding the election 709 N. Bradford of the City Attorney and also Executive Sessions. Placentia Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen thanked Mr. Arnold for his concerns, but stated that the City Council does not need his assistance in running the City. She stated that the people of Grand Terrace elected them to make the decisions for the City, which included contracting many of its services. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 2 Continued Public Participation Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen pointed out that if the citizens of this community choose to have the City Attorney elected, then they can petition Council for that. Mr. Arnold stated that she was incorrect, he being a part of the public has a right to petition the government. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she was not saying that he could not speak, but felt his input was not needed in telling the Council how to run the City. Dick Rollins Mr. Rollins stated he would like to join the Crime 22700 DeBerry Prevention Committee, as well as remain a member of the Parks and Recreation Committee and asked if there was policy which would prohibit him from doing that. City Attorney Hopkins replied, he did not recall there being such a policy, but felt it would be up to Council whether or not they would permit that. Councilmember Grant stated he was not in opposition to a person serving on more than one committee. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen concurred with Councilmember Grant. Mr. Rollins stated he will submit his application and continued his discussion with reflecting on the Citizens Patrol program. Tony Petta Since we will be celebrating Abraham Lincoln's birthday, 11875 Eton Drive Mr. Petta reflected on the many accomplishments of Abraham Lincoln that he admired. He made reference to the issue of potential park sites and offered his services as a broker, free of cost to the City. He stated he attended a meeting in Fontana, sponsored by the Fair Political Practice Commission, and a question came up regarding the Conflict of Interest Code, and asked the City Attorney to explain it. City Attorney Hopkins stated the general rule is that if it affects the substantial portion of the community in the same manner that affects that particular Councilmember, then he does not have a conflict and may participate in the decision. Mayor Matteson directed the City Manager to put Mr. Petta's offer as broker on the Agenda for the next meeting. City Manager Schwab agreed. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Paae 3 ORAL REPORTS Committee Reports Ralph Buchwalter Mr. Buchwalter, Chairman of the Crime Prevention 22970 Merle Ct. Committee, discussed accomplishments and upcoming events of the Chamber of Commerce and advised of their current committee vacancies. Mayor Matteson stated the safety fair was very educational last year and hoped that the Foothill Journal would endorse the upcoming affair. r. CC-88-19 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, second by Councilmember Evans, ALL AYES, to accept the resignations of Bob Bailes, Laurie Payce and Jamie Butler with regret and that appropriate letters be sent out to all three and vacancies posted. Viola Gratson Mrs. Gratson, Chairperson of the Historical and Cultural 12168 Mt. Vernon Activities Committee, gave an update on the requested Avenue banner explaining the purpose, as well as what it would look like and gave an update on their upcoming events. CC-88-20 Motion by Councilmember Grant, second by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, ALL AYES, to approve this request for this expenditure for a permanent banner for the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee be approved by this Council. �av COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Councilmember Evans inquired as to the status of the Evans development on Pico Park Site. City Manager Schwab replied, staff is currently developing an idea for what we would like to have developed and stated that the Engineering Department is doing some topographic work on that development. He indicated that one ballfield should be developed by the end of this fiscal year, and if not, we will be back before Council for other direction. Councilmember Evans asked the City Manager if he will be preparing a time schedule for Council as to what is available and is hoped to be accomplished. City Manager Schwab agreed to prepare a schedule. Councilmember Evans asked the City Manager if he had conferred with the Parks and Recreation Committee in reference to the development? Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 4 Continued Council Reports City Manager Schwab replied, staff will be asking the Parks and Recreation Committee to put that on their Agenda for their March meeting and to give Council some recommendations as to what they see as priority. Councilmember Evans asked if a time schedule would be available by the next Council meeting. City Manager Schwab replied, as soon as staff gives it to the Parks and Recreation Committee they will also make copies for Council. tbw Councilmember Evans stated Council had an opportunity to review the original draft of the City's General Plan last Friday and in that document there was a proposal made by the consultants that Barton Road be improved with a center median which would be landscaped. He stated he would like to see this phased in with the upgrade of Barton Road and getting a preliminary cost, if there is concurrence of Council. Council concurred with Mayor Matteson stating that it was a good idea with not only the median, but trees along the side. Councilmember Councilmember Shirley reported that she attended the Shirley Omnitrans Board meeting February 3, 1988, as 4 representative of the City. Councilmember Councilmember Grant reported attending the Omnitrans Board Grant meeting as alternate; attended the SANDBAG meeting and the County Transportation Commission meeting as the principal member on the same day. He indicated that he received a memorandum from the City Engineer regarding the substantial difference in cost for the reconstruction of Arliss Drive between Barton Road and Minona. He stated the partial construction of this thoroughfare would probably be sufficient to resolve the problems of flooding the residents have been experiencing. Mayor Matteson asked City Engineer Kicak what was his recommendation, the complete reconstruction or the partial reconstruction? City Engineer Kicak replied if we are just trying to solve the drainage problem, he believed the partial reconstruction would be adequate, but it's the drainage problem that we are concerned with. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 5 Continued Council Reports Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she believed we could spend $35,000.00 now and not adequately address the problem without removing the roadbed. She stated if we left the road the way it is and adjusted curbs and gutters, we are still going to have water flowing down and sitting in driveways. Councilmember Grant stated partial reconstruction would resolve the main cause of the water going into these residents' front yards. rr Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen replied, it still doesn't solve the problem because the grade of the road sits high and invited Council to go out and take a look at this before making a decision. City Engineer Kicak stated the problem we have now is that we have curbs in some areas that have sunk, there is no continuous grade along from Barton Road from the crown of Arliss as it comes out from Barton towards Minona. He felt if we remove the curb from where it is now and put in a straight grade between the top of the ground, north of Barton down to Minona, the curbs and driveways that will be constructed will provide adequate capacity for the drainage in that area to eliminate the problem that exists now. He stated the problem is a lack of consistent drainage that will carry that water off as a result of puddles. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked if this is an adequate solution to the problem? City Engineer Kicak replied it's a solution to the drainage problem. However, if we are talking about reconstruction the full street to the curb standards it's not. City Manager Schwab stated since we did not put this item on the Agenda, the information that was provided to Councilmember Grant was what the cost would be to improve that particular stretch. He stated that there are other areas in the City that might be in even more need for this type of work and with the limited source of funds that are available, that might not be where you would put the funds. Mayor Matteson asked if he staff to look at citywide back to Council as soon as Council concurred. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 PaaP 6 had consensus of Council for flooding problems and bring it possible. Continued Council Reports Mayor Pro Tem Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen reported attending the Pfennighausen Southern California Associated Governments (SCAG) Conference, as well as Councilmember Evans. She stated she had some concerns in our continued membership in SCAG in that SCAG seems to only address problems in Los Angeles and Orange County. Councilmember Grant felt staff should look into the value of SCAG. Councilmember Evans stated what we probably need to do is to consolidate and bring together the representatives in this southern part of California and have SCAG start harvesting our problems so that we can more utilize and make more intelligent decisions as growth comes into the area. PUBLIC HEARING Item 6(A) Assistant City Manager Anstine reported that the San Housing & Bernardino County Board of Supervisors is in the process Community of putting together the 1988 through 1991 Community Development Development Block Grant Program and at this time, they are Block Grant asking the participating cities to put together a list of projects to be submitted before the HCD staff for eligibility. It will then be brought back before Council for establishment of priorities and re-routed back to the board for final approval. Staff is asking Council for guidance and input in compiling that list that we need to submit to the board. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated a piece of information was distributed to the City Council and staff prior to the opening of this meeting by Mrs. Broussard regarding day-care for the elderly, as well as the young. A care facility where the elderly could interact with the young. Mayor Matteson asked the Assistant City Manager how much money are we talking about in the Block Grant program? Assistant City Manager Anstine replied we are looking at a reduction over the next three years, indicating it is anticipated that we can expect to receive somewhere in the neighborhood of approximately $25,000.00 per year. It was the general consensus of Council that this was a worthwhile project to look into. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Dana 7 Continued Public Hearing Assistant City Manager Anstine listed the previous projects that this Council and previous Councils have approved for Community Development Block Grant funding. He listed some of the areas that staff would like Council to consider. Tony Petta Mr. Petta stated $25,000.00 per year is not sufficient to 11875 Eton Dr. take care of any large facility, indicating the seniors and day-care will need attention in the near future. He recommended designating a day-care Senior Citizen facility use and then determining where it should be located. 440 Councilmember Evans stated instead of earmarking something this evening, he would like for the Assistant City Manager to elaborate in more detail in the form of a staff report and to provide Council with cost figures. He asked the Assistant City Manager in his opinion what it was that needed to be done and to prioritize those items and bring them back to Council. Assistant City Manager Anstine replied that what the County is looking is not a priority list from the cities right now, they want a wish list, to think of anything and everything and submit it to them so that they can review and declare it eligible or ineligible. He stated staff will get more specific at the time it is brought back to Council for prioritization with a budget attached to it, 4 but at this point in time, it is strictly a wish list. Mayor Matteson asked the Assistant City Manager to add to your list all the things you heard tonight and then let Council review it. He asked when did the list have to turned in and did they have time to review it at the next Council meeting? Assistant City Manager Anstine replied he did not think so, but he would check on it. Councilmember Evans asked once the wish list is submitted, how long will it take for the reply? Assistant City Manager Anstine replied they are looking at around a 45 day turn -around period, this program does not start until July 1, 1988. Councilmember Evans stated, but we would know before the new budget year as to whether or not any of these projects would be meeting the criteria. The response was "yes." Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 8 Continued Public Hearing Councilmember Evans suggested that 30 days from the date of receipt of what is going to be authorized, you have a staff report and hopefully it can.be done in conjunction with the budget. Mayor Matteson stated to meet this deadline, go ahead and prepare the list, submit a copy to each Councilmember and then if they don't approve it, they can call a special meeting and it will be discussed beforehand, indicating otherwise proceed. Recessed at 7:00 p.m. Reconvened at 7:15 p.m. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Item 7(A) City Manager Schwab stated at the meeting of December 17, Snack Bar 1987, Council directed staff to look into the background Recommendations of the snack bar and make a recommendation to Council on how to proceed. He gave a description of what presently exists and what staff's recommendation is. He pointed out that the Soccer Club is willing to use their own volunteer labor and materials to finish the interior of the structure and to operate it. He stated the second alternative is that if the Soccer Club is either not interested in it or we could not negotiate a lease, staff has received a letter from the School District indicating that they have a general interest in the structure if the City was not interested in operating it as a snack bar. He stated in the staff report it is shown that the total expenditures to date has been $10,058.00 and what staff is asking for is an appropriation of $5,750.00, pointing out that $4,750.00 of that has already been committed or spent. Mayor Matteson asked if the $5,750.00 was part of the $10,058.00? City Manager Schwab replied, "that's true," the total cost when we are finished will be $11,708.00 and that is for the exterior. Barbara Conley Ms. Conley, Chairman of the Parks and Recreation 22857 Dove Street Committee, stated the Parks and Recreation Committee has already given Council their recommendation on how to complete the snack bar. She stated the parks and Recreation Committee, as a committee, is not aware of staff's recommendation or evaluation. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 9 Continued Unfinished Business CC-88-21 Motion by Mayor Matteson, second by Councilmember Shirley, to follow staff's recommendation and appropriate $5,750.00 and also offer this building for lease to the Soccer Club. Mayor Matteson felt this was a good situation, indicating the Little League in Colton has been very successful and made most of the funds from handling the snack bar, and just like we allow the Lion's Club to control the Senior Citizens building, he felt it is a good idea. Councilmember Grant stated he believes the Soccer Club's intent is that this will be used as a fortified storage area which will be utilized by other clubs and organizations. Mayor Matteson asked the City Manager to verify this and asked if this going to be used as a storage or a snack bar? City Manager Schwab stated it was his understanding that they were going to use it as a combination of storage and snack bar. Councilmember Evans felt it should be offered to all of the organizations, indicating if this becomes a viable building that is utilized and the Soccer Club is the only organization who had the opportunity to get first crack, there might be some ill will. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she wanted it to be a snack bar and not a storage facility, indicating she has reservations about any youth organization within the Terrace taking this facility over and managing it. She felt it puts organizations against each other for use, which creates friction. Councilmember Grant concurred with Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen and asked if we had any idea what the remaining cost would be to convert this into a viable snack bar over and beyond what the Lion's Club hopefully would contribute. City Manager Schwab replied in round figures he believes it is about $3,750.00 more, and if the Lion's Club contributes $2,500.00, we are looking at $1,250.00 to the City. Mayor Matteson stated he would like to amend his motion to appropriate the $5,700.00 to complete it, and that we offer it to a service club to operate and manage and that they complete the inside and operate it as a snack bar. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Pana 1n Continued Unfinished Business Councilmember Shirley withdrew her second. Mayor Matteson stated Motion CC-88-21 died, due to lack of second. CC-88-22 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, second by Councilmember Shirley, to appropriate $9,500.00 for the completion of the snack bar as a structure, which includes the cabinet work and that when it is completed, that we take the $2,500.00 that the Lion's Club has pledged to the facility and outfit it on the inside. Councilmember Grant asked if it was consensus to let someone from the floor speak after a motion is on the floor, is that correct. He stated he would like to get Mr. Petta's feelings since he represents the Lion's Club. Tony Petta Mr. Petta expressed his thoughts on the subject of the 11875 Eton Drive snack bar, indicating it was through input from Assistant City Manager Anstine that Council arrived at the conclusion that it was no longer viable to continue with that building. He stated that the Soccer Club was really coming to the rescue by their offer, indicating he felt Council should get Assistant City Manager Anstine's input before going any further on this. Assistant City Manager Anstine stated he and the City Manager sat down and discussed this at great length, stating he conveyed to City Manager Schwab what the proposal was by the Soccer Club and the reaction of the School District and they jointly formulated this recommendation to the Council. Mayor Matteson stated he concurred with staff's recommendation. Assistant City Manager Anstine stated if that is the way Council would vote, staff will need further clarification as to whether or not these dollars are earmarked for completion of the ongoing volunteer labor force or do we actually terminate that and bring in a licensed contractor under contract to complete the job. He stated if that is the case, it is going to cost much more than what's being asked for. Mr. Petta stated the Lion's Club was allocating funds for a snack bar, whereby all of the youth organizations will be able to utilize it. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 11 Continued Unfinished Business Councilmember Grant stated the whole idea behind this is to make this into what it should have been in the first place, a snack bar. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen concurred with Councilmember Grant. Councilmember Evans asked, if the City continues to outfit this snack bar, what legal procedures will we have to follow; are we going to have to go out for bid and will that create any problems. He questioned, if we were to give it to the Soccer Club, what kind of problems over and above the potential cost would they encounter. City Attorney Hopkins replied referencing the latter question of what they would encounter, their biggest problem he assumed would be providing the insurance, indicating if we lease it, we will want some insurance from them. He stated it's a money making facility, but they are going to have to complete it with volunteer help. He stated if the City completes it under the proposal as before, he understands that's volunteer help and obviously we are not putting that out to bid, but if a contractor is brought in, that's going to require a public bid. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen felt if the City supplied the 4, materials, we could get volunteers to do the refined labor that has to be done, such as the plumbing, electrical wiring and so forth. Councilmember Grant concurred with Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen. Motion CC-88-22 carried with Mayor Matteson voting NOE, to appropriate $9,500.00 to complete the exterior and interior with the exception of appliances. Item 7(B) City Manager Schwab reported that at the last meeting, SA-87-14, A Mr. Keeney had brought up his proposed site plan, and request to Council had indicated some concerns over Caltrans' construct a objection to the driveway locations. He stated Mr. Keeney RV Park and has been in contact with Caltrans and at this point had Commercial not received a definite retraction or something that would Center give Council some comfort level. He stated what Mr. Keeney would like to do is address Council on the issue, explaining that the Planning Commission has approved the plan with the stipulation of No. 38, that there would be one driveway only. He felt Mr. Keeney's proposal tonight would be to ask for a two -driveway approach as was indicated in the past. