HomeMy WebLinkAbout071090 CC Agenda~,d4nO~c~& No.
's~8 to seMider mX pz~ort! aequi-sit'ion.
Invocation
Flag Salute
I~LL~LLLt
Pastor Steven Struickmans
~ncho conunity Church
~irdsall, Linde~ans, Moore, Nunez,
Parks
Certificate of Appreciation - Doug
Davies
Introduction of Traffic Controllers
Presentation by Captain 'R~ck Sayre.
Check ~fron CARE (Coalit~on for A
Reasonable Environment) -
Presentation by Judy Rosen,
President
A total of 15 minutes is prov~ledso members of the public can
address the Council on items that are not listed on the
Agenda, Speakers are l~nitedfto two (2) minutes each. ~f you
desire to speak totheCounctlsboutan~tennot listed on the
Agenda, a pink uRoquo~t To ,M# form should be filled out
and filod eith the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state
For all other agenda items a #1oquest To Spoil" form must be
filed w~th the City Clerk ~ -the Council gets to that
item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual
speakers.
/
ill ~stt~rs listed und~_Cl~l!~P~,Cpl.~r'.areoons!der~d to
~t~ ~ ~11 viii
City C~[1 r~~
1.1 ~pr~e ~e Bi~es of J~e 26, 1990 as ~iled.
'~pr~e ~e ninut~ of ~une 30, 1990 as ~iled.
2. ~-!lp,~t~ Ap,~ri~i~q ~j~Ation of. ~-]~$ e~ Use Tax
~TION:
2.1
o
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 90-
· tBIOLUTXONO~THB CXTrCOU~XLO~THBCXTrO~ TB~BCULA
&IPl*~3fRZS331~ B]DkIf/M~TXC~OF 8ALBS ~ USB TAZRBOORDS
¸o
-q~oJ~l ~d~ of Qr4Jr~p~ce ~hlt!h.tng ,,
RECOiOi~HDATZON:
Adopt and read by title only an ordinance entitled:
C~D~ NO. O0-10
~ omoxix~ GI' m c~x'x'~ eO~ZL 0~' m czT~ oz'
]!IT]diLXIHXIIG x ~momulL SYSTEM IBTXTLBD
Continued fron ~he meetLnq of Dune 26, 1990.
· RE~JO~HDATION:
7.1 ContXnue tot he meetXng of ~uly 24, 1990.
RB-.~3MMBHDATXON:
8.!
AuthorXze budget &pproprL&tion of $20, S00 for the
purpose of purchasXncj& vehXclo for t~euleof the
¢~tyHanager from&ccount no. 00L~60-42-5608, sa~d
funds to be tran~£erred from reserve for
Contingency (account no. 001-905)
~141e~71ooo s 07;oeJJo
~op'c a resolution entitled:
HIIOX,OTXO~ ~!0, ~0-
RF~I-~f~./~uATION:
r ~0' X Conduct Public Hearing
10.2
-Direct staff to proceed with abatement procedures
pursuant to the provisions adopted in Resolution
9.0-55.
· gl~'- (To be beXd at OtO0 ~lf) Pledge ooe,oolparato agenda
.~q. gx!A~x"ce.R~nn of ?~e - Tel)~At4vo PArcel l~p ,~!383
'~ATXON:
11.1 Set for public hearing July 24, 1990.
~JbEsmd~07m:
~~'~ of , p~c4~on-~k;Ing Author4,,ty fo~'. r~n~ Use
16.1 C~d~ r~~at~ons ~ ~e City Attorney a~
Next meeting: July 24, 1990, 7:00 PM, Temecula C~unity Center,
28816 PuJol Street, Temecula, California
~JEand~7 I010 e 07J0~10
.TUN ~ ~13 0?:56 STOORZA, 7T£C~, M~TZC~R P.~_/~
June 28, 1990
Ms. June Oreelf
Deputy City Clerk
City_ of Temecula
43172 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
Dear Ms. Greek:
*** BY FACSIMILE ***
Thank you for accommodating our request for a spot on the July 10, 1990
City Council agenda.
This letter confirms that Coalition for A Reasonable Environment -- CARE
.. will be on the Tuesday, July 10, 1990 City Council agenda for a very
brief presentation. Judy Rosen, president of CARE, wdl present a check
to the council for the city's overpats traffic officer program.
If you have any questions, please call me at (714) 699-8327.
Thanks for all of your help.
D~nnis Cushman
Account Executive
c;: Judy Ros~n
llllfflll~till~l)l _,-.--,dJl,tllllll.'?t'~lt.. ! ~ ' hllMli~m
MINUTE8 OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULACITY COUNCIL
HELD JUNE 26, ~990
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order
at 6:40 PM in the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street,
Temecula, California. Mayor Ron Parks presiding.
EXECUTXVE BESSION:
Mayor Parks adjourned to an executive session pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.8 to consider real property
acquisition and 54957.9A to discuss the matter of Ramsey vs the
County of Riverside. The executive session was adjourned at 7:16
PM.
The regular meeting was convened at 7:20 PM with the following
members present:
PRESENT 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mufioz, Parks
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Also present were City Manager Frank Aleshire, City Attorney Scott
F. Field, and Deputy City Clerk June S. Greek.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor Gary Nelson of Calvary Church.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilmember
Muffoz.
City Attorney Fields stated during the closed session the Council
took action to authorize the City Manager to sign the Joint Tenant
Lease with Windsor Properties for Building A located at 43180
Business Park Drive.
Mayor Parks asked that Agenda Item No. 13 be presented first.
13. City Seal Contest
Mayor Parks presented checks and certificates to the winners
of the City Sea1 Contest as follows:
First Place for Originality - Dominique Alcantar of Temecula
Middle School.
N ~ nut es~6~26\90 - 1 - 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
First Place -Artwork -Kris Kennedy of Temecula Middle School
First Place - Slogan - Heather Short - Temecula Middle School
Honorable Mention - Michael Ramos - Temecula Middle School
Councilmember Lindemans said the final City Seal must be the
result of a mission statement, and the seals submitted may not
be the permanent City of Temecula seal.
PUBLIC COMMENTB
James Marple, 28541 Via Princesa, stated distributed a letter from
Ivan Termant, County of Riverside Road Department regarding urban
run-off to the Council. He said there will be a series of meetings
during the next few months on this subject and asked Council to
appoint a representative to attend these meetings.
Councilmember Mufioz stated the size of City Council agendas is
getting out of hand. He said it is not fair to the Council as
there is too much information to thoroughly review, as well as not
being fair to the citizens to have to sit through such lengthy
meetings.
CONSENT C]~LENDAR
Mayor Parks advised he had a request to continue Item No. 5 to the
meeting of July 10, 1990.
Councilmember Lindemans asked for the removal of Item No. 6, 9, 10
and 11 from the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Birdsall asked to remove Consent Calendar Item No. 8.
Councilmember Mufioz asked for the removal of Item No. 12.
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember
Lindemans to approve Consent Calendar Items 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 as
follows:
1. Minutes
1.1 Approved minutes of June 12, 1990 as mailed.
14 ~ nut e~\6\26\90 - 2 - 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
Resolution Asproving Payment of Demands
2.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 90-64
A RESOLUTION OFT HE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMB AND DEMANDS AB SET FORTH IN
E~IBIT A.
City Treasurer's Report for the Month Ending May 31, 1990.
3.1 Receive and file.
Statement of Revenues and Expenditures, Budaet and Actual for
the Month Endina May 31, 1990,
4.1 Receive and file.
4.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 90-65
A RESOLUTION OFT HE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 19S9-90 BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE
$1,000 FORT HE PURPOSE OF PROVIDINGADDITIONAL COMMUNITY
SERVICES CONSULTING FEES AND CAPITAL OUTLAY
8oils and Materials Testing Services
7.1 Authorize the City Engineer to solicit proposals for the
provisions of soils and material testing services for
Fiscal Year 1990-91·
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES: 0
ABSENT: i
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
None
Moore
Lindemarts,
N i nutes\6\26\90 -3- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
COUNCIL BUSINESS
5. Street Name Change, Kathleen Way to Ridge Park Drive
Councilmember Birdsall moved, Councilmember Lindemans seconded
a motion to continue this item for two weeks to the meeting of
July 10, 1990.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES: 0
ABSENT: i
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
None
Moore
Agreement for Maintenance of Traffic Signals and Safety
Lighting
Councilmember Lindemans stated he feels this contract is
excessively costly and requested staff look into other
options.
City Manager Aleshire reported this contract is for 24-hour a
day maintenance of traffic lights. He further stated that
lights are run on computers and these people have the
equipment and the knowledge to handle this service. He stated
if Council preferred he could have the new City Manager take
a survey of how other cities handle this maintenance.
Councilmember Mufioz questioned response time required in the
contract. Mr. Aleshire answered that every call will be
answered, and time to restore service will depend on the
problem.
Councilmember Mufioz also asked if liability would totally rest
upon the City instead of the County. City Attorney Fields
stated that on short term, high liability contracts, the
County would act more as a City employee and would place all
liability with the City. He stated that in long term
contracts this would not be the case.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by
Councilmember Birdsall to authorize the Mayor to execute an
agreement for traffic signals and safety lighting with
Riverside County.
N~nutes\6\26\90 -4- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26, 1990
e
e
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mu5oz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Special OutBoor Event Permits ¢P&ra~es)
Councilmember Birdsall stated she has concerns with this item
and would like to refer it back to staff with a direction to
set up an ad hoc committee to review an appropriate
resolution. She said she felt two resolutions, one for
parades and one for special events would be a better solution.
Councilmember Mu5oz asked that there be an indication of how
far in advance these permits should be started and also
suggested a cost of living clause.
Mayor Parks agreed with setting up a seven-member, ad hoc
committee comprising of a representative from the Council,
representatives from the Chamber of Commerce, the Town
Association and the public at large. He suggested appointing
Councilmember Birdsall as the Council's representative and
asked the City Manager to put together this committee.
Councilmember Birdsall moved, Councilmember Lindemans seconded
a motion to continue this item off calendar and refer back to
staff with direction to set up an ad hoc committee to review
an appropriate resolution.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mu~oz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Tentative Parcel MaD 23513
Councilmember Lindemans stated he felt this item should not be
received and filed and warranted a public hearing. He said
this area is a large open space and residents should have the
opportunity to voice their opinions.
Ni nutes\6\26\90 -5- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
Councilmember Mufioz expressed his concern with respect to
grading. He said the Council made a statement that it did not
want the hill tops flattened. He requested recommendations
from staff on what appropriate grading levels would be. He
also requested before and after sketches for projects.
Mayor Parks said he has a problem with setting this item for
public hearing since it has already gone through the County
process and been approved. He statedthis would cost the City
$2,000 to $3,000 with the outcome likely remaining the same.
He asked staff if all property owners were notified regarding
the County Public Hearing. Ross Geller, Planning Director,
stated they were notified.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans,
Councilmember Mufioz to set for public hearing.
seconded by
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall,
Mu5oz
Lindemans,
NOES: i COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
10. COpieS Purohase
Councilmember Lindemans stated he felt the cost of the copier
was much too high and staff should look into leasing a machine
for City use. He further stated the Kodak machine had
limitations that other machines did not have, such as the
inability to enlarge and use large paper. He said he felt the
City should use local merchants whenever possible.
Joe Hreha, Manager of Information Systems, stated the copier
recommended is a high speed machine, primarily for the purpose
of producing high volumes of copies such as agendas every
week. He stated the plan is to purchase a high speed copier
to do this kind of work and a smaller one for the more
specialized copying needs.
Councilmember Birdsall said she felt staff had done a thorough
study on the purchase of a copier, but would agree to looking
at a lease rs. purchase.
N J nutes\6\26\90 -6- 07/05/90
City Council M{nutes
June 26. ~990
Councilmember Lindemans moved, Councilmember Mufioz seconded a
motion to continue this item off-calendar, and direct staff to
look at lease options for this equipment.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
11.
Second Extension of Time - Tentative Parcel Yap 21383
Ross Geller, Planning Director, stated there has been a
request to continue this item for two weeks with the hope of
changing the recommendation to receive and file.
It was moved by Councilmember Mufioz, seconded by Councilmember
Lindemarts to continue the item for two weeks.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mu5oz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
12.
Final Tract Map No. 24169
Councilmember Mufioz asked if the questions raised regarding
the left turn problems have been resolved.
Tim Serlet, City Engineer, stated he met with the County Road
Department and the left turn pockets have been designed. He
said the County has allowed the developer to proceed with
striping plans.
Councilmember Mufioz informed Larry Markham, representing the
developer, that he has received phone calls from current
tenants expressing their concern with insufficient parking
when the Lube and Tune is built. Mr. Markham said the Lube
andTune has been on the approved plot plan from the inception
of the project and the development is in compliance with
parking requirements.
