REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL

11. Measure I Two-Year Capital Improvement Program (2008/09-2009/10)

Approved Resolution No. 2008-046 adopting the 2008/09-2009/10 Measure I Two-Year Capital Improvement Program and Expenditure Strategy, as presented.

RESOLUTION NO. 2008-046

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF HIGHLAND, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

ADOPTING THE THREE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

AND EXPENDITURE STRATEGY

FOR MEASURE I LOCAL PASS-THROUGH FUNDS

(2008/2009 - 2009/2010)

ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR

2. Warrant Register

Councilwoman Scott stated she was very concerned for the fact the Library, who has solar panels, had an August electric bill of $8,831.16. She understands the bill has to come to the city so we can get the rebate but if the building has state of the art electrical capabilities and has an electric bill this high every month then we need to reconsider whether or not we want to spend the money to install solar panels on the community center.

Councilman McCallon stated without the solar panels it could have been doubled the amount.

Councilman Timmer stated this is a 30,000 square foot building.

A MOTION was made by Councilwoman Scott, seconded by Councilman McCallon, to approve Warrant Register No. 469 for September 23, 2008, in the amount of $361,042.50 and Payroll of $70,093.26. Motion carried, 5-0.

12. Final Map Approval/Tract No. 16295 (Subdivider: City of Highland)

Councilwoman Scott stated she asked for this item to be pulled because she cannot believe the map. This is on the 13 properties that are across from the Community Center ball park. If we are trying to get our citizens to utilize that and the population is going to grow in this community, do we really want to put 13 homes there with more traffic, more cars parking? When they have games there now they have problems with parking and people are parking on Hibiscus. She thinks we really need to reconsider 13 homes there. She doesn’t think it is prudent thinking on our part.

Councilman McCallon stated he believes the Council approved this a year ago.

Councilman Timmer stated it was part of the work plan.

Councilman McCallon stated we are just accomplishing what we agreed to do as far as the work plan.

Councilwoman Scott stated sometimes things need to be changed and she thinks this is one of them.

Mayor Lilburn stated she did hear the same thing with the park about the lack of parking on the street.

Councilman Timmer stated no, they don’t park where the parking is. They want to park as close as they can and won’t use the library parking lot or the parking lot.

Mayor Lilburn stated everyone does that. They park wherever it is convenient for them and if they are going to play on the southern portion then they are going to park down there. Are we in a need for additional parking or is it something that’s even an option?

Councilman Timmer stated the initial plan had some parking planned along Lillian Lane inside the park. However, three prior Council Members took that out so there was a plan to have parking along Lillian but that was done away with. So, maybe that’s an option of looking at. Do we want to re-institute some parking on that area if there is a parking problem?

Councilman McCallon stated we did make Lillian Lane wider to accommodate parking along there.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones asked what is the requirement as far as a public facility of that type and what is the required necessary parking for the facility?

City Engineer Wong stated we can look at the existing situation now. It appears that there is adequate parking for the facility that we have built so far. Now, adding another 13 lots they will have their own parking areas. In the future if the activity in the park and all the other public buildings is so intense that we need to add parking at that time, we can always add another parking lot. This is just basically a final map to separate the different lots. This map not only creates lot lines but allows the city to go to the state government to get some reimbursement back for our environmental center project. If parking is an issue, it can always be addressed later on.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated it needs to be addressed now because when he went by the other day and there were ballgames going on, they were parked literally on both sides of where the 13 homes are being proposed. If we build housing there, we are going to increase the number of parking spaces that are currently being used and it’s not adequate and the parking lot was full. If they parked at the community center and walked over, there were vacant spots but not immediately next to the ball park.

Councilman Timmer stated that is one of the reasons for the walking trail and the sidewalks to help some of that and he would think at some point if we want to look at putting some additional parking along Lillian Lane, we could certainly do that later.

Mayor Lilburn stated she thinks we don’t want to stop this action because this is for reimbursement. This doesn’t commit us to going forward to building those homes.

Councilwoman Scott stated she wants it in writing and in the minutes. That approving this for the action does not say that this is exactly what we are going to do because she thinks that the parking issue definitely needs to be addressed.

Councilman McCallon stated he doesn’t think we can say that because this is the final map that says there will be 13 lots there that we will sell off to developers. He thinks the parking issue needs to be addressed and we can address that separately.

Mayor Lilburn stated how soon can we address that.

Councilman McCallon stated bring the item before the Public Facilities Subcommittee.

Councilman Timmer stated he wouldn’t think until the houses or some developer contacts the city to buy that but right now it’s not an issue.

Councilwoman Scott stated we are talking right now because the market is down but we want more people to use the community center. We want the YMCA to get more programs. More programs are going to mean more people are going to be using the YMCA, hopefully. Then you’ve got the ballfield and the park. When you drive down there, it’s an absolute nightmare when we have very little attendance at the YMCA.

Councilman Timmer stated if it’s a nightmare, how come the little attendance?

Councilwoman Scott stated because people are there with their cars and they are not going to park over at the library where there might be a lot of parking and walk over to the park. They’re not going to do it.

Councilman McCallon stated like he said he thinks we need to bring it before the Public Facilities or Public Works Subcommittee and move forward. He makes it part of his motion to direct staff to bring the issue to one of the subcommittees so that we can get additional parking established.

Councilwoman Scott stated if this is a final map and a vote yes means that it is final and that’s the way it is going to be, she cannot vote for that.

Councilman Timmer stated this map doesn’t say the construction is going tomorrow. This is basically subdividing the property.

Councilwoman Scott stated but it says this is how it’s going to be partitioned off and for what purpose it’s going to be partitioned off that way.

Mayor Lilburn stated because we need to get our funding in for the public facilities.

Councilwoman Scott asked is there any other way besides dividing these 13 lots that we can get our refund from the state?

Councilman McCallon stated the parking lot isn’t going to go where the 13 lots are.

Mayor Lilburn asked where would it go?

Councilman Timmer stated it would go on the west side of Lillian where it was originally planned. It was a long linear parking that went along. The thing is if we put parking on the east side of the street, all the residents on the east side are going to go crazy which would be a bigger issue.

Mayor Lilburn stated the resident on the corner of the field, the first house next to the field where the proposed houses are, prefers parking rather than homes.

Councilman Timmer stated the reason we designed Lillian to go south like it is, is to create a buffer between the park and the residential housing. Now, if we put parking on the other side of the street we don’t have that buffer anymore. He thinks Councilman McCallon’s motion is appropriate and goes to the appropriate committee to look at different options and come back to the Council to see how to address the parking issue.

Councilman McCallon stated all the Council has stated is we need to address the parking issue and we will do that. To hold us up doesn’t make sense.

A MOTION was made by Councilman McCallon, seconded by Councilman Timmer, to allocate RDA funds in the total amount of $578,950 as cash subdivision bonds to be posted with the City of Highland for Tract No. 16295, and to approve a budget adjustment in the amount of $578,950 from 081-2100 (Unreserved, Undesignated) to 081-8010-4011 (Contract Services - Low/Mid Income Housing. Adopted Resolution No. 2008-047 to approve Final Map No. 16295, accept the cash subdivision bonds from the RDA and authorize the Mayor to sign the standard subdivision agreement and to bring the issue of additional parking to the Public Facilities Subcommittee for discussion and recommendation. Motion carried, 4-1, with Councilwoman Scott dissenting.

CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PUBLIC HEARING

13. Adoption of an Ordinance Repealing Ordinance No. 282 and Adopting Ordinance No. 333 Relating to the Adoption of the 2007 California Fire Code and Local Amendments

Mayor Lilburn opened the public hearing.

Community Development Director Jaquess gave a brief review of the staff report.

Mayor Lilburn called for any speakers in favor of or in opposition of this item. Hearing none, Mayor Lilburn closed the public hearing.

A MOTION was made by Mayor Pro Tem Jones, seconded by Councilwoman Scott, to adopt Ordinance No. 333 regarding the 2007 California Fire Code and local amendments. Motion carried, 5-0.

City Clerk Hughes introduced Ordinance No. 333:

ORDINANCE NO. 333

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AND AMENDING THE 2007 EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 282

which title was read.

14. Posting of Disaster Safety Assessment Placards

Mayor Lilburn opened the public hearing.

Community Development Director Jaquess gave a brief review of the staff report.

Mayor Lilburn called for any speakers in favor of or in opposition of this item. Hearing none, Mayor Lilburn closed the public hearing.

A MOTION was made by Councilman Timmer, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Jones, to adopt Ordinance No. 334 adopting the use of Post-Disaster Safety Assessment Placards that are placed on buildings or structures to notify owners, tenants and the general public. The ordinance also identifies the rules and penalties associated with Post-Disaster Safety Assessment Placard postings. Motion carried, 5-0.

City Clerk Hughes introduced Ordinance No. 334:

ORDINANCE NO. 334

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADDING TO TITLE 15,

CHAPTER 15.56 OF THE HIGHLAND MUNICAPAL CODE, RELATING TO PLACARDS USED TO DENOTE CONDITIONS RELATING TO CONTINUED

OCCUPANCY OF BUILDING

which title was read.

CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY LEGISLATIVE

15. Extension of Base Line to Greenspot Road

City Engineer Wong stated at the last meeting Council directed staff to bring this item for your discussion tonight. What staff has provided to you are the meeting minutes and staff reports for some prior Council agenda items related to this topic. He would like to draw your attention to Base Line and Greenspot that are connected by three streets and one emergency access. The emergency access in on Alta Vista Drive. If the emergency access is used during an emergency, then you can go to Greenspot to Base Line. This concludes staff presentation.

City Manager Hughes stated he would like to point out that there was a petition that Council received from the Entrada Toll Brothers area.

Mr. Gregg Hemmila stated he is for the greater good but he wants to know where it is. When you and I talked recently, you said Greenspot was closed down, people couldn’t get out because of the fire that happened two, three weeks ago. He doesn’t buy it and still doesn’t buy it. The fire department is supposed to be here and he would like to know why people are not let in or at least out of the area. The road was in perfect shape and you may have had aircraft coming in there but if you waited a minute and let them out, everyone could have gotten in and out. The other thing is that if this is an emergency road then for cheaper we can connect Santa Ana Canyon across the bridge. Well it’s not then, if Base Line is going to come down to let more people onto Greenspot. It’s not the emergency road; it may second it but it’s not the emergency road. Where I live I have three ways out, one is a designated emergency road, one is Base Line and one is one the ranch put in. The thing is Greenspot is a mighty big road and is going to get bigger and bigger as

time goes on. If you’re going to say you can’t use Greenspot well why can’t he say what are going to do when he says you can’t use Greenspot and Base Line. Are you going to put in another road? You said you were on the other side of Greenspot. What that road is supposed to do is bring people in and out.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated Highland Avenue has been closed because of various disasters that have occurred and these, of course, we leave for public safety people to advise us as to what is unsafe to use those at various times. So, in the history of the City of Highland we, in fact, know of given times when they were closed and they were closed for emergency purposes.

Mr. Gregg Hemmila stated you did say you were going to build one at the other side of Greenspot. If it was always on the city master plan, how did it get taken off and how did it get put back on? He knows you weren’t on the Council the whole time but somehow it got off and how did it get back on. If you tell me who took it off and what was the reason for taking off, he would feel better if there was a valid reason for taking it off.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated it was taken off in 2002.

Mr. Gregg Hemmila stated why.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated because the developer did not want to make it part of their project.

Mr. Gregg Hemmila stated because a developer didn’t want to pay for it.

Councilman Timmer stated that’s not entirely correct. This Council voted to remove it, feeling it wasn’t necessary based on whatever factors. To answer the question, Plunge Creek and the steel bridge have never been closed at the same time. However, because the steel bridge had issues further out on Garnett which closed Greenspot on certain points but both the bridge and Greenspot were not out of service at the same time. Right now in design, we are going through design, to replace the steel bridge, to widen the road all the way to the steel bridge and a little after to the city boundary lines. That road is going to be, he thinks the bridge is being designed for two lanes in each direction, four lanes, and the road will be widened. At some point we are also going to be widening and taking care of the S curves. There are plans in design now, working with Caltrans or whichever agency we are working with, to obtain funding which he thinks most of the funding is in place to widen that road through the S curves, to build the bridge and the road approaches in both directions.

Mr. Gregg Hemmila stated if all these roads are going in the planning stages, why were they miraculously in there right now and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

Councilman Timmer stated he’s not real sure what is being discussed.

Mr. Gregg Hemmila stated Base Line, bringing Base Line down to Greenspot. We could talk emergency exits all day long but to make Base Line a thoroughfare. That’s the key point. If you want an emergency exit, go ahead and build it but let’s call it what it is. If it’s Base Line coming all the way down Greenspot that’s going to be a way for a lot of traffic to avoid the traffic on Greenspot.

Councilman McCallon stated this Council previously agreed not to put the Base Line extension through. Last week two of the Council Members asked for this issue to be revisited and that’s why we are having this discussion tonight. There is no plan at the moment to run Base Line through to Greenspot. Two Council Members have asked that we change that decision and that’s why we are having this hearing tonight to discuss that. We haven’t taken action to do it.

Mayor Lilburn stated this is for discussion.

Mr. Gregg Hemmila stated if it’s an emergency exit then go ahead take Base Line out to Highland Estates at Oak Creek. If they want it open, fine and when the traffic starts building up and coming through their housing area and going out to Greenspot, are we going to call that an emergency exit or a thoroughfare.