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Paae 12 Continued Unfinished Business Bob Keeney Mr. Keeney reported that he is presently going through 12139 Mt. Vernon Assemblyman Bill Leonard trying to get Caltrans to either retract the letter or at least write another letter saying that it is completely out of their jurisdiction and that they have nothing to do with it. He stated they would like to progress with the project and would like a vote from Council saying that if we can satisfy the legal department of the City, that they approve the project as submitted. Mayor Matteson felt it should be resolved with Caltrans 4 first and then brought back to the City Council. Mr. Keeney stated he asked for Council's approval on this pending the satisfaction of the City Attorney because it is a legal problem. He did not feel anybody was arguing the design that their engineer came up with at the request of the City Council; he felt it is better than anything that Caltrans has proposed. Mayor Matteson replied there is a design problem according to Caltrans, indicating that is the problem, the letter they sent said there is a design problem. Mr. Keeney stated if we can get Caltrans to withdraw that statement, then the City apparently doesn't have any problems with the way it is designed now. 40 Councilmember Shirley asked the City Attorney if Caltrans were either to say that they have no jurisdiction in that area or retract their letter would that satisfy our problem here. City Attorney Hopkins replied probably so. CC-88-23 Motion by Councilmember Shirley, to okay Mr. Keeney's project SA-87-14 with the stipulation that he get us off the hook with Caltrans. Motion CC-88-23 died for lack of second. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated that Mr. Keeney has supplied a lane where people could turn into his facility and questioned if he was aware of potential future plans to widen Barton Road and the bridge on the other side of the freeway. Mr. Keeney replied they are widening the street to its ultimate width right now. He stated the lanes will be considerably wider than Barton Road and will have a 100-foot right-of-way with a 72-foot curb to curb. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 13 Continued Unfinished Business Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked the City Engineer if that would match Barton Road on both sides and the bridge expansion were that to happen, would that then be consistent with that project? City Engineer Kicak replied Barton Road easterly of I-215 element is 72 feet curb to curb which is the same as it is now required of Mr. Keeney, indicating 36 feet from centerline to curb line. He stated as far as the traffic across the bridge is concerned, he wasn't sure if that was ever any major concern to Caltrans, indicating that is something Mr. Keeney will have to address with Caltrans. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated she believed it was Council's direction before that if Mr. Keeney got clearance from Caltrans, Council did not have a problem with his project. It was the general consensus of Council that Mr. Keeney should get a letter from Caltrans agreeing to his design. Mayor Matteson told Mr. Keeney if he could get a letter on Monday, Council could call a special meeting to give him approval on it. Mr. Keeney concurred. 4 NEW BUSINESS Councilmember Shirley abstained from any discussion on this issue due to any potential conflict of interest. Item 8(A) Planning Director Sawyer stated as a result of Council's A request for direction at the last meeting, Planning Staff has met with an exemption Mr. Gene McMeans of the Riverside/Highland Water Company for the current and Mr. Barney Karger, owner of the property and discussed residential the preliminary tentative map. He stated the Planning development Department does not recommend exempting this applicant moratorium from the current moratorium, indicating such a allowing the recommendation would imply that the Planning staff feels submittal of a it is appropriate to establish minimum lot sizes prior to tentative tract the overall hearings for this area, and staff does not. map (Mr. Barney He stated considering the size of this property, any such Karger/Riverside decision would be very influential on the future Highland Water recommendations, hearings and decisions for this area. However, if the City Council feels it is necessary to exempt this application because of the water company's involvement and their declared need, the Planning Department would request that because of the States Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 14 Continued Unfinished Business Permanent Streamlining Act and vacation schedules in the month of February in the Planning Department, that the application not be accepted until after March;2, 1988. Mayor Matteson asked what the lot size's are in the general area surrounding that property? Planning Director Sawyer pointed it out on the map. He stated this area here (making indication on map) is the property which is in Tentative Tract Map 13205 owned by T.J. Austyn and they are 7,200 sq. ft. lots, which of course goes up the hillside in the A-1 acreage, which is 40,000 minimum square foot lots. Mayor Matteson asked if the one that the City Council denied was the one just mentioned, T.J. Austyn? Planning Director Sawyer replied, "no." Mayor Matteson asked that piece that is sticking in right there (indicating on the map), what size lots are those? Planning Director Sawyer replied, no size right now, it's zoned for 7,200 sq. ft. Mayor Matteson stated, he wouldn't be opposed to letting him submit a tract map, but he would be opposed to the size of the lots they have on that parcel. Councilmember Grant concurred with Mayor Matteson. Eugene McMeans Mr. McMeans stated the question before Council today is 1405 Washington two -fold; whether you will forward the exemption for the Colton moratorium, and the other, the time frame for construction Manager of of the water tank; 7 1/2 to 8 months. He continued to Riverside/ give the pros and cons for his request, ending by asking Highland Water if it could be moved forward as fast as possible. He continued with addressing the lot sizes. Councilmember Evans asked the Planning Director if the topography on the north side of the roadway is very similar to that of the Steven Fox Subdivision? The Planning Director replied, it is similar. Councilmember Evans asked how similar? Planning Director Sawyer replied, for that overall lot, it's not as steep, but it is very similar. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 15 Continued New Business Councilmember Evans addressed the Planning Director in reference to a report dated September 21, 1987, where he made a statement, that it's anticipated that during the upcoming General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Revision, this property (referencing the Fox property) will be recommended for a zone change to A-1 (R-1 40) for the R-1 20 residential designation to better blend with the surrounding zoning and land use. Councilmember Evans asked him what was he going to recommend, indicating it was fair to assume that he had some ideas? Planning Director Sawyer stated ideas is one thing, but sitting down and formulating a recommendation this early before we do that is another thing. He stated in reference to the Fox property he was going to be considering 20,000 ft. recommendations, as well as considering whether R-1 40 would be appropriate or perhaps a new zone for that area which would be around 14,000 or 15,000 sq. ft. recommendations. Councilmember Evans stated so in other words we can flip a coin right now and decide what you want to go with. City Attorney Hopkins stated Council can't make that decision this evening, it will have to be an advertised public hearing. He stated the only thing that is before Council is to exempt this from that moratorium so that they can proceed. He felt before they could proceed they need some guidelines from someone that there's going to be a good chance of success, indicating Council can't make that decision because there are certain factors that cannot be considered except at public hearings. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated that it was her understanding that what Mr. McMeans wants is a general consensus that a certain size of lot would be acceptable so they can engineer for the water tank site. City Attorney Hopkins stated he can lay it out, but you don't have to approve, at least Mr. McMeans should have gotten the feeling that you are not going to get anything very small in size. Mr. McMeans stated what they are trying to get is a guideline. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated as a guideline, she would like to see nothing developed up there less than 12,000 to 15,000 sq. ft. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 16 Continued New Business Councilmember Grant asked if Council were to approve the exemption of the application tonight, are we then required to institute a public hearing on the acreage?: City Attorney Hopkins replied, "yes sir," both you and the Planning Commission. Councilmember Grant stated that before we imply a particular size, he felt we need to have a public hearing and supported this issue and did not know why Council could not go ahead and make a motion tonight. 4 City Attorney replied as a caution that if Council does, in fact, exempt them from the moratorium for the purpose of the tentative map, that is no assurance that the tentative map that they submit at this or any other hearing will be approved. CC-88-24 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen, second by Councilmember Evans, that in the area under discussion be exempted from the moratorium in order to facilitate the installation of the water tank and that no lot in the subdivision be less than 13,000 sq. ft. City Manager Schwab stated the only reason staff indicated having a preference for minimum size lot is because if they did bring it to a 7,200 sq. ft. lot, the Planning Commission and the City Council may have turned it down. He stated under the current zoning and current General Plan, Council couldn't turn it down just based on lot size, because the lot size would be allowable under the current condition, so therefore, you would have to find some other reason to turn it down. Councilmember Grant stated for the record that the arbitrary figure of 13,000 is simply to get the motion approved, indicating he was not going to support that kind of figure. Motion CC-88-24 carried with Councilmember Shirley abstaining. Item 8(B) City Manager Schwab stated a motion made by Councilmember Feasibility Grant, directed staff to conduct a feasibility study to study regarding determine the potential of; year-round schools; schools feasibility of a high school in Grand Terrace; and Grand Terrace School District. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 17 Continued New Business City Manger Schwab indicated that this information came from City staff, as well as staff from Colton Joint Unified School District. He discussed the outcome of the research done. He stated on the issue of year-round schooling, currently the Colton Joint Unified School District is not looking at year-round schools for the next fiscal year for the district, in order for them to do that, they would have to hold a public hearing one year before the implementation of the year-round schools, they have not done that for next year and so that implies that for next year, there will be no year-round school. He stated at this point when you talk about a high school, the school district is not looking to build an additional elementary school in the area nor are they looking at the potential of building a high school here anytime in the near future. He stated if the City did desire to have an independent high school in Grand Terrace, the only feasible method would be for the City to petition and be able to pull out of the Joint Unified School District. He stated the cost of providing a school in Grand Terrace would will require about 30 acres and we will probably have a tough time coming up with that, as well as out of pocket cost of about sixteen and a quarter dollars. He summarized that it appears there is no immediate plans for year-round schools in Colton, no plans in the near future to accommodate high school students within the geographical boundaries of Grand Terrace or the likelihood of the City forming it's own school district and financing the expansion. Councilmember Grant agreed it was a very detailed report, indicating it should be common knowledge to members of this Council that majority of the people in this town would probably like to see the kind of things that he had recommended here. He stated he was delighted at the observation regarding the year-round school because he was opposed to that. Councilmember Grant stated he was disappointed over the other two issues, the idea of a high school and a school district. He agreed with improving our relationship with the school district through our board members, particular those who represent Grand Terrace and expressed his appreciation to staff for the research done. Item 8(C) City Attorney Hopkins reported this is an ORDINANCE OF THE Loitering CITY COUNCIL OF GRAND TERRACE, CA ADDING CHAPTER 9.12 Ordinance LOITERING TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 18 Continued New Business City Manager Schwab stated the potential Ordinance has arisen from a situation that exists on Barton Road going into the Stater Bros. Shopping Center, where individuals are soliciting work. Staff is asking to adopt the 1st reading and set a public hearing for the meeting of February 25, 1988. CC-88-25 Motion by Mayor Matteson to adopt the 1st reading and conduct a public hearing to be set for the meeting of February 25, 1988. Councilmember Evans stated our problem is how can you rectify the problem that you have, indicating he doesn't want to pass an ordinance that has absolutely no teeth to it. He stated the courts have defined loitering as lying in wait and waiting to commit a crime. He stated the only thing these people are doing is waiting for work, indicating they are not out there with the intent of wanting to commit a crime, they are looking for some revenue so they can pay their bills, instead of standing in the welfare lines. He stated that he had suggested to the City Manager whether or not the term loitering could not be changed possibly to trespassing and could that govern the actions that we are trying to prohibit. Councilmember Evans questioned the City Attorney regarding sections in the proposed Ordinance versus similar sections in the Penal Code, indicating we have sections already in the books that would serve our needs, is it just a matter of enforcing those? City Attorney stated one of the advantages to the City adopting an ordinance is that they can be cited by the City as an infraction rather than a violation of the Penal Code and a misdemeanor charge. Motion CC-88-25 carried 4 AYES with Councilmember Grant being absent on the vote. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 19 u Adjourned City Council meeting at 8:55 p.m. until the next regular City Council meeting which will be held Thursday, February 25, 1988 at 5:30 p.m. Council Minutes - 02/11/88 Page 20 Respectfully submitted: Deputy City Clerk APPROVED: Mayor CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - FEBRUARY 25, 1988 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace was called to order in the Council Chambers, Grand Terrace Civic Center, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, on February 25, 1988, at 5:35 p.m. PRESENT: Byron Matteson, Mayor Hugh J. Grant, Councilmember Susan Shirley, Councilmember Thomas J. Schwab, City Manager/Finance Director Juanita Brown, Deputy City Clerk Ivan Hopkins, City Attorney Joe Kicak, City Engineer ABSENT: Barbara Pfennighausen, Mayor Pro Tem Dennis L. Evans, Councilmember Randy Anstine, Assistant City Manager David Sawyer, Planning Director The meeting was opened with invocation by Dick Yost, President of the Grand Terrace Chamber of Commerce, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Councilmember Grant. ITEMS TO DELETE None. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS Proclamation read by Mayor Matteson regarding "Cancer Awareness Week," April 18-24, 1988. CONSENT CALENDAR CC-88-26 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER GRANT, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SHIRLEY, CARRIED 3-2 (MAYOR PRO TEM PFENNIGHAUSEN AND COUNCILMEMBER EVANS BEING ABSENT), to approve the Consent Calendar. A. CHECK REGISTER NO. 022588 B. RATIFY 2/25/88 CRA ACTION C. WAIVE FULL READING OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS ON AGENDA D. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 28, 1988, CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 05, 1988 E. ACCEPTANCE OF AUDITED ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT AND SINGLE AUDIT REPORT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ORAL REPORTS UNFINISHED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS Dick Yost, President, Grand Terrace Chamber of Commerce, summarized the events the Chamber is involved with, as well as upcoming events. Dick Rollins. 22700 DeBerry Street, stated that the upcoming demonstration by Sgt. English of the Eagle Center regarding the Computer Aided Dispatch Service will be very informative to Council, as well as the citizens. A. Judy Orttung, San Bernardino County Environmental Health Services, gave an outline of what the State requires of cities regarding the plan and presented an overview of what the proposals are in the plan. B. Commission/Committee None. Council accepted the February 1, 1988 Minutes submitted by the Historical and Cultural Activities Committee. C. Councilmembers Councilmember Grant, reported that he represented the cities at the LAFC on February 17, 1988 and in addition, went on a field trip to Apple Valley with the LAFC regarding possible cityhood. None. A. Discussion Reqardinq Minutes CC-88-27 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SHIRLEY, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER GRANT, CARRIED 3-2 (MAYOR PRO TEM PFENNIGHAUSEN AND COUNCILMEMBER EVANS ABSENT), to go to an action item minute format following the format of the City of San Clemente and using the audio and visual tapes for preparation of the minutes only, after which they would be destroyed. Cnunri i Mi nirtPq - n2/?r,/RR B. Consider Offer for Brokerage Services on Potential Parkland Acquisition City Manager Schwab summarized Council's direction at the last meeting for Staff to obtain an in-house broker; noting that Mr. Tony petta offered his services free of charge to the City; advised that since Mr. Petta owns or is partners on three of the parcels Staff is looking at, he could not act as the City's agent; asked for Council's consideration and action. CC-88-28 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SHIRLEY, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER GRANT, CARRIED 3-2 (MAYOR PRO TEM PFENNIGHAUSEN AND COUNCILMEMBER EVANS BEING ABSENT), directing the City Manager to prepare a letter stating the stipulations that Mr. Petta made about any financial gain through any transaction going to the City and send it to all brokers with a business license in the City, soliciting their help with Mr. Petta on a committee. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, CA, estab fishing a Loitering Ordinance CC-88-29 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER SHIRLEY, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER GRANT, CARRIED 3-2 (MAYOR PRO TEM PFENNIGHAUSEN AND COUNCILMEMBER EVANS BEING ABSENT), to continue the second reading of the Loitering Ordinance to the Council meeting of March 10, 1988. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Matteson adjourned the City Council meeting at 8:55 p.m. until the next regular City Council meeting which will be held Thursday, March 10, 1988 at 5:30 p.m. DEPUTY CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace MAYOR of the City of Grand Terrace Council Minutes - 02/25/88 DATE: Mar 2, 1988 S T A F F R E P O R T CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) MEETING DATE: March 10, 1988 SUBJECT: RESCIND RESOLUTION NO. 84-34 -(y 4W FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED At the Council Meeting of February 25th Council directed staff to prepare minutes by action format as well as establishing a new policy for retention of video and audio tapes. Council directed staff that in the future video and audio tapes would be used for the purpose of preparing or aiding in the preparation of minutes and would be disposed of or erased as soon as the minutes were officially approved. We have been made aware that in November of 1984 Council adopted Resolution 84-34 (attached) that outlined the record retention policy. Under this policy it was established that the cassette tapes would be kept for two years. To effect Council's direction of February 25th, staff needs Council to rescind Resolution No. 84-34 and adopt the attached Resolution. CTnrr DrrnMMrn1nc rniintrri . RESCIND RESOLUTION NO. 84-34 AND ADOPT THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION NO. 88- TS:bt t'} INt''1!' Arr7lxjna ITI=AA . Q /- RESOLUTION NO. 88- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN CITY RECORDS AS PROVIDED BY SECTION 34090 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. WHEREAS, the keeping of numerous records is not necessary after a certain period of time for the effective and efficient operation of the government of the City of Grand Terrace; and WHEREAS, Section 34090 of the Government Code of the State of California provides a procedure whereby any City record which has served its purpose and is no longer required may be destroyed, and the destruction of said records will not interfere with the services and functions of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, The City Council of the City of Grand Terrace does hereby resolve, determine, and demand as follows: Section 1. That the records of the City of Grand Terrace, as set forth in a schedule by groups on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, are hereby authorized to be destroyed as provided by Section 34090 of the Government Code of the State of California and in accordance with the provisions of said schedule upon the request of the department head and with the consent, in writing, of the City Attorney without further action by the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace. Section 2. The provisions of Section 1. above do not authorize the destruction of: (a) Records affecting the title to real property or liens thereon; (b) Court records; (c) Records required to be kept by statute; (d) Records less than two (2) years old; (e) The minutes, ordinances, or resolutions of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace or of any City board, committee, or commission. Section 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 2., the duplicates of records not less than two (2) years old which are no longer required are hereby authorized to be destroyed as set forth in the attached Exhibit "A". Section 4. The destruction of any record as provided for herein shall be by burning, shredding, or other effective method of destruction, and said destruction shall be witnessed by the City Clerk or designated representative. Section 5. The term "records" as used herein shall include documents, instruments, books, microfilm or papers. The term "records" shall not include audio or video tapes. ADOPTED this day of , 1988. ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk ot the i y Mayor of the City of Grand - of Grand Terrace and of the Terrace and of the City Council Cith Council thereof. thereof. I, Juanita Brown, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held on the day of 4 , 1988, by the following vole: Approved as to form: City Attorney -2- Deputy City Clerk i Group I Group II Group III Group IV EXHIBIT "A" Resolution No. 84-34 Adopted November 8 . 1984 DESCRIPTION OF PERMANENT RECORDS Building Permits Maps Plans Drawings Checks & Inspections Easements Deeds Liens Condemnations Assessment Districts Utility Undergrounding Flood Control Cablevision Capital Improvements Streets Lights Trees Signals Signs Curbs Gutters Bikeways Drainage Soil Erosion Hydrology Parks Landscaping Rights -of -'play Parking Weed Abatement Street Names & Numbers Housing General Plan Amendments Records Required by Statute, such as Articles of Incorporation, annexations, final audits, certain contracts and leases, etc. Minutes, Ordinances, and Resolutions of City Council or Boards and Commissions. Notices of special meetings, affidavits, supporting exhibits. Documents with lasting administrative, legal, fiscal, historical or research value including, but not limited to: Personnel cumulative records, Reviews, Promotions, Time Records, Leave, CETA, Policy and Procedures, OSHA Inspections, Affirmative Action Programs. Fiscal: Audit - Annual and Semi-annual, Budget Allocations, Appropriations, Expenditures, Encumbrances, Journals and Ledgers, Inventory, Payroll, Receipts, Collections, Check Register, Capital Property, Business Licenses, Fees, Schedules, Grants, Bonds, Trust Funds, Revenue Sharing, Treasurer's Register. Historical - City Organization Charts, City Flower/Tree/Motto/Poem, Bicentennial Year, Press Releases, Report and Statistical Analyses. OTHER RECORDS Groups V Pertain to duplicate copies of the above four listings, reference thru XIII files, and transitory files. Groups XIV, Include items which can be destroyed departmentally upon supersession i XV & XVI or obsolescence. Exhibit "A" Resolution No. 84-34 Page 2 of 4 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE RETENTION SCHEDULE Dnfnnf-i nn Pn'; nA' Record Group Office Center Number Title or Description Orig Dup (in yrs) (in yrs) Destroy I Records affecting title x 2 yrs Perm If Micro to real property or (See Note liens thereon. #1) II Records required to be x 2 yrs Perm If Micro kept permanently by (See Note statute. #1) III Minutes, ordinances, and x 2 yrs Perm (See Note resolutions of the City #4) Council or Boards, Commit- tees and Commissions IV Documents with lasting x 2 yrs Perm (See Note historical, administra- #1) tive, legal, fiscal, or research value & record copy of City publications V Correspondence, operation- x 2 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs al reports & information (See Note upon which City policy has #5) been established VI Duplicates of V above when x 2 yrs 2 yrs retention is necessary for reference VII Records requiring reten- x 2 yrs 5 yrs 5 yrs tion for five years by (See Note statute or administrative #3) value 2 yrs 3 yrs 5 yrs (See Note VIII Duplicates needed for x administrative purposes #5) for five years. REMARKS Note No. 1: Any item can be destroyed if there are 2 copies on microfilm, with one in safe stor- age. (Destruction years only apply if not on film.) Note No. 2: Any item not on microfilm and sub- ject to destruction will not be des- troyed without written permission of the department head & the City Attorney 1 Note No. 3: ega�ss of Office Retention period as listed, earlier transfer to the Records Center is authorized. Note No. 4: Original Council minutes, ordin- ances, resolutions, and official bonds will not be des- troyed even if microfilmed. Note No. 5: es roy upon supersession or obsolescence. N Exhibit "A" Resolution No. 84-34 Page 3 of 4 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE RETENTION SCHEDULE Retention Periods Record Group Office Center Number Title or Description Orig Dup (in yrs) (in yrs) Destroy IX All other original City x 2 yrs 1 yr 3 yrs records or instruments, (See Note books, or papers that are #3) considered public docu- ments not included in Groups I through VIII X Duplicates and other docu- x x 2 yrs 3 yrs 5 yrs ments not public record (See Note required to be maintained #5) for administrative purposes. XI Duplicate records x 1 yr 1 yr requiring retention for administrative purpose such as reference material for making up budgets, for planning, and programming. XII Reference files. (Copies x 1 yr l yr of documents which dupli- cate the record copies filed elsewhere in the City; documents which require no action and are non -record; rough drafts, notes, feeder reports, and similar working papers accumulated in preparation of a communication, study, or other document, and cards, listings, indexes, and other papers used for contolling work.) XIII Transitory files, includ- x x 3 mos 3 mos ing letters of transmittal (when not a public record) suspense copies when reply has been received, routine requests for information & publication, tracer let- ters, feeder reports, and other duplicate copies no longer needed. REMARKS Exhibit "A" Resolution No. 84- 34 Page 4 of 4 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE RETENTION SCHEDULE Rntantinn PPrinrlc Record Group Office Center Number Title or Description Orig Dup (in yrs) (in yrs) Destroy XIV Original documents dis- x 2 yrs 3 yrs 5 yrs. posable upon occurrence of (See Note an event or an action #5) (i.e., audit completion, job completion, completion of contract, etc.) or upon obsolescence, superses- sion, revocation. XV Department policy files x Indef Indef and reference sets of (See Note publications. #5) XVI Duplicates of non -record x Indef. Indef documents required for (See dote administrative needs but #5) destroyable on occurrence ow of an event or an action. REMARKS 11 DATE: Mar 3, 1988 S T A F F R E P O R T CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) MEETING DATE: Mar 10, 1988 SUBJECT: REJECT GTLC 88-01 ------------------------------------------------------------------ FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED The City of Grand Terrace has received a claim (attached) for damages in the amount of $825.55. Mr. Arthur Benitez is claiming the underside of his car was damaged due to a large dip in the road at the intersection of Van Buren and Oriole Ave. No liability can be found on the City's behalf and staff is recommending that Council reject this claim and submit it to our Claims Adjustor. [`r Arr nrnnM\Arklnn nnIl Lin I _ REJECT CLAIM GTLC 88-01 AND AUTHORIZE THE DEPUTY CITY CLERK TO REFER THE CLAIM TO OUR CLAIMS ADJUSTOR AND TO NOTIFY THE CLAIMANT OF THE ACTION TAKEN. TS:bt Attachment rraImrlr `drm1),K TrFM 8 � F CLAIM FOR DHMHGE OR INJURY Claims for death , injury to person, or to personal property must be filed not later than 100 days after the occurrence (Gov. Code, Sec. 911 .2). Claims for damages to real property must be filed not later than 1 year after the occurrence (Gov. Code, Sec. 911.2). �mur- -a 17T6- n�.� Zip one �2,wge ame of aiman Address p FILED IN OFFICE OF CITY CLERK /-\ddress to which Claimant wishes notices sent. ANHEN did damage or injury occur? BY WHERE did damage or injury occur? Van Buren and Oriole Ave CITY CLERK CITY OF C1Z"k..0 i L;"; ;ACE HOW and under what circumstances did damage or injury occur? Urdprsi dP of r'ar damage r1uG ^ WHATti�uamact�ioby�he�ity; or1ifs em�loyees°,ucausec�he all�dl`dTar>aetort�ur}tersection. (Include names of employees, if known) NOTE: I contacted the Grand Terrace Sheriffs office ancl was advised —that a police report was not I12PPs' Sr'3rV 4i nr.P t.ha_rP tram nn i n;nri ( ^T WHAT sum do you claim? Include the estimated amoeE, �f aq�5�os l�ct el(�o�stein' '�5 tymay be known at the time of the presentation of this claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed: (Attach estimates or bills, if possible) SEE ATTACHED INVOICES FOR AMOTTNT nF nAm p — $ — 825,T�---- P1 �9 3Cv��v— 7 i Q r f n r h r a k a P aQT9T----- labor, I had the brake pads replaced then since not damaged due to the condition of the street. Total Amount Claimed: NAMES and addresses of witnesses, Doctors and Hospitals: It was $ The brakes were not defective $ 825.55 -------^-i. .. r--'+-'C's---=•ties---•�:----•.�-rT,.�-Z--�;�, �^'-+r.^. a /? ! .7 X •• •CODE N•t11EW U-USED R-REBUILT hrvv. '�. ; , • ' � � at � // f`f%/ 9M ' 1 ' 1 OR OESCRIPTIONa (Name �� T ime RecslvetlMMN I , ' ^r dA.M. Ady s . /,G,....-�� l Apt. No. J,- M P. M. P. M. Lubrication ❑ Cky _„ t . J - 'TONY the GREEK t Promised A.M. P. M. Written BY Change Oil ❑ Change 0" ❑ ' � Flit., Call. Service Air Cleaner CD Cuss. Order No. 121 N. CACTUS AVE., RIALTO, CA 92376 (714) 874-4420 Change ❑ Trans. Oil - Phone when ready Yes 0 No 0 Adjust Transmission ❑ R 6'iff. Oil ❑ Y k - odel Ic sa No. Speed t N Bus. Pack Front L__I G O E Wheel Brgs. Rotate ESTIMATE AMOUNTS hereova ihor¢e t e above reoa.r work to De done along wnh the necessary matb�al ana hereby gam you and or y I employees, permnsmn to operate the car truck or vemcle haen oes 'r on sirecti. n.gnwayf or elsewhere for the purpose of tw,nq and/or.mpechon An...—s meth Tires ,_r�:- Adjust ❑ Revised Estimate TIME a s snms hen n hweffr acknowledged on above car truck or vehicle to secure the amount of rew�rs thereto You wen rot Ile held yes for ss or dame" to veh.cle or arbclN left m v NCle m Brakes Retain cax of fire, theft, acp.dent or other yond your contr = ..- Parts ❑ - Revised Estimate Destroy ❑ S Authorized B Parts 1' 1 a 1.1 :1' 1 ' - j , r \ TT < or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration In accordance the Judgement upon the award rendered by the Arbitrator(s) maybe "Mered in any Cou CITY. SALK tatt.LING INTi1eNAL illMMARY AccV.1 c—faee Icost GALS. GAS ❑ CASH Total Labor OIL ❑ CHARGE Labor -Body QTS. Shop_ Additional Materials from reverse side I LBS. GREAS ❑INTERNAL Sublet Repairs TOTAL PARTSIt Total gas, oil, grease OK•D BY Parts 0 SUBLET REPAIRSRECOMMENDED SERVICE: Tires Gas, Oil 1•& Grcase ' Paint 6 Body - 2. shop Materials W4RRANTY ON ALL WORK 30qP M 3 MONT-146 TO OUR LES OR 3. Materials TOWING EXCLV 4. a,;, seta riR TOTAL suflom REPAIR s .� Total Arnij At 7 "CODE N-NEW U-USED R-REBUILT • ti K-1— -. " - ", -r) &,—&/ TC Z atf Time Received A.M. P. M. Lubrication 0 a 13M PART NO, OR 1 1 a Name 1 Addrelk Apt. No. City- Promised A.M. P. M. Written By Change Oil 0 a g. oil 0 Change Oil 0 7se'rvic TONY the GREEK 121 N. CACTUS AVE., RIALTO, CA 92376 J-714) 874-4420 P 0.9//.1/`d e- / M Ye r-Make-Mo L 2 E 11 Filter Cart. ic Al Cleaner 0 Cust. Order No. Change 0 Trans.011 Phone when ready Yes 0 No 0 Adjust Transmission 0 R W:�6 change -0 )fDi" 'i But Pack ront 0 WhealFBrgs. ESTIMATE AMOUNT $ work . ....... with want you ano,of vo.1 emploviren oernint.un to ooe'alt the car on streets. highways of eliewhine for the purpose of letting ind/o—spect,on An a an'.. tert is hereby acknowledged on above car truck or, vehicle to,ec,re the amount of tcoa thereto You will not be hold ret s or damage to vehicle or ar�" 1,1,,n vehicle in castrof 1::*i ths d. roil Auth d B, ORDER --LABOR INSTRUCTION Rotate 0 Adjust Brakes 0 Rev Sed ESti Ate TIME Retain Parts 0 Revised Estimate $ REPAIR 0 estroy 0 Parts ez�j '0A a" Irls conird or the r. hrh _t� 'ereof, shallTb.3."."tr.d by arbitration'1 n accordance F13Ubif]UbbtSUFedUAfOlLraxion,ano the judgement uponthe award trenderedby the Arbitrator(s) may be uurx having lurisuictiontnerooT. k QTY. 111A a BILLING INTKRNAL SUMMARY GALS. GAS ❑ CASH Total Labor QTS. OIL 0 CHARGE Labor-Body Sho dditional Materials Additional reverse fromside LBS. GREASE INTERNAL Sublet Repairs TOTAL PARTS t Total gas, oil, grease OK'D BY Parts 00 SUBLET REP kI RS RECOMMENDED SERVICE: Tires Gas, Oil & Grease 12. Paint & Body Shop Materials WARRANTY ON ALL (S 3000 M WO 3 MO THS4 I LES R 3. Materials I I TOWING iil�ld 4. Sales Tax TOTAL SUBLET REPAIR?' + S. Total Amount GARDENA: 13316 So. Western Ave. (213) 321-2261/323-1870 LOS ANGELES .ACME • 4969 Santa Monica Blvd (213) 663-3251 LOS ANGELES .JACK RENTS • 6177 Santa Monica Blvd. (213) 464-6119 ANAHEIM: 1822 So. Lewis Street (714) 634-8345 GLENDALE ACME • 1855 S. Brand, (818) 244.4121 • r r L O n PASADENA .ACME • 1870 E Walnut, (818) 796-6151 IRVINE: 16401 Construction Circle West (714) 552-0051 LANCASTER ACME • 44110 Yucca Ave., (805) 945-0471 i LONG BEACH CONTRACTORS EOUIPT • 2020 W Pacific Coast Hwy, (213) 432-2954 e n FONTANA: 16190 Valley Blvd. (714) 822-1222 GARDENA .ACTION 13316 So Western Avenue, (213) 321.2261 1323-1870 ANAHEIM .ACTION 1822 So. Lewis Street (714) 634.8345 AN ACME RENTS CO IRVINE .ACTION 16401 Construction Circle West, (714) 552-0051 FONTANA .ACTION • 16190 Valley Blvd , (714) 822-1222 41 2 2 5 DEPOSIT �y / $ CASH P O R CHK CHG. NEW 0 ❑ .� ❑ ❑ RENTEE PURCHASE ORD. NO. MAKE OF Ct)AIJ OooG`C- STATE LICENSE NO. _z �C`l-7 SALES TIME OUT � 1 t 5T ADDRESS PHONE 1.1. DRIVER LIC. Ell41, LIC N �. �S JEXP DATE ` %S �� DOB TIME IN /'u > 2 EQUIP LOC. AUTH. BY ORIGINAL CONTRACT AND DATE CONTINUED FROM CONTINUED TO TIME F RENTED y� 1 C.)";,,:i_� r��•_ �(-far., RENTAL RATES PER HOUR MIN CHG. DAY WEEK 4 WEEKS AMOUNT EQUIP NO COMPUTER CODE EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION i FOR AN ADDITIONAL FEE OF 10% OF THE TOTAL RENTAL, RENTER AGREES TO WAIVE CERTAIN CLAIMS FOR YD NO. O CHECKED OUT BY TAXABLE DAMAGE TO THE RENTED VEHICLE(S) AND/OR EQUIPMENT AS SPECIFIED ON THE REVERSE. W j DAMAGE WAIVER IS REQUIRED UNLESS RENTEE HAS PREVIOUSLY SUPPLIED RENTER WITH A CERTIFICATE. OF INSURANCE SHOWING THAT PROTECTION IS PROVIDED TO RENTER FOR ANY DAMAGE TO THE RENTED ITEMS, REGARDLESS OF FAULT. THEFT WAIVER NOT AVAILABLE. YD NO. IN CHECKED IN BY GASOLINE RENTEE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL TIRE DAMAGE REGARDLESS OF FAULT RENTEE ACCEPTS DAMAGE WAIVER BY INITIA41NG THE INDICATED SPACE. RENTEE UNDERSTANDS THAT DAMAGE WAIVER IS NOT INSURANCE. MANUFACTURER'S OPERATING AND SAFETY INSTRUCTIONS, WHEN AVAILABLE, ARE PROVIDED. I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS AGREEMENT, RENTEE RESPONSIBLE TO CHECK WATER AND OIL DAILY ALL RENTALS PLUS FUEL. DIESEL HAVE RECEIVED AND UNDERSTAND SAFETY INSTRUCTIONS ON OPERATION OF THE EQUIPMENT I AM RENTING, HAVE RECEIVED A COMPLETE COPY OF THIS AGREEMENT AND AGREE TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS AGREEMENT. CONTRACT EXP DAY WK 4 WKS RET EXP DATE SALES TAX �_...-, DAMAGE WAIVER i _ INITIAL SIGNING PERSONALLY AND FOR CUSTOMER % 1 rrors required both sides of vehicle when view is obstructed. .,�., +- ! + 29Speed limn towed vehicles 55 m.p.h. EXCEPT towed vehicles over 3000M GVW without brakes 20 m.p h - Prevent illegal trailer sway by loading heavier in front. R R. FROM MIRRORS ACCEPTED I DECLINED I DELIVERY A DATE OUT 19 DATE TO BE (/ :� RETURNED 19 PICKUP TOTAL RENTER ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR MIRROR OR BUMPER DAMAGE 11 FnuiDUPMT nnr:c runT wORK PROPERLY N OFFICE AT ONCE .4 A h r of 1Va% r month will 11e ^harnPrf nn all oast due accounts service c a ge pe I ORANGE SHOW LINCOLN • MERCURY • VOLKSWAGEN PHONE: (714) 889-3514 1600 S. Camino Real SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 92408 ESTIMATE OF REPAIRS DATE ( / ME �` e�Y( / `J W Tv27 LICENSE < L J�� MILEAGE DRESS CITY TEL Co. ADJ. TEL. 6 M"E MODEL BODY STYLE SERIAL a S Q IL LABOR PARTS AND MATERIAL SUBLET -NET 3 PAINT BODY PAINT W 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 13 li 15 16 17 18 19 - 20 21 22 23 24 25 aRTS PRICES based on standard catalogue procurement PRICE LISTS subject to CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE TOTALS aculerwant and delivery charges may be added for special service on items not available locally DAMAGED or ROKEM pert. removed from car will be junked, unless owner instructs us otherwise in writing If NEW PARTS S ,tea #.stem or requireo are NOT avauaore, we re..,va tna right to prucure UuED r i oru914 or broken ports, where possible, the. CHARGE for which will be made on an actual time basis at out prevailing �b,w safe per hour The above is an estimate based on the inspection made ADDITIONAL parts or labor may be tayrred occasionally after the work has started, and opened up, as damaged ur broken parts are then discovered which -se riot evident on the first inspection. SUCH ADDITIONAL LABOR AND MATERIAL WILL BE CHARGED FOR IN UDITION TO THE ABOVE ESTIMATE. ESTIMATE EXPIRES 30 DAYS AFTER DATE. .,d ictible Portion of All Insurance Claims Must Be Paid Upon Delivery of Car X ems:1 bareby authorize the below repair work to be done along with necessary materials You and your employees ,my epesate vehale for purposes of testing, inspection or delivery at my risk An express mechanic's ben is mknowlea9ed on vehicle to secure Ina amount of repairs thereto You will not be held responsible lot loss or mage to vehicle or ai ticles tell in vehicle in case of fire, thelt, accident or any other cause beyond your control .? D6/ / Hrs at�j �—Labor $ Q Parts $ I Paint $ O Sublet, net $ Sales Tax $ ADV. CHARGES $ COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE REPORTS COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March lo. 1988 COMMISSION/COMMITTEE grand Terrace Crime Prevention Committee SUBJECT•Candidates for membership on the Crime Prevention Committee. PROBLEM: DATE: txlydi 2 ,1988 Facts: In January the committee lost three members for the following reasons. Robert Bailes. Bad health. Mr. Bailes was recently retired from the San Bernardino County Sheriffs Department for bad health and resigned from the committee as well. Laurie Pace. Moved cut of the area. Jamie Butler. Resigned citing 'over work' and explained that with her job and family responsibilities she could no longer serve full time on the committee but will be available as a volunteer. ALTERNATIVES: The committee has three colunteers who have asked to serve on the committee an who have turned in applications. Debra Muller Urs Aeberli Dick Rollins (Rollins serves on another city committee but was authorised by the city council to serve on two committees simultaneously with no conflict) SOLUTION: The Crime Prevention committee requests that the Grand Terrace City Council to acknowledge the three above applicants and post notices for additional applicants to fill the above vacancies. Council to accept the above three resignations. REQUESTED ACTION TO BE TAKEN BY COUNCIL AND/OR STAFF: Accept above resignations. Post notices of the vacancies and seek additional applications. i CITY OF GRAND TERRACE APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN SERVICE COMPLETE AND SUBMIT TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AS A MEMBER OF: 8 //'YJ,0 P11P V-aA) /D/V" COMM r �6U'2 W41- : lulu V l /v r ,ILAIrSS: 22(008 �a f'czix , �r�� arm nQ (22 92-3z� -V,- PHONE: 783- �z 7Cp BUSINESS PHONE: )CCUPATION: 1�o o-se cll �p DUC-.ATION: �L (List highest year completed and all degrees) e there any workday evenings you could not meet? e list: rr1,110i/ Yes (/'�, No ( ) If so, y are you interested in this position: 1��Dhl thi S / S fit) n/ejl n)lI r nh 1�JrVAI )Q ri :F'rI'M V d6a)AZi A/ SO I /"r0-0 e dhat do you consider to be your major qualifications? -T S h REFERENCES: 1. Xo Z) 2. .7�ra� u OKI a riy Keg 'V-&�V7�z 783-3(:�-,/) Please attach a written statement containing any additional information you feel would he useful to the City Council. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN SERVICE COMPLETE AND SUBMIT TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AS A MEMBER OF: -t4lr— `/ ��µti• r[. �Gtiiv1� c v�v� NAME: r 6k�- '.41 it— (� R S /9 ADDRESS • IZ0 10 rz ,q HOME PHONE: -7 BUSINESS PHONE: OCCUPATION: r4/(,yi-(o( cc-:�r4<<-7z7- EDUCATION: (List highest year completed and all degrees) Are there any workday evenings you could not meet? Yes ( ) No (t�' If so, please list: Why are you interested in this position: C (UlG S� Z-ui F — << % o "(.)(Joy 06--_- � What do you consider to be your major qualifications? 6c-1ti\�1w`aiJI L7IZ REFERENCES: 1. -�ivkA- S,Qc,( 6. y 2. 3 Please attach a written statement containing any additional information you feel would be useful to the City Council. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN SERVICE COMPLETE AND SUBMIT TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE tS A MEMBER OF: �%��N7E �.�FYc�iVT/oil &D MMtTr0 E �AME • /� /�'�'�,�J � L L/cc� ,DD S • cl,5276 d OME PHONE: �%1P3�/o0 BUSINESS PHONE_—//S/- 'CCUPATION AI&AV�y --DUCATION: (List highest year completed and all degrees) .are there any workday evenings you could not meet? Yes (� No ( ) If so, Plu list: y/velL /1.1U'1147° 4hy are you interested in this position: ��/�� ,T ,-Vtl,617-16V IJ�A J- Ad &mA4,PM What do you consider to be your major qualifications? ��4,(KY �/d`v,cr7-fE /Z GyaIK'O('- REFERENCES: I . S`51,Xe06' 1f1 /klle 1.