#~nutes\6\26\90 -7- 0;'/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
Councilmember Mufioz said he has been very displeased with the
developers violation of the City's sign ordinance and
recommended this situation be corrected as soon as possible.
Councilmember Lindemans moved, Councilmember Birdsall seconded
a motion to approve Final Tract Map No. 24169, subject to the
conditions of approval contained in the staff report.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Mayor Parks called a recess at 8:25 PM. The meeting was reconvened
at 8:45 PM.
Mayor Parks asked if anyone was present to speak regarding the
public hearing on Weed Abatement. Since there were no speakers
present, the Mayor suggested continuing this item.
It was moved by Councilmember Muhoz, seconded by Councilmember
Birdsall to continue this item to July 10, 1990 and direct staff to
re-notice the Public Hearing.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemarts,
Mu~oz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Mayor Parks adjourned to the Community Services District Meeting at
8:46 PM. The City Council meeting was reconvened at 9:10 PM.
Councilmember Lindemans requested taking Item No. 24 out of order.
# J nutes\6\26\90 - 8- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
COD~ClL BUSINESS
24. Traff~o Safety Measure A110oation of Funds
City Manager Aleshire reported that at a previous meeting the
City Council formed an advisory committee made up of
Councilmember Lindemans, Max Gillis and the City Manager. He
said the recommendations listed in the staff report are the
result of their work. He requested endorsing the list of
projects and adding any projects the Council wished. He said
it would be appropriate to hire someone to coordinate this
program, allocate $200,000 and begin to get the work done.
Councilmember Lindemans stated Max Gillis has agreed to be the
facilitater if it is the will of the Council and the new City
Manager at no charge to the City. Councilmember Lindemans
suggesting changing the allocation to $250,000 and allocate
this amount to be repaid from the capital improvements budget.
Mayor Parks recommended referring this issue to the Ad Hoc
Traffic Committee until the Traffic Safety Commission is
appointed. He said this committee could establish a priority
list for projects needed and since this is an established
committee they are familiar with these issues and could solve
the problem quickly.
Councilmember Mufioz asked that we do not stretch this process
over months instead of days or weeks. He stressed the
importance of solving these matters in a timely fashion.
Mayor Parks stated he was not in favor of having one
individual doing this job, but felt a veryqualified committee
of seven people could solve these problems faster and more
effectively.
Councilmember Birdsall moved, Councilmember Lindemans seconded
a motion to allocate $200,000 to be administered under the
auspices of the Temecula Traffic Committee utilizing the
services of Mr. Max Gillis as facilitater; and further direct
staff to notify the Traffic Committee of the Council's desire
to utilize their services in this capacity.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mufioz
# J nutes\6\26\90 - 9 - 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
14.
Councilmember Birdsall requested a further point of discussion
on this item. She suggested establishing an Ad Hoc Committee
to make the final determination on how the City Seal will be
handled.
Councilmember Lindemans stated the City needs a mission
statement, a one sentence slogan to go along with the seal.
Councilmember Birdsall moved, Councilmember Lindemans seconded
a motion to establish an Ad Hoc committee made up of
volunteers from the community to make the final determination
on how the City Seal and mission statement will be developed.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Resolution Establishinq the City's &ppropriations Limit for
Fiscal Year 1990-91
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Director, requested this item be
continued off calendar.
It was moved byCouncilmember Mufioz, seconded by Councilmember
Birdsall to continue this item off calendar.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemarts,
Mu~oz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
15. City of Temecula Personnel Policies
City Manager Aleshire reported that the Council authorized the
hiring of a consultant to put together a personnel policy,
which is before the Council tonight. He recommended the
Council take action to adopt these personnel rules. He said
two actions are needed: first, adoption of an ordinance
Ninutes\6\Z6\90 - 10- 0?/05/90
City Council M{nutes June 26. 1990
setting up the frame work for establishing rules, which
requires two readings and a 30 day waiting period, and second
adoption of a resolution establishing rules and procedures
governing attendance and leaves.
Mr. Aleshire outlined the rules and recommended taking action
on these items. He introduced Mike Deblieux from the
consulting firm of IEM to answer questions.
Councilmember Mufioz stated he felt that 18 days comprehensive
leave/sick time was too high and did not compare with the
private sector.
Mr. Deblieux answered that the number was conservative in
comparison to most other cities in which employees are allowed
a total of 22 days. He explained that the 18 days combined
sick and vacation time serves as an incentive to employees to
be more consistent in their attendance.
Councilmember Mufioz stated that many people want to work for
the City of Temecula, and the City does not need to over-
compensate employees.
Mayor Parks declared a one minute break at 9:45 PM to change
the tape.
Councilmember Mufioz also questioned the length of time-off
with pay for jury duty, stating the vast majority of cases
that go to trial only last two weeks.
It was moved byCouncilmember Mufioz, seconded byCouncilmember
Lindemans to adopt Resolution No. 90-67 with the amendment to
reduce the comprehensive annual leave for the first year to 15
days, 17 days for the second and third year, and to amend the
managerial leave to 19 days the first year and 21 days for the
second and third year. Jury duty was amended to 30 days with
pay, instead of 90 days with pay.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Councilmember Mufioz moved, Councilmember Lindemans seconded a
motion to read by title only, waive further reading of
Ordinance No. 90-10 and approve first reading.
Hinutes\6\26\90 - 11- 07/05/90
.... Citv Council Minutes June 26. 1990
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember
Moore to extend the meeting to 11:00 PM. The motion was
unanimously carried.
PUBLIC HEARING
16. &DDeal No. 2 - Tentative Parcel Map No. 21769
Councilmember Moore moved, Councilmember Mufioz seconded a
motion to continue this item off calendar.
Councilmember Nufioz asked the reason for the request of
continuance. Ross Geller, Planning Director, explained staff
is awaiting verification on information regarding biological
impact. He stated staff is working with the applicant.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mufioz
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
ABSTAIN: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Parks
17. Plot Plan 11499 - Appeal No. 3
Ross Geller stated this item contains two parts; a request for
plot plan approval and an appeal. He stated the plot plan has
been approved by the County Planning Director and 1/3 of the
site is proposed to be landscaped.
Tim Serlet, City Engineer, stated this case is similar to
several others appealed to the Council recently. The project
was submitted to the County when all new developments were
conditioned with a traffic study and required to meet those
conditions. Mr. Serlet recommended not requiring the
applicant to improve the intersection but rather to pay a fair
share of fees, and deposit $10,000 as a good faith measure.
# { nutes\6\26\90 - 12 - 0?/05/90
City Council Minutes
June 26. 1990
18.
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by
Councilmember Lindemans to approve staff recommendations to 1)
uphold the appeal, subject to the recommendations of the City
Traffic Engineer, based on findings and analysis contained in
the County report. 2) Approve Plot Plan No. 11499, based on
the analysis and findings contained in the County Staff
Report, subject to the conditions of approval revised in
Appeal No. 3.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Report by Temecula Commerce Conittee on Suggested Sign
Ordinance ~mendments
City Manager Aleshire reported he received a recommendation
from the Temecula Commerce Committee founded to consider
amendments to the sign ordinance. He suggested taking the
suggestions from the committee and having the City Attorney
prepare an ordinance. Mr. Aleshire stated these amendments
deal directly with the use of balloons as an acceptable form
of advertising. He introduced John Bell, spokesperson for the
Commerce Committee, to make a presentation.
John Bell, 27711 Diaz Road, gave a presentation to Council
stating Temecula has unofficially been labeled "The Balloon
Capital of Southern California" and stated many merchants have
capitalized on Temecula's festive image by using balloons as
a form of advertising. He said the present sign ordinance
does not provide a vehicle in which merchants can apply for
temporary forms of outdoor advertising. He reported that on
July 1, 1990, all balloons must come down without an amendment
to this ordinance. He said the committee has included in its
report a draft proposal which was formulating using other
cities as a guide including: San Marcos, Escondido, Vista,
Oceanside, Corona and City of Industry.
Councilmember Birdsall stated she would like the period not to
exceed fifteen consecutive days within any 90 day, not 60 day
period.
#~ nutes\6\~6\~O - 13- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
Councilmember Nu~oz stated he would like stricter limits, and
asked Council if it is willing to accept the fact that
everyone could have a balloon.
Ed Morale, Commerce Committee, spoke regarding an informal
survey taken. Of 200 people, only one objected to the use of
balloon advertising in Temecula, and that person was in
opposition to a tethered balloon which could be a hazard.
City Attorney Fields said that all zoning ordinances must
first go to the Planning Commission for Public Hearings and
then would be brought back to the City Council. He stated
this is a rather lengthy process taking anywhere from six to
nine months. He suggested adopting a moratorium amending
standards for up to one year period of time, while planning is
reviewing the Ordinance.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by
Councilmember Birdsall to direct staff to prepare a moratorium
ordinance permitting use of specific balloons as suggested by
the committee and incorporating changes suggested by Council
to raise the time limit to read not to exceed fifteen
consecutive days of use within a 90 day period.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mu5oz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Councilmember Mu~oz moved, Councilmember Birdsall seconded a
motion to instruct staff to continue to enforce all other
provisions of the County Sign Ordinance.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mu5oz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Mayor Parks requested taking Item No. 20 out of order.
# ~ nut es\6~6\90 - 14 - 07/05/90
city Council Minutes June 26. 1990
20. Town Center Traffic Improvements
City Manager Aleshire reported the owners of the Town Center
on Ynez and Rancho California Road would like to have a
traffic signal installed. He stated a traffic signal is
warranted and should be installed. Also suggested was the
closure of the left turn pocket located adjacent to Marie
Calendar's. He said Rancho California Water District is
willing to install a pilot planting program in the medians
east of Ynez that would feature low water usage landscaping.
Mr. Aleshire recommended the following:
Install a traffic signal at the main entrance to the
shopping center.
bo
Close the existing median cut at the westerly driveway to
the shopping center.
Ce
Reimburse developer for improvements out of future sales
tax revenues.
d®
Request Rancho Water District to install pilot planning
program in the medians east of Ynez Road.
Councilmember Mufioz asked when the signal would be installed.
Mr. Aleshire stated all work should be completed by late
November, 1990.
Mayor Parks called a one minute break to change the tape at 11:00
PM.
Councilmember Mu~oz questioned the reasoning behind closing
the Marie Calendar entrance into the center, suggesting this
may cause an increased traffic build up.
City Manager Aleshire stated this was recommended after the
traffic study conducted by Willdan.
Lisa Peterson, 28765 Single Oak Drive, representing Bedford
properties voiced her objection to the proposed reimbursement
to the developer for improvements out of futures sales tax
revenues. She stated all developers had paid signal
mitigation fees, and this developer should not be singled out
for reimbursement.
#~ nutes\6\26\90 - 15- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
Councilmember Mufioz praised Bedford Properties stating they
have done what is necessary to aid in traffic solutions. He
stated the Target Center owners are attempting to get the City
to pay for signals which should be their responsibility. He
said if fees had been paid to the County and can be recovered,
this would be acceptable.
Mayor Parks asked the City Manager to research other means to
obtain funds without giving up sales tax dollars, but stressed
the point that this improvement is absolutely necessary.
Councilmember Birdsall asked that a time limit be placed on
implementing this project since it is a critical area.
It was moved byCouncilmember Mufioz, seconded byCouncilmember
Lindemans to accept staff recommendations A and D, direct
staff to further study recommendation B, and to reject
recommendation C.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemarts,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Councilmember Lindemans moved, Councilmember Mufioz seconded a
motion to extend the meeting to 12:00 AM. The motion was
unanimously carried.
21. Calle Medusa Traffic Study
City Manager Aleshire reported he held a meeting with the
residents of Calle Medusa and several improvements were
recommended including: Three Stop intersections,
installations of crosswalks, warning signs, a 25 MPH speed
zone and a school bus stop. He said the developer of US Homes
has agreed to install the signs and markings if desired by
City Council, and would further consider doing an expanded
traffic study to address alternate street patterns to reduce
through traffic on Calle Medusa.
Mr. Aleshire recommended Council approve these measures to
allow traffic improvements to be made.
N i nut es\6\2.6\90 - 16- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
Jim Estock, 40420 Calle Medusa, stated he is in favor of these
recommendations as they represent a step in the right
direction, but he is not fully satisfied with the results. He
said when the builder admits he was not truthful to
homeowners, and when through traffic can be redirected, the
homeowners will be satisfied.
Sherman Haggetty, stated US Homes agrees there is a problem on
Calle Medusa. He said the street is used for something other
than it was designed for, and this was not anticipated by the
builder. Mr. Haggerry said US Homes has agreed to take the
lead in doing a traffic study. He stated it would appear that
when Nicholas and Butterfield Roads are complete the vast
majority of present traffic will not use Calle Medusa. He
also stated US Homes would be willing to install undulations,
which would solve the problem of high speeds on this
residential road.