Ms. Sue Haggerty stated thank you for the opportunity to speak regarding the extension of Base Line Road. It is her understanding that there are a few reasons for addressing the extension of Base Line at this time. First and foremost is to address an alternative form of exit for the homeowners within the Entrada/Ventana and Toll Brothers’ homes. Currently the major streets that are exiting these subdivisions apparently have only one exit, which is Greenspot and because of the problem with Greenspot being closed a few weeks ago because there was a fire, this issue has come up before the Council again. Talking with Councilman Jones connecting Greenspot to Base Line would provide an alternate evacuation road for these communities in the future if there was an emergency, another fire down on Greenspot. Also, he mentioned that it could act as an evacuation route for our community, the Cove, which is at the end of Base Line and for us; we have two major evacuation routes. If Base Line gets closed down because of the fire we access the East Valley Water access road as well as another walkway. For the homes lower from us who are on the eastern part of the Cove and the streets that Base Line turns into, they do have the access roads that connect them to Alta Vista. If Base Line gets extended the people that are living in Entrada/Ventana will still have to get to Greenspot to access Base Line Road to come back up to Base Line. So, it seems like that would be a problem to connect Base Line to Greenspot. If the plan is an alternative road that would connect the Toll Brothers homes directly to Base Line or an alternative route that could connect them across Plunge Lake to Santa Ana Canyon Road, those also would be alternate ways for them to get out rather than connecting Greenspot down to Base Line. One of the issues that was raised is that the reason for extending Base Line to Greenspot is because there are no homes that border Base Line and that appears to be true there are the backs of homes in The Cove that are exposed to the orange groves and if the street were to be built behind those homes they would be right up against there. There also are three homes on the corner of Weaver and Base Line that face Base Line. Santa Ana Canyon Road has five homes in their community which actually face Santa Ana Canyon Road but other than that there are no other homes. So, Santa Ana Canyon Road could provide an alternative evacuation point for the Ventana/Entrada homes. Connecting to Greenspot, to her, means that it’s meant to connect Base Line to the new subdivision of the Seven Oaks community that is proposed in the Mill Creek area towards Bryant Avenue. The overall impact of this can only be guessed. Councilman Jones suggested that the traffic would be negligible that there would be some increase but not enough to be a problem. She thinks that with such a large subdivision that’s going out in that area is greatly going to increase the traffic through that region. There are only three main arteries that direct traffic to the east side of Highland that would be Highland Avenue off the 210 freeway. Highland Avenue, Highland Avenue at certain point turns into Weaver at Base Line, Base Line filters into Greenspot through Church Street and Weaver and then Greenspot which are connected to Fifth Street is the third major road. She just thinks the connection is supposed to be for a major arterial way. Speaking with Councilman Jones, he suggested that it was going to be a collector road and when it’s a 104 feet wide that’s no longer a collector road, that’s a special major highway and she thinks there are other alternatives to be suggested. At this point there’s no plans to connect that to the freeway which she thinks would be more prudent because anyone that is on the 210 coming home, if there is no off ramp at the proposed Central Parkway they will be exiting off Highland or Base Line. She is against the extension at Base Line from Base Line to Greenspot. If it’s a question of an emergency access road that connects to the Toll Brothers, she can understand that. She just thinks it’s not prudent to create that big of a causeway through a residential area.

Councilman Timmer stated just for information. The Central Expressway, which was referred to, is not on the master plan. That’s been talked about periodically over the years but there’s no funding source. There’s not even any agency that he is aware of that has it on their master plan. So, it’s not something that is in the foreseeable future.

Ms. Sue Haggerty stated are there any other alternative roads that are projected. There was talk of a recreation park south of Greenspot.

Councilman Timmer stated no. The park is on Plan B and that’s years away based on the mining activity but there is no park planned in the near future.

Mr. George Einfeldt stated the Board of Directors, East Highland Ranch, has taken a neutral position on this subject for the time being. We’ve done that because we feel this issue has been rushed. If the Council were to take a vote, they would be most upset. We would like an opportunity to have communicated with our 2,475 homeowners. You have heard from a couple of them tonight who are not too pleased. We would like an opportunity to invite them to a Council meeting where this issue would be discussed. Yes, we had two weeks notice but that was far short.

He couldn’t get a mailing out in that time frame to invite the people. So, one he is asking for a delay in decision. The Board is not unreasonable. The Board understands the situation. We would like to investigate it with you and we would ask for a postponement. We would suggest this issue be tabled and brought back up at least 30 days notice so we can put out a proper mailing notice to our homeowners.

Mr. Gary Underwood stated he wanted to speak about this particular issue because several years ago there was quite an intense discussion about the extension of Base Line onto Greenspot. At that time the Council decided that they would make sure that there was some access, emergency access roads, and that particular discussion met the acid test of public safety. He thinks the other thing too was is during that discussion, if you recall, the cost of the extension was prohibitive. He thinks Mr. Racadio said something between $15 to $20 million and it is probably considerably more now. The other thing too and that is in the foreseeable future, perhaps 10 years out or less, we will see 3,000 more homes on the far end of that east valley. By opening up Base Line it doesn’t make any sense to invite those homeowners to bring their traffic as well as other traffic that may be coming from Redlands and other sources into the community, the quiet community of Base Line. As Base Line enters East Highland’s Ranch, it really becomes a two lane road and he would like to call your attention to what happened in San Bernardino. On Victoria, when San Manuel constructed their Casino, how it devastated those neighborhoods. A lot of homeowners in East Highland’s Ranch and especially The Cove invested their life savings for that quality of life. He urges you to consider: (1) it’s cost prohibitive, (2) it meets the safety requirements and (3) it will degrade the quality of life in east Highland.

Councilman Timmer stated he thinks Council has discussed this several times in the past, really no factors have changed in his mind. As one of the speakers mentioned, we did address the emergency access for the Toll Brothers projects. There are several emergency access points out of that project. However, they all go onto Greenspot, there’s no denying that. We have closed Greenspot in times past but he’s sure if there is some real urgency to get in and out, as we have done in other areas, if you ferry people in, traffic control to get people home, this can be done. He doesn’t see any factors changing and he really can’t support extending Base Line.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated he thinks it’s important to note that we have received a petition. There are 60 residents that have signed this particular petition. He thinks it’s important to note that they are asking for an alternative access. He thinks that it was what we ought to direct staff to do, is to go and investigate other alternatives other than the extension of Base Line which in fact could address this particular issue and maybe help resolve the problem and the anxiety that residents are expressing as to when it is necessary to close Greenspot and then in fact they are trapped. That project, in fact, is an island when we shut off both ends of Greenspot in that way. Greenspot has been closed as far out as Garnett when the floods were taking place then because they were afraid of the bridge going out on Garnett, also our steel bridge, various other water crossings along Base Line and other places of that type. The issue is still before us. We have not resolved it. When it was taken off the agenda when it was originally put on there, it was taken off for the reason that we didn’t need it. The vision of course was that Highland ended at Cone Camp Road; it didn’t go out and include the other proposed homes and projects that are in fact yet to come. The Arnott property will bring another 225 homes depending upon that subdivision and whatever gets approved there. We don’t have anything approved but there have been some proposed projects on there. His proposal would be that we ask staff to investigate and explore other alternatives that could help resolve this problem and bring back to the Council those alternatives and see if there are things that can help us address these residents concerns.

City Engineer Wong stated if Council would turn to page 2 of their staff report; it shows a roadway network for Highland. This is a representation of the city’s long range full build out of the roadway network. You can see that south of Greenspot there is a Cone Camp Road that is intended to be extended southerly to the Mentone area if everything else works together.

Councilman Timmer stated that’s not in the Master Plan.

City Engineer Wong stated General Plan; it is in the General Plan. This is a copy of the General Plan that Council is looking at.

Councilman Timmer stated it doesn’t show it going through.

City Engineer Wong stated that’s because we only show it up to the city limit. That’s just one quick thought.

Councilman Timmer stated that still doesn’t provide access. It stops in the wash.