�o 3 Please attach a written statement containing any additional information you feel would be useful to the City Council. RECEIVED CITY OF GRAND TERRACE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE PARKS 7 RECREATION COMMITTEE MEETING MONDAY, JANUARY 4, 1988 M I N U T E S MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Barbara Conley, Mike Breckenride 4W Allyn Kruse, Dick Rollins, Dave Widor CITY STAFF PRESENT: Randall Anstine, Renee McCarthy GUEST: Councilman Hugh Grant, Tony Petta CALL TO ORDER: 7:12 p.m. by Chairman Conley ITEMS 1. Minutes of the December 7, 1988 meeting were reviewed and upon a motion by Davie Widor and seconded by Dick Rollins approved by unanimous vote. 2. PARK CONCERNS--Restroom maintenance and rubbish disposal appear to be adequate and level of service acceptable to Committee members. No further discussion. 3. GRIFFIN PARK DESIGNS --Randall Anstine has submitted design to DWR for approval. A minimum of 60 days before they will reply, so further discussion tabled until March with cost estimates at that time also. 4. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE --Still behind schedule. No further information of availability date at this time. 5. APPLICATIONS OF PROSPECTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS --Some question as to the business license held by Tamara Barr. Research shows two current members have such licenses, City Manager does not feel this is a problem, but will be checking validity with City Attorney, Committee suggestion is that Council should be made aware of this fact for possible amendment, 6. CPRS CONFERENCE --As previously stated, Chairman Conley, Mike Breckenridge and Lennie Frost will attend 2 nights/3 days. Dick Rollins will attend for 1 night/2 days. Dave Widor and Allyn Kruse will attend 1 day. Randall Anstine is handling CPRS pre- registration except for Dave Widor and Allyn Kruse who are on - site 1-day registration only. Mileage reimbursement is .25 per mile. All necessary expenses relating to the conference will be submitted to Randall Anstine individually with appropriate receipts by each committee member. =NC19 AGENDA ITEM P & R MINUTES 1/04/88 7. P & R RULES & POLICIES DRAFT --Chairman Conley distributed a rough draft. Committee members were asked to peruse guidelines and give suggestions at the February meeting. B. SNACKBAR UPDATE --Much discussion entailed over the "intended" kW purpose and "actual" physical design of Snackbar. $10,058.25 has been expended YTD for building. Tony Petta suggested that the Soccer Club take over a lease, per se, like the Lion's Club has with the City concerning the Community Center. The Soccer Club would be responsible for completion, maintenance and utilities for unit. In turn, they could rent it out to other groups if they so choose. Dave Widor will take this suggestion to the Soccer Board for their approval, Dave Widor may have an answer by the February P & R meeting. 9. Allyn Kruse asked if the lights were functional at the park since the token machine is broken. Randall Anstine stated the lights come on and off at will, but can be put on manually for usage, 10. Dave Widor reported that the Soccer Club Tournament held in Grand Terrace went extremely well. Most visitors were impressed with Grand Terrace, 11. Dick Rollins stated the Crime Prevention Committee is now taking applications for its Citizen's Patrol. This will become a viable organization to help patrol the park problem, which Dick Rollins stated as having quite a bit of drug traffikking lately. 12. Renee McCarthy stated the Winter Recreation program will be starting soon with a few more excursions added. 13. Christmas tree lighting program attendance appeared to be low in 1987. This was possibly due to date, day, time, etc, Saturdays appeared to be the best day for this event. It was felt residents associate the tree lighting ceremony with the beginning of the festive season so it was determined that the second saturday of December (December 10, 1988) will be the date, Councilman Grant asked why the ceremony was changed from the Park to the Civic Center. Weather, new building, etc., was mentioned for the change. Due to the City's loth Birthday the P & R Committee will check into the feasibility of resurrecting this bit of nostalgia for the occasion. Further discussion at a later time. 14. Councilman Grand asked how could the snackbar have turned into such a fiasco. Chairman Conley attempted to explain the P & R Committe did not do enough research prior to the construction of the snackbar. Council has always been aware, as was the then City Manager and City Engineer of the plans of the unit and no input/direction was given at that time either. Although the P & R Committee accepts the responsibility of the problems of the snackbar, they still wish to make it a viable use unit for the athletic leagues. 15. Chairman Conley asked if the Committee Member roster had been updated. The Chairman was advised to check with the City Clerk. Meeting adjourned at 8:33 pm. NEXT MEETING: FEBRUARY 1. 1988 AT 7:00 PM. Respectfully submitte Barbara M. Conley Chairman/Recording Secretary 11 n DATE: Mar 2, 1988 S T A F F R E P O R T CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) MEETING DATE: Mar 10, 1988 SUBJECT: LOITERING ORDINANCE �9 ------------------------------------------------------------------ FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED x Attached for review is the amended version of the first reading of the loitering ordinance. The language in the amended ordinance has been clarified and Council indicates that the changes are not substantive and, therefore, we may proceed to the second reading. f'TA rr nrnn\A\Ar\I of 1. COUNCIL CONDUCT A SECOND READING OF THE PROPOSED LOITERING ORDINANCE AND HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING. 2. ADOPT THE ATTACHED LOITERING ORDINANCE. TS:bt tA)UI CIMI AGVWA llf-M it (P)% ORDINANCE NO, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 9.12, "LOITERING" TO THE GRAND TERRACE MUNICIPAL CODE The City Council of the City of Grand Terrace, California, does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 9.12 is hereby added to Title 9, Public Peace, Morals and Welfare, to read as follows: Chapter 9 LOITERING Sections: 9.12.010 Definition. 9.12.020 Prohibition. 040 9.12.010 Definition. As used in this Chapter, the word "Loiter" means entering and remaining on any premises, public or private, either trespassing or (1) does not have a purpose legitimately connected with the business or activity of the legal occupant of the premises and (2) does not have a bona fide intent to exercise a constitutional right and (3) is causing public inconvenience or annoyance. 9.12.020 Prohibition. (a) It shall be unlawful and a violation of this Section for any person to loiter within the City limits of Grand Terrace. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to willfully and maliciously stand, sit, lie in or under any street, sidewalk, passageway, or other public place in such manner as to obstruct, hinder or delay the free passage or use in the customary mannerr of such street, sidewalk, passageway, or other public place. (c) It shall be unlawful for any person to stand, sit, lie in or upon any doorway or way of ingress or egress of any building or other structure without the consent of the owner thereof. (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to loiter, trespass, 4W or stand in or upon any parking lot, shopping center, or other commercial or industrial property generally open to the public, or otherwise occupy any portion thereof, in such a manner as unreasonably obstructs, injures, or interferes with the traffic flow or any lawful business or occupation carried on by the owner of such land, his agent, or the person in lawful possession thereof after being requested to leave by the owner of such land, his agent, or the person in lawful possession thereof. SECTION 2.Posting. The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3) public places, designated for such public purpose by the City Council, within fifteen (15) days after its passage. SECTION 3. First read at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on the 11th day of February, 1988, and finally adopted and ordered posted at a regular meeting of said City Council on the day of ATTEST: , 1988. City Clerk of the City of Grand Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council Terrace and of the City Council thereof. thereof. I, THOMAS SCHWAB, City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held on the day of 1988 by the following vote: r AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Aoproved as to Form: City Attorney City Clerk STAFF REPORT DATE:3/4/88 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEE'CING DATE:3/10/88 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT: SA-87-14 BOB K__EENEY - REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A RECREATIONAL-VER1-CLE -PARK AND COMMERCr-A-1,CENTFR - - �s FUNDING REQUIRED: NO FUNDING REQUIRED: SUBJECT: Staff Report, SA-87-14 DATE: March 4, 1988 APPLICANT: Bob Keeney LOCATION: Northwest corner of Barton Road and La Crosse Avenue Please find attached to this report the City Council staff report regarding this item dated 1-20-88 (see Exhibit A). As a result of Council discussion from the meetings of 1-28-88 and 2-11.-88 the applicant was advised to work with Cal Trans on a solution regarding Cal Trans'concerns about the easterly driveway of the project. The applicant has since met with Cal Trans and has submitted to staff a letter from Cal Trans withdrawing their previous concerns,(see Exhibit B). The City Engineer has indicated that he is still concerned with the proposed driveway improvements and that additional information regarding the improvements is necessary (see Exhibit C). RECOMMENDATION: In the 1-20-88 staff report the Planning Department recommended the City Council deny the proposed ingress and egress design based on the City Engineer's concerns and recommendations. Presently, the Planning Department is satisfied with the proposed project as conditioned by the Planning Commission with the exception of the City Engineer's concerns. However, considering that the City Engineer's concerns deal with the important issue of public safety the Planning Department must recommend against MUN.CIL AGENDA ITEM # 1 k the proposed ingress and egress configuration until such time as the City Engineer's concerns are adequately met. If the City Council should wish to approve the proposed ingress and egress configuration onto Barton Road, the Council should include in the motion the removal of Condition No. 38 of CUP-87-7 which called for the elimination of the easterly driveway. 4 Respectfully Submitted, (71 "�-- DavSa id wyer, Planning Direct S T A F F R E Y 0 R T DATE 1/20/88 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (X) MEETING DATE __J,/28_Z88_ AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT SA-87-14 Keeney A Request to Construct a Recreational Vehicle Park and Commercial Center FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED. TO: City Council FROM: David R. Sawyer, Planning Director DA'FE: January 28, 1988 SUHJECC: SA-87-14 - A Request to Construct a Recreational Vehicle Park and Commercial Center APPLICANT: Bob Keeney LOCATION: Northwest Corner of Barton Road and La Crosse Avenue BACKGROUND On December 21, 1987 the Site and Architectural Review Board considered SA-87-14, Mr. Bob Keeney's application for Site and Architectural approval of a combined recreational vehicle park and retail shops facility (see Attachment A, the Planning Commission staff report dated December 21, 1987). At that meeting the architectural elements of the proposal was approved brit the site plan portion of the proposal dealing with ingress and egress onto Barton Road was referred to the City Council for final consideration. DISCUSSION The applicant's proposal has two driveways onto Barton Road. The easterly driveway is limited to ingress only and is not to be EXHIBIT A used by recreational vehicles. The westerly driveway will be for ingress and egress and will be identified as -the R.V. entrance. In reviewing the project Cal Trans has indicated t11ev are opposed to the easterly driveway because of its proximity to the Barton Read of.f ramp facility. The City Engineer has also reviewed this project and has indicated concern regarding the location of the driveways. The applicant has indicated the removal of the easterly driveway will severely hinder the design and success of the commercial portion of his project. From a project design standpoint, the Planning Staff feels that the two driveway configuration provides a better design for the overall project due to interior circulation patterns. However, the impact that the easterly driveway will have on Barton Road traffic is an important issue. After reviewing the project, its associated traffic study and comments received from Cal Trans, the City Engineer recommended against the proposed ingress and egress configuration and as a result the Planning Department also recommended against approval. The Planning Commission as a body was concerned with the issue of liability if an accident should occur as a result of the easterly driveway and they had approved the project as presented against staff recommendations. However, they did feel the remainder of the proposal merited approval. After discussion with the applicant, the City Engineer and the Planning Director the Planning Commission approved the following motion: "The Planning Commission approves SA-87-14 subject to the following conditions, 1. The architectural elements of the proposal are approved as presented. 2. The siteplan elements of the proposal. are approved with the following exceptions; a) The entire area of open space required by Condition No. 14 of CUP-87-7 shall be unpaved and landscaped. b) The exact location and design of. the RV spaces shall be approved by the Planning Director. c) This approval does not include approval of the proposed ingress and egress configuration on Barton Road. This element of the site plan is referred to the City Council for consideration and approval. 3. This approval does not include approval of the signage elements. A11 signs shall be approved through the City's sign permit process. 4. This approval is contingent upon final approval by the City Council on the issue of ingress and -egress onto Barton Road. The Planning Commission also recommends that the City Council remove Condition No. 38 of CUP-87-7." RECOMMENDATIONS In consideration of the City Engineer's concern regarding traffic safety as it relates to the easterly driveway and his recommendation against the proposed ingress and egress configuration, the Planning Department recommends the City Council deny the proposed site plan's ingress and egress configuration and recommends an alternative design be considered. Respectfully Submitted, David R. Sawyer, Planning Directo 11 BYRON R MATTESON l,!a) o, BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN Mayo, Pro Tem Counnl !!omburs HUGH J GRANT DENNIS L. EVANS SUSAN CRAWFORD THOMASJ SCHWAB City Manager TO: F'lannlnq Commission FROM: David Sawve,r l F'lanninq Director SUBJECT: Staff Report, SA-87-14 DATE: December 21, 1987 APPLICANT: Robert keeney LOCATION: Northwest corner of Barton Road and 1_a. REQUEST: Site and architectural approval. t a czimbinec I,ecr rational •✓ehicle park. and retai 1. shop-_ facility ZONING AND LANDUSE Property 13R Zon 1 ng Land! !Se SUb iect Property GC C-? Vacant To the North LDR R_2 Vacant To the South GC C 'JehicIe toI,a•:qE and office bui ldinq to the Eo=.;t r,r C %ominerc:ai: l'.,can t 1 o thr (ti)r.�5 t: I !L��t f - .. 1.1(-,b i 1 en:Dme BACKGROUND: =V1.).)eCt pl'O(:c?t t•v Whll:h c!71-ISistEi� C)'( 4 vacant. 1 t is iocatf. d pn the r1Ol-thWLst corner oI t_:arcon 1 r a.1 La and 1 -_ :_-!ant=d 1:-.- (ot t:achmerl )., (A) . I h arr I = 5n t pl't.3po,_,lnq I,o cony tr!-Ict -1 I et--reatl.ona.l. vr2111c Ie pa I in(] c I-n tr-2r (tn 'App 111_ >A 1. l.nn f or o C.ond i t, 1 on •a) Lisp pr?I,in i r was .-A raved )l',, �.1 t✓ ;_,!]t,IfiCl I on L.c1�t! n1�7��1' 1��. 1':'�.', =U6lt_ 'i ] i= MM 19 conditions of approval, (Attachment LO on appeal of a 1='lanning Commission denial. The applicant is required by his conditional use perrnit to submit a revised site plan meeting all of the conditions of approval as part of the required site and architectural review. A11 of the applicable conditions have been (net with the exception of those outlined below. DISCUSSION AND PLANNING ISSUES: Access to Project Condition 38 of the Conditional Use Permit requires that the applicant redesign his project to delete the easterly driveway. The applicant has chosen to not incorporate this change into his plans. The applicant feels that the elimination of the easterly driveway will adversely effect the design of the project and its overall success. The applicant has indicated that he will have an alternative entry design for, your- consideration at the time of Your' meetinq. Traffic Studv 4 As a condition of appr-oval the applicant was required to commission a traffic study and submit it to City Engineer and Caltrans for review. As a. result of this study comments were received from Caltrans that indicate a. problem with the easter-ly dr-iveway and its safety. The City Engineer remains concerned about the ingress and egress configuration (Attachment C). Conversations were held with Joe [%.ical , City Engineer,, about this problem and the planning department concurs with his counsel. Si.9nage Signage is indicated in two locations on the development: It IS r-ecommended that this site and arch i tectLlt-a.l r-ev i ew pi-ocess not be an apl-)roval of signaae. The planning staff recommends that sirjnage be decided at a later- date by -_.taff throUgh the sign permit process. Cornmer-c is 1 Cen ter, f ll":1,11_1 ec.tUl-ea and I la.11 rot the: Lzoll)(Ilei'f.-la.i c!.,nr?1 l.11clude �.I: 1'-- �E r.�f)1 �yl-lr l =1• _1 (.7� 1. 1 CdtieSi F_'I'I, laUrldt•y anu setai l space tl ir'f?s a.re des i gneo 1.1l tl-1 at'cl"Ik?U Wall 4o . 5 and (fI l EiS 1 Gf1 4 S I►e o j; r'!_(c G E. I f' e 5 =!f''t2 -L.&1'1 w n I t!_' S7: 1.1 t='_G Wl th C011_I !TI( Ccrp).tc11S iJt' fllE'l iCit.11 'c,tt'3W y'f-•i low, doot �iI-a"ll!_s OY i710s5Off1 blU_. viiiidclw (nl._Ill ir)ns aiik:l Ila.ndrai i_; of _.�lUa. iuscf•e. an;:, w •lnscot- o- lllt+'j9. Ali?.LIJE_'. t)l:ller of;:[i311L: c0).ol'S th,_kt %Ji l l Cif tlLl l i-c'I7 taffy and salmon. (-1 Ina ter'ial board will be available at the inret1.rlg. The arChltectur'e 01: the bulldings incorporate arched walkways with larq_e windows. The lines of the buildings are staggered by multiple roof lines. Large windows are proposed, some with multiple panes. Pa. I.1_i ng to The applicant has provided sufficient par'E:ing for, the commercial convenience center, square footage. The pat -king requirements pursuant to Section 1.8.5C) designates 1 space per 2Uff squa -a feet of building area plus one space -for, each employee. The applicant is providing 74 spaces plus 8 for- employees for, a total of 82 spaces. The required number of pat,kinq spaces for the commercial structures is 8 1- No loading spaces have been provided for any of the buildings in the commercial center, at -ea. Landscaping The percentage of landscaping to pat -king is 6.5 percent. This is 1.5 percent more than is required by the Grand Terrace Municipal (Code. The applicant is proposing to plant several different varieties of trees including Jacarandas, palms, pines, car,rotwoods, sycamores, ash and chinese flame trees. Some of the shrubs include Agapanthus, da•y 1 i 1 ies and ind is hv.wthor,ns (attachment E). Recreational Vehicle park Park: i ng The R.V. pat- provides space for a total of 98 recreational ',vehicles. These spaces are divided into five categories of R. V. s, A, L, C, L', and E. These spaces r•a.nge from 1�! k 2�� to 1C x ,,j1:1. The applicant has pro,.�ided a tell toot area of open space - between each of the R.V. spaces. In addition, quest parr 1in9 ha= been provided at a. r-atio o•r 5 F;. V. -spaces to i C1ue_t SF- a-C_. Th= rer;ulr'ernents on aisle width t1-om the conditions o►- a,ghro.al ha.- a 1 ao been met. (Si:I-i=- i I+-rLe: e-'ng1.i-)E_FI'1llq �&C.).11r__DU1JnS aI'hd1t pat'•1- inq (leer=s11:c1:e crlanges, the f' IA-nin , _1r'tniii?nt Ileconlfnr-I Idctllr_se=.h:a.riy- rye Jeai t I.r, th of-, _ 3n�75C�=�ln� iCl �'fl JJLL•_E I III--? app i Icant plans 1,0 C0r11, 111ue t,I1Gf SaIT, E• ty pe a h ldil•7_ 'F,p l it thr•oL!;_jh0Ut the h.`•l. p.al I as is 1 n d 1 c a ed in U-:Ci, c.orrrrler•=i •- CO.'I'VelllLnce rarF, a, abo,,,e I" 1.i(iS 1.I101Cate a Lot II.Dt, fULii. %r e: . two pla_,'gror.uIds and a dog run_ A winding pa\,ed pathway weaves thr-oLrgh a parr -1 3.E.e area in the center of the development. Condition No. 1 of the Conditional Use Permit regUires that "No more than oar% of the R.V. (=ark portion of the project shall be paved, and all unpaved areas shall be landscaped with live plant materials and sha11 be permanently maintained". The submitted siteplan indicates that 75/ of the ten foot wide open spaces r,egUired between the R.V. spaces are to be paved. if this is allowed, the unpaved percentage falls far short of the required 4()4. Therefore, staff recommends that the entire area of open space required by Condition No. 14 of the CUP be Unpaved and landscaped. Conformance with this recommendation and condition along with an interpretation that the pool area meets the definition of openspace will increase the project's percentage to 422% unpaved/openspace within the R.V. portion of the project_ PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: Due to the nonconformance of the proposed accessways onto Ba.'to�I Road with the r^egUirements of the CUP and the recommendation of the City Engineer against the proposed accessway desitin, the Planning Department recommends the Site and Architectural Review Board deny SA-87-14 as submitted. Respectfully SUbinitted, David R. Sawyer, Planning Director VICINITY MAP THE SITE ♦ = a q . .a s _� ll -l'.90 ..1J.1'1ON NO. 117- A 11E901,U 1'J:ON OF 1111 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CUP-87-7, AN APPLICATION 7'0 CONSTRUCT A COMBINED RECREATIONAL Vl:H1C1.E PARK AND RETAIL SHOPS FACILITY 1N THE" C-2 7.ONJ:: AND ITS ASSOCIATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WHEREAS, the applicant, Robert Keeney applied for a ;tional Use Permit to construct and operate a combined rational vehicle park and retail shops facility to be located to Northwest corner. of Barton Road and LaCrosse; and WHEREAS, a properly noticed public hearing was held by the i..nc Commi.ssion on August 17, J.987 , regarding this , :�ati.on; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission motion 87- approving the ;7-7 failed by a 2-4 vote; and 4HER AS, the applicant, Mr.. Robert 1(eenev has filed a letter heal with the City Clerk's office and paid the appropriate and WHEREAS, the City Council held a properly noticed public .