Councilmember Lindemans asked if speed undulations are an
approved traffic control devise. He recommended referring
this problem to the Traffic Commission, but stated he was in
favor of making whatever changes are necessary to make the
residents feel more at ease. City Engineer, Tim Setlet
recommended trying the other traffic solutions first.
Councilmember Mufioz stated he felt undulations are a radical
approach to this problem and would also favor referring this
study to the Traffic Commission.
Councilmember Mufioz moved, Councilmember Birdsall seconded a
motion to approve staff recommendation to direct the City
Manager to implement the traffic improvements recommended in
the Willdan Report.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Mu~oz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
ABSTAIN: I COUNCILMEMBERS:
Lindemans
#i nute~\6\~6\90 - 17- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
22.
~evelopment Inventory
City Manager Aleshire reported staff recommendation is to
direct the City Manager to execute a contract with Lightfoot
Planning Group to conduct a comprehensive land use inventory.
He said this report would provide staff with a comprehensive
report on all approved projects within the City.
He reported that four proposals were received, and the least
costly option of $37,600 by Lightfoot Planning Group is
recommended.
It was moved byCouncilmember Mufioz, seconded by Councilmember
Lindemans to direct the City Manager to execute a contract
with Lightfoot Planning Group to conduct a comprehensive land
use inventory.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemarts,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
19. Proposal for Street Sweeping Servioes
Councilmember Birdsall moved, Councilmember Lindemans seconded
a motion to authorize the City Manager to enter into an
agreement with R. F. Dickson Company for street sweeping
services.
Councilmember Mufioz asked Mayor Parks to call County
Supervisor WaltAbraham and ask him to request County Roads to
do their final street sweeping for the City of Temecula.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
Ni nut es\6~26\90 - 18- 07/05/90
city Council Minutes
June 26. 1990
23. Buildina I~speotion
City Manager Aleshire recommended authorizing the Mayor to
sign an Agreement for Building Plans Examining Services with
Willdan and Associates. He said the County does not wish to
manage this program any longer, and Willdan will direct this
program until such time as the new City Manager hires a
Building Director. Mr. Aleshire reported that the City would
then collect the building fees.
Councilmember Lindemans asked if these fees will be the same
as the County fees. City Manager Aleshire stated the present
fees are the same as the County fees, but a recommendation to
change the rate will be coming in a couple of weeks.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by
Councilmember Mufioz to authorize the Mayor to sign the
"Agreement for Building Plans Examining Services."
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemarts,
Mufioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Aleshire reported that he spoke withLadd Penfold, who
is ready to relocate the KRTM FMRadio Tower and who requested the
City grant him a permit to locate a telephone pole in the vicinity
of the new location. He stated that at the present time there is
a moratorium on antennas, but the Council could declare an
exemption with four votes.
City Attorney Fields stated this item is not on the agenda and
would require a 4/Sths vote to add this item.
Ni nutes\6\Z6\90 - 19- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember
Mu~oz to declare this a subsequent need item and to add it to the
agenda.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mu~oz, Parks
NOES: 0
ABSENT: i
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
None
Moore
Councilmember Lindemans moved, seconded by Councilmember Mufioz to
grant an exemption from the Tower Moratoriumto Ladd Penfold on the
condition that 1) the existing radio tower on Via Montezuma be
removed, 2) that the requested power pole may be located at a new
location subject to the City manager's approval, and 3) that the
pole must be removed when the final plot plan for the tower is
approved.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Mu~oz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Moore
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
25.
Stephens' Kanaaroo Rat Report
City Attorney Fields reported that a letter reporting on this
issue would be distributed to Council for their review and it
should answer questions previously raised.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Mufioz requested staff to look into a Sister City
program to include a city in Japan.
14inutes\6\26\~O - 20- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes June 26. 1990
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember
Mufioz to adjourn at 12:00AM. The motion was unanimously carried.
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk
H i nut es\6\26\90 - 21 - 07/05/90
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED MEETING
OF THE TEMECUL~ CITY COUNCIL
HELD JUNE 30, 1990
An adjourned meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to
order at 9:06 AM in the City of Temecula City Hall Annex, 43180
Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Mayor Ron Parks
presiding.
PRESENT 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Moore Mufioz, Parks
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Also present was Deputy City Clerk June S. Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No public comments were offered at this time.
COUNCIL BUSINESS
Mayor Parks explained the reason for holding this adjourned meeting
is specifically to interview candidates for the City's Parks and
Recreation Commission. He discussed briefly the manner in which he
would like to have the interviews conducted.
Candidates were then interviewed in the following order:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Claudia Brode
Jean P. Stenger
John Sterling
William D. Hillin
Michael Kirby
Jeffrey Nimeshein
Evelyn Harker
At the conclusion of the interviews the Council took a straw vote
ballot to determine if any clear choices were evident.
Council discussed their individual choices and the reasons for
those selections.
Council unanimously agreed to request that Candidate Claudia Brode
return to the interview room to respond to a question regarding her
association with the Temecula Town Association.
N~nutes 6\30\90 -1- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes January 9. 1990
Ms. Brode, responded to the Council's question, stating she would
choose to retain a position as a member of the Parks and Recreation
Commission over a position on the Temecula Town Association Board
if she were required to make such a choice.
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Councilmember
Lindemans to poll the Council by a ballot. The motion was
unanimously carried.
On the first tally, Claudia Brode, William D. Hillen and Jeffrey
Nimeshine were selected unanimously.
Following discussion it was moved by Councilmember Lindemans,
seconded byCouncilmember Birdsall to elect Candidate Evelyn Harker
and Candidate Michael Kirby.
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
NOES: 1
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans,
Muhoz, Parks
Moore
None
Councilmember Moore requested that the record state her only reason
for voting no was because she objected to voting for two candidates
in the same motion.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Parks requested concurrence from the City Council to schedule
interviews for the Public Safety Commission on Saturday, July 7,
1990 at 9:00 PM.
Councilmembers Moore and Munoz gave brief overviews of the criteria
used by the ad hoc committee in making the selections of the
candidates to be interviewed for the Public Safety Commission.
The Mayor requested Council's concurrence to waive the meeting of
July 17, 1990, since four members would be attending a League of
California Cities meeting in Northern California. All members of
the Council agreed to the waiver.
The Mayor agreed to notify all candidates interviewed for the Parks
and Recreation Commission, of the action taken by the City Council.
Ninutes 6~30\90 -2- 07/05/90
City Council Minutes January 9. 1990
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Councilmember
Lindemans to adjourn at 11:55 AM to the next meeting to be held on
July 3, 1990, at 7:00 PM in the Community Room of the Rancho
California Water District, 28061 Diaz Road, Temecula. The motion
was unanimously carried.
RONALD J. PARKS, MAYOR
ATTEST:
F. D. ALESHIRE, CITY CLERK
Ninute8 6\30\90 -3- 07/05/90
:~&
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
AB#:
MTG:
DEPT: FZNANCE
TITL£: RESOLUTZON &UTHORZZING EX~I~ZN&TION
OF B~LEB ~ USE T~[ RECORDS
DEPT TY~
HD
CITY AT
CITY MGR '
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council adopt a resolution
examination of sales and use tax records.
authorizing
B~CKGROUND
In order to obtain a record of the sales tax returns submitted
to the State Board of Equalization by Temecula businesses, the
City Council needs to adopt the attached resolution
authorizing the City Manager and Finance Director to examine
the records.
~TT~CHMENT
Resolution
records.
authorizing examination of sales and use tax
RESOLUTION NO. 90-
A RESOLSON OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECL~A AUTHORIZING THE EXAMINATION OF SALES
AND USE TAX RECORDS
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as
follows:
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance 89-5, the City of Temecula entered into a contract
with the State Board of Equalization to perform all functions incident to the administration and
collection of local sales and use taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula deems it desirable and necessary
for authorized representatives of the City to examine confidential sales and use tax records of
the State Board of Equalization pertaining to sales and use taxes collected by the Board for the
City pursuant to that contract; and
WHEREAS, Section 7056 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code sets forth
certain requirements and conditions for the disclosure of Board records, and establishes criminal
penalties for the unlawful disclosure of information contained in, or derived from, the sales and
use tax records of the Board;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Temecula does determine and order as follows:
Section 1.That the City Manager, Finance Director or other officer or employee of the
City designated in writing by the City Manager to the State Board of Equalization (hereafter
referred to as Board), is hereby appointed to represent the City with Authority to examine sales
and use tax records of the City by the Board pursuant to the contract between the City and the
Board. The information obtained by examination of Board records shall be used only for
purposes related to the collection of City sales and use taxes by the Board pursuant to that
contract.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of July, 1990.
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk
[SEAL]
2/RESOS/83 I 07/02/90
RF_~OLWrlON NO. ~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPOINTING THE CITY MANAGER
follows:
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, California was incorporated on December 1, 1989,
as a general law city of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, the City, by ordinance has adopted a Council/Manager form of government.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of
Temecula does determine and order as follows:
Section 1. David F. Dixon is hereby appointed City Manager of the City of Temecula
to serve at the pleasure of the City Council.
Section 2. The terms and conditions of this appointment shall be as defined in the
letter of agreement dated June 13, 1990, attached hereto as Exhibit A.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of July, 1990.
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk
[SEAL]
2/RESOS/81 1 06/29190
Mayor
Ron Parks
Mayor Pro Tem
Karel F. Linderoans
CITY OF TEMECULA
P.O. Box 3000
Temecula, California 92390
(714) 694-1989
FAX (714) 694-1999
Councilmembers
Patricia H. Birdsall
Peg Moore
J. Sal Mufioz
~TBIT "An
June 13, 1990
Mr. David F. Dixon
11140 Pioneer Ridge Drive
Moreno Valley, California 92388
AGREEMENT/APPOINTMENT AS CITY MANAGER OF TEMECULA
On behalf of the City Council, it is my pleasure to officially offer you the
position of City Manager for the City of Temecula.
It is my understanding that you are already familiar with the duties and
responsibilities of the City Manager, and that you will perform all of the duties
necessary to manage the City and to perform such other duties as the Council
may assign from time to time. The purpose of this letter is to set forth the
additional terms and conditions of employment for your position.
1. Appointment - If you decide to accept this position, your
appointment would become effective July 5, 1990. Your appointment will
terminate on July 5, 1995; however, the City and you anticipate that this
Agreement may be extended from time to time with the consent of the City and
you, and according to such terms as the City and you may agree on.
2. Salary - Your base salary will be set at $103,870.00 per year for
the remainder of the fiscal year 1989-1990, and all of the fiscal year 1990-1991.
Your annual base salary will be payable in installments at the same time as the
other employees of the City. Commencing on July 5, 1990, the City will
contribute to a deferred compensation program of your choice, a sum equal to
seven and 22/100 percent (7.22%) of your base monthly salary.
3. Retirement - The City of Temecula will execute all necessary
agreements to participate in the State of California Public Employees Retirement
System (PERS) and you will be enrolled in that program at the earliest eligible
date. The employee's contribution to PERS would be paid on your behalf by the
City of Temecula.
AGREEMENT/APPOINTMENT AS CITY MANAGER
June 13, 1990
Page No. 2
4. Vacation Leave and Sick Leave - Effective on your first day of
employment with the City, you will be credited with fourteen (14) days of
combined vacation and sick leave. Thereafter, you will accrue combined paid
vacation and sick leave at the rate of 2.334 days per month during the term of
your employment. You will also be eligible to receive any unused vacation leave
and sick leave in cash when leaving the employment of the City. All aspects of
the administration of sick leave and vacation leave will be in accordance with that
which is provided to all executive management employees of the City.
5. Administrative Leave - The City will provide you with ten (10)
days of administrative leave per fiscal year accumulating at a rate of 0.834/day
per month. Any unused leave may be paid out to you in cash semi-annually at
your option.
6. Medical Benefits - The City will enroll you and all of your eligible
dependents in the major medical, health, sickness, accident, and disability income
programs the City provides or makes available to all executive management
employees of the City. In the event that no such plan exists, the City will
provide a similar plan for you, substantially equal to that which is provided to
employees of similar cities in the area.
7. Life Insurance - The City will provide you with term life
insurance from a carrier of the City's choice in accordance with that which is
provided to all executive management employees of the City. In the event that
no such plan exists, the City will provide a similar plan for you substantially
equal to that which is provided to employees of similar cities in the area.
8. Physical Examination - You will submit to a complete physical
examination by a qualified physician selected by the City once a year. The City
will pay for the cost of this physical examination and the City will receive a copy
of all medical reports related to such examination.
AGREEMENT/APPOINTMENT AS CITY MANAGER
June 13, 1990
Page No. 3
9. Professional Development - All normal business expenses,
including attendance at League of California Cities, Independent Cities
Association, California Redevelopment Association, and International City
Managers Association meetings and conferences, as well as local service club
membership, business lunches and dinners, etcetera, will be paid for by the City
and provided for separately in the operating budget of the City Manager's Office.