City Engineer Wong stated if this General Plan is implemented in the very long future and all the neighboring community also plans theirs to fit our General Plan then you could have Cone Camp Road go down to the Mentone area. Number two is Alta Vista Drive can actually provide access to Greenspot Road and connect to Aplin come back to Weaver Street and Base Line. If Greenspot is open up to, you know from the Ventana subdivision, if Greenspot is opened up to Alta Vista then there is that way out. So, we do have a viable alternative to provide to the Ventana subdivision if Greenspot can be left open.

Councilman Timmer stated well if it’s open then they wouldn’t need that access, they would just use Greenspot to go to the freeway.

City Engineer Wong stated sometimes Greenspot is closed, for example, further west of Alta Vista.

Councilman McCallon stated the last time this Council addressed this issue was at the time we were updating the General Plan and at that time we decided taking into account all the factors that were brought up by Mr. Underwood, public safety, access and everything, this Council decided that we didn’t need to put it into our General Plan and our General Plan, at that time, included all the development that Councilman Jones brought up as potential expansion. One thing that we are doing here in the near future is we are going to be taking the Iron Bridge out of our circulation network, if you will, and that’s been a problem in the past of having to close down Greenspot at that point because the bridge being hit, flooding, etc. He thinks with the new bridge and new road way and straightening out the S curve the need to shut down Greenspot at both ends will be diminished quite a bit. He’s not trying to second guess our public safety people, but personally he thinks shutting down Greenspot at both ends in this last incident was, in his view, a mistake but like he said he’s not a public safety person. He personally doesn’t see anything has changed since we made the decision last time to take it out of our General Plan. We are making some improvements out on Greenspot and the bridge area which will help open up access. That’s included in the plan and should begin construction here next year. He is with Councilman Timmer, he doesn’t see any need to change our position and he would be opposed to extending Base Line.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated when the new Greenspot bridge is put in and the S is straightened out, it dumps all the traffic back onto Florida and onto Garnett. Garnett was closed before because of the bridge on Garnett which is another inferior bridge as far as the flood waters and other things that are there. We haven’t improved the all weather road that’s necessary for the exit to the east for all the residents of east Highland to use. Then he thinks the other factor that he is not sure what Councilman McCallon’s position is on but we have a petition before us that has 60 people who have signed it, are we to ignore that petition, that they don’t have a genuine concern.

Councilman Timmer stated it really wasn’t clear what the concern was in the petition.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated their concern is they want another access. They do not like being left trapped.

Councilman McCallon stated he doesn’t believe they are trapped and he thinks with the development that’s going to go out in the new area, we have an opportunity to fix some of those circulation things at that time with developer monies and not the city’s.

Councilwoman Scott stated she wants to make a couple of observations since she was one of the Council Members that asked this to be brought back. In the staff report it listed six different Council meetings and Planning Commission meetings, however, it neglected to put in the original General Plan. It was only in 2002 the meeting where it was changed. She was on the Council when the circulation was brought up for the City of Highland. In 1987 when we became a city, Highland had a 24,000 population; today we are 51,800. Our eastern boundary went to Cone Camp Road. Our boundary today goes to Bryant Street in Yucaipa. When the 30 freeway was built and we fought with Caltrans over the width of what we needed that freeway to be and they couldn’t widen that freeway, they couldn’t give us a six lane or even an eight lane, and we said we’re going to need it. Well it was built and, of course now, the 210 connects to it. If you have ever been out on that freeway in the morning, in the afternoon or in the evening, it’s like being in Los Angeles on a parking lot. She knows that we were thinking ahead, we can’t just plan for today and tomorrow or when our four year term is up. We’ve got to think about the safety of all our citizens. We have to think about the traffic. Now she knows when she met with the group the other day, they are concerned. They don’t want the traffic in their neighborhood. She can relate to that. Nobody wants to be on a busy thoroughfare but by the same token if you are going to build out on land that you have that’s vacant and you’re going to keep giving permits for developers to build more, you are going to have more traffic. At any rate that is why she brought the issue up. She doesn’t think that our citizens, in the event of an emergency, whether it is an automobile accident, an earthquake, who knows, one of the planes when Norton finally gets a plane off the ground, a plane crash, we’ve got to have roads and not little dirt roads. We are going to have too many people that are going to be trying to get to safety and then you’re going to have road rage, tempers flaring and so forth. Regarding Greenspot for what the traffic Greenspot is carrying today and we’re projecting that the Orange County property and the Arnott property, Greenspot is not going to be able to handle it. When Lowe’s and our other shopping centers and the housing gets over there at the Golden Triangle, try getting on the freeway right now at Greenspot when that is populated it’s going to be even worse yet. So, the only alternative you have for not having any traffic is quit building. Quit inviting people to come to this marvelous community. Frankly, she wants more people here. She thinks everyone should enjoy this city, this city that is run correctly compared to all the rest of them.

Councilman Timmer stated historically this Council and previous Council have been very pro-active on safety issues, traffic, police and fire. We all have that as our paramount objective. To make sure the community is safe for our citizens, whether its traffic, fire, police, other issues. One thing we failed and haven’t been talked about specifically yet is when we do build to the east. The Master Plan and General Plan indicates that we are going to tie in Greenspot through the eastern project across Mill Creek and tie into Highway 38 with the bridge. That will create a major road then it will eliminate Garnett, eliminates Florida for access to the east, which he thinks will be a tremendous asset to our community for moving people both directions. Again, he still doesn’t see the safety issue of getting people in and out of that tract and who aren’t in jeopardy at all. They may be isolated there for a period of time while they open the road because of a traffic accident, those things, but as far as their individual safety he doesn’t see it as an issue. They may be inconvenienced for a period of time so they can’t get home or out of there for a short period of time but for their individual safety he doesn’t see that as an issue. That community is pretty safe from the natural hazards that we have.

Councilwoman Scott stated it was such a natural and she believes Councilman Timmer even had a part when it was designed where we had the road against the mountain for the fire break and the houses and it’s such a natural to continue that circulation, circulation, circulation. She can’t say it enough.

Councilman Timmer stated the tract that we are talking about has those perimeter roads. They have the washes, they have all those things. They are pretty well protected from wildfire at this point.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated we don’t have the loop connectors though. The safest planning efforts for any fire safety emergencies are a loop system. When we originally put in the extension of Base Line, which went clear out past the Entrada/Ventana and connected into Greenspot at that point, the intent to put it in at that time was to create a loop system. In fire systems, water, we do the same thing because they are opportunities and things happen that shut off the other supplies and, therefore, the loop system is the most popular. In every single project or city that he is involved with in trying to get ISO ratings down for insurance, they take into consideration the loop system. The loop system, of course, allows you to get better access, quicker access and provide protection to them. We have in fact created an island in this group of homes. The east Highland itself is an island unto itself. You take four roads and we shut off the entire east Highland and it is an island and we have proved that in the past both in fires and in floods and we become an island unto ourselves. So, it’s prudent for us as a Council to consider a loop system, all weather, that we can provide for our citizens to get in and out of the community. If we do other than that we are being imprudent as planners, as far as the city is concerned.

City Manager Hughes stated we did include the 1992 General Plan information that talked about Base Line Road. If you look at page 27 of the staff report, page 26 of the staff report, page 25 of the staff report, shows the old 1992 and has the General Plan language on page 27, Base Line extension.