-,g regarding this itern on September 1.0th, 1987; and 4HEREAS , ej Negat i ve Der 1 arat. i on has been pr. eparecl for t)� f s t. flu r�;1.1ant -to ('ha1)t er 3 , Art i.c 1.e f, of the Cal t r�nmr,n la 1 (1uet l i t' y Act ; �111rJ 1\'lll'ItFA`: , I Ilr• ,wod l It(. !,;I ) rl ;\t _ ivlll 'il f\�-;, 111 r• FoIh It-( 1 1); ()1) (-1 I \' I ti c'111 1 c!I11 I \ vilr;t itI , tilt, 1'illl I,I \`i I Ilr• ceI ,t i 1 tillc,l)'. it t „ i)t I ut l I l r•cl tt ,r• Ili 1 �tlttl Ivl11 12.1;!\ l h1; 1 CCr(•,,0t a.or1i. 1 v(..11 i.r. 1 r• llar lc s nc�t spec: i. I' i ed ,as a 1i t l(�cl 11 0 c1►' 0 cnncli I..io1.)a I I1, 1)eI'•III i'l;l'.0d use in ilnv zone of the r tlnc.l the rr 1urc; Inky elI!'I1Iy 1 or a colldi I.-1one►1 usp e (-"rin11. at any 1 I'lis sit'.e; 1I1d 41'Illal2l!\ ,, 1:he proposed use is in conl:or.rnance with the Ci.ty's �raI Ulan; and W1-1L;1.21.'AS, conditi.olis have been placed on this conditional. use ini.-t so as to insure 1'.he proposed use wi. I 1 not be detrimental to general health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of persons residing or. worlci.ng in the neighborhood; NOW, THEREFORE, B J,F RESOLVED by the City Council of the of Grand Terrace, California, that said City Council finds l The Cite Council. ha:, reviewed the Negative Declaration for th;.s project attached as "]?xhibi.t A" and finds that as conditioned by the mitigation measures, included with the Negative Decl.aral:ion, the project will not have a significant effect on the environment; and 2. As conditioned, the proposed use will not be detrimental to the genera.l health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or w0r.k.i.11g within the neighborhood of the proposed use or within the city; or' will he injurious to the property or i((11)7"UVC:((I(?11.1- in i.hr ne i trh1)or1100d nr wi1:hi.n i:hc! ci 1.y, i)IId 1. 'I'll(: t,1 Oposecl 11>;(: w 1 I I hr I ill I'• I rld(wt (•,'I G(:11(-'I ,I I P l iIII ; itlld �, I h�' I •, i I !,\\' I III) ( ,)I„I I i I „I1', it ('(' I(,;,�I,• ., n•,: ,� I I I, i '. ,il,l,1 t1\•'., I �11111 .1 � (• II(:(.,�.`.•'��1'\� I (, �.,','lll (• I I„ I,II I 11�,•-,� „I ',,�, I 1 ,)11 I It c, c, 11 �111 �, I 111,: I,: ,�I lccl I ,• I I .,� � :`11111 1 , I Il,l I t'l�clt' ; No moo 0 t. h �.l 1) 0 0% laJ t 1) e It. v P(a)-k I)ol*.,t i oil 0 1: he 1.) 1-- o I t- c (-. tiIIil I I t) (-,' pavecl, ,)I-)cl a I I tillplived al-ecii.; s h a J 1 1) e I ands cliped Nit i th 'I i V(.-, 1) J a I-) I ri a I- e r i it I -,. a I I (i C; 1-1 ti I 1 1) e p e r III el 11 e 11 t I. v 11113 i. I I t a in e d 2) The 12. V . Park port ). 01) of t 11 e project Sh(al I c -1 c 0 t c -c ereationa I vetiic 1.es Fuld e1CCoIIlp1jllvj.IIa .Onio(ja 1-) 0 a t a I ers dune bugg).es etc. only 4Occupancy of: t he .14. V . spaces sha I I be I iiiii ted to one recreeltione)) vehicle Only. 3) The maximum length of stay f o r any recreational vehicle shall be fourteen days. 11) All recreational vehicles shall be located in a designated R.V. space. 5) A twenty foot wide landscaped buffer area which shall include a three foot high berm, shall be required adjacent to the ultimate right- of way of Barton Road and La Crosse Avenue. 6) A solid six foot split face block wali shall be required along the peri.mi.!ter of the project, except along the right of way of Bartort Road and La Crosse Avenue. 7) The minimum distance betw'een a recreationai velicle and any other recreational vellicle or buildinIg shall be ten feet. 8) No ii-iternal street shall be less than 25 feet it, width, 9) No internal street sb8ll be less than *33 feet in width if parallel parking 1 S permitted on one side. 10) No interns I street Shal I be less than !10 f- e w i d t II i [ 11) fl ra I 1 e I T) k i n 3 S I)e 1-11) 1: ed oil bot.11 V. 1);l c. e shil I (I till I it fit I(It"'I I I it re it I I It 11I1!(-11 I I (" i I %, I I 10 0 1 Ow I ()Illi)h I I p, J2 -,pi)( �' 1-1 it 11 ildd I I i (,It It, d it I a c 1-1 P 11 space shn I I I ild " ii t 0 e-.i -s' I) a c (: e C.1 I I a I or t 110 1) ki )- 1) os (-' o 1; r e F; (:! I- \/ e rl o 1) e n s 1) a C P. T I-1 e r e I'In I 1 1.) e o 1, 1 S I (-) 11 o 1) e I'l v e 11 j. C I I I a r a c C e S S NV() y (III to 1:1 (1 i"L. o n koi.jcl .end sa -i.d occes swav S lie' J I 11j, v (., j., 1111. 11 j. III I., III j gh 1- - o I- - NY r-1 v NY ) d t I -I o 1: 50 J: e e -1 rand e) curb I- (a(I 11) S of NY e 11 *t )' - f: .1, \'(-� feet. )6) r e s Ii a I I he Prov) ded at I east. one emei-.-gencY V e I'l i C LI 1. a r access NY a a I-) I-) r o v e d IDY t h e Hire Department. 1.7 The app). icant - sha 1. 1 offer to dedicate to the City, the proposed 30 by 255 foot emergency accessway at such time j. n the future , the City Engineer may request it. 18) Al 1. trash collection and storage areas shall be screened and enclosed. 1.9) All. utilities sba 1. 1 be underground Individual. rooftop or outdoor television antennas shal.l not be permitted in the park, except that one single television antenna for community service may be 4w situated in the park. 20) An area s ha 1. 1 be provided for use as a clog run Dogs and other household pets shall. not. be a I I oNved to run at large in the park. 2).) All I) I u mb i n g provided shall be designed so that the park will accornodate a.1 I recreational vehicles. 22) The project sha 1. 1 receive Site and Architectural Review Board approva I . Sai.d approva I S h a I. I j. n c I u d e a detailed landscape and irrigation plan. 23) CC) [III-.) I V NY j -(-. 11 1: lie I:- (f i I i r e m e n t s of Ca I -'F)- 8 1-1 S regard.i.11W any Improvelfients of" t 11 e State 0 way of: LaC'rosse Avenue. 1) 0 (1 ) call I I.) )))-. o V i d (3 1 or 1: 1 f y 5 0 feet: h1t- ol %S" I V I o c III I I I I I e o r t-, 0 1-1 d (:(111"[ 1-111 I " I .IllOit r (I ( ti 1 1) it I id I I mt( ()I 'ilih 1(-( 1 pit I I I- I CI)II"I I tit I "I 'ilid.11 (I I ()It lwt 11.11 t i"I. ko'l(I ( (.111 (.1 1 111,, '1110 I It(. lw%y C(III 1' I I II(. I :' I it III I'l I (I I (i I: w -) I P C1 deli(,(�1 I cell 1;r� l;he CI tv Ivor -hese f:ac�. I i.ti.e . >cl) IIIs( -II I OrIIItn1(:ntaI st.roeL I :1.f 1)tS. 30 A ) I ut i 11. I .i c: slid 1 I hr� 111tderl;r.'01l1)d . aI) 0ht�l�.rl �Il.�d 1pr•ovi.d0 to the City a "wi.l 1 serve J.r;l:ter from Riverside Hi.ghlanri Water Company. 32) 1n8taI I wC1i'c,I- system to Provide adequate fire prot.ecti on i n accordance wi.th p) ans to he approved by i;he Fire, Marsha 1 I . :33) Comply with all City of Grand Terrace ordinances. 34) Coordinate with the adjacent property owners the vehicular access rights and drainage to Grand Terrace Road from parcels to the North, Northeast and Fast. 35) Any improvements fronting on State of Ud.lifornia (Cal Trans) right-of-way shall he reviewed, approved and permits issued by Cal -Trans. 36) All improvements shall be designed by .)wner's civil engineer to the standards required by the City and State. 37) If any roadwork, lighting, etc. , takes place in close proximity to the signalized intersection, then a 20-sca'e (reproducible) plan showing both the existing and the proposed facilities sha 1 1 be submitted to Caltr.ans for review. 38) As recommended by the Department of Transportation, the easterly driveway ias proi�o"ied ) sha 1 1 not be constructed. Its close proximity to the ini'ersecti.on of La Crosse and HF)rton !toad wi.I I crPei t, traf Li.c siafel-y pr.nble(n.s. ])f,ve 1 ol;r r SIM 1 I consl.rucl: (Jri vewav as r I osc i:o - rIe wes 1.e1, 1.)ro1>crr! v l i Ie as poss ir)) fi It:l l--l11 1'11 1)r) k(;t i111(i ttn\' �.� cl c.l)tlunal I',iclr ll�n t(1 fit 'i I (. V( I I r;ll,l 1 I)P i dt•(1 011 Hell. I OII NOW ., tI it ) o", I, I I I (II•II!, i r11 () III(= (1)- i v(:w.-I".. h U) 11.! )cl l (,III I +111t1):c :.Itil l l i,( 111 uv i rl( ri lit ( ti l 1) I (• 1 I I III I r'l.',n l c.l li", Iwo11<<, I III: (11 it 1 IIiI I; ;: 1)iII rc: o-I-Is S)-Ii) I I illlil III (; il'. 111'(1 h1 I O I(11 1_1 f; i)I-e dra .l it fl f;(:' �� 1) A I I (,c)Ild .1 i on.; •,e 1. I or•1 h 1.1-1 1 he I`(?III o da ted Mead, 1.2 , ] 987 I-e(:e) ve(1 I.I"oIII the CounLY I"J-)'•r l.tr)ched as Gxhi bit A sho I I hr: r'(!(Ii.I I.I—ed . 43) An onsi.te property Ina nalye r shal I he required. G 44) An i.n(Ie))endeni: Traf1:ic Analysis of: the pr.o.jPct shall be completed and submibted to the Department of Transportation and 1:he Ci.1:y Engineer. for. review and comment and an), subsequent recommendations made by the City Engineer as a result of the Tr.af.fi.c study shall be .required. 45) A rev i.sed site plan meeting rail of the conditions of this conditional use permit shall be submitted as part of the required Site and Architectural. Review. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that C.U.P.-87-7, conditioned. ADOPTED this loth day of September., 1987. EST: is hereby approved v CIr:rIc of the City of. H�ayor aI: the (.'I'ly of: Grand lid Teri -ace Bind of the 1,errar.r. arrrl (-)I v Comic'r I (horr!ol. . Colilir•I I 1.11o) (�nl . I i I it) In a q S, I I wcl b. C, I: I )- k cif 1. ]'1 (a C I t y 01 G I i., 11 d 1'(� ).- I.- F, C. e , d 0 I) Y c 1, 1, 1 1 1, v t o I- o 0.1. 11 g R e.s o Il.i.o11 wa i n I- I: o (I i I c o d a I) cl the -ty nc I I ol tho ). t. Y ci 1; rl t ( -)o e c I - il r. I I(.-! I d 0 1*1 11 e 1: 11 d �i y v , 1 987 "Wing vote: AV FS #40 NOM ABSENT: ABSTAIN: City Clerk oved as to :orni: (W At. t. 0'r 11 e N., L' IM 140 �? H BYRON R. TTESON Mayo PLANNING DEPARIMENT BARBARA PFENNIGHAUSEN Mayor Pro Tom Council Members HUGH J GRANT DENNIS L. EVANS SUSAN CRAWFORD THOMAS J. SCHWAB City Manager W.O. 12-8.5078 MEMORANDUM To; Dave Sawyer, Planning Director From: Bill Noble, Kicak&Assoc. Date: December 7, 1987 Subject: R.V. Park, 21900 Barton Rd., Grand Terrace Dear Dave, Enclosed is a letter from C G Engineer i ngdregardi ng the ewes#er driveway to this project and their proposed solution to it's inherent safety hazard. At this writing, the office of Kicak & Associates is still opposed to the presently proposed ingress/egress configuration. We feel that the proposed remedy is not a viable solution and subsequently not acceptable. Could you please send a copy of the letter from C G Engineering along with a copy of the traffic analysis to the City Attorney, Ivan Hopkins, for his recommendation regarding this issue, specifically, what position would the City be in if the proposed driveway were constructed and the City were on record opposing this issue. Please contact me if you have any questions or comments. Sincer ely, Bill Noble Enclosure; (2) copies LPG ATTACHMENT C J 11 C G ENGINEERING Planning and Engineering December 4, 1987 Mr. Joe Kicak City Engineer City of Grand Terrace 22365 Barton Road Suite 110 Grand Terrace, California 92324 Reference: Proposed Recreational Vehicle Park and Commercial Development at Barton Road and I-215 Dear Joe: I have recently reviewed a letter from Bol. Pote a", Caltrans, dated November 20, 1987, wherein they have_ stated.. they are ,, still opposed to the proposed easterly dr : veway at the referenced. development. Prior to preparing my traffic analysis for this proposed development, I spoke with Mr. Will Brisley of Caltrans who indicated .that their initial opposition to this driveway was due to the possible traffic safety problems due to turning movements out of the -pro * posed driveway and possible conflicts with ramp traffic. Wefeel we have addressed these possible conflicts by changing the driveway to an ingress only situation and thereby eliminating any right or left turns which could possibly obstruct turning traffic from the I-215 off ramps or LaCrosse Avenue. Please reference Figure 4 of our traffic study wherein our peak hour count at the intersection of the on and off 'ramps with Barton Road showed only ten vehicles making the right turn from the southbound offramp onto westbound Barton Road. As referenced on page 4 of my report, this low volume of traffic making the turn onto Barton Road will not, in my opinion, create an adverse impact for the "entrance only" driveway at this location. Mr. Joe Kicak -2- December 4, 1987 I urge your reconsideration of the driveway denial due to the relatively low volume of turning traffic from the off ramp as concluded in the traffic report. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, David J. Barakian ProjectManager DJBab 096001.'00 120401(57,12) Copy to Bob Keeney c Of CAI.IfORNIA—BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY ARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION �:T U, P O. BOX 231 .LI(NAIIDINO, CA 92402 14) 303.4609 Noverber 20, 1987 Mr. Joe Kicak City Engineer City of Grand Terrace 22365 Barton Road, Suite 110 Grand Terrace, CA 92324 Dear Mr. Kicak: f P17 ' r r GGORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor P+OV ti5 19G7 ;.sn.. ICi A and Assoc. 08-SBd-215-1.31 CUP-87-7/ROBT.KEENEY We appreciate the opportunity to review the "Conceptual Striping Plan' submitted to Caltrans by a November 3, 1987 transmittal letter from Mr. David R. Sawyer, Planning Director for the proposed recreational vehicle park and commercial development ocated at the nori-.hwc.st corner of Barton Road and LaCrosse enue. This location, as you are aware, consists of a signalized intersection with the southbound freeway on -ramp, two-way La Crosse Avenue (northside) and Barton Road, within close proximity of a westerly unsignalized intersection at right -turn La Crosse Avenue (northside), two-way La Crosse Avenue (south side) and Barton Road. Caltrans cannot support the proposed easterly driveway, however, this proposed project is beyond our jurisdiction. We believe that the easterly driveway will only add to driver confusion already present at this location. Caltrans is planning signal coordination for Barton Road between Michigan Avenue and the freeway ramps and La Crosse Avenue. Therefore, in addition to the recommended easterly driveway elimination, we recommend that a separate westbound turn -lane into the westerly driveway be provided to allow recreational and other vehicles to enter the facility without obstructing traffic flow on Barton Road. if additional information is required, please contact- Mr. Will )3risley, DevelohlTlent Review Engineer, at (714) 383-4671. VeLy truly yours, BYRON R. MATTESON Mayor BARBARAPFENNIGHAUSEN Mayor Pro Tern Council Membors HUGH J. GRANT DENNIS L. EVANS SUSAN CRAWFORD THOMAS J. SCHWAB City Manager November 3, 1987 40 State of California Department of Transportation Attention: Will Brisley Dist 8 P.O. Box 231 San Bernardino, CA. 92403 lie: CUP-87-7 Dear Mr. Brisley: The attached street improvement and striping plan has been submitted as part of the proposed recreational vehicle park and commercial development located at the corner of Barton Road and La Crosse Avenue which your agency has previously reviewed. This improvement and striping plan is a result of the traffic study conducted for this project, which you also reviewed. Since a rtiol, of this plan effects Cal Trans right-of-way, our City lginer.r has requested your agency to review these placis and submit comments you may have regarding the proposal, with particular attention paid to the intersection of Barton Road and the 1-215 off ramp (La Crosse Avenue). Please make ,your comments in writing and forward them to Mr. Joe Kicak, City Engineer, 22365 Barton Road, Suite 110., Grand 'terrace, California, 92324, (714) 825-3825. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincer 1 � - avid-R.� awyer Planning Director UIts /IncIII i.,tl i J, Nov 41987 'Jrl'T OF i -'IZANSF-01-ITATION P 11 4 �pUr: of •Pr,.�/�I�6uT' I:b616 OF r-7>,`EMC-N-r a EXI�t '�R►P�NC� 5. PI D �v 1 ►T L� �JJ� 3 l6c, NT vaNi— 5--, I F� t C 11 �f t � Jf i r1r �wji ULI: 7 JL, -11, 111kiflilillil W111111111I k 111.1111 lJ11.11 i , lil gh i 111iiIIH I I lid ii i , i b":! all BLDG. A B C - FLOOR PLAN & COMMUNITY CENTER A - LAUNDRY & ARCADE B - DELJCATESSEN C - ICE CREAM / YOGURT SHOP BARTON WJ-AGE A DEVELOPMENT BY KJ(JL / GRAND TERRACE N g r4 _ 7M DQdi !Flw� T�O I>- FETAL SPACE F"M-11—omn 1111 W;?Arllmw4mzmwAl 11 1114111—H i 119111 lu I III eff HIIMIMU fl-ft "ll IN i I�ni i��=�Emjw mnnln„nrilifi Mmil -1 BARTON VILLAGE A DEVELOPMENT BY KK-k / GRAND TERRACE g rl TM U. — Aortn� BLDG. E — FLOOR PLAN a a BARTON VILLAGE A DEVELOPMENT BY KKA. / GRAND TERRACE MATE OF CALIFURNIA--Hi iNESS. TRANSFORTATiON AND HOUSING AGENCY ,3EuRGE DhUr.MtjiAh. �overror 3EPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 8, P. 0. BOX 231 SAN BERNARDINO, CA. 92402 February 29, 1988 Mr. Joe Kicak City Engineer W(_,ty of Grand Terrace 22365 Barton Road. Suite 110 Grand Terrace. CA 92324 RECZIVED MAR 0 21988 PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECEIVED FEB 2 91988 KICAK AND ASSOC. Gear Mr. Kicak: After rurther review and based on the fact. that Caltrans has no jurisdiction over the location involved in Mr. Robert Keeney's C.U.P.-7-87. Caltrans hereby withdraws its letters dated April 23. 1987 and November 20, 1987 and have no comment or objections to the rroposed driveway alignments. Sincerely. H. N.'LEWANDOWSKI ,orDistrict. Permits Engineer EXHI BIT B MEMORANDUM 12-08.5078 DATE: March 4, 1988 RECEIVED To: David Sawyer, Planning Director MAR 04 1988 PI ANNING DEPARTMENT FROM: Joseph Kicak, City Engineer �4_ Re: Site & Architectural SA-87-14 RV Park and Commerce Center You have requested my comments on the above project regarding the driveway lcoation as proposed. I would like to refer you to page 25 of the draft minutes of January 28, 1988. The minutes reflect that I have stated to Mr. Keeney prior to the Cal -Trans comments my concern over the driveway location. I totally agree with Mr. Keeney that the plan that he has presented and wishes to have approved is the best plan from the standpoint of private developer and the potential use of the property. However, consideration must be given to the use of the public -rights -of -ways by the general public. It is the responsibility of the public agency to review, comment and approve those plans which are in the best interest of the public. As of this date, there is no specified distance on any of the plans that have been submitted to me from the intersection of La Crosse and Barton to the centerline of the easterly driveway. We are estimating that the driveway as proposed is approximately 45 feet from the current intersection. At the meeting of January 28, 1988, I made a recommendation to the City Countil that Mr. Keeney consider some alternatives with respect to the driveway location, prepare a sketch for each, review these with the Planning Director and present those to Cal -Trans. To my knowledge, no alternatives were presented to the Planning Director. On February 19, 1988, Mr. Keeney, myself, and four staff members of Cal -Trans met to discuss the possibility of withdraw of the•1Cal-Trans comments regarding this project. No alternatives were presented to Cal -Trans at that time. Although a letter dated February 29, 1988 addressed to me indicates that Cal -Trans has no jurisdiction over the location of the driveway, Mr. Keeney's project, and therefore withdraws their letters of objections and has no comment, I feel that a more detailed plan should be presented. The plan should show the locations of the existing curbs, and islands on the westerly side side of I-215 off -ramps as well as the location of the proposed curbs and driveways along the frontage of that property. It should also indicate the dimensions of the easterly driveway as to the width, distance from the intersection and the interior parking arrangements and movements within the project area. This would permit the staff to evalutate the proposal in it's final form and furnish the City Council with a Staff recommendation. JK:dlk EXHIBIT C S T A F F R E P O R T DATE 3-3-88 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM ( X ) MEETING DATE 3-10-88 AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT SA-87-11 MS Partnership Appeal of=Plannin ommissfon Decisionof January18, 1988 FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED_X SUBJECT: Staff Report, SA-87-11 DATE: February 11, 1988 APPLICANT: M.S. Partnership LOCATION: 22488 Barton Road REQUEST: The construction of a 2,805 square foot commercial structure facing Barton Road BACKGROUND: The Applicant appeared before the Site and Architectural Review Board at their meeting of January 18, 1988. The Planning Commission Staff Report is attached. At that time the Board approved this project subject to the following conditions: 1. Dedicate to provide for forty-four (44) feet of right of way westerly of centerline of Mt. Vernon Avenue and install appropriate striping up to Britton Way. 2. If standard curb and gutter does not exist, construct standard curb and gutter at thirty-two (32) feet from centerline. 3. Construct standard sidewalks. 4. Install ornamental street lights. 5. Obtain from Riverside Highland Water Company and provide to the City a copy of "Will Serve Letter". 6. Pay into the traffic signal fund for upgrading of the signal at Barton Road and Mt. Vernon Avenue in the amount of $10,156.25. 7. All utilities shall be underground. rn, rre.r .. �-1 . A 8. All improvements to be designed by owner's civil engineer to the specifications of the City. 9. If any stores will be selling food products, submit plans to DEHS prior to construction or conversion. 10. All items required by the Forestry and Fire Warden Department in their memo dated October 7, 1987. 11. There shall be no vehicular access between the subject parcel and any other parcel without obtaining prior approval from the Planning Director and City Engineer and all parking stalls located on the southerly property line shall be equipped with concrete wheel stops or any other means required by the Planning Director deemed necessary to prevent such vehicular access. 