All other job-related seminars, training sessions, and professional dues and
subscriptions will be paid for by the City and provided for separately in the
operating budget of the City Manager's office.
10. Vehicle - The City will provide you with a City vehicle for your
professional and personal use, not including vacations. The City will pay for all
insurance, gasoline, maintenance, and registration for this vehicle. In addition,
the City will provide for regular replacement of the vehicle consistent with the
depreciation policies of the City.
11. Residency - The City and you have acknowledged the desirability
of your relocation to the City of Temecula. In order to secure your relocation,
the City will provide you with:
(A) Low Interest Loan. The City will make available to you
a housing loan. The loan, a first mortgage, will be up to 705{; of the purchase
price of a home within the City. The interest payments will be paid to the City
on a monthly basis at a rate equivalent to the interest earned by the City
investment portfolio or some other mutually agreed upon index. The rate will be
an adjustable rate, calculated on an annual basis. There will be a cap rate of
three percentage points on the loan which means that the rate will not increase by
more than three percentage points during the life of the loan. The loan will be
due and payable within twelve (12) months of your leaving your employment with
the City or when the home is no longer your primary residence, whichever occurs
first. You will obtain, and keep current, a life insurance policy in the amount of
the loan and the City will be named as the primary beneficiary in order to pay off
the loan in the event of your death. You will be responsible for the cost of this
policy and you will file a copy of the policy with the City.
AGREEMENT/APPOINTMENT AS CITY MANAGER
June 13, 1990
Page No. 4
(B) Moving Expenses. The City will pay your expenses, in an
amount not to exceed $4,000, for packing, moving and Wansporting, storing,
unpacking, and insurance of your personal belongings and those of your family.
12. Performance Evaluation - The Council will review and evaluate
your performance at least once annually in advance of the adoption of the City's
budget. This review and evaluation will be in accordance with specific criteria,
goals, and performance objectives developed jointly by you and the Council.
13. Outside Activities - You will not engage in any outside activities
for compensation without prior approval of the Council.
14. Termination of Appointment; Severance - The City and you will
have the right to terminate this Agreement prior to July 1, 1995 or any extensions
of this Agreement, except that the City will not terminate this Agreement during
the first ninety (90) days following a regular or special municipal election in
which members of the Council are elected. The City may terminate this
Agreement for any reason; however, should you be involuntarily terminated by
the City for any reason other than conviction of an illegal act involving moral
turpitude or personal gain to you, you would be provided with a lump sum cash
payment equal to six (6) months' aggregate salary. Medical benefits and life
insurance will be extended six (6) months after termination, or when replaced by
another employer, whichever first occurs. You may terminate this Agreement for
any reason, provided you first furnish the City with at least thirty (30) days'
advance notice.
15. Indemnification and Bond - The City will defend, save harmless,
and indemnify you against any tort, professional liability claim or demand, or
other legal action, whether groundless or otherwise, arising out of an alleged act
or omission occurring in the performance of your duties as City Manager. This
provision will not apply with respect to any intentional tort or crime which you
may commit or to any punitive damages which may be assessed against you. The
City will bear the full cost of a fidelity bond in the amount of $100,000.00 or any
other bonds which may be required of you in the performance of your duties as
City Manager.
AGREF. MENT/APPOINTMENT AS CITY MANAGER
June 13, 1990
Page No. 5
16. Miscellaneous - Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement,
you will receive all benefits to which executive management employees of the
City are entitled. In addition, the City will not, at any time during the term of
this Agreement, reduce your salary, compensation, or other financial benefits,
except to the degree the City reduces such benefits, or any portion of such
benefits, for all employees of the City.
This offer of employment is made with the approval and authorization of the
Temecula City Council.
Sincerely,
Ronald Parks
Mayor
ACCEPT~r~:
Davm F. DLxon /
RP:sjf
,1990
RESOLIYrlON NO.
A RESOLIYFION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPOINTING THE CITY TREASURER
follows:
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, California was incorporated on December 1, 1989,
as a general law city of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary that a City Treasurer be appointed immediately in order that
the affairs of the City may be properly administered;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVF~D, that the City Council of the City of
Temecula does determine and order as follows:
Section 1. David F. Dixon is hereby appointed City Treasurer of the City of
Temecula to serve at the pleasure of the City Council.
Section 2. The City Treasurer will furnish a corporate surety bond to be approved
by the City Council in such amount as determined by the said City Council, and it shall be
conditioned upon the satisfactory performance of the duties imposed upon the City Treasurer as
herein prescribed. Any premium for such bond shall be a proper charge against the City of
Temecula.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of July, 1990.
AT~F.~T:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk
[SEAL]
21RF. SOSI~O I 06129190
~LUTION NO. ~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPOINTING THE CITY CLERK
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as
follows:
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, California was incorporated on December 1, 1989,
as a general law city of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary that a City Clerk be appointed immediately in order that the
affairs of the City may be properly administered; and
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City Council to appoint David F. Dixon as City
Clerk of the City of Temecula.;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVF~D, that the City Council of the City of
Temecula does determine and order as follows:
Section 1. David F. Dixon is hereby appointed City Clerk of the City of Temecula.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of July, 1990.
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk
[SEAL]
2/RESOS/79 I 07~02/90
ORDINANCE NO. 90-10
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 2.60 TO THE
TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING A
PERSONNEL SYSTEM ENTITLED "PERSONNEL SYSTEM"
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
AS FOLI~WS:
Section 1.
read as follows:
Sections:
Chapter 2.60 is hereby added to the Temecula Municipal Code which shall
Chapter 2.60
2.60.010
2.60.020
2.60.030
2.60.040
2.60.050
2.60.060
2.60.070
2.60.080
2.60.090
2.60.100
2.60.110
2.60.120
2.60. 130
2.60.140
2.60.150
System Adopted.
Definitions.
Administration
Competitive Service
Adoption and Amendment of Policies and Procedures
Appointments.
Probationary Period.
Status of Present Employees.
Demotion, Dismissal, Reduction in Pay, Suspension, Reprimand.
Right of Appeal.
Lay Off and Reemployment.
Political Activity.
Contract for Special Services.
Appropriation of Funds.
Abolishment of Position.
08/27/90
Ordinance No. 90-10
Page 2.
2.60.010. System Adopted.
In order to establish an equitable and uniform procedure for dealing with
personnel matters and to comply with applicable laws relating to the administration of the
personnel process, the following personnel system is hereby adopted.
2.060.020 Definitions.
The terms used to administer the personnel system shall be defined in the
personnel policies.
2.040.030 Administration
The City Manager shall administer the city personnel system and may delegate
any of the powers and duties of such administration to any other officer or employee of the city
or may recommend that such powers and duties be performed under contract as provided in
Section 2.60.130. The City Manager shall:
(a) Act as the appointing authority for the City in accordance with
§2.08.060Co) of the Municipal Code;
(b) Administer all the provisions of this chapter and of the personnel policies
and procedures not specifically reserved to the Council;
(c) Prepare or cause to be prepared personnel policies and procedures and
revisions. The City Attorney shall approve the legality of such policies and procedures and
revisions prior to their submission to their implementation;
(d) Recommend to the City Council personnel policy issues involving financial
commitments such as, but not limited to, pay rates and employee benefit programs;
(e) Prepare or cause to be prepared, a position classification plan, including
class specifications, and revisions of the plan;
(f) Prepare, or cause to be prepared, a plan of compensation, and revisions
thereof, covering all classification rifles for authorized City positions. The plan and any
revisions thereof shall become effective upon approval of the Council;
(g) Have the authority to discipline employees in accordance with this
ordinance and the personnel policies of the City;
(h) Provide for the recruitment and selection of City employees based upon
open or promotional recruitment, and performing any other duty that may be required to
administer the personnel system.
06127/~0
Ordinance No. 90-10
Page 3.
2.60.040. Competitive Scrvice
The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all offices, positions and employments
in the service of the City which offices, positions and employments shall be in the competitive
service, except this chapter shall not apply to:
(a) Members of the City Council;
(b) Members of the appointive boards, commissions and committees;
(c) Persons engaged under contract to supply expert, professional, or technical
service for a definite period of time.
(d) Volunteer personnel, who receive no regular compensation from the City.
(e) City Attorney, City Clerk, City Manager, City Treasurer, Assistant City
Manager and/or Assistant to the City Manager, City Treasurer, City Clerk;
(f) Department Heads and other management positions so designated by the
City Manager.
(g) Emergency employees who are hired to meet the immediate requirements
of an emergency condition such as extraordinary fire, flood or earthquake which threatens life
or property;
(h) Employees, other than those listed elsewhere in this section, who are not
regularly employed in positions. 'Regularly employed in positions' means an employee hired
for an indefinite term into a budgeted position, who is regularly scheduled to work no less than
forty 940) hours per week and has successfully completed the probationary period and been
retained as provided in this ordinance and the personnel policies;
(i) Any position primarily funded under state or federal employment
programs;
(J)
by the City Council to be in the classified service at the time of creation or thereafter.
Any new position hereafter created by the City Council, unless declared
Employees not included in the competitive service under this section shall serve
at the wffi of their appointing authority and may be discharged without cause or right of appeal.
0e/27~0
Ordinance No. 90-10
Page 4.
2.60.050. Adoption and Amendment of Policies
Personnel policies shall be prepared and may be amended from time to time by
the City Manager, subject to the review of the City Council. Any policy matters involving the
commitment of financial resources shall be recommended and must be approved by the City
Council prior to implementation. The policies shall govern the personnel system, including but
not limited to:
(a) Preparation, installation, revision and maintenance of a position
classification plan covering all positions in the competitive service, including employment
standards and qualifications for each class;
(b) Preparation, revision and administration of a plan of compensation directly
correlated with the position classification plan providing a rate or range of pay for each class;
(c) Open and promotional recruitment to fill regular positions;
(d) The making of temporary and emergency appointments;
(e) Establishment of probationary testing periods;
(f) Transfer, promotion, demotion and reinstatement of employees;
(g) Evaluation of the job performance of employees;
(h) Separation of employees from the City service;
(i) Content, maintenance and use of personnel records and forms;
(j) The establishment of any necessary appeal procedures.
2.60.060. Appointments
(a) Appointments to vacant positions in the competitive service shall be made
in accordance with the personnel policies. Appointments and promotions shall be based on merit
and fitness. Examinations shall be used in and conducted to aid in the selection of qualified
employees, and shall consist of selection techniques which will test fairly the qualifications of
candidates such as achievement and aptitude tests and other written tests, personal interviews,
performance tests, physical agility tests, evaluation of daily work performance, work samples
or any combination of these tests. The probation period shall be considered an extension of the
examination process. Physical, medical and psychological tests may be given as part of any
examination.
2/Orde/02 06127/~0
Ordinance No. 90-10
Page 5
(b) In any examination, the City Manager or his designee may include, in
addition to the competitive tests, qualifying test or tests, and set minimum standards therefore.
(e) The appointing authority of employees in the competitive service is the
City Manager. The City Manager may delegate the appointing authority to any other officer or
employee of the City.
2.60.070 Probationary Period
All regular appointments, including promotional appointments, shall be for a
probationary period in accordance with applicable provisions of the personnel policies.
Determination as to satisfactory completion or extension of said period, and/or rejection of an
employee during said period, shall also be consistent with the applicable provisions of the
personnel policies and procedures.
2.60.080 Status of Present Employees.
Any person holding a position in the competitive service who, on the effective
date of this ordinance, shall have served continuously in such position, or in some other position
in the competitive service for a period equal to the probationary period prescribed in the
personnel policies and procedure for his class, shall assume regular status in the competitive
service in the position held on such effective date without qualifying test, and shall thereafter
be subject in all respects to the provisions of this ordinance and the personnel policies and
procedures.
Any other persons holding positions in the competitive service shall be regarded
as probationers who are serving out the balance of their probationary periods as prescribed in
the personnel policies and procedures before obtaining regular status. The probationary period
shall be computed from the date of appointment or employment.
All employees as defined under this section are employed subject to the personnel
system established herein which in accordance with Government Code §53291, supersedes any
other system.
2.60.090 Demotion, Dismissal, Reduction in Pay. Suspension, Reprimand.
The City Manager or any appointing authority shall have the authority to demote,
discharge, reprimand, reduce in pay or suspend any regular employee for cause in accordance
with procedures included in the personnel policies.
2/OrdW02 06127/~0
Ordinance No. 90-10
Page 6
2.60.100 Right of Appeal
Any employee in the competitive service shall have the right to appeal a demotion,
reduction in pay, suspension exceeding five (5) days, or discharge for disciplinary reasons,
except in those instances where the fight of appeal is specifically prohibited by this ordinance
or the policies and procedures adopted thereunder. All appeals shall be processed in accordance
with the requirements and the procedures as set forth in the personnel policies and procedures
adopted pursuant to this ordinance.