Councilwoman Scott stated she could have saved herself a lot of looking if she would have found it in here; if it would have been identified here. It does concern her when the access was removed. It was removed because east Highlands Ranch Board did want Alta Vista to become a through street, and the citizens felt the additional traffic through the area was something they didn’t want.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated he thinks it is important to note too, that the development, as far as the Orange County property, as he sits on the Ad Hoc Committee for that, there is no forward plan. It’s stalled and there is no hope he would bet within the next 10 to 15 years to see that project develop, if that early. Therefore, to take these residents who are asking for their concerns, their interests now, to say well we’re going to fix that when we do the Orange County property because then we will correct the road and give you a better route to Highway 28. That’s imprudent as far as planners are concerned. That property is a lot further away than many other projects we’ve got involved here and it’s only prudent for us to look at those things that are going to be fixing this problem or helping to assist these people to be able to get ingress and egress during all times of the seasons,

not only during those emergencies. So, again he would propose the Council look at providing some alternatives and have staff bring those reports back and some estimated costs of what those are going to be and how this problem can be addressed. He cannot sit here, honestly as a Council Member, and throw these 60 petition signers away and say nope we’ve talked about that before and we’re not going to talk about it again. He likes to address each and every citizen’s complaints and certainly this is one that deserves that consideration.

Councilman Timmer stated could it be expanded on what Mayor Pro Tem Jones’ envision is for alternatives as obviously he has something in mind other than just the Base Line connection to Greenspot. He can’t envision any way to eliminate Greenspot as being basically a long road with very little access points to it other than this particular project we’re talking about has six access points onto Greenspot. Three are emergency but they all come back onto Greenspot. One of the options the young lady talked about is the option of tying into Santa Ana Canyon which means a bridge across, basically across Plunge Creek and across Oak Creek as well.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated that is unacceptable as far as he is concerned because you are dumping one tract into another tract. Nobody can sit still and allow that to happen. He thinks the other alternatives would be to consider punching Opal across and plugging into Greenspot.

Councilman Timmer stated across the wash.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated across the wash. Punching Wabash across the wash and plugging it into Greenspot. Again, these would all have to be all weather roads and not dirt trails, these are other alternatives. We could build a fly over and fly over all of Highland. There are lots of other alternatives. We ought to look at ones that are going to address this. That problem exists now and it’s going to continue to exist and as we build more homes in the Arnott property and others, all we are doing is adding more to this monumental island that’s stranded during certain disasters. Those disasters, which we haven’t experienced yet, would be earthquakes. We’ve experienced the floods, we’ve experienced the fires, we’ve experienced the accidents on Greenspot and he thinks it’s only prudent for the Council to take those things into consideration.

Mayor Lilburn asked are you talking about an exit out of the Greenspot or are you worried about the exit out of Base Line? Are you talking Greenspot now on the extension roads and worried about being an island on the Greenspot because she’s confused? Are we talking about the island on Base Line, not being able to get out from Base Line down to Greenspot or Greenspot trying to get out up to Base Line?

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated those people who live in The Cove have multiple ingress and egress roads at this time. These people who live in Ventana/Entrada and the Toll Brothers do not. Their total access and exit is through Greenspot only. If Greenspot is closed on both ends they don’t have any access. So, the only alternatives he sees is to bring Base Line through hooking up to both the Entrada and the Toll Brothers homes or punching Opal across or Wabash across that would open it up a south route out on Greenspot that could be used if in fact it was an improved road they could access. He doesn’t know. He certainly wants to explore all of the possibilities and then one of these certainly has got to be able to work.

Councilman McCallon stated in Plan B right now there’s no vision of punching either Wabash or Opal through.

Councilman Timmer stated no, there was no discussion as far as a project for that.

Councilman McCallon stated he’s not sure Redlands would be in favor of doing that anyway but any project that goes entirely across the wash is going to be rather expensive from an environmental issue, even if you could get it done. He thinks some of those would go through the Planned Preservation Areas that are in Plan B. Those are nice pie in the sky alternatives; he doesn’t think they are realistic at all.

Mayor Lilburn stated either way you look at it, the cost factor is out of sight but that’s neither here nor there.

Councilman McCallon stated the timing that Mayor Pro Tem Jones brought up about the area up in the Greenspot area for development; even if we decided to do something right now it would certainly not get done any faster than development out there.

Councilwoman Scott stated but we have to plan for it now because that’s one of the things that happened. Where they’ve made that gigantic skateboard ramp, that was poor planning and they put houses where now if you’re going to try and do something for circulation, you’re going to have to move houses. No, you’ve got to plan like the original General Plan was to begin with. We planned for the circulation and then because somebody didn’t want to make a road wide enough or somebody else didn’t want this and somebody else didn’t want that, then we gave to this developer and gave to that developer and gave to another one. Then we ended up an oops. We couldn’t do something there. She knows it’s going to be costly. She knows it’s going to probably not be in her lifetime but it needs to be planned for. It would be a lot cheaper than what would come with lawsuits because of poor planning.

Councilman McCallon stated say you planned and decided to try to put Base Line through and got all those costs together, there would be a significant impact on development impact fees going up because it’s not included right now, it’s not included in our Nexxus Study or Measure I monies. He’s not sure how that would work out. You might get your development impact fees so high you wouldn’t have any development.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated he finds it quite humorous to sit here today and make excuses as to why we can’t do this because we can’t afford it or we can’t find the funds here, we can’t find the funds there. It takes him back to a meeting that he attended in 1980 where the City of San Bernardino was attempting to annex the entire area of Highland and he was told by Mayor Holcomb that we couldn’t become a city, we could not remain unincorporated because it wasn’t feasible to do so. The same excuse we are using today. The interesting part about that little story is that we battled for eight years being told by every single individual there was, including LAFCO, that Highland was not feasible, that would it never survive as a city. In fact we would go bankrupt within three years after incorporation because there’s no money there to do it. The interesting part about that conclusion story is here we sit today; we are one of the model cities in the State of California. We, in fact, overcame all the pessimism that we shouldn’t have planned this because it will never work but it is working and he wants to continue to plan it, to make it work for the safety of every citizen of this community, not a few selfish few. That’s what his purpose in being here is. So, to say we can’t do it because there’s no money is baloney. If we want to do it, we can go find the money and we will do it.

Councilman Timmer stated he was taken back a little by Councilwoman Scott’s statement when she stated we have given to developers over and over. This city has played pretty tough with developers in general. We haven’t given. The only thing we’ve given here is when we gave money to the widening of Greenspot for all those projects. We have been really pretty frugal in our dealings with developers on what they can and cannot do. We haven’t given the farm away as you indicated and he was disappointed. His experience in working and living in Highland, he still feels it is not necessary to do this.

Mayor Lilburn stated it is pretty clear we have a mixed opinion on this. She just has a couple of curious questions. Councilwoman Scott made the comment that Greenspot, we keep building and building and we do keep building down there but we planned for the traffic down there as well with roads and the widening of the streets. Her concern is we planned down there on Greenspot but we didn’t plan for that traffic on Base Line. So to put that road through and then that creates traffic from Greenspot, that wasn’t intended to go through Base Line and through those neighborhoods and those streets. It kind of concerns her.

Councilwoman Scott stated well it was planned in the beginning. It was on the General Plan. Clear up until 1998 it was on because she didn’t leave the Council until 1998. So it stayed on since we adopted the first General Plan until 1998 when she left the Council.