12. The structure shall be relocated 13'-0" to the west of its originally proposed location. 13. The area to the west of the structure shall be improved as proposed in plans submitted January 14, 1988, with the exception that the east/west width shall be 13"-6". 14. The area to the east of the structure shall be landscaped in a manner consistent with the remainder of the site's landscaped area as approved by the Planning Director. 15. This approval does not represent approval of any signage elements or location. Signage shall be approved through the City's sign permit process. 16. -The project shall not be partitioned to contain more than two shops. This project has now been appealed before this City Council. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends the City Council uphold the decision of the Site and Architectural Review Hoard. Respe lly Submitted David Sawyer, Pla ning Director TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: BACKGROUND BYRON R. MATTESON Mayor BARBARA PFENNIGNAUSEN Mayor Pro Tom Council Members HUGH J. GRANT DENNIS L. EVANS SUSAN CRAWFORD Site and Architectural Review Board David Sawyer, Planning Director January 18, 1988 Staff Report, SA-87-11 M.S. Partnership 22488 Barton Road THOMAS J. SCHWAB City Manager This item was first considered by your Commission at the meeting of December 7, 1987 (please see the attached staff report, EXhiblt A ). At that time ,your Commission was concerned with the proposed location of the structure and the landscape area 'to the west of the building. 4 D18CUSSION Since that meeting staff has met with the applicant and reiterated the Planning Commission's concerns. In an effort to address these concerns the applicant h.as revised the project by replacing the green landscaped area with an enclosed paved area to he used as access to utility panels only. This area will not Rave a solid roof and therefore would not be counted of square footage. The applicant feels this will work well with an,y additional future development on this site. The applicant has indicated that they wish to keep the structure located in its original proposed location. In recognition of the Planning Commission's previous concerns regarding the now proposed enclosed area west of the structure and the applicant's desire to be as close to Mt. Vernon Avenue as possible, staff feels the following conditions would be an appropriate compromise. Additional Recommended Conditions: 1) The structure shall be relocated 13'-0" to the west of it's originally proposed location. 2) The area to the west of the structure shall be improved as proposed in Attachment B with the exception that the 1-18-88 PC REPORT J east/west width shall be 13'-6" 3) The area to the east of the structure shall be landscaped in a manner consistent with the remainder of the site's landscaped area as approved by the Planning Director. 4) This approval does not represent approval of any signage elements or location. Signage shall be approved through the City's Sign permit process. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends approval of SA-87-11 subject to the 11 conditions listed in the attached staff report and the above listed additional four conditions. DRS/mcm 1i Respectfully Submitted, pa:iaawyer, Planning Direc or :I :1 BYRON A. MATTESON Mayor BARBARA PFENNIG'iAU,f ?I Mayor Pro rem Council Members HUGH J. GRANT DENNIS L. EVANS SUSAN CRAWFORD THOMAS J. SCHWAS City Mennoor TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Site and Architectural Review Board David Sawyer, Planning Director December 7, 1987 Staff Report, SA-87-11 M.S. Partnership 22468 Barton Road ZONING AND LAND U9E PROPERTYGP ZONING LAND_ 11gF: Subject Property GC C-2 Vacant To the North GC C-2 Bicycle Shop To the South GC C-2 Liquor Store and Barber Shop ,ro the Fast GC C-2 Vacant Market To the West OC AP Offices and Commercial BACKGROUND The subject property contains 11,970 sq. feet and is currently vacarit. It is located on the west side of Mt. Vernon Avenue just north of Barton Road (see Attachment A). The property is owned by Mr. and Mrs. Frances Blackwell and Rex Edmonson. The subject property along with the property adjacent to the south is in escrow with the applicant, MS Partnership. I-t is ultimately the applicant's desire to combine the two lots and huild a second commercial structure in addition to the currently proposes] structure. However, the current lease on the existinft structure on the southerly lot is preventing the applicant from pursuing that concept at this time. For this reason, the applicant has submitted a proposed plan which only includes tilt sul),ject property and plans to submit a future proptosal at a later (late. Since the two lots are aiindivvidalarcpls Neect applicant on is allowed to do this as long proposed its on with respect to the City's code requirements. EXHIBIT A i — i 1�..% nne can+ DISCUSSION AND PLANNING ISSUES The Applicant is proposing a 2,805 sq. ft. commercial structure. The proposed building is orientated to face Barton Road, however, this building will currently be blocked from view on Barton Road by the existing liquor and barber shop structure. 4r, All access to this building will be provided from a single driveway on Mt. Vernon, there will he no access across the southerly property to Barton Road. Architecture The applicant has submitted colored elevations which illustrate that the structure will have a red mission clay tile roof, beige cement plaster walls with an accent color of red, matching the roof (see Attachment B). The building is proposed to be divided into three separate units each containing approximately 1000 sq. ft. The applicant has not indicated any potential tenants at this time. Park ing_and Traffic The project contains 18 standard parking spaces, 1 handicapped space and 1 loading space. The Grand Terrace Municipal Code requires a total of 17 spaces with 1 loading space. During the initial review of this project the increased traffic impact from this proposal became a concern and the applicant was required to submit a traffic study addressing the issues of access onto Mt. Vernon Avenue, trip generation and the impact on the Mt. Vernon Avenue and Barton Road intersection. This study was conducted by CG Engineering and was submitted for review to the City Engineer. City staff then met with the applicant and reviewed the Engineering Department's concerns and comments and revised the project accordingly. As a result, the revised plans as submitted to your Commission along with the recommended conditions of approval listed below satisfy the concerns of the Engineering Department regarding traffic impacts. Landscaping The plans indicate approximately 10.8% of landscaping area within the parking area, this is twice that which is required by the Municipal Code. The conceptual landscaping plan included in Attachment B indicates the trees shall include Magnolias, Crepe Myrtles, Red Iron Bark and Sweetshade. Shrubs include India Hawthorn and Star Jasmine along with Creeping Figs and Periwinkles as ground covers. A detailed landscaping and Irrigation plan shall be approved by staff prior to project completion. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends the Planning Commission approve 8A-87-11 subject to the following conditions: 1. Dedicate to provide for forty-four (44) feet of right of way westerly of centerline of Mt. Vernon Avenue and install appropriate striping up to Britton Way. 2. If standard curb and gutter does not exist, construct standard curb and Rutter at thirty two (32) feet from centerline. 3. Construct standard sidewalk. 4. Install ornamental street lights. 5. Obtain from Riverside Highland Water Company and Provide to the City a copy of "Will Serve Letter". 6. Pay into the traffic signal fund for upgrading of the signal at Barton Road and Mt. Vernon Avenue in the amount of $10,156.25. 7. All utilities shall be underground. 8. All improvements to be designed by owner's civil engineer to the specifications of the City. 9. If any stores will be selling food products, submit nlpns 1:0 DRHS prior to construction or conversion. 10. All items required by the Forestry and Fire Warden Department in their memo dated October 7, 1987. 11. There shall be no vehicular access between the subject parcel and any other parcel without obtaining prior approval from the Planning Director and City Engineer and all parking stalls located on the southerly property line shall be equipped with concrete wheel stops or any other means required by the Planning Director deemed necessary to prevent such vehicular access. Respectfully Submitted, 4PIannin awg Direc.or Ell El FVL MAR O-L SITEPLAN MAP. 3R I SUBJECT SITE AT t'_14UPMT A °ORESTRY AND FIRE' 'rfRDEN DEPARTMENT. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 'Ins Protection Planning Services • County Government Center OFFICE OF PUBLIC SAFETY' dS No. Arrowhead Avenue, First Floor San Bernardino, CA 92415-0186 FLOYD TIDWELL. Director 014) 387.4212, 387-4213 FIRE WARDEN tf • 1 O: GENCY SERVICES SHERIFF ��Nc aEa'utrMF ATE OCTOBER 7, 1987 0 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE REFERENCE N0: SA-07-11 . Planning Dept. APN: 277-251-21 & 30 ROM GLEN J. NEWMAN County Fire Warden UBJECT FIRE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS CHECKED BOXES WILL APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT X� F1. The above referenced project is protected by the Forestry P 01 & Fire Warden Dept. Prior to construction occurring on any parcel the owner shall contact the fire department for verification of current fire protection development requirements. XI F2. All new construction shall comply with applicable sections of the F002 1985 Uniform Fire Code (Ordinance No. 106), Development Code, Community Plans, and other statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations A, regarding fires and fire prevention adopted by the State of California. XJ F3. The street address shall be posted with a minimum of three (3) F 03 inch numbers, visible from the street in accordance with San Bernardino County Ordinance No. 2108, prior to occupancy. Posted numbers shall contrast with their background and be visible and legible from the street. X� F4. Each chimney used in conjunction with any fireplace P or any F 04 heating appliance in which solid or liquid fuel is used shall be maint- ained with an approved spark arrestor as identified in the Uniform Fire Code. XI F5. All flammable vegetation shall be removed from each building F005 site a minimum distance of thirty (30) feet from any flammable building material, including a finished structure. I F6. The development and each phase thereof shall have two points F006 of vehicular access for fire and other emergency equipment, and for routes of escape which will safely handle evacuations as required in the Development Code. XI F7. Private roadways which exceed one -hundred and fifty (150) in F007 length shall be approved by the fire agency having jurisdiction, and shall be extended to within one -hundred and fifty (150) feet of and shall give reasonable access to all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of any building. An access road shall be provided within fifty (50) feet of all buildings is the natural grade between the access road and building is in excess of thirty percent (30%) Where (1) �J =] the access roadway cannot be provided, approved fire protection system or systems shall be provided as required and approved by the fire department. XI F8. A turn -around shall be required at the end of each roadway 150 3008 feet or more in length and shall be approved by the fire department. Cul-de-sac length shall not exceed six -hundred (600) feet except as identified in the Development Code. XI - F9. Private road maintenance, including but not limited to grading 0 and snow removal, shall be provided for prior to recordation or approval. Written documentation shall be submitted to the fire agency having jurisdiction. K�F10. All fire protection systems designed to meet the fire flow 10 requirements specifide in the Conditions of Approval for this project shall be approved by the fire agency having jurisdiction prior to the installation of said systems. Said systems shall be installed and made serviceable prior to recordation unless construction of said systems has been bonded for a s required by the water purveyor. Water for fire protection, as required by the fire agency having jurisdiction, shall be in and operable prior to the start of building construction and shall be over and above the average daily consumption of water. The following are minimum requirements for your proposed development: A. System Standards *Fire Flow 2000 GPM @20 psi Residual Pressure with sprinklered building Duration 2 Hour/s Hydrant Spacing 330 Feet between hydrants *If blank, flow to be determined by calculation when additional construction information is received. B. Distribution System Mains 6 inch minimum Laterials Riser C. Fire Hydrants Numbers Type Street Valve 6 inch minimum 6 inch minimum 1 Total (public only) 0 Inch w/ 2 - 2 1/2 Inch outlet/s with National Standard thread and with 1 - 4 inch pumper connection 6 Inch Gate t Fll'. The required fire flow shall be determined by appropriate cal- (2) i ,J culations, using the 1974 editin of the Insurance Services Office (ISO) "Guide for the Determination of Required Fire Flow." F12. In areas without water -serving utilities, the fire protection )12 water system shall be based on NFPA Pamphlet No. 1231, "Water Supplies for Suburban and Rural Fire Fighting". A storage reservoir must be provided for each parcel; the minimum capacity to be maintained shall be determined by the fire department. F13. The developer or his engineer shall furnish the fire department )13 with two copies of water system improvement plans where fire protection water systems are required. The fire department shall also sign all water plans prior to recordation. F14. Mountain Fire Zone building regulations specified in San Bernardino 4 County Ordinance No. 2475 shall be strictly enforced. F15. A greenbelt or fuel modification zone shall be required. Req- �15 uirements will be site specific to the project. The greenbelt/zone plan must be filed with and approved by the fire department with jurisdiction prior to recordation of the final map. Maintenance of said greenbelts and/or fuel modification zones shall be provided for with approval from the fire department. a ons and/or comments may be directed to the Fire Protection Planning ,tf�n; County Government Center, 385 North Arrowhead, lst Floor, San Bernard- , California, 92415-0186; or call 714-387-4225. Thank you for your coopera- n. cerely, _ KARL F. SCHNEIDER lire Protection Planning Assistant M. S. Partnership BSK Engineering & Associates, Inc. Riverside -Highland Water Co. 3517 File following are IXI Non -Standard Conditions I I Clarifications I Comments: (3) NON-STANDARD CONDITIONS REFERENCE # NAME: M. S. Partnership LOCATION: SA-87-11 THE FOLLOWING NON-STANDARD CONDITIONS SHALL A PLY TO THIS PROJECT BASED UPON PLANS SUBMITTED TO THIS OFFICE. PLEASE CONTACT THE INDICATED FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING OFFICE FOR THE APPLICABLE STANDARD AND PROCEDURE FOR COMPLIANCE. F16. Fire extinguishers are required in accordance with Uniform Fire Code Standard # 10-1. [] F17. Any gated access shall be approved by the Fire Department and emergency access arrangements made prior to occupancy. [X] F16. Additional requirements may be applied due to the lack of sufficient information to review. Please submit building plans and declaration of use for proper application of codes. [] F19. The building occupancy is under the jurisdiction`of the State Fire Marshal. Written -documentation of revie4 and inspection required prior to final occupancy. Contact the West Covina Office at (818) 960-6441. F20. All flammable liquid storage and dispensing shall be in compliance with the applicable sections of the Uniform Fire Code Article 79. Plan review and permit to operate are required. [] F21. All commercial Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG) storage and dispensing shall be in compliance with the Uniform Fire Code Article 82 and County Ordinance # 3054. Plan review and permit to operate are required. [� F22. All access roadways shall be in accordance with County Ordinance # 3055. [] F23. Development is within the Safety Foothills Hazardous Protective Overlay Area (Greenbelt Standards). Compliance with the provisions of County Ordinance # 3108 as applicable and determined by the Fire Department shall be required. In those areas not so designated under said ordinance, the appropriate Community Plan Overlay Ordinance will apply. t] F24. An automatic fire alarm system is required. Said system shall be installed to the requirements of Uniform Fire Code Standard # 10-2. [] F25. Additional requirements shall be required as noted on attachments. nonstd 04-27-87 ORESTRY AND FIRE 'rdRDEN DEPARTMENT `-- COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO E; Protection Planning Services • County Government Center OFFICE OF PUBLIC SAFETY No, Arrowhead Avenue, First Floor • San Bernardino, CA 92415-0186 FLOYD TIDWELL, Director 4) 3137.4212, 387-4213 EMERGENCY SERVICESSHERIFF I l\A `\�� //�/llll DATE : OCTOBER 15, 1.987 Q C T i 0 11 f 4r TO : CITY OF GRAND TERRACE PLANNING DEPARTMENT Planning Dapt. FROM GLEN J. NEYHAN County Fire Warden SUBJECT : CORRECTION TO FIRE PROTECTION REQUIR94ENTS Regarding recently conditioned project # SA-87-11, APN 275-251-21 & 30, please delete the following: . F10: A. "with sprinklered building" C. "public only" If any problems arise, please call this office. Sincerely, Karl F. Schneider Fire Protection Planning Assistant KFS: rd cc: L. A. Wainscott & Assoc., Inc. Rivers ide•-Highland Water Co. 3517 File Pile DATE: Mar 2, 1988 S T A F F R E P O R T CRA ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM (xx) MEETING DATE: Mar 10, 1988 SUBJECT: BUDGET REVIEW r FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED City staff annually prepares a budget analysis to review actual revenues and expenditures. Based on the review, adjustments are recommended. REVENUE Original Received Revised ACCT # Account Title Estimate YTD Estimate 10-200-06 Construction Permits 30,000 143,607 155,000 10-400-04 Public Wks -Inspection Fees 5,000 19,992 15,000 10-400-10 Planning 20,000 17,094 25,000 11-800-01 Cap Impry Fees - Streets 30,000 150,385 160,000 11-600-01 Invest Earnings - Streets 4,000 13,000 12-800-01 Cap Impry fees -Storm Drains 25,000 157,250 165,000 12-600-01 Invest Earnings -Storm Drains 4,800 14,000 13-800-01 Cap Impry Fees -- Parks 25,000 105,887 113,000 13-600-01 Invest Earnings -- Parks 2,000 8,000 21-400-25 Sewer Connection Fees(G.T.) 20,000 52,498 54,000 Permit and capital improvement fees are estimated based on the number of housing starts anticipated. The original estimate did not anticipate the approvals of the multi -family housing. Therefore, revenue needs to be increased to match the actual fees collected. 18-300-25 TDA Article 8a 110,000 -0- 138,813 Staff estimated TDA based on a SANDBAG projection. The estimate has been revised to anticipate $138,813. PUUN,CIL AGENDA ITEM * 3P STAFF REPORT -- Budget Review March 10, 1988 Page Two EXPENDITURES/ENGINEERING As Council is aware, the bulk of our engineering and inspections are on a pay as you go basis contracted with Kicak & Associates. The approved building activity is substantially higher than what was projected and our expenditures will be higher than anticipated. We have collected approximately $128,000 more in construction permit fees and inspection fees than was budgeted. These fees represent payments for engineering and inspection services. The following is an analysis of our current activity. ACCT. General 10-170-250 Coord.W/Pub. 10-170-255 Staff 10-170-601 Public Wks. 10-170-603 Bldg.&Safety 10-170-604 COST COST PROD. NEED ADDTL APPR BUDGET BALANCE TO DATE PER MTH 5 MTHS REMAIN REQUEST 25,000 7,204.30 17,795.70 2,224.46 11,122.30 4,000.00 7,000 1,927.97 5,072.03 634.00 3,170.00 1,250.00 26,000 365.12 25,634.88 3,204.36 16,021.80 15,660.00 20,000 -1,315.71 21,315.71 2,666.46 13,332.30 14,650.00 45,000 4,124.75 40,875.25 5,109.40 25,547.00 21,400.00 123,000 69,193.40 56,960.00 As shown by the above analysis the engineering expenditures at the current levels will exceed our appropriation by $56,960. Staff has projected the appropriation required to continue engineering and inspections for the balance of the fiscal year. This appropriation is covered by the additional revenues collected on the increased development. STAFF REPORT -- Budget Review March 10, 1988 Page Three EXPENDITURES/GENERAL FUND ADDITIONAL ORIG APPROP ACCT # TITLE APPROP YTD REQUESTED 10-190-210 Non-dept Office Exp 7,000 7,600 5,000 10-190-238 Utilities 32,000 22,700 5,500 10-190-240 Lease of Equipment 7,000 6,000 2,000 10-190-701 Fire Station Furn 5,000 5,800 800 10-390-256 Contract Pub Health 17,000 19,100 2,100 10-410-210 C.S.O. Office Supplies 0 98 200 10-410-220 C.S.O. Special Dept. 0 212 300 10-410-258 Cal I. D. 0 4,441 4,441 10-631-255 Storm Drain Maint. 7,000 12,330 6,400 10-370-210 Planning Office 1,200 1,800 800 10-370-219 Minor Equipment 1,000 2,100 1,100 10-370-220 Special Dept Exp 1,000 1,100 700 10-370-230 Advertising 2,000 500 1,500 PARKS AND RECREATION/GENERAL FUND 10-430-110 Salaries 70,700 48,466 23,000 10-430-210 Office 0 235 500 10-430-242 Rental of Property 500 854 2,800 10-430-245 Maint of Bldg/Grounds 12,000 9,700 2,000 STAFF REPORT -- Budget Review March 10, 1988 Page Four JUSTIFICATION FOR EXPENDITURES GENERAL FUND 10-190-210 -- NON-DEPT. OFFICE EXPENSE -- This account is utilized to buy general supplies for both copying machines and is the cost of the copies with the volume with which we are using the copier for both City Council as well as Planning Commission packets. We have underestimated our appropriation by $5,000. 10-190-238 -- UTILITIES -- In analyzing our utility usage due to the less than mild winter that we have experienced our estimate is going to fall short by $5,500. 10-190-240 -- LEASE OF EQUIPMENT -- The lease of the upgraded copier as well as the need to purchase a new postage machine will result in a short fall of $2,000 in this account. 