2.60.110 Lay Off and Reemployment
Lay off and reemployment actions shall follow the process outlined in the
personnel policies.
2.60.120 Political Activity
The political activities of City employees shall conform to the pertinent provision
of state law and any local provision adopted pursuant to state law.
2.60.130 Contract for Special Services
The City Manager shall consider and make recommendations to the City Council
regarding the extent to which the City should contract for the performance of technical personnel
system. The City Council may contract with any qualified person or public or private agency
for the performance of all or any of the following responsibilities and duties imposed by this
ordinance.
2.60.140 Appropriation of Funds
The City Council shall appropriate such funds as are necessary to carry out the
provisions of this chapter.
2.60.150 Abolishment of Position
Whenever in the judgement of the Council it becomes necessary in the interests
of economy or because the necessity for the position involved no longer exists, the Council may
abolish any position or employment in the classified service and discharge the employee or
officer holding such position or employment."
06127/90
Ordinance No. 90-10
Page 7.
Section 2. SEVERABILITY. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions of
this Ordinance are severable and if for any fearn a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold
any sentence, paragraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect
the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
Section 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty
(30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and
cause the same to be posted in the manner prescribed by law.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOP'rle. D this th day July, 1990.
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks
Mayor
June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk
[SV_ L}
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss.
CITY OF TEMF, CULA )
I, June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify the
foregoing Ordinance No. 90- was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 26th day of June, 1990, and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the ~ day of
,1990, by the following vote, to wit.'
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
0e/27/~0
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
HTG:
DEPT:
7/10/gC TITLE: [at~ieen Wa~ Bt~eet Na~e change
Bngrng.
OEPT HD
CITY ATTY
CITY HGR
RECOMMENDATION:
Continue this matter to the meeting of July 24, 1990.
BACKGROUND:
Staff is still working with the Post Office to determine that the
postal authorities do not have a problem with this name change
within this.zip code area.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No direct fiscal impact anticipated.
JSG
C¥"r'~'
C)~'- .-T ~.I~__..CL.I LA
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
AB#:
HTG:
DEPT:
7/10/9¢ TITLE: Appropriation of Fundo for ~u~ohase
C.H. of city Hanager'o Vehicle
DEPT HD "
CITY HGP, /~
RECOHNEHDATION~
Authorize budget appropriation of $20,500 for the purpose of
purchasing a vehicle for the use of the City Manager from account
no. 001-160-42-5608, said funds to be transferred from Reserve for
Contingency (account no. 001-905).
B&CKGROUND~
City Council approved a bid in the amount of $20,500 for the
purpose of purchasing a vehicle for the use of the City Manager at
the meeting of July 3, 1990. This amount was not included in the
Fiscal Year 1990-1991 budget. Pursuant to Council's direction this
requires a budget transfer which is requested for approval at this
time.
FISCAL IMPACT~
Requirement for budget transfer in the amount of $20,500.
JSG
RESOLUTION NO. 90-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN
CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN
EXHIBIT Ao
follows:
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as
Section 1:
That the following claims and demands as set forth in
Exhibit A have been audited by the City Manager and that
the same are hereby allowed in the amount of $46,562.61.
Section 2:
The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of July, 1990.
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk
[SEAL]
2/Resos/85 07/05/90 6:52p~
m~.~o ~ ~
m~: m
~ ~0 ~ ~
~m m
Z ~ m
ill
m e, ~n
~ "O
~0
I'O I~ 0 0
'n t
m
Z
.-I
0
,-,n
0 0 ~o a~ ~ O~ 0 0 '~ '.4 0
o oo0o 0 o o o o o o o o 0 o o ~ o o ~ o o 0 o o 0 o o o
o oooo ~ o o o o o ~ o ~ o o ~ g g ~ § g o g ~ o ~ o o o
o oooo o o o o o o o o o ~ o o
~ 0~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0
o
0
0
o
to
.1~0
: O~ - 0
0 0
0
',,,4
0
~0
foO
0
0
0
0
0
,%1
0
O~
0
0
0
o
0
to
0
0
o
o
0
0
OX
0 !
'~m
~0
~.x
o
o
o
o~
0
0
0
0
~X
O~
om
m Z
0
oo
~
o
-n
'D
m
m
"U
m
m
g~
,.,.
:1.'!1
~m
z
z
m
m
o
om
-n
o
iD
-.I
~0
o
ooooooo--
000~ O0
000~0
~~ 000
i , ~ z
m
ooooooo~ ~o~
o0oo0oo
o t
C
o~
9o~ o
Z m mm · ~ m mmmm~ m mm · m ~
o ~ -- -~ m ~ ~mmm
~ o nn o o ~nnn~
0
m
z
· .
o 0 o o 0o 0 o 0 o o o o oo o
¢ ¢ 0 O 0
. '.. o 0 o :,
o ~.
I~ 0
~D
0
~Z
o
C
r
-<
0
r
Z
0
0
c
,.i.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
AND FIRE PROTECTION
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
June '29, 1990 ;~\
,' ,It ' 5 ~0~ \\\\2,OWESTSANJACINTOAVENUE
~ ~::' ~U~- - ~.~B 1 FERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370
'. ~ ~ ~,~~ TELEPHONE: (714) 657.3183
Dear Property Owner;
Recently you received a letter changing the date of the City Council
meeting. The City Council meeting of June 26, 1990 has been continued
to July 10, 1990 at 7:00 P.M. due to a technical error. Because of
the continuation of the meeting we will not be starting our weed abate-
ment until July 11, 1990.
If your property has already been cleared, please disregard this notice.
We appreciate your cooperation in this matter.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, contact Cheryl Cervantes
or Paul Smith at Fire Prevention at (714) 275-4788.
Sincerely
GLEN J. NEWMAN
County Fire Chief
By: Paul Smith
Fire Captain Specialist
Notice of Public Hearing,
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
43172 Busin~ Park Drive
Temecula, California 92390
A PUBLIC ItEARING has been scheduled before the CITY COUNCIL to consider the
matter(s) described below.
The City Council of the City of Temecula i~_~_~'sed Resolution No. 90-55
declaring that noxious or dangerous weeds growing upon or in front
of property specified in said resolution constitute a public nuisance
which must be abated by the removal of said noxious or dangerous
weeds. Otherwise they will be removed and the nuisance will be
abated by the city authorities, in which case the cost of such removal
shall be assessed upon the lots and lands from which or in front of
which such weeds are removed and such cost will constitute a lien
upon such lots or lands until paid. Reference is hereby made to said
resolution for further particulars.
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before the hearing(s) or may
appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of
hearing. If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those
issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing(s). The
proposed project application(s) may be viewed at the public information counter, Temecula City
Hall, 43172 Business Park Drive, Monday through Friday from 9:00 AM until 4:00 PM.
Questions concerning the project(s) may be addressed to Samuel Reed, City of Temecula
Planning Department, (714) 694-1989.
The time, place and date of the hearing(s) are as follows:
PLACE OF HEARING:
DATE OF HEARING:
TIME OF HEARING:
Temecu!a Community Center
28816 Pujol Street
Temecula
Tuesday. July !0, 1990
7:00 PM
AGENDA REPORT
AB#: it TITLE: DEPT
HTG: ~,;/i)-qo TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 21383 CiTY
DEPT:~,,~,~ SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME CiTY HGR
Recommendation
That the City Council SET FOR HEARING the second extension of time request
for Tentative Parcel Map No. 21383 on July 2q, 1990.
Prolect Information
Request Filed:
Case No.:
Applicant:
Representative:
Proposal:
Location:
Zoning:
Surrounding Zoning:
Surrounding
Land Uses:
Project
Statistics:
County Planning, February 23, 1990
Tentative Parcel Map No. 21383, second application for
a one year time extension.
Rancho Core Associates No. 1
NBS/Lowry
Second extension of time request for Tentative Parcel
Map No. 21383, 130 industrial lot subdivision on 16q
acres.
Northwest corner of the intersection of Winchester and
Diaz Roads.
M-SC
North:
South:
East:
West:
M-SC '*'
M-SC
R-R, M-SC
R-A-20
North: Vacant
South: Industrial Park
East: Murrleta Creek
West: Hillside/Vacant
Tentative Parcel Map for 130 industrial lots on 16q
acres. The minimum proposed lot size is one (1) gross
acre.
Project B~ck.~round
This project was originally approved by the Riverside County Board of
Supervisors on March 2q, 1987. The first extension of time was applied for on
March 16, 1989 and was approved on October 2~, 1989.
The second extension of time was applied for at the Riverside County Planning
Department on February 23, 1990. The case was then transferred to the City of
Temecula with a RECEIVE and FILE recommendation.
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TZTLE:
FINAL TRACT MAP 2330~
DEPT HD ~
CZTY ATTY
CZTY HGR/'~¢,~
RAco.,mendation
That the City Council CONSIDER the results of the Traffic and Drainage study
authorized on June 15, 1990, APPROVE the findings contained in the Staff Report
and SET additional Conditions of Approval for the Tract 23304, APPROVE an
agreement for storm drain easements across the tract, and APPROVE Tract 23304,
based upon the attached revised Conditions of Approval.
Discussion
Tentative Tract 23304 was originally submitted to the County of Riverside
Planning Department on December 29, 1987, and was approved by the Board of
Supervisors on May 10. 1988,
The tentative map was approved as a condominium project, subject to the
provisions of Section 18,5 (Planned Residential Developments) of Ordinance No,
3q8 and Section 5,4 of Ordinance No, 460 (Vesting Tentative Maps). The
applicant, however, has indicated the project will not be constructed as
condominiums. but rather as apartments, The applicant is the I DM Corporation,
The project site lies in an area of gently rolling terrain which is undergoing
extremely rapid urbanization. An apartment project I Woodcreek Apartments) is
constructed and occupied to the west. A single family development and linear
three-acre park has been developed to the east. One older residential structure
is within sight of the project to the north. A horse farm exists to the south
across Rancho California Road, but is surrounded by single family residential
development.
Rancho California Road is a major east/west artery in the City. This project lies
on the north side of Rancho California Road and has three access points from that
road. A traffic study was not performed for the project when the project was
originally approved by the County of Riverside. Due to previous testimony on
this tract at-previous Council meetings, on June 15, 1990 the City Council
authorized Willdan Associates to investigate potential hydrology and traffic issues
related to this tract.
A Benefit District (reimbursement district) has been approved by the City to
engineer and construct street improvements on Rancho California Road between
Via Los Colinas and the eastern boundary of the project. The applicant is
conditioned to design and construct street and drainage improvements as part of
this project and is not a part of the benefit district. The Project Engineer,
Robert Bein, William Frost F~ Associates, has identified a severe drainage
deficiency in the area encompassed by the Benefit District, which creates
hazardous sump conditions on Rancho California Road during the 100 year storm.
The street/project design by the applicant has not addressed this condition. At
this time the exact structures necessary to alleviate the drainage problem have
not been designed. However, the applicant is willing to record an agreement with
the City for the purpose of establishing said easements at such time as they are
needed. The agreement is attached for Council consideration.
The traffic issues have been addressed in an attached report by Willdan
Associates and are categorized as follows:
2.
3.
Left turn movements into the project
Left Turn movements out of the project
Driveway access points on Rancho California Road
Deposit of funds in a Road Benefit Fund.
The following findings were made in the Traffic Study:
1. Pre-project traffic volumes already have a significant impact on Rancho
California Road.
2. Without significant improvements to Rancho California Road post-
project traffic will operate at level of service '~E%r worse.
3. The anticipated traffic volumes generated by the proposed development
amount to approximately 7% of the total traffic volume at the intersection
of Moraga Road and Rancho California Road during the P.M. peak period.
Based on the findings, the following additional conditions of approval are needed
to approve the Project:
A. Off Site improvements and Conditions
1. The applicant shall pay $4,500.00 toward the cost of striping and
signing Rancho California Road between Moraga Road and Cosmic Drive.
The amount represents the cost of striping and signing one eastbound
through lane, two westbound through lanes, and one continuous left turn
lane.
2. No building occupancy shall be issued to the applicant prior to the
construction of Rancho California Road to its standard half width from
Moraga Road to Cosmic Drive.
3. At the time that a Certificate of Occupancy is issued, the applicant is
required to deposit an amount of $10,000.00 to a newly approved City
~Road Benefit Fund. The Development Impact Fee Study currently being
prepared by Willdan Associates will determine an equitable fair share of the
developer's cost of improving regional traffic facilities based on the
number of vehicles which will be generated by the project.
4. Road Department Condition No. 5 shall be modified to read: ~'PRIOR to
issuance of Building Permits, Rancho California Road shall be improved
with concrete curb and gutter located 43 feet from centerline and match up
asphalt concrete paving; reconstruction or resurfacing of existing paving
as determined by the Road Commissioner within a 55 foot half width
dedicated right of way in accordance with County Standard No. 100."