Mayor Lilburn stated she understands. We’ve done some development and we had a housing tract that went and saw a General Plan that said no, we don’t have an extension of Base Line and so on and so forth. She can sit here and come up with all the cons and the pros of this whole outline. She knows we have a number of developments that have ways in and out, emergency access, and one of her main concerns is that we did keep the residents from the Entrada/Ventana in there to create this little hysteria that we have going on right now. Maybe it was an eye opener of some sorts for us to come back and revisit this. She thinks those happen for a reason. What if we did look at some alternatives and we did look at, not a major road, but an emergency access road that went from point A to point B and it was used as an emergency access.

Councilwoman Scott stated when you’re talking emergency access; you’re usually talking about something that has a gate across it.

Mayor Lilburn stated with a road, whether it be paved or whatever but we use those and they are good enough to put in developments, why aren’t they good enough to bring Point A to Point B together.

Councilman McCallon stated if he might, they have emergency access now.

Mayor Lilburn stated on the Greenspot developments, correct.

Councilman McCallon stated they come down to Greenspot, everything comes down to Greenspot.

Mayor Lilburn stated she’s talking about Base Line.

Councilman McCallon asked Base Line to where?

Mayor Lilburn stated down to the Greenspot.

Councilman McCallon stated that’s not the issue. The petition is from the people in Entrada/Ventana.

Mayor Lilburn stated who want a way out of Greenspot.

Councilman Timmer stated the only way we are going to get an alternate whether it’s a real road or an emergency road is building bridges. Across the Santa Ana, across Plunge Creek, that’s the only way you can do that. You can’t put Arizona crossings or dry crossing in because then you’re restricted flooding times. You’ve got to have some kind of elevated structure where its culverts or bridges to ensure those roads, emergency or regular roads, are accessible.

Councilwoman Scott stated if she was a person that lived in the east Highlands area and she worked in Yucaipa, and she came home and she tried to get to her home at the Arroyo Vista homes at the end of Highland Avenue, she would have to come all the way down and completely around to get the street where she could get home. It just doesn’t make sense.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated one of the most interesting observations that he has made over many, many years is that planning of Caltrans on freeways and other things is always too late and too inadequate. Just about the time they complete a project, we already have exceeded that plan and we’ve got the same problem right here with the 210. When the 210/30 was originally built we begged and did everything we could to get them to plan it larger. Fortunately, we were successful in getting them to purchase the right-of-way but we didn’t get them to put the roadway in and no more did we open that freeway, the 30 freeway, if you can remember, that in fact it was packed. Then we finished, of course, the 210 extension and all we did was we brought the congestion that was in Rialto and Fontana on the 210 getting off and on and we brought that to Highland. Now we have it today. Now we sit here and say well let’s plan a road that’s not adequate to fix the problem because we’re not willing to plan for the future. If we put it there it’s going to be used and it’s going to be used to meet our needs instead of creating another congested problem that we have to come back later and then we’ve got to buy right-of-way and we go to buy everything else at a period of time that is going to be a whole lot more expensive than it is today. When he worked for Kasler Corporation and we built the Redlands freeway, it cost a million dollars a mile to build those freeways and we should have built millions of them then because today, they cost $33 million a mile to build them and we can’t get them through fast enough. So, again his planning, his vision and he knows he is out of his tree is that we ought to plan for not only this but for other projects that would come into Highland, if in fact, we plan for them. If we don’t plan for them, then get ready for the congestion because believe him it’s coming.

Councilman Timmer stated that is the purpose of the General Plan. The General Plan when it was developed was based on 100% build out on the current land use designations of the city. That’s why we sized Greenspot, the way it was. That’s why we’re adding the bridge and going back to the question why we changed Base Line. Another reason why we had a lot of discussion on reducing Base Line extension and the size was, as you recall, when East Highlands Ranch was initially approved they had 3,700 or 3,800 dwelling units, apartment complexes, and townhouses which were all along Base Line and different areas. As that project developed the densities were significantly reduced down to 2,400 or 2,300 now at this point, so based on those factors we, as a Council, looked at the traffic volume were significantly decreasing the need for having a larger road was not there.

Councilwoman Scott stated but again the city boundary ended at Cone Camp Road.

Councilman Timmer stated he’s not sure when we annexed further out there but another issue on congestion is our General Plan identified certain developments were going to occur and were sizing Greenspot now to address that as well as other streets. One of the factors that is going to be changing in the next year or so is when the new school, high school, opens. Right now we have some traffic issues with the high schoolers driving Greenspot, which is going to go away because they are going to go to the new school and probably will take the freeway or take Orange to get to the new school location. So, the traffic will be reduced from that and whenever we do develop at the very east end, whatever the project will be, we will be designing infrastructure to handle the traffic concerns and the congestion at that time. To him he doesn’t see a need to do what we are talking about here. Nothing has been introduced to him to change his mind. In fact the significance of traffic issues he thinks has diminished over what we had in the past.

Mayor Lilburn stated she believes they are sitting here today because we had a fire in Highland. We didn’t take the proper public safety measures. We had a neighborhood that was inconvenienced and trapped for a few hours and now we’re looking to go back and look at an alternative because we had a neighborhood with 60 people who signed a petition who were inconvenienced and we didn’t handle the situation probably like we should have. That is the bottom line on why we are sitting here. We probably shouldn’t have cut it off. We could have had the traffic flow.

Councilman Timmer stated normally when we put up road blocks is we try to control the traffic going in and out of areas but we generally in the emergency services look at where they live. If they live in there, they are usually given directions to go or they are given an opportunity to be led through safely to get home or get out of there. Maybe we need to evaluate, not throwing rocks, but if we do have an area like this we should address how we can handle that better.

Mayor Lilburn stated she’s thinking if we did handle it a little differently, we probably wouldn’t be here right now readdressing this issue.

Councilman Timmer stated the residents weren’t in danger, they were just inconvenienced for a period of couple of hours.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated it’s interesting to hear all of you talk about this and you don’t live in east Highland. During the floods and during the fires where he lives, he was not only inconvenienced but was shut off from going in there.

Mayor Lilburn stated but you were on Highland Avenue so you weren’t down on Base Line or you weren’t down on Greenspot. Are you going to run Highland Avenue another extension to Base Line?

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated Highland Avenue was shut off.

Mayor Lilburn stated where do we draw running extensions.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated Base Line was shut off, Greenspot was shut off, the bridge was shut off out here and we were an island in east Highland.

Councilman Timmer stated for a period of time.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated those are only past experiences and we haven’t experienced all that we’re ever going to experience out there. We’re going to have future possible earthquakes, future fires, future accidents and stuff on Greenspot and we can go on and name many, many others and we have a problem here we need to address. East Highland is an island and we need to plan for other alternatives to fix that problem.

Councilwoman Scott stated it has always been an island because that was based on the early days of our school district because of the floods.

Councilman Timmer stated we’re in the process now of designing and finalizing the bridge across City Creek. That will eliminate one of those issues unless we get the big earthquake and it falls down. We are in the process of re-designing and going to replace the bridge across City Creek on Boulder so that’s going to strengthen that access point. We’re going to put a new bridge out across the Santa Ana, that’s going to improve that or reduce the significance of road closures out there so we are addressing the issues. You can’t have 100% guarantee that we are going to have access to every part of the city every day of the year. There’s going to be events that occur that you have to adjust and take care of things and you just can’t build roads to tie everywhere for every reason for every event. They close roads all the time all over the state.