10-190-701 -- FIRE STATION FURN. -- The fire station during the original budget provided us a list of needed furniture and an approximate cost. The price quotes for the purchased furniture exceed our appropriation by $800. 10-390-256 -- PUBL. HEALTH CONTRACT -- The City has a contract for public health services within the county. Each year the City is billed for the actual cost expended in the prior year. We had estimated $17,000. The actual cost billed to us by the County was $19,100. An additional $2,100 is required. 10-410-210 and 220 -- CRIME PREVENTION OFFICER -- In the initial budget adopted by the Council we had eliminated the position of Community Services Officer as well as the appropriation for supplies for that position. Council has subsequently reauthorized the position and we need to reinstate the original appropriation for the position's supplies. 10-410-258 -- CAL I-D -- Staff at the time of developing the budget did not have the dollar amount for the City's participation in CAL ID. The bill has been provided by the County for the 1987-88 share and the City's contribution is $4,441. 10-631-255 -- STORM DRAIN MAINT. -- Storm drain maintenance is a pay as you go item. We are needed to clean the storm drains only when there are blockages or maintenance is required. We have had to rebuild two open storm drain channels which has caused this line item to be exceeded. Staff is requesting an appropriation of $6,400 to cover the deficit and any other costs until the end of the year. STAFF REPORT -- Budget Review March 10, 1988 Page Five 10-370-210, 219, 220 and 230 -- PLANNING DEPARTMENT -- Our initial budget for Planning was based on estimates. We underestimated the startup and operating costs of the Planning Department, partially, due to much additional work including printing and advertising in conjunction with the General Plan. The appropriation of $4,100 is required with distribution as outlined on page three. 10-430-110 -- PARKS AND RECREATION SALARIES -- This is the first year of our In - House Recreation Program. We took over the program from People Helpers on September 1, 1987 and several reasons have caused the salary line item to be insufficient. First, is the transition from the People Helpers' contract to in-house. Second, is that the Recreation Supervisor had illnesses related to a pregnancy which required us to hire additional help during this period. Staff requires $25,000 additional appropriation for the salaries for the balance of the fiscal year. 10-430-210 -- PARKS AND RECREATION OFFICE SUPPLIES -- We had not provided a line item for recreation general office supplies needed by this department. 10-430-242 -- PARKS AND RECREATION RENTAL OF PROPERTY -- When we started our program we did not bud et for the rental of the church site for our child care which is at a cost of ?350 per month. 10-430-245 -- MAINT. OF BLDGS./GROUNDS -- The original budget of $12,000 generally included chemical treatment of the turf as well as maintenance of the restroom structure and the irrigation system to the park. An increase in vandalism of the sprinkler heads as well as an expense of $1,900 to install speed bumps in the parking lot has resulted in a situation that will cause the account to be insufficient for the rest of the fiscal year. Staff, therefore, is requesting an additional appropriation of $2,000 to carry us to the balance of the fiscal year. PERSONNEL In the area of personnel staff is recommending two changes. Due to the reorganization of several departments within the City and the elminination of the Finance Director and City Clerk positions, we have reduced a number of staff in the City Clerk's office from three and one-half positions to two positions. We find it necessary for employee coverage of the telephone and reception area, as well as the need to keep our files and records in order,to request the addition of a part-time position. This position would be unclassified part-time working a total of 22112 hours a week. This part-time position will require the City to expend an additional $3,000 between now and the end of the current fiscal year. The yearly cost of this part-time position would be approximately $9,000 per year. Sufficient funds are available in the salary line item to provide for this part-time position. Staff is requesting Council to authorize and fill a part-time clerk typist position in the City Clerk's department. STAFF REPORT -- Budget Review March 10, 1988 Page Six The reorganization has also changed the responsibility of the clerk -typist in the City Manager's office. The responsibilities of the clerk -typist have increased substantially and created a situation where an individual is working out of her classification. The responsibility is more conducive to the position of a secretary. Currently within our classification system we do not have the classification of secretary. Staff is requesting that Council review the attached job description and adopt the attached Resolution rescinding Resolution No. 87-19 with the addition of a position of secretary with a range of $1,425.89 to $1,930.30. The current salary of the clerk -typist falls within the proposed salary range of the secretary and at this point we are not asking for any additional appropriation for a wage increase. STAFF RECOMMENDS: 1. COUNCIL REVISE THE FOLLOWING REVENUE ESTIMATES: 10-200-06 Construction Permits 155,000 10-400-04 Public Wks -Inspection Fees 15,000 10-400-10 Planning 25,000 11-800-01 Cap Impry Fees - Streets 160,000 11-600-01 Invest Earnings - Streets 13,000 12-800-01 Cap Impry fees -Storm Drains 165,000 12-600-01 Invest Earnings -Storm Drains 14,000 13-800-01 Cap Impry Fees -- Parks 113,000 13-600-01 Invest Earnings -- Parks 8,000 21-400-25 Sewer Connection Fees(G.T.) 54,000 18-300-25 TDA Article 8a 138,813 2. COUNCIL MAKE THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS: 10-170-250 General/Eng 4,000 10-170-255 Coord.W/Pub 1,250 10-170-601 Staff 15,660 10-170-603 Public Works 14,650 10-170-604 Bldg.&Safety 21,400 10-190-210 Non-dept Office Exp 5,000 10-190-238 Utilities 5,500 10-190-240 Lease of Equip 2,000 10-190-701 Fire Station Furn 800 10-390-256 Contract Pub Health 2,100 10-410-210 CSO Office Supplies 200 10-410-220 CSO Special Dept 300 10-410-258 Cal I.D. 4,441 STAFF REPORT -- Budget Review March 10, 1988 Page Seven 10-631-255 Storm Drain Maint. 6,400 10-370-210 Planning Office 800 10-370-219 Minor Equipment 1,100 10-370-220 Special Dept. Exp. 700 10-370-230 Advertising 1,500 10-430-110 Salaries 23,000 10-430-210 Office 500 10-430-242 Rental of Property 2,800 10-430-245 Maint of Bldg/Grounds 2,000 3. COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT AND FILLING OF A PART-TIME CLERK -TYPIST POSITION. 4. COUNCIL ADOPT THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 87-19 CREATING THE POSITION OF SECRETARY WITH A SALARY RANGE OF $1,425.89 to $1,930.30. TS:bt ATTACHMENTS P9 AVAILABLE FUND BALANCES: Estimate Approved Mid -year Adjusted per Budget Changes Adjustments Balance GENERAL FUND Fund Balance 6/30/87 601,190 27,950 629,140 Estimated Revenue 1,937,809 91,500 140,000 2,169,309 Appropriations 2,008,889 117,239 116,101 2,242,229 Available Balance 6/30/88 530,110 556,220 STREET FUND Fund Balance 6/30/87 76,554 76,554 Estimated Revenue 34,000 139,000 173,000 Appropriations 15,000 14,725 29,725 Available Balance 6/30/88 95,554 219,829 STORM DRAIN FUND Fund Balance 6/30/87 92,713 92,713 Estimated Revenue 29,800 149,200 179,000 Appropriations -0- -0- (,w Available Balance 6/30/88 122,513 2715713 PARK DEVELOPMENT FUND Fund Balance 6/30/87 46,378 46,378 Estimated Revenue 27,000 94,000 121,000 Appropriations 54,200 19,000 73,200 Available Balance 6/30/88 19,178 103,678 GAS TAX FUND Fund Balance 6/30/87 186,416 186,416 Estimated Revenue 206,225 206,225 Appropriations 312,710 312,710 Available Balance 6/30/88 79,931 67,531 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT FUND Fund Balance 6/30/87 Estimated Revenue Appropriations Available Balance 6/30/88 WASTEWATER DISPOSAL FUND Fund Balance 6/30/87 Estimated Revenue Appropriations Available Balance 6/30/88 IM 295,481 295,481 220,000 28,813 248,813 515,105 515,105 376 29,189 108,291 1083291 383,600 34,000 417,600 315,840 315,840 176,051 210,051 CITY OF GRAND TERRACE JOB DESCRIPTION Title: Secretary -- City Manager's Office Date: Feb., 1988 Job Summary Under the supervision of the City Manager's Office provides a $41jW variety of secretarial assistance in varied duties dealing with the City Manager's office. Typical Duties Prepares and assembles the City Council/CRA Agenda; assembles and reproduces documents for Council Agenda packets; attends the staff meetings in order to incorporate all agenda items. Types and transcribes a variety of documents from typed or hand- written drafts or tapes; takes some citizen complaints that come directly to the City Manager; receives and screens incoming calls and answers routine inquiries. Processes the incoming mail and distribution thereof. Monitors office supply levels and places orders for the City Manager's office. Assists with correspondence for the City Council such as legislative letters and other correspondence that is not routine in nature (automatically the City Clerk handles routine Committee and transmittal letters for the Council). Processes travel arrangements for the Mayor and City Council attendance at conferences, seminars, etc.; maintains the Mayor's calendar. Issues and maintains record of City keys. Performs related duties as assigned. Desirable Qualifications Ability to type 60 words per minute with a good command of proper Business English, good vocabulary and grammar usage; knowledge of standard office practices, procedures and equipment. Experience on wordprocessor as well as ability to take dictation is beneficial. Ability to communicate effectively and establish cooperative working relationships with a variety of persons contacted in the course of performing assigned duties; and to represent the City in an official capacity. CITY OF GRAND TERRACE Position Description Secretary -- City Manager's Office Page 2 Any combination of education, training and experience that provides the required knowledges, skills, and abilities. An example of this would be completion of high school and previous clerical experience involving public contact. Special Conditions The incumbent in this position must be bondable. RESOLUTION NO. 88- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 87-19 AND ADJUSTING THE SALARY RANGES FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace has determined the need to adjust the salary ranges for the positions contained in this resolution: v NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING: SECTION 1. AMENDMENT - That Resolution No. 87-19 is hereby amended. SECTION 2. Classifications/Salary Ranges - That the following job classifications and sa ary ranges are hereby established for employees of the City of Grand Terrace, and said salary ranges shall be effective March 10, 1988. TITLE SALARY RANGE Minimum Midpoint Maximum Assistant City Manager 2,708.44 3,187.72 3,677.00 4 Planning Director 2,403.73 2,827.38 3,251.02 City Clerk 2,070.18 2,435.88 2,801.58 Assistant Finance Director 2,070.18 2,435.88 2,801.58 Assistant to the City Manager 1,917.54 2,255.68 2,593.82 Recreation Supervisor 1,750.00 2,050.00 2,350.00 Deputy City Clerk 1,629.22 1,916.48 2,203.74 Senior Account Clerk 1,425.89 1,678.10 1,930.30 Secretary 1,425.89 1,678.10 1,930.30 Planning Aide 1,384.36 1,629.22 1,874.08 Maintenance Lead Person 1,370.21 1,611.50 1,852.78 Minutes Clerk/Records Clerk 1,294.26 1,522.16 1,750.06 Maintenance Worker 1,252.92 1,474.46 1,696.00 Clerk Typist 1,220.06 1,435.24 1,650.42 TITLE Day/Child Care Coordinator (33hrs. per week) Head Teachers Receptionist Recreation Leaders Recreation Aide ADOPTED this loth day of March, 1988. ATTEST: Deputy City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof. SALARY RANGE Minimum Midpoint Maximum 8.00 hr. 8.50 hr. 9.00 hr. 7.00 hr. 7.50 hr. 8.00 hr. 6.2010 hr. 6.8689 hr. 7.5366 hr. 5.50 hr. 6.00 hr. 6.50 hr. 3.50 hr. 4.75 hr. 6.00 hr. Mayor of the City of Grand Terrace and of the City Council thereof. I, Juanita Brown, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held on the loth day of March, 1988, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Approved as to form: City Attorney Deputy City Clerk - 2 - S T A F F R E P O R T DATE 3-3-88 C R A ITEM ( ) COUNCIL ITEM ( X ) MEETING DATE 3-10-88 AGENDA ITEM NO. 4W SUBJECT Steven Fox - Request For Exemption From Residen i�' al Moratorium - Southeas�Corner oy-PTco and T� B-rue Mountain our£---`�`—�--- — _ FUNDING REQUIRED NO FUNDING REQUIRED X BACKGROUND: On December 3, 1987, TPM-87-9 a two parcel subdivision, which divided a 1.1 acre lot into two individual lots of 20,495 and 22,230 was approved by this City Council, at the request of Steven Fox. At the same meeting the Council clarified the City's moratorium on residential development. One of the points brought forward in that discussion was the issue of what would be done with projects already in the tentative map process. At that time it was determined that a tentative map may be approved but the applicant would not be able to submit the final map until after the moratorium is lifted (pages 14 and 15, Attachment A). As a result of this Mr. Fox has requested that his project, TPM-87-9, be exempt from the moratorium (see attachment B). After the action was taken to clarify the moratorium, the public hearing for TPM-87-9 was opened and Mr. Fox's tentative parcel map was approved. RECOMMENDATION: The exemption of this project will allow the processing of a final map which will result in an additional buildable residential lot in the area. The Planning Department has interpreted this as against the intent of the moratorium and without sufficient justification for the exemption, the Planning Department therefore recommends against the request. Respectf lly Submitted David Sawyer, Z17hing Director .J City Engineer The City Engineer replied he believes he passed out a letter in Joe Kicak which Caltrans advised him they were working on a report as far as the feasibility was concerned, as well as the cost. Re- stated this correspondence came in within the last three weeks and they did not give staff a specific date, but;they did say that report will be coming very soon. Councilmember stated so they will have the cost figures in tnat report? The City Engineer replied, "that is correct." Planning Director The Planning Director stated on November 12, 1987, Council David Sawyer enacted the development of a moratorium on all clarification tem 7-A residentially -zoned property located east of the 215 freeway. on He then- indicated the property which is identified on the ma p Residential board labeled as Item 7 affects all property zoned R-1, R-2, Moratorium R-3 and has some affect on AP -zoned property for any residential R-3 projects that maybe submitted for in that zone. He read b scenario from his Staff Report regarding the Planning Department's procedures as a result of these'actions. He stated the Planning Department recommends Council to revise the aforementioned moratorium, as requested. Mayor Matteson ask the Planning Director what is the current status of the General Plan revision? The Planning Director replied, the General Plan Revisions are due in tomorrow afternoon from the consultant on a staff level and will be reviewing their draft Environmental Impact Report and General Plan Document and then staff will go back to the 40 consultant with their comments in approximately a week and a half to two weeks. The consultant will then prepare a final document which will be available for public comment for 30 days. Mayor Matteson asked if he was talking about 30 days from the date staff returns it to the Consultant. The Planning Director replied, "that's correct." He indicated the Planning Commission and City Council hearings will proDaDly begin around the first couple of weeks in February. Mayor Matteson stated, so approximately six to seven weeks. He then stated he was going to open this up for public input on this particular issue. He stated if there was anyone in the audience who wished to address this issue. Tony Petta Mr. Petta stated there has been no objection on the part of the 11875 Eton Dr. public as far as building houses or swimming pools or pati:_ or re -roofing the house. He stated it would appear that the revision of the moratorium, whereby individuals might want :o build their house, would be allowed since apparently there s no objection on the part of anyone to someone building the�- J ATTACHMENT Council Minutes - 12/03/87 A i IM Bill Storm T.J. Austyn L own home. He then asked if the Planning Director would be the only staff that would be allowed to look at the plans or could anyone else who wants to? The Planning Director replied the intent is that the General Plan Consultant will be submitting to him the draft that he has come up with and then he will sit down with the consultant and go over what he has proposed with questions and comments; they will sit down with the City Engineer; they will provide the park information to the Parks and Recreation Committee and go over it on,staff level at that meeting. He stated it will not be open to public for comment or review until after staff completes it from staff point -of -view because it is still in a draft writing stage. , He stated once staff has made their comments on it, staff will give it back to.,the consultant and then'he will formalize it into a public comment format. Mr. Petta stated, so that communication is strictly between the consultant and City staff. The Planning Director replied, "that's correct." Mr. Storm stated they are processing an extension for Tract 13050 and he was trying to get a clarification on the status of that extension. He stated they are now working with staff on a compromise for that tract and he understands the extension would allow them to move ahead because they made an application prior to the cut-off date. He then asked for clarification about their Site Plan and Architectural Review not being allowed to move ahead because they had not made the formal application. The Planning Director replied, "that's correct," that's the way the Planning Department is viewing the moratorium up until this evening and clarifications for projects such as this one, which has come in for a tentative map and has been working with the Engineering Department on the conditions in the submittal of the final map would be allowed to continue and come to Council with the final map recommendations to be heard. He stated after that, the developer will have to submit a new Site and Architectural Review Application and that will not be accepted because that is a new application for the next phase of that development. He stated if Council feels that they don't want to have a project such as this in this type of timing to go forward with the final map, then that is the kind of clarification he would like. He indicated he is interpreting it that he will be allowed to go forward with that type of project in pipeline. He stated there are two items here tonight that are exactly the same type of situation where the developers have submitted tentative maps that have gone to the Planning Commission and are now coming to Council and are now caught in a time-lag because of the moratorium. Mr. Storm stated his other question would be on Tract' No. 13205, they are two to three weeks away before they will be submitting their final map on that project to the city. Mayor Matteson stated for clarification, asked Mr. Storm the projects that are under construction now, what map is that. Mr. Storm replied, 13050 indicating those are phases I thru IV and the one that was just mentioned. They wished to complete the final three phases, which are Phases 5 thru 1. Mayor Matteson questioned the phase after that? Mr. Storm replied, they have another tract, Tract 13205 on Main Street above Oriole and that's another map altogether, which is about 95 percent through final plan check with the City now. The Planning Director -stated that second map is not affected by the extension issue that we will be considering at the next Council Meeting and that first map, 13050 is, so they are really two separate issues. Mr. Storm stated he believe the second map would be expiring around June and he was concerned whether or not their time would be extended in the moratorium? Do they Have two years sometime to get approval until the time they can get a final map on that parcel. He stated if the General Plan process 00 stretches out for a period of time, it coul..d stretch beyond that two-year period and he wanted to know how that would affect him. The City Attorney stated he believes there is language in the Code that says when a moratorium is applied, that the time is automatically extended. Councilmember Evans asked Mayor Matteson what was the purpose of imposing a moratorium on all residential developments? Mayor Matteson replied the purpose was to redo the General Plan and see if we were going to be changing the zoning on some of the property and therefore, wanted to stop all construction until that time when they could see what the General Plan was going to bring and not having people coming through with maps and putting a great expense for projects that Council was not going to accept. Councilmember Evans asked so that was all residential developments? Council Minutes - 12/03/81.. Mayor Matteson replied', "yes," that was the intent of the motion. Councilmember Evans asked if that was still the intent of the C motion? Mayor Matteson stated the reason the Planning Director is bringing this up tonight is so that Council can review it and see if some adjustments can be made. Councilmember Evans stated he would like to know what the intent of the motion is because Mr. Petta mentioned that he felt the intent of the moratorium was not to stop the construction of houses. He stated in light of what has transpired in the last cou.pl.e of months, he can't help but feel it's okay to continue with 4Oh§-tr`uction.or development of single-family' homes, however, we don't want apartments. He wanted to know if the intent of the