5. Prior to issuance of building permits, a raised median island with left
turn pockets will be constructed on Rancho California Road in accordance
with County Standard 100 and Additional Condition No. 1.
B. On Site Improvements and Conditions
1. The center driveway will provide the main access to the development.
Left turn movements will be allowed only at this driveway in and out of the
development to Rancho California Road.
2. The curb radii of the center driveway shall be increased to 35 feet to
accommodate the required turning radius for a fire truck.
3. The width of the center driveway shall be increased to 24 feet to
accommodate two twelve foot lanes.
4. The center driveway should be free of any control such as gates or
fences.
Fiscal Impact
The developer has posted the following bonds for the project:
Faithful Performance Material ~; Labor
Improvements Security Security
Streets and Drainage 237,500 233,750
Flood Control 230,000 ~ 467,500)
Water 136,500 68,250
Sewer 59,000 29,500
663,000 331,500
The following fees have been paid by the developer for this project:
Fee
Signal Mitigation
Drainage Fee
Inspection
*Development Impact
Amount
48,160.00
21,053.88
32,625.00
*Paid at issuance of building permits.
Staff recommends that the City Council consider the results of the Traffic and
Drainage Study authorized on June 15, 1990, set additional Conditions of
Approval for Tract 23304, approve an agreement for storm drain easements across
the tract, and APPROVE Tract 23304, based upon the attached Conditions of
Approval as modified.
TRAFFIC ENGINEERS REPORT
RANCHO VALANCIA DEVELOPMENT
TRACT i= 23301~
The City has directed the staff to conduct a traffic impact study for Rancho
Valancia Development. The City Staff completed the study based on: the
proposed site plan of the proposed development. projected traffic growth in the
area for the year 1991. expected completion date of the project. and planned and
to be completed developments by 1991. These three items will have a direct
impact on the traffic operation and level of service in the Rancho California Road
Corridor from 1-15 to Moraga Road.
The study results show that pre-project traffic volumes already have a
significant impact on the Rancho California Road traffic operation. Without
significant improvements to Rancho California Road, post-project traffic will
operate at a level of service "E" or worse. The anticipated traffic volumes
generated by the proposed development amount to approximately 7% of the total
traffic volume at the intersection of Moraga Road and Rancho California Road
during the P.M. peak period.
Therefore, based on the result of the traffic impact study, the following on-site
and off-site improvements are recommended for Rancho Valanchia Development:
A. Off Site Improvements and Conditions
1. the applicant shall improve Rancho California Road to q3 feet of paved
roadway width on a 55 feet of right of way measures from the centerline of
existing roadway. The applicant shall provide any widening, as approved by the
City Engineer, at no cost to the City or any other government agency.
2. The applicant shall pay $~,500.00 toward the cost of striping and
signing Rancho California Road between Moraga Road and Cosmic Drive. The
amount represents the cost of striping and signing one eastbound through lane,
two westbound through lanes, and one continuous left turn lane.
3. No building occupancy shall be issued to the applicant prior to the
construction of Rancho California Road to its standard full width from Moraga
Road to Cosmic Drive.
t~. If a fair and equitable share of the developer's cost of transportation
improvements has not been determined at the time a Certificate of Occupancy is
needed, the developer shall be required to deposit $10,000.00 into a City
established Road Benefit Fund. The developer is also required to sign an
agreement with the City to either pay an amount or receive a refund equal to the
difference between his estimated fair share and the amount of deposit with the
City.
B. On Site Improvements and Conditions
1, The center driveway will provide the main access to the development.
Left turn movements will be allowed only at this driveway in and out of the
development to Rancho California Road.
2. The curb radii of the center driveway shall be increased to 35 feet to
accommodate the required turning radius for a fire truck.
3. The width of the center driveway shall be increased to 2q feet each way
to accommodate two twelve foot lanes.
t~. The center driveway should be free of any control such as gates or
fences.
'l
_J
.J
.J
J
J
J'LL-B3-'9~ TUE 13:44 ID: [DM CO!~[!~TION TEL N0:21:~.-498-9312 1:I'72~ 1:~2 .......
,'~'
F~H~NT AG3~H~NT
CR~i~This Ea.me~u. nt Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into ~his
day of ~o\~ , 1990, by and between ~ corporation, a
fo~a Gumption (uI~"), and the C~ty of T~eoula, a
~n~olpal co~a~lon, ~a~ ~ro~ 1es cl~y co~oll
W~ terence to the followlnq~
A. I~( is the ~wner of certain real proper~y commonly
knowA aS ~lubvalencia, 30100 Rancho California Road, in the city
Of Tomscala, Riverside County, California, am nero particularly
dosorLbed on the attached Exhibit & ("~he propor~yH).
Propercy in the form of an easement ("the Easement") for the
purpose of access to and constructing, operating and maintaining
and ed~acont to the Proper~,
the terms and conditions set forth ~n th~s Agreement.
NOW, T~REFOR~, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. ~r'2~ OT tnna~en~. For valuable consideration0
I~Nhero~y grants ~o'city an Easemen~ as shown on ~he attached
~ratn ~ar or on ~e western bou~da~ O~ ~e ~oper~y, a new le-
Arich 8~o~dra~n ~o ~ l~a~od appr~lmatel~ ~rallol ~o the
oenter ll~ of ~e ~o~y, and for operation and aaint~ce
dams p~Aor ~o co, enGine o~ const~ction on such wate~ drai~ge
~aoil~es. ~e per,los agree ~ fu~her define and opeo~fy ~o
boundaries of ~he Easement by amending ~hts Aqree~en2 prior to
the oc~en~ma~t ~£ oozetruer[on as set forth herein.
~. Access to PrOperty. IDMwlll allow assess to City
~or the naln~enance of wa~er drainage facill~os a2 all
pr_ov~ded thg. t City shall provtd~ at least thirty (30) days prior
written notice to II~4 of any naintenanca which is not due
TEL NO: 21~-4519-8:312
ex:Letez~ o£ an im~z-qsnc=¥ s:Ltuatd-ono Z~ I~1 no~ co~l~ any
lap~~nts willa the easeae~t vhich would im~de ~e
o~at~ ~lnte~e or repair o~ ~e va~a~ a~$~l p~i~d
hov~er, that this l~ttatton ~11 not a~ly ~o the oo~lt~ctton
of la~api~.
3, encroq~Bjll~. For valuable consideratton~ City
agrees ~o alloy lD~4~o-~ro&oh upon thl Easement in connlc~cn_
With itl centtraction of improveneats, including but not l~uitea
to utilitiaa, on the Property.
4. Copo2ru~cion, Reoa4r An~ Uointenanceo City Ghal!
be responsible £oz any and all surface'improvement restoration
necoseaL~y as a rmsult of any oonstruati0n, ol~ration or
maintenance o£ its vater drainage facilities, including but not
limited to asphalt, concrete and landscaping restoration, Vltioh
is debased due to avatar Bain break or any City repair,
mainteniJ~e, operation, inspection or o~har activity. Tn
addition, City shall not under~ake any construc~ion, repair or
maintenance activities vhich will prevent any of ZDH'S tenants
fram entering, using or leaving ~e Property and any of the
aEmrlment units located therein.
S. xn~J~iA47r~-nt. This ins~rument contains the
entire Agreanan~ between the par~ies relating to the rights
herein granted and the obligations herein assumed. Any oral
~epresentations or uodlf£catione concerning ~hia Agraanent shall
not be o£fe~ttvo unless made in writing and executed by ~Ae
parties hereto.
of ~hie Agreement, the prevailing par~¥ shall be antitied to ~ts
reasonable attorney's ~oes and costs.
2
ZDI( OORI~I~ZON,
a CalL£ornia aorpoz~t~on
~ CITY OF TEH~CUI~
& mm:~e:ipal corporatLon
$LL-~3-'9~ TUE 't3:46 ID: [DI'I CORPORRTION TEL NO.'21:.'.'.~491~-EG~.2 t1'7"2~ ~
TEl. NO: 21:3'-49~--E1:~12
ZIMi CX)BJ'O/L1LT'3:O~
TiT,,1EC~oIrXIsB TPJLM&liX BBXO~
July 3, !ggo
Doug Stewart
1~:0o
'~313m (m)
CITY OF TEMECULA
t
(71#J 69q- 1999
Bill ~hlan/Project MBniger
Mary _Ann DunKInlofi ! Slcret~-v
'ff~[ OOR~.OI~IuJ:O~I / Amef't, menta .Cor, poemlo~
mhouXd you enoountez a~,-,&t'~msLon defauXt o:~ rooe~ve al1 pages; please
~u~ ~ry Ann Ounkin~ at ~13/40B-OXdX, ext. 11~ ·
~.obe~t ~l~eii1, Willia= CFrost ~ c~ssociat=s
PLANNERS&SURVEYORS .~j"~ r-- ~!! -'~
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, ~.,
]; JUN. 6 1990
':
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL _ ~1 ~":~.~£-
Rich Engineering Co.
TO:
3050 Chicago Ave., Suite 100
Riverside, CA 92507
A1-FN: Mike Ratican
DATE
RBF JOB NO.
DESCRIPTION
June 6, 1990
24255
Rancho California Road
Benefit District
WE ARE FORWARDING: ~ BY MAIL [] BY MESSENGER [] BY BLUEPRINTER
NO. OF COPIES
DESCRIPTION
Easement Plan For Club Valencia
STATUS:
[] PRELIMINARY
[] REVISED
[] APPROVED-
[] RELEASED
[] REVIEWED
SENT FOR YOUR:
[] APPROVAL
[] SIGNATURE
X]~ USE
[] FILE
X]I INFORMATION
PLEASE NOTE:
[] REVISIONS
[] ADDITIONS
[] DELETIONS
[] CORRECTIONS
[] NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
COPIES TO:
Doug Stewart - City of Temecula
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FRQST & ASSOCIATES
Richard Heffner / ~ /jv
Project Engineer
Temecula Office
m
28765 SINGLE OAK DRIVE · SUITE 250 ° RANCHO CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA 92390 · (714) 676-8042 · FAX (714) 676-7240
OFFICES IN IRVINE · NEWPORT BEACH · PALM DESERT' SAN DIEGO
OFFICE OF THE ROAD COMMISSIONER AND COUNTY SURVEYOR
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
Ivan F. Termant Acting
Road Commissioner
County Administrative Center
Mailing Address: PO Box 1090
Riverside, CA 92502
Telephone (714) 787-6554
May 10, 1990
SUBMITTAL TO FRANK ALESHIRE, CITY NC~NAGEROF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
FROM: Acting City Engineer for the City of Temecula
SUBJECT: Tract Map 23304
in the First Supervisorial District
SPECIFIC REQUEST:
Pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act and local ordinance it
is REQUESTED that the City Council approve said map.
All required certificates and documents have been filed and
the map is ready for recordation.
IFT:GAS:MSB:rdb
Acting City Engineer
The City of Temecula
Re: Tract 23304
2 May 10, 1990
The developer wishes to enter into the following agreements to
cover the improvements within this subdivision for:
IMPROVEMENT OF STREETS (Bond No. 4349)
WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (Water to be supplied by Rancho
California Water District) (Bond No. 4349)
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM (Service to be provided by Eastern
Municipal Water District) (Bond No. 4349)
SETTING OF LOT STAKES AND SUBDIVISION MONUMENTS (Bond No.
4351)
MATERIALS AND LABOR (Bond No. 4349) in the amount of
$26,500 is also attached.
SECURING TAXES, (Bond No. 4350)
The above referenced bonds are issued by Pacific States
Casualty Company.
This map complies in all respects with the provisions of Division
2 of Title 7 of the Government Code and applicable local
ordinances.
The dedications made on said map are for:
Abutters rights of access along Rancho California Road
is dedicated to public use and as part of the City
maintained road system.
Lot "A" is dedicated to public use for the construction
and maintenance of flood control facilities.
Public utility easements and drainage easements are
dedicated to public use.
OFFICE OF ROAD COMMISSIONER & COUNTY SURVEYOR
l~m E Tenrant
~ so~ CO~mmS~ONER ~. ¢o~r~ s~mv~YoR
April 19, 1990
COUNTY ADMINIST~AT~VE CENTER
MAILING ADDRF~:
!~O. BOX 1090
RIVEI~!DF., CALII:ORNtA 92502
(714) 275-688O
TO'
FROM:
Re:
County Counsel
County Surveyor and Road Commissioner
Subdivisions
Tract No 23304
The following are hereby submitted to your office for approval as
to form:
Agreements Bond No. Amount
Streets XXX 4349 $237,500
Water XXX 4349 $136,500
Sewer XXX 4349 $ 59,000
Monuments XXX 4351 . $ 1,596
Material and Labor 4349 $216,500
Othe~ - Taxes 4350 $ 95,700
The amounts in the agreements and bonds have been checked by this
office and are correct as shown above.
