General Plan Workshop and Problems: Feb 11th

Paaww..

Going through the draft edition of the City of G.T. General Plan Report. Still finding errors that had been pointed out at Workshops were to have been corrected, but looks they did not.

Per 3.3.4 The city has not taken any active measures to divert truck traffic away from residential areas. Prime examples that I see already is the encouragement and use of Michigan Avenue (due to trucking business on the route), the use of Grand Terrace Road (due to daily deliveries of supplies to the S.C.E. plant on Newport Road) and for the industrial park in Northwest area of city wherein less than "Residential" width streets are intended to be utilized for truck traffic. As was stated in the Environmental papers filed by Colton Joint Schools, the full length of Michigan, Main street, and a few offshoot side streets were to be improved to handle the anticipated 40 school buses in traffic improvements funded by the residents of the City of G.T. The full length of Michigan is not to built to four lane, but only that section north of Van Buren. I guess that this is where the school busses are expected to turn off. The School district has already commented that due to the volume and distances involved, they expect to stack them up nose to tail along Michigan when not involved with driving into the facilities, or actually picking up and transporting students.

As per section 3.4.1 the total length of Mt. Vernon is to eventually be to four lane use. There is some doubt as to if the section going down the slope in to City of Colton is included in to this directive or not.

On page 17 of the report, is note that Policy 3.2.1 and 3.3.2 be implemented. However, due to recent developments, the city seems just as quick to say no to the requested action. Delay until doomsday or whenever the residents of the city have enough money to pay for some construction in another area of town.

We sure don't want the adjacent property owners to benefit for the improvements. As per other items
noted, this is pretty well down on the priority listing, for a potential Bikeway is rated number One, more important to the city. Guess they figure that all those employees living in Riverside County will bicycle to work each morning. The bike trail routes are also smack alongside the truck routes, just so that the employees know where they are going to work at.

Per 4.2.5 The Northeast sector of the city, up near Honey Hills is in a designated Flood Zone. (Doubtful)

Section 4.3.1 says the City has 100 acres of developed and undeveloped or recreation areas. (See table 4.1) But that table only outlines about 41.2 acres. The remainder is currently fenced in, occupied by privately owned buildings, a operating commercial lumber yard, or just plain plowed dirt. The remainder is under the thumb of the Colton J. Schools, and should be subtracted from the quantity expressed in section 4.3.1 Then in next paragraph is says G.T. has only 41 acres.

I also am wondering what was done to create statement 4.3.6 for I had thought the staff had a lot of time to determine as to if or not areas in Flood Plains are safe or not.
Hope that everyone is going to the meeting on evening of the eleventh. This whole plan is to be discussed once again. May be, the Hammar