motion was to stifle multi -family development. If so, we need to specifically state that so everyone knows, then Council can proceed with what we have with us without any clarification. Mayor Matteson replied part of the problem is not just multi -family units, it's clarification on what the Planning Director had in way of lot size in the area of Blue Mountain. Councilmember Evans stated if he understood what Mayor Matteson was saying, was that any kind of residential construction will stand. Mayor Matteson replied after reviewing the Planning Commissioner's Report, he wouldn't say that any residential construction, large tract units. He stated personal residential units that were owner -occupied buildings that are going in he has no problem with, that was not the real intent. Councilmember Evans asked the Planning Director when he said in his Staff Report, owner occupied, did he have in mind someone who wanted to do an addition to their home that are currently living o'n the premises.? The Planning Director replied that and also a person who is in the R-1 Area and has a lot that is vacant and is planning on building his home on it, that he will be allowed to build a single-family residence on it. Councilmember Evans asked what was the difference we are waiting the General Plan for review whether it's one house, ten or twenty homes? He stated one more home will obviously will impact it, if we are going to be taking a look at residential construction as it relates to the impact in the community, that is what he is trying to get a clarification as to the purpose of the moratorium. w The Planning Director replied there is an "element of staff being able to work with the public and if a person is coming in and wants to build his own home in an area which may not be a residential area in the future, there is some working capabilities that we can deal with and get the person to perhaps not go forward with that, but if he really wants to, he can. He stated that is different than a person who is an area that has been ear -marked or is being talked about changing from residential to commercial or industrial area. He has a two or three -acre piece of property that he wants to split, subdivide and sell off, and then future people coming in and buying residential property being surrounded by a commercial area. He stated that is the type of thing he was concerned about stopping. He felt staff can deal with an individual homeowner on an individual basis. Councilmember Evans replied he understands what the Planning Director was saying, but it still comes to the point when the motion was made stating all residential development, it doesn't state if it is an owner -occupied one -dwelling unit, it's okay. He stated it seems like we are picking and choosing and he would like some definitive guidelines and that is why he was asking the purpose of the moratorium. The Planning Director replied that is exactly what the Planning Department interpreted it with a "hard-line" on interpretation until this meeting and that is why staff is coming back to Council with this request for a revision. Councilmember Grant stated the original intent was not to create something that would jeopardize the integrity of the development of the revised General Plan, you start authorizing things that would place the consultant in a peculiar position in terms of his recommendations to Council and it was a very logical act on the part of this Council to that extent. He stated to another extent, it was somewhat over -killed and that is why he would support staff's recommendations. He indicated Council could make it more liberal and still not jeopardize the consultant in what he is doing; indicating he supports the moratorium and that is the reason he seconds this motion, but felt it should be revised tonight and made more sensible. Councilmember Shirley stated she would like to get an opinion and add one more thing to Councilmember Grant's recommendation and that is replacement construction, for instance if someone's house burns down, it would be nice if it could be rebuilt. She stated she did not think that has been addressed. The Planning Director replied staff has interpreted that kitchen remodeling, replacement of an existing structure. He stated he would accept that applicant and do a permit for that on a single-family maximum type of situation. Council Minutes - 12/03/87 Councilmember Evans stated if he understood Mr. Storm's position in looking for direction, we are talking abou,t the property that is just immediately south of what is under construction, known as Fieldcrest Homes, is that correct? Mr. Storm replied, "that's correct." Councilmember Evans stated if he recalls, Mr. Storm has not had a final tract map on that property? Mr. Storm replied they have a contract map on the first plot 4 where Fieldcrest is located, but they did not have a final tract map on Phases 5 thru 7. Councilmember Evans stated the rest of the area came up and fell into the two-year time limit, then -asked Mr: Storm had he not filed his finial tract map? Mr. Storm replied, "that's correct" they filed for an extension in July 1987 and carried into the extension a few weeks ago. Councilmember Evans asked if it was because of some problems and indicated he did not know if the City Attorney. or the Planning Director had mentioned it, but usually when a developer files there is a sixty-day time limit they automatically get. He then asked Mr. Storm if that had expired also and did that expire prior to the moratorium or after the moratorium was imposed? f The Planning Director replied the moratorium was placed on the last meeting and we either extended that 60-day extension time period at that meeting or the prior meeting. He asked the City Attorney if he could remember which meeting that took place? The City Attorney replied, he did not recall which meeting it was. However, Council agreed by stipulation that the status quo would be preserved and felt the moratorium would not apply to those phases and believed that they would come before Council at the next meeting. He presumed, otherwise, the developer had certain recourses they would have taken and in order to preserve the status quo, Council arrived at a stipulation and wouldn't work an unfair hardship. Councilmember Evans stated to the City Attorney, if he recalled his direction, it was because of potential litigation. The ` City Attorney replied, "yes." Councilmember Evans he asked in answer to Mr. Storm's question this evening, although he is putting together a major residential development, he will not fall under this moratorium. The City Attorney repl-i.ed, "yes and no," he wasn't dragging the question, but as to the final map, he would say "no," Mr. Storm would not fall under the moratorium, that they would come before Council at the next meeting or the extension of the tentative map. He stated as to taking out permits'in any of those for building, that is another matter and the Planning Director has already indicated they would not entertain that. Councilmember Evans asked if Mr. Storm would be able to bring to the Planning Commission a review of what will be built on the subdivision. The City Attorney replied, "no sir," the Planning Department has already indicated they would not accept. Councilmember Evans stated so assuming that at the next meeting, he was to be granted the extension, he would then have to wait for the six-month period or until the General Plan was adopted before he could then continue further. The City Attorney replied, "yes." Councilmember Evans asked Mr. Storm if that was clear to him. Mr. Storm replied, "yes," but he was not happy with that; they would like to submit those plans if they could, but it is clear and he understands that. The City Engineer stated he believes he understands this, but he would like clarificatio►i that if any final or. tentative tract that is now ready to go final, that could not be brought before the City Council for final approval until such time as the moratorium is over, is that the way I understand it? The City Attorney replied, "yes," but the time would not rurr on those maps because they have an automatic extension'of time or whatever the duration of the moratorium. Mayor Matteson asked Mr. Storm if he had any other questions. Mr. Storm replied, "no," other than you were talking about financial impact and saving people any great financial impact, we have already spent the money, so it's already been a very great financial impact on us. He stated they are a small company and he hopes some decision can be made fairly quick so they can get on with this thing. Harry Baie Mr. Baie stated for the last year he has been trying to build an extension on his home with a bathroom. The Veterans Administration approved all his plans and he was ready to go on the 14th of November and he was turned down because the moratorium was in affect. He requested the City Council to modify this ordinance so that individual cases can be adjudicated properly and swiftly. Council Minutes - 12/03/87 pan,- 11 A Tony Petta Mr. Petta asked the City Attorney and the City Engineer if the 11875 Eton Dr. moratorium that took place west of the freeway was R-3 property? The City Attorney replied, it might have included R-2 also, but it certainly was R-3, not R-1 property. Mr. Petta stated that was the factor that brought on the moratorium in the first place west of the freeway. Therefore, the Council took care of that problem by imposing a moratorium essentially on R-3 properties. He stated west of the freeway, the point of discussion was the R-3 properties and there were absolutely no objections whatsoever on any form of R-1 constructed houses. Therefore, if the same criteria was used here east of the freeway, by placing a moratorium on R-3 properties, that takes care of the concern of the people an(I also it would not burden the individual's who are in the process of building residential homes. Mayor Matteson replied, east of the freeway, we have some other problems we didn't have on the west side and one of those is the gradual increase of lot sizes as you go south, where you get into larger lots and it made more sense to blend in increasingly larger lots, this is the reason why we are waiting for the General Plan. Mr. Petta replied he understands that, however, the Planning Commission can address that because all development has to go first before the Planning Commission. He stated the Planning Director might comment on that. He stated where there is a problem that is in reference to lot sizes, the Planning Commission can directly take action to request and then make recommendation to Council to make those lots larger without a moratorium. The Planning Director replied the Planning Commission and the Planning Department would have the zoning issues that they will be able to enforce with different projects that are proposed. He stated he would be concerned with eliminating R-1 properties from the moratorium in the instance on the southern portion part of the City, there has been an application that wanted to come to subdivide some property which he knew the General Plan Consultant is considering changing from R-1 to a commercial or industrial business park type of environment. He stated that is exactly the reason he would like to have R-1 still in there because that allows him to put that application off so it doesn't get into the procedure and doesn't give that applicant any proceeds to vested rights to that type of development. .ave Cole Mr. Cole stated he was here on behalf of a property owner 'rinciple of Grand Terrace who is asking for an exemption from thye 'egional & moratorium for a specific site that he is proposing ystem multi -family housing tract which is located just southerly of andscaping & the Retirement Hotel that is being constructed. He.§tated they ;chitectural have requested through the City Manager to come before Council irm this evening to ask for this request. He indicated this project is being considered as a replacement of the existing multi -family housing which is in a deteriorated state of condition. He stated this project would be a replacement for the existing situation. He stated he was here to request a waiver on this moratorium for this specific site is so that the developer can proceed with his planning in an expeditious manner. Mayor Matteson indicated his particular position on this is that the major constructions we are talking about would may be two months, and felt that is not a length of time that is to be of great consideration. He stated he felt these are the things we want to get straight in the General Plan and he would not be in favor of the extension or exemption on any major construction on the moratorium. However, he would be in favor of accepting the Planning Commission recommendations on the R-1 and R-2. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen apologized to Mr. Baie'for the degree of difficulties he had because of the moratorium. She indicated the frustrating thing for her was that she sat here Car at the last Council Meeting for three pages of minutes and went item by item with Council on the motion on the floor saying are you sure that's what you mean, do you really want to stop this, and the City Attorney and Councilmembers replying and it was clear what we were doing. She indicated, feeling good, that Council is now ready to correct something that was done so incorrectly. CC-87-231 Motion by Mayor Matteson, second by Councilmember Grant, to approve Planning Director's recommendation. Council member Evans asked for the definition of major construction and clarification as to it applying to R-1 and R-2, or will this moratorium govern all multi -family? Mayor Matteson replied it already governs all multi -family, as well as it governs all R-1 at the present time. He stated we are making an exception here for people who are building their own residents or making modifications to their homes. P-minri 1 Mi mitpr - 12/03/87 Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen asked what would the - recommendations be, to continue those items until such time as the General Plan is approved, or the moratorium is lifted? - The City Attorney replied, "yes," but you could approve them, they may never be finalized until the moratoriumiis completed, but if that is the action you prefer take at that time, yes. The Planning Director indicated this is part of the reason why he wanted a clarification. He stated the Planning Department's interpretation has been that if it has been applied for, then staff will go forward with that. He stated these were applied for and that is the reason he brought them before Council tonight because it is part of tentative map approval process, just as T.J. Austyn Project is applied for, then staff would come before Council at the next meeting with that extension issue. He stated if the two applicants were to come in tomorrow with these two proposals, he would say "no" to them, he could not accept them as he interpreted it. He stated that is the reason they are here tonight because they are in the process already and if I'm not interpreting that correctly, he needed Council to tell him that very plainly. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated if she understands from what the Planning Director and the direction the City Attorney gave Council, Council could go ahead and approve these maps, but that would be the end of the process for them as would it be for T.J. Austyn until such time as the moratorium is lifted or the General Plan is adopted. The Planning Director replied, "that's correct," this one is slightly different than T.J. Austyn, it's the same process, we have a tentative tract map approval process; the final map approval process and the site -and architectural -approval process. He stated this one is at the tentative map process, it would be stopped there as these two and could not go forward to the final map process. He stated T.J. Austyn would be in the position where they would get the final map., but could not go on to the site and architectural, etc. Mayor Pro Tem Pfennighausen stated, in other words, essentially completing a process they already started and they can't go on to the next step, so we're not involved with anything being constructed there. She stated if the General Plan land use designation were to change and we had gone ahead and okayed these tract maps, then are we going to say to these people, we had a tentative approval or final approval on your tract map because you were that far into the pipeline, but now it isn't going to apply anymore, is that what's going to happen? Council Minutes - 1.2/03/87 The Planning Director replied they would still have the tentative map approval and then staff will have to sit down with them and bring in legal council on that whether or not a tentative map is actually vested or not with that, :but there would be argument that they should be able to go forward with those two maps. He stated these particular two maps, one is in the area where he did not anticipate any changes at all, it's in an established R-1 area. The other one is in an area that staff will be looking at larger lot sizes, but through the Planning Commission process what we are seeing tonight is a compromise that has been worked out and the Planning Department feels comfortable with it. Motion CC-87-231 carried ALL AYES, to approve Planning Commission's recommendations. PUBLIC HEARING Item 6-A The Planning Director indicated Item 6-A is the first map on TPM-87-8 the board, the applicants are Kevin and Cheryl Trawinski and is APN 277-131-69 represented by Dotson Engineering. He gave a scenario of the project and it's location. Mayor Matteson opened up for public hearing inquiring if there was anyone who wished to speak for or against this project. Being there was none, he turned it over to Council. ''r- 87-232 Motion by Mayor Matteson, second by Mayor Pro Tem 1r Pfennighausen, to approve TPM-87-8. Councilmember Shirley on your requirement 6-B "a minimum lot• coverage shall be 60 percent?" The Planning Director replied, "yes," the lot coverage is the birds -eye -view if you are above the lot that is not open earth or landscaped, but does not include a deck or something that's more than 30 inches, but there is a certain percentage that can be paved over or covered. Councilmember Shirley asked, "shouldn't that read maximum lot coverage?" The Planning Director replied, "you are right." Councilmember Evans asked what was the clarification. Councilmember Shirley replied, where it states minimum lot coverage shall be 60 percent, it will be corrected to read maximum lot coverage shall be 60 percent under condition of approval and also on the Resolution it needs to be changed in those two places. She stated she would like to make a comment about this area indicating she had a call from a resident on rniin,-i 1 - 1 i/01/A7 Councilmember Evans stated that is why he came back to the intent of the moratorium in the first place. What is ' considered major construction, because the minute you put one house, one more house in this City is going to cause an impact. He asked are you specifically identifying one house versus fifty homes. Mayor Matteson stated if you read the paragraph the Planning Director has written which specifically says "owner occupied." Councilmember Evans asked the Planning Director if that paragraph was being modified in any way during the discussion tonight? Mayor Matteson replied, "it hasn't so far." Councilmember Evans asked the Planning Director if there were any problems he has with discussion tonight? The Planning Director replied as he understand the motion that was made, it was to accept staff's recommendation as written and he still concurs with his recommendations as written. Councilmember Evans replied so R-1 would be included into that. The Planning Director replied, R-1 would be included in it and a single owner -occupied person; a gentlemen/lady who owns their own lot who wants to build his/her house can do so, but they can't put a duplex on that lot. Councilmember Evans asked the City Attorney if this motion were to pass, we have two subdivisions for public hearings, would these fall under the moratorium and should not be considered this evening? The City Attorney replied, he felt they could consider them, the tentative map will never be able to be finalized until such time as the moratorium is completed, because there would be a moratorium on that. Councilmember Evans stated he felt one involved a project of three parcels; the other one two parcels indicating he was trying to get some understanding as to where we stand. He stated it would seem from what he has heard this evening that these should also fall under the moratorium and it seem rather foolish to take a look at something now before we take a look at the document that the moratorium is supposed to be awaiting. The City Attorney replied he may wish to take that precise action on those items. City Council Members C/O Mr. Tom Schwab City Manager City of Grand Terrace 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, CA 92324-5295 Re: Tentative Parcel Map 10915 Honorable Council Members: At the City Council meeting of December 3, 1987, I received tentative map approval on Parcel Map 10915. This was after several revisions and two previous public hearings. The approved map now consists of two lots. The final configuration of the map was derived from the input received at the public hearings as well as the desires of the Planning Commission and City Council as stated in the meetings. I understood this final layout to be a compromise between all parties concerned and felt we had complete staff support. The engineer has begun the final plans and has been brought to a standstill because of the building moratorium. We were not aware that the building moratorium was discussed prior to the public hearing and it was not brought to our attention during the public hearing. I would like to final the approved tentative and respectfully request removal from the building moratorium. We request that this item be placed on the March loth agenda for discussion. LLLaj 093-001.00 022501(60,2) Sincerely Act, Stev Fox 382 E. Bonnieview Drive Rialto, California 92376 ATTACHMENT B