Developer for this tract:
IDM Apartments Corporation
5150 E. Pacific Coast Highway
Long Beach, CA 90804
Bonding Company:
Pacific States Casualty Co.
4021 Rosewood Ave., 3rd Floor
Glendale, CA 90004-2932
By:
PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE WHEN READY
Extension - 56751
Attacl~ments
I NTE FI- D I PA FITM E NTAL. I. BTTE FI
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
SURVEY DEPARTMENT
Original and DPH for PH~ No. ~O ~/ were
submitted to the Survey Dept. on
All clearances required by the Survey Department have
been completed.
Clear~/~'is still required from: /~
L~J Health Dept. ~1ood Control
DATE
TO:
May i0, 1988
Surveyor
Road
Building & Safety
Flood Control
Heal th
Fi re Protection
::iiVE::DiDE county
PL, nnin DEPA:IClltEnc
JUN2 0t9[18 -'"
RIVERSIDE COUNTY ROAD
~EmART~ENT TENTATIVE TRACT/PARCEE MAP NO.2330A
REGIONAL TEAM NO. I
The Riverside County F-~ Planning Director/n~]Board of Supervisors has taken the following
action on the above referenced tentative map:
XX APPROVED tentative map subject to the attached conditions (no waiver request submitted)
DENIED tentative map based on the attached findings.
APPROVED tentative map subject to attached conditions and DENIED request for waiver
of the final map.
APPROVED tentative map and APPROVED request for waiver of the final map.
APPROVED
Extenslonmf Time to
all previously ap~r6ied,',conditions.
"~
APPROVED ';t,., Extension/of-Time-to ...... ~~ , .,
all previously app~ve~.~ond~ti~n~: and. the attached ~d,~t~"~] conditions.
DENIED Extension of
APPROVED
__ APP~VED H~no~ Change to r~k~.~d"6bi~al]y appmved conditions as shown (attached).
APPROVED HSno~ Change to revise originally approved mp (attached).
subject to
subject to
,., DENIED request for Minor Change.
APPROVED Minor Change to waive the final map.
RJM: sc
Very truly yours,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Roger S. Streeter, Planning Director
Richard .~MacHott - Supervising Planner
SURVEYOR - WHITE
(~.eV. 10183)
ROAD - BLUE
HEALTH - PINK
BUILDING & SAFETY - GREEN
FIRE PROTECTION - GOLDENROD
FLOOD - CANARY
4080 LEMON STREET, 9'r" FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787'6181
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
~ _ PINKS~
SUBMITTAL TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FROM: THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBMr!TALDATE:
SUBJECT: TRACT NO. 23304 - The Phair Company - F'irst Supervisorial
District - Rancho California Area - 20.95 Acres - 344 Units - Schedule A -
R-3 Zoning
RECOMMENDEDMOTION:
GN: sc
4/14/88
RECEIVE AND FILE the above mentioned case acted on by the Planning
Commission on April 13, 19B8.
THE PLANNING COI~ISSION:
ADOPTED the Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 32327
based on the findings incorporated in the environmental assessment
and the conclusion that the proposed project will not have a significant
effect on the environment; and
APPROVED TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23304 subject to the attached conditions
and based on the findings and conclusions incorporated in the Planning
Conmission minutes dated April 13, lg88.'
Ro~er S. Str/~et~rF PlanniyDire~'r ~
Prey. Agn. re/. Depts. Comments Dist. AGENDA NO.
R~ERSIDE COUNTY PLARNII~ COlII4I$SION RINUTES
APRIL 13, 1988
(JIGERDA ITEH4-1 - REEL 980 - SIDE 1 - 1393-1544)
VESTING TRACTRAP23304 -EA32327 -ThePhatrcomoany-Rancho California
A~ea -Ftrst Supo~vtsort&l Dtstrtct- ~orth of Rancho Caltforota Rd, east of
I~raoa IM- 344Untt condoMntuml)roJect on 20.95t acres - R-3 Zone. Sched A
Tim beartrig ds opened at 11:40 a.~ end closed at 11:64 a,u.
STAFF REC~IkI~MTION: Moptfon of tbenegattve declaration for EA32327 and
epprovt] of Vesting Tentative Tract 23304 subject to the proposed conditions.
The trect mp ms a resubmttt,1 of a previously approved tract, and had been
submtttod tn order to g~tn vesttag stJtus. Staff felt the proposal ~ould be
compatible vtth the surrounding area, vhtch tncluded stngle famtly and
· ulttple flatly residences, offtces, schnols, and churches. ~r. Nee1 noted
that the ftsca~ tmpact report had Indicated the project you, d have a negattve
t~poct on the County of S91,369 durtng butld out and S85,648 &nnua~ly there-
Ifter, based one selltag prtce of S58,571 per untt.
Rodney Heye~s, representing the applicant, accepted the conditions as
presonted.
ComtsstonerPurvtance vented to knov boy the County vould be cmpensated for
the negattve ftscal tmpicts under the vesttag trect mp procedure. fir. K1otz
advtsed there mre no spectal conditions applicable only to vesting tentative
mps. The Board ms currently considering the Countyvide ~eveloment ~tttga-
tton Fees, but no dectston had been mde as yet. ~hen Commissioner Pu~vtance
asked about the posstble use of general ob]tgatton bonds, Hr. K1otz advtsed
this optton had been considered by the Admlntstratton 0fftce tn thetr
recmmended fee propose~. They had trted to fatfly apportion the cost of new
captt41 facilities betveen extsttng and nay residents.
CoawlsstonerOonahoe asked ~hether these fees ~ou3d app3y to approved vesttag
tentattvemps. ~. Klotz could not answer thts question, slnce the ftna~
structure of thts program had not as yet been datemined. Conntsstoner
Beadllng felt the Commission needed general guidelines before discussing
financial tmpacts, because every pro~ect could not posstbly pay for ttself.
The Comtsston needed tnfomitlon on a ragtone1 bests, tn order to balance
postttve end negattve projects. She dtd ~ot thtnk tt ms posstble to
deteredna the full financial Impict Mthout thts type of raglone1 tnfon~tton.
Nr. K1otz advtsed thts ms port of the process for the proposed Countyvide
fees. is port of the proposal ms use an everaging
Mdllng felt thts should be done ~ process. C~mtsstoner
a ragtonal b&sts rather than Countyvide&
she ms particularly concerned about ireas Vhtch Mght Incorporate as thts
could destro~ the billace tn that plrttcul&r ragton. Hr. Streeter agreed, and
Idvtsed the Planntng Department ms trytag to prepire the first annual grovth
report ~or the Board. He ~elt tt ms very necessary to look it the overa~
ptcture, end questioned the v&lue of these Individual ftscal tmpact report
I1though he felt they vere needed it thts ttme.
Cm~Isstoner aresson asked vhether a~y esttmted ftgures vere available
regarding the vestt~ mp f~s for ~ts ty~ of p~J~t. ~r. K1o~ advtsed
~e p~posK ~se fee for t~ ws~ ~ton of ~e ~unty mS approxtmtely
15
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING CQI~IISSIOfi #INIJTES
APRIL 13, 1988
600 Nr untt, Ilthoegh he dtd knov vhether there weuld be I~y reduction
r &partmats or condmtnlum. ~ Conntsstoner Beadllng's
concerns by &dvtsteg that to a ver~ 1tatted extent, separating the eastern
frmn the western pert1.· of the County. there had been an art·apt to segregate
cepttal Ceciltries needs.
Comtsslmer aresson asked vhether any all,vance had been male for vesttag mp
fees Wen preparing the fiscal analysts report. ~eff Phitr. the applicant,
Idvtsnd theY dtd not knw the mount of the fee but were vtllfnq to accept
mount estab31shed. The cu~nt proposll wes $2600 per untt. vhtch weuld take
the fee approxtmtely $900,000 for thts j~o:Ject. ~. Phetr could not edvtse
uhether or not thts mount had been tncluded tn the ftscll analysts, as they
had Just racetveal thetr ~py thlt morntnq ind hid not hid in opportunity to
revtev tt. They were pa)~ng ipproxt~ately S1.4 ~tllton tn dtrect fees for
wetor, sewer, roads, etc.
The hearJng wes closed it 11:54 I.m.
Comdsstoner Bresson advtsed the project slte yes located tn a fist grwtnq
Irel. and several tndustrtll/cmmerctal centers vere hatrig proposed v~tch
Mould have a beneficial effect on the economy. Zn hts optnton. the overall
area had to be considered vhen reviewing reside·till propos&Is.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Vesttng Tentative Tract HaD 23304 ts a request to
develop 20.95 acres is · one lot, 344 untt statutory condo~Intu~ project; thts
vesttrig mp ls a resubmtttal of Tract 21608 (approved hy the Board of Super-
vtsors October 28, 1986); the project stte ts currently vacant; surrounding
lind uses tnclude stngle flmtly Ind multtple family residences, offlces,
schools. and churches; the project stte ts zoned R-3; surrounding zentn9
tncludes numerous residential zones. A-2-20 Ind C-l/C-P; the project stte ts
located vtthtn the Rancho California Subarea of the Southwst Territory Land
Use Planntng Area; Ganifil Plan poltctes call for Category I and II develop-
ment; · ftsc&l analysts ,as prepared for thts project and had been revtewd by
the Administrative Office; Ind environmental concerns tncluded ~ount Palomar.
biological, and nots· tmpacts. The proposed project ts consistent vtth the
Comprehensive General Plln; compatible Mth area development; and
environmental ceecerns cln be adequately iddressed. The proposed project wtll
aot have a significant effect on the envtromeent.
PlOTION: Upon not1.· by Commlsstoner Bresson, seconded by Co~qtsstoner
Beadltng and duly carried. the Comtsston Idoptod the nagarty· decllrltton for
EA 32327 and approved Vesttag Tentlttve Hap 23304 subject to the proposed
conditions, based on the above ftndtngs and conclusions and the recomenda-
tlons of stiff.
16
· RIVL~t$IDE COONTV PLA~ING C~I$$I0~ 8INUT~$
APRIL 13, 1988
AYES: Cmntsstonev's Bresson, SMth, Beldltng and Oonahoe
Conntsstone~' Perv~ance
(Could not support a tract map Vlth · large
negattve ftscal t~pact untt1 tnfo~tton ~s
available ~ s~ a ~la~e ~ a ~t~al
~sts)
ABSENT: None
17
Zonlng Area: Rancho California
Supervtsortal District: Flrst
£. A. Number: 32327
Regtonal Team No. !
VEST[lIB TE]ITATIVE TK4C[ Z3304
Planntng Commission: 4-13-88
Agenda Item No.: 4-1
Applicant:
Engineer:
Location:
5. Extsttng Zontng:
6. Surrounding Zoning:
7. Existtrig Land Use:
8. Surrounding Land Uses:
Comprehensive General Plan
Elements:
10. Land Dtvtston Data:
11. Agency Recommendations:
12. Letters:
13. Sphere of Influence:
The Phatr Company
The Phatr Company
344 unit condominium project
Northerly of Rancho California Road and
easterly of Moraga Road
R-3
Variety of residential zones, A-2-20 and
C-1/C-P
Vacant
Single family residential, multiple
family residential, a school, churches
and a horse faro
Land Use: Category I
Density: 8 - 20 dwelling units per
acre
Total Acreage: 20.95
Total Units: 344
DU Per Acre: 16.42
See letter dated:
Road: 2-18-88
Health: 2-26-88
Flood: 2-26-88
Fire: 3-01-88
Opposing/Supporting: None received
Not within a city sphere
NIALYSIS:
JProJectl)escrtptton Background
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23304 ts a request to develop 20.95 acres as a one
lot, 344 unit statutory condominium project in the Rancho California area.
This tract is a re-submittal of an already approved tract (Tract 21608, Board
o[ Supervisors approved 10-28-86) in order to gain vesting status. The project
site is located on the north side of Rancho california Road, Just to the east
of Moraga Road.
IIESTI11G TENTATIVE 111ACT ~3304
Staff Report
The project stte ls currontly vacant. Sur?oundtng land uses tnclude &~tments
to the ~est and stngle f~ly homes to the north, east, and south. A school
and church are 1oc&ted along tlorega Road, vtth a farm/horse tretntng f&ctllty
locitad across Rincho California Road to the south.
Zoning on the subject slta ts R-3. Zontng tn the vtctntty tncludes numerous
residential zones, A-Z-ZO end C-1/C:-P.
Mtm Consideratlas
The proposed project has been destgned tn accordance wtth the planned
residential development standards of 0rdtnance 348 and all other pertinent
standards of 0rdtnances 348 and 460. The applicant w~11 be providing three
floor plans varytrig tn stze from 750 to 1,014 square feet. Proposed colors.
Mterlals end architecture reflect a '#edtterreneann them.