Councilman McCallon stated he thinks we’ve had lots of discussion and lots of views have been presented. He would propose a motion not to take any action on this and move forward.

Mayor Lilburn asked that we take no action and move forward.

Councilman McCallon stated that we take no action and go ahead with our agenda.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated he will not support the motion. He can’t because he thinks Council is not being prudent in representing the citizens who in fact told us of a problem and throw them under the bus and say no your issue is not important, your concerns are not important. That is unacceptable as far as he is concerned. He won’t vote for this.

Mayor Lilburn stated we have lots of residents who have issues and bring it forward to us and she doesn’t think that we think their issues aren’t important to us and she’s not sure we are disregarding but there’s a lot more to it.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated we have 60 individuals who took the time to draw up a petition and sign it and send it to us. That means we ignore it, if we brought all 60 of those people in here to speak to us.

Mayor Lilburn stated well she is sure we could get 60 people in here from Base Line saying we don’t need it. So, do we believe the ones from Base Line saying no, we don’t need it or do we go with the ones that say okay, we do need another alternative.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated we can say what ifs. This is what we have before us. The other what ifs are what ifs. These are what is before us. Are we going to listen to these citizens? Are we going to vote accordingly or are we going to ignore it?

Mayor Lilburn stated what you’re saying is because we have these 60 people we are going to approve to build a road.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated he didn’t say that. He is saying we need to explore the alternatives and then make a decision based upon what those alternatives are. We have no issue before us at this point other than they are asking for an alternative route so they are not left trapped in their current condition. That’s what they are asking for. At least from what he has read in the petition. Safety upgrades are necessary for the safe ingress to and egress from schools, facilities, for school employees, parents, pupils, business and emergency personnel to find it necessary to walk, ride, bicycle or drive with Greenspot road as the only route to and from our site.

Mayor Lilburn stated so they are looking for another route, another full-time route.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated an alternate so that this condition doesn’t occur again.

Mayor Lilburn stated so they’re looking for another road, that’s what it sounds like.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated that’s what they’re asking.

Mayor Lilburn stated she guesses she is confused because she thought she heard they were looking for alternate routes for emergencies.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated alternate route, whether it’s emergency or every day.

Mayor Lilburn stated well this sounds like an every day road use.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated whatever way you want to call it.

Mayor Lilburn asked what kind of in depth alternative are you looking for? Is it a yes, no or a study?

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated he thinks there are lots of different alternatives that we can use and he thinks Council needs to explore those. He thinks we need to bring back to these citizens a resolve that we, in fact, have taken their concerns and we have done the staff reports and other things such as investigations and said these are the alternatives. These are the ways we can fix that and then as a Council look at that issue and vote on that issue. Right now we have no issue before us other than they have a concern and we need to address it.

Mayor Lilburn stated she thought they were speaking about a Base Line extension. Now it’s being talked about an extension off of somewhere else off of Greenspot, let’s look at other alternatives.

Councilman Timmer stated maybe the option at this time would be that we vote on the motion and we have a work program coming up in a month and a half. This is a significant impact on staff, to do this. He would think we would want to, Council Members, to bring this item up under the work program and we can do the analysis that is required, just as a suggestion.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated he thinks we have a very high priority of 60 citizens who, in fact, have told us they have great concern.

Mayor Lilburn stated what is on the agenda is the extension of Base Line. Is she voting on the extension of Base Line or are we trying to address the need of these people who want some kind of alternative whether it be Base Line or other roads. Do they want the extension of Base Line or do they want other roads?

A MOTION was made by Councilman McCallon, seconded by Councilman Timmer, to take no action regarding the extension of Base Line to Greenspot and move forward with the agenda. Motion carried, 2-2-1, with Mayor Pro Tem Jones and Councilwoman Scott dissenting and with Mayor Lilburn abstaining.

Councilwoman Scott stated she would like to make a motion that the Mayor do an Ad Hoc Committee and she would recommend Mayor Pro Tem Jones be on it because he knows the area or to address the concerns of not only those residents but also the future residents that are going to be having, that will include the traffic. Yes, it might take some staff time but we’ll also have some other help too.

Councilman Timmer stated we have standing committees that address these kinds of issues all the time. He doesn’t see the need for an Ad Hoc Committee. We have committees that can address this.

Councilwoman Scott stated she was thinking of the Ad Hoc that could not impede on the staff time to at least get the ball rolling. Rather than waste staff time to say well you know here’s an alternative, here’s an alternative, here’s an alternative, someone who knows the area to come forward with three or four alternatives and then work with staff on that.

Councilman Timmer stated another alternative as he suggested earlier is we are about a month away from when we start the work plan process.

Mayor Lilburn stated this isn’t an overnight project. As we know this is years, not in our lifetime project.

Councilwoman Scott stated 21 years we have been working with Plan B and we still don’t have it going.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated the interesting thing is when he proposed we put a bridge on Base Line over City Creek everybody said no we don’t have the money to do that. We did it because of an unfortunate accident that occurred. The interesting part about that story is what happened, we planned it, we designed it and now we have the money and we are moving forward. Isn’t it interesting that we can always say we don’t have the money, we don’t have the plan, we don’t have the vision to do that but every time we do it, we get it.

City Manager Hughes stated a recommendation for a work program item because that’s how we got the bridge. We went after the grant and we did those things through the work program.

Councilman Timmer stated as Council Members we have the opportunity during the process, City Manager Hughes gives us a blank form for what we would like to be included in the work program.

Mayor Lilburn stated we can do a motion to place this item on the work program.

Councilman Timmer stated we don’t need to. We have individual authority or ability to do that when the process starts. You can submit or I could submit it.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated the issue is whether we want to use it as part of the work program or whether in fact we want to address this item independent of the work program in order to give it preference.

Councilman McCallon stated the work program is supposed to be defined by staff, what they are supposed to working on, what the priorities of the Council are. Nothing is really independent of the work program because it takes hours and time and staff time. That’s the reason for the work program is so staff can prioritize so he doesn’t think Council should do anything that’s independent of the work program.

Councilwoman Scott stated she doesn’t think it should be independent of the work program. The work program is for the whole city and basically even though this is the east Highland area, it’s still the whole city. She is not against waiting one month but she would like to make a motion tonight that this be one of the items put on the work program.

Councilman McCallon stated the only objection he has to it, he would agree to it as long it doesn’t give the impression that Council is approving a work program item at this point. That’s why he objects to the motion because it’s saying put it on the work program and we’re going to do it. He would like to see the entire work program and see what’s brought forward before we say yeah we’re going to do this as opposed to that.

Mayor Pro Tem Jones stated if we put it on the work program it will get prioritized and if doesn’t seek a high priority it’s not going to be done.

Councilman McCallon stated he doesn’t think it should be a motion. The work program is going to have the item on it.

Mayor Lilburn stated because we bring it forward as a motion doesn’t mean it comes in any prioritization. We do the prioritizing by our numbers. It’s going to be brought forward. We can do it in a motion, we don’t have to do it in a motion and if you want to add it on as a work program and that’s when it gets added on because we all have an opportunity to add work items on. Then we come together and prioritize them.