Due ~o the tracts vesttrig status, the following addlttonal plans were sutmttted
for revte~f tn compliance wtth Ordinance 460:
-Fenctng Plan
- Landscape and Xrrlgatton Plans
-Dretnage Plan
- Comprehensive Stte and Gradtrig Plan
These plans were found to be adequate and wtll be Implemented through the
conditions of approval.
Pro~ect Conststency/Compatlbtl tt~
The pro~ect stte ls located wtthtn the Pancho C4ltfornta subarea of the
Southwest Terrttor~ Land Use Planntng Area. Poltctes call for Category ! and
3! lind uses. The project as proposed vtll have a denstt~ of 16.42 dwelltng
untts per acre, ,htch fills tnto the 8-20 dwelltrig untt range allowed wtthtn
Categor~ Z. The project v tll provtde a product different from the majority of
multt-f~tl~ residences tn the area. _Recreational facilities are proposed as a
part of thts project, Including three tannts courts a~d two swtmmtng pools.
The proposed project ts considered consistent wtth the Comprehensive General
Plan and ts compatible wtth development tn the area.
Ftsral JM~l~sts
Unde~ current ~ollcy regarding processing of vesttrig tentative mps, a fiscal
Inal~sts ts requtred to be sulxnttted to the Coun~ for revtew. A fiscal
&nalysts has been prepared for thts project and ts now currently hatrig raytawed
e the Administrative 0fftce. Conclusions for thts raytaw wtll be available by
Plenntng Con~tsston heartrig date.
Staff kport
Envt roamentel ~l~sis
The ¶ntttal study of Envtronmntal Assessment No. 32327 Indicated that the
Ject bed the potential for biological resources, that tt could lapact ~unt
omar 0bservator~ operations and that the subject stte could be impacted by
htghulynotse.
A biological report ms praparad for the project stte (County Biological Report
No. 180). The only significant biological resource found on stte ms a
bur~Mtng owl and 1rs burrow. 141ttgatton wtll entatl relocating the owl
the stte prtor to dtng. The conditions of approval ~tll tnsure thts
mitigation ts adhered ~a.
Impacts to Hount Palomar wtll be mitigated by the requirement to use low
pressure sodium lighting. Nots, impacts wtll be mitigated through the
preparation of an acoustical study prtor to butldtng por~tts, wtth any
reconunendattons design.el tnto the construction of the buildings.
FINDINGS:
1. Vesttrig Tentative Tract NO. 23304 ts a request to develop 20.96 acres as a
one lot, 344 unit statutory condominium project.
2. This vesting map ts a re-submittal of already approved Tract No. 21608.
(Board of Supervisors approved 10-28-86)
The pro~ect slte is currently vacant. Surrounding land uses include:
single family, multi-family, offices, schools and churches.
The pro~ect site ts zoned R-3. Surrounding zoning includes numerous
residential zones, A-2-20 and C-1/C-P.
5. The pro~ect site ts located vlthtn the Rancho California Subarea of the
Southwest Terrtto~ Land Use Planning Area.
6. General Plan policies call for Category ! and II development.
7. A ftscal analysis was prepared for this project and ts now being reviewed
by the Administrative Office.
B. Tnvtromentil concerns tnclude: biological, 14ount Palaumr impacts and noise
impacts.
IXJNCLUSIONS:
proposed pro~Ject ts consistent wtth the Co~ehenstve Mneral Plan.
2. 11u proposal ts compatible vtth area deve]oment.
3. The pr~ect vtll not have · significant effect on the envt~oment.
/~OPTZOg of 8 gegattve Decla~atton for Environmental Assessment No. 32327,
bIsed on the conclusion that the project wtll not have a significant efCect on
the envtrormunt; and,
N~OV~ of VEST[I~ TENTATIVE 111ACT BO. 23304, subject to the conditions of
approval, and based on the ftndtngs and conclusions Incorporated ~n thts staff
report.
G~.N: a ea
3-30-88
I ~AND ,USE
1
,1~ o°
APT.
2_C~_ 4S40
· u~, 20.95 AC. 344 UNIT CCWI~$ ..... ~- L ' /
f ~ S. ~NERAL KEARNY:RD. ARTERIAL 110' ~..~ ~-~
~) iEXISTING ZONING
13
:1
~. ~,~ ~s ~-
RANCHO CALIF. RD~RTEnlL IfO'
~NERAL KEARNY.RD. ARTERIAL 110'
, *!
I
:
l
!!ii[~!!
I~1111ll
' i
ItlVEItSIOE COUIfTV PLANNING
~Um)IVI$ION
CON)ITIONS OF APPglOVAL
~ TBffATIVE 1~4CT NO. 233O4
STANDARD CONDITIONS
1.
EIPIItE$:
The subdivider shall defend, Indemnify, and hold harmless the County of
Riverside, 1rs agents, officers, and employees from any clatm, actton, or
proceeding agalnst the County of Riverside or 1rs agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set aside, votd, or annul an approval of the County
of Riverside, 1rs advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body
concerning Vesttng Tentative Tract No. 23304, ~htch actton ts brought
about ~thtn the ttme pertod provtded for tn California Government Code
Section 66499.37. The County of Riverside wtll promptly nottry the
subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the County of
Riverside and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the County fails to
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or
fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the
County of Riverside.
2. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule
A, unless modified by the conditions listed below.
e
®
lhts conditionally approved tentative map will' exptre two years after the
ounty of Riverside Board of Supervisors approval date, unless extended as
provided by Ordinance 460.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all
the requirements of the State of California Subdivision flap Act and
Ordinance 460.
The sulxltvtder~kal. l.submtt o~e copy of · soils .triooft to the Riverside
nl~y ~p.~veyor's Offtce and two coptes to the OIlxartment of Butldtn9 and
i'~fety. mne report shall address the soils stability and ~ologtcal
conditions of the site.
If any g~adtn9 is proposed, the subdivider shall submit one print of
comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Building and Safety. The
plan shall comply vrith the Untfom Bulldtng Code, Chapter 70, as amended
by Ordinance 457 and as maybe additionally provided for in these
conditions of approval.
IXmdltloms ~f
7. A gradtrig I~rmlt shall be obtatned from ~e ~~nt of ~tldtng
~e~ prt~ ~ ¢~nc~nt of m~ gradtrig ~%stde of ¢~n~ ~tn~tned
~t~1
Ntlln~ tn t~ Rtve~t~ ~un~ Road h~rmnt's letter
'lB, ~, a ~p~ of ~tch ts ItUc~d.
20. ~1 access is reft red by 0~tnince 460 shall ~ provtded fr~ ~he tr~c~
mp ~unda~ ~ a ~un~ mtntatned
2~. All ~ad ~swnts shall ~ offend for dedication ~ the ~bllc and shall
conttnue tn fore unit1 ~e ~ve~tng ~dy accepts or abandons such
offers. Al1 dedications shall ~ free fr~ Ill encu~rlnces is approved
by ~ ~ad C~tsstoner. S~r~ nl~s shall ~ subJec~ ~ Ipprova~
tM ~id ~tssloner.
12.
13.
14.
%5.
Easements, vhe, ~equtred for ~oad~ay slopes, dratnage facilities,
utilities, etc., shall be sho~ on the ftnal map tf they a~e located
wtthtn the land dtvtston boundary. All offers of dedication and
conveyances shall be submitted and recorded as dtrected by the County
SurveyDr.
Vater end sewerage dtsposal facilities shall be Inst~lled tn accordance
wtth the provisions set forth tn the Riverside County tMalth Department's
letter dated Februar~ %8, %988, a copy of ~tch ts attached.
The suMtvtder shall comply wtth the flood control reconnendattons
outltned b~ the Rtverslde County Flood Contro~ Dtstrlct's letter dated
Februar? 26° %~88o a copy of vhtch ts attached. %f the land dtvtston 11es
vttht, I~ Idoptod flood control dratnmge area pursuant to Sectton %0.Z5 of
Ordinance 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area dratnage
facfitttes sh~11 be collected by the RDad Coatsstoner.
The su~dtvlder shall comply vtth the ftre tmprovment recmmendattons
outltned tn the County Ftre Rirshll's letter dated Nlrch %, %~88, a copy
~f ~htch ts attached.
Subdivision ~hastng, Including any proposed co.on open space area
lmprovment phistrig, tf applicable,. shall be subject to Planntng
~eportment Ipp~oval. My proposed ~haslng shall provtde for adequate
vehicular access to sll lots tn each phase, and shall substantially
confore to the tntont and purpose of the subdivision approva].
I~STING TENTATIVE ~ NO. Z3304
Cmdtt~ons of/~oval
Page 3
27. ~Lots' eftired by this sul)dtvtston shall ,.'llml)ly ldth the ~bilmdng:
~~e. Lots created by thts subdtvtslon shall be tn con¢ommnce with
development standards of the &-3 zome.
the
Graded but undeveloped land shall be mintmined in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted With interim landscaping or
prowtried wtth other eroston control measures as approved by the
Director of !lutldlng and Safety.
c. Trash bins, shall be located away and visually screened
surrounding areas with the use of block walls and landscaptn9.
fro~
d. Bike racks an bike lockers in sufficient quantity shall be provided in
convenient locations to facilitate bike access to the pro~ect area.
~B. 1)rtortoRECORDATION of the final map the follwtng conditions shall be
satisfied:
m. Prior to the recordation of the final mp the applicant shall submit
written clearances to the Riverside County Road and Survey DepartMnt
that all pertinent requirefimnts outlined in the attached approval
letters from the followIn9 a9enctes have been
Ccmnty Fire Department County Health Department
County Flood Control County Planning Departant
County Parks Department County Airports DepartMnt
Santa AM Regional Water quality Control Board
b. Prior to recordation of the final mp, the subdivider shall submit the
ollovtng docunmnts to the Planntng Deportmnt for review, which
ocumnts shall be subject to the approval of that department and the
office of the Coun~ CouRse1:
]) A declaration of coveMnts, conditions end r~strtcttons; and
2) A simple document conveying tttle to the purchaser of an
individual lot or untt which provtdes that the declaration of
covenants, conditions and restrictions is incorporated therein by
reference.
CoMltlons of Al~fOgal
The WKlaratton of covenants, eruditions end restrictions ~ttted
for revte~ she11 (a) provtde for · term of 60 years, (b) provtde for
the establtslanent of I property o~ners' &ssoctatton comprised of the
o~ne~s of each Individual lot or untt, (c) provtde for o~ershtp of
t~ coinon area by ~t~r the property ramere' ~$_octatton or the
tamers of each t~tvldual lot or untt as ~nan~ In conIra and (d)
contatn ~ ~11m~ng ~ovtstons ve~ttm:
"~t~thstandt~ a~ provision t thts ~claretton
contraS, the fo11~ng ~ovtstons shall apply:
the
?~ proH~y ov~ers' association es~bltshed heretn shall manage
and continuously metntatn th? 'cmmon area', more particularly
descrt~ on Exhtbtt ' attached hereto, and shall not sell
or tra. sfer the 'common area', or any pert thereof, absent the
~rtor ~rttten consent of the Planntng Dtrector of the County of
tverstde or the County's successor-In-Interest,
The ~rty ovmers' association shall have the rlght ~ assess
the mmers of each Individual lot or untt for the reasonable cost
of Iatn~tntng the 'common area' and shall have the rtght to 1ten
the property of any such o~mer ~ho defaults tn the papent of a
maintenance assessment. An assessment 1ten, once estab]tshed,
shall ~ot ~ subo~tnate to an~ oncu~rance other than a ftrst
trust ~ed or ftrst mortgage, made tn good fat~ and for value
a~ of record prior ~ the assessment 1ten.
~ts ~claretton shall not ~ temtnated, 'substantially' amended
or property deannexed therefrom absent the prtor ~rttten consent
Of the Planntng ~trector of the Coun~ of Riverside or the
County's successor-In-Interest. A proposed amendment shall be
considered 'substantial' tf tt affects t~ extent, usage or
iatntonance of the 'cmIon area'.
%n ~I event of a~ conflict ~twon thts ~claretton and the
Arttcles of %ncorporatton or the Bylaws, tfany, thts Declaration
shall control.'
1he developer shall cM~ly Vlth the ~11ovtng parkway landscaping
~ndtttons:
3) .~to~ ~ recm~atton of the ftnal Ip the ~velo~r .I~11 ftle an
application vtth the County for the formation of or anneutton to,
~STIW T~rrATl~ ~ i:). ~3~o4
Conditions of Ap~l
Pages
2)
3)
a Imr4agay mtntenance dtstr4ct e~ CSA ~or maintenance of larkways
along hncho California Road tn accordance utth the Landscaping
and £tghttng Act of 1972, paless the project ts wtthtn an extsttn9
perkk~y maintenance dtstrtct.
Prtor to the tssuance of butldtng pemtts, the developer shall
secure approval of proposed 1artrisc&ping and Irrigation plans from
the County Road and Plenntng Depamnt. All landscaping and
t~tgatton plans end specifications shall be prepared