Councilman Timmer stated he can’t support this motion even though he thinks we need to look at this. We are kind of starting a new system for how we prioritize and do projects and we have a work program process that has worked very successfully for our city. In fact we’ve gotten awards, statewide awards, for our process. Now we’re kind of surfing how we do that process. We, as individuals, staff has the options to put in, he thinks it’s pretty clear that we are going to have a work program item addressing this issue. He thinks we are going out of the normal process.

Councilwoman Scott stated when it gets to the work program and the study sessions that we have, the thing may get totally shot down because it’s going to have the grading system. She’s just saying she wants this to be one of the items on the work program.

A MOTION was made by Councilwoman Scott, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Jones, to place the item consideration on the Work Program for review of alternative access to Greenspot Road. Motion failed, 2-3, with Councilman Timmer, Councilman McCallon and Mayor Lilburn dissenting.

16. Greenspot Road Traffic Signals – Request for Reimbursement (JLM-TREH)

City Engineer Wong gave a brief review of the staff report.

Councilman McCallon stated if City Attorney Steele has any comments regarding the letter received from Regency’s Legal Representation.

City Attorney Steele stated he does not think there is any concern with changing the conditions in this point of the process. He is not concerned with that portion of the letter, especially if Regency comes back in for a major revision of their project. After all they were conditioned to provide 100% of the signal costs. He would suggest that there is some notice we should take regarding the argument that simply assigning a percentage based on the four corners theory could be viewed as being somewhat arbitrary. If the council is inclined to grant this request it may be less arbitrary and more certain for everyone if we base it on the traffic studies and base reimbursement on the actual percentage of trips generated by each property. It may work out to be close to the 25%, 50% or it may be different but at least then there is an independent rationale basis for us to point to stating these are the number of trips, this is the percentage of costs that ought to be paid.

A MOTION was made by Mayor Pro Tem Jones, seconded by Councilman Timmer, to require future developments located north of the TREH project for reimbursement to be applied by staff when the other developers come back for approvals and it is to be based on the percentage of traffic generated from each side as reflected in a traffic study. Motion carried, 5-0.

17. The Planning Center’s EIR Professional Service Agreement Amendment No. 2 – Budget Augmentation/Scope of Work Change (Greenspot Village and Marketplace Specific Plan) (City Council Agreement Approval on July 11, 2006, and Amendment No. 1 approved by City Council on February 12, 2008)

Community Development Director Jaquess gave a brief review of the staff report.

A MOTION was made by Mayor Pro Tem Jones, seconded by Councilman McCallon, to approve The Planning Center’s budget augmentation in the amount of $66,325.00 as a result of work required beyond the previously approved Scope of Work. Motion carried, 5-0.

18. Definition of Residential Exemption for Implementation of Eminent Domain

Community Development Director Jaquess gave a brief review of the staff report.

A MOTION was made by Mayor Pro Tem Jones, seconded by Councilwoman Scott, to leave the definition of the residential exemption for implementation of eminent domain as is. Motion carried, 5-0.

19. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 331 Flood Plain Management Ordinance (MCA-008-005)

Community Development Director Jaquess gave a brief review of the staff report.

A MOTION was made by Councilman McCallon, seconded by Councilwoman Scott, to conduct a second reading of Ordinance No. 331, adding Chapter 16.76. Flood Plain Management, Repealing Sections 16.04.150 Flood Plain Management Administrator and 16.40.460 Flood Plain Development Regulations and Amending Sections 16.06.010 A Definitions, 16.06.120 B Definitions, 16.06.130 M Definitions, 16.06.140 N Definitions, 16.06.190 S Definitions of Title 16 (Land Use and Development) of the Highland Municipal Code. Motion carried, 5-0.

City Clerk Hughes introduced Ordinance No. 331:

ORDINANCE NO. 331

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HIGHLAND, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 16.76. FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT, REPEALING SECTIONS 16.04.150 FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATOR AND 16.40.460 FLOOD PLAIN DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, AND AMENDING SECTIONS 16.06.010 A DEFINITIONS, 16.060.020 B DEFINITIONS, 16.06.060 F DEFINITIONS, 16.06.120 L DEFINITIONS, 16.06.130 M DEFINITIONS, 16.06.140 N DEFINITIONS, 16.06.190 S DEFINITIONS OF TITLE 16 (LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT) OF THE HIGHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE [GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA-008-001), ZONE CHANGE (ZC0-007-001), AND MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT (MCA-008-005)]

which title was read.

20. Two Appointments to the Public Nuisance Hearing Board (PNHB)

City Clerk Hughes stated there are two applications for the two vacancies. Both applicants are currently serving and would like to be considered for reappointment.

A MOTION was made by Councilman Timmer, seconded by Councilman McCallon, to reappoint both current members of the Public to the Public Nuisance Hearing Board, terms to expire in August, 2012. Motion carried, 5-0.

21. Designation of Voting Delegate and Alternate for the League of California Cities Annual Conference

City Clerk Hughes stated previously the Council appointed a voting delegate and an alternate. There is a conflict of scheduling, therefore, the item is brought back before the Council for direction.

A MOTION was made by Mayor Pro Tem Jones, seconded by Councilwoman Scott, to appoint Councilman McCallon as the Voting Delegate for the League of California Cities Annual Conference. Motion carried, 5-0.

22. League of California Cities 2008 Annual Conference Resolutions Packet

City Clerk Hughes gave a brief review of the staff report.

Councilman Timmer stated there are two issues he has concerns for, one being on how the fees are being calculated for each League member and how the League wants to create their own formula to do so. He would think we want they should use the same process as how the State allocates our per capita numbers.

Councilman McCallon stated the bylaws change says it is determined by the California Department of Finance, etc., and then they added that sentence upon recommendation that the league may approve an alternate process.

Councilman Timmer stated the other issue is when people are no longer in office, it states they can still represent their agency up to 90 days after they are no longer in office.

Councilman McCallon stated an issue he would like to bring up is the one that deal with caucuses. The amendment that they want to put in is that we will add to the Board Members from the various caucuses to ensure we have the right ethnicity diversity on the Board and based on state population ethnicity. The League Board should be representative of those elected officials of the cities not the population of the State. He understands Council is directing him to cast a no vote in each of the proposed bylaw amendments or amend them.

23. Update on SANBAG, SCAG, Omnitrans, Work Program and Regional/Legislative Issues/Development Issues/Subcommittees/AB 1234 Updates

Councilman McCallon stated we have received a request for a letter of support for the following, Governor Schwarzenegger has approved a fourth round of regional blueprint planning program funding at approximately $4.5 million which will be available to NPO’s statewide and in this fourth round of blueprint grant funding SCAG would like to continue funding for our Compass Blueprint Demonstration Projects and expand the SCAG’s suite of service to local government and to develop tools for local government to measure the effect of planning strategies and greenhouse gas emissions and to train local planners on a variety of technical assistance tools through the tool box. We expect a great amount of competition for these funds being made available. SCAG is asking the City of Highland and others to write a letter of support for SCAG to receive funding from the Blueprint Planning Grant.

A MOTION was made by Councilman McCallon, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Jones, to compose a letter of support for SCAG to receive funding from the Blueprint Planning Grant. Motion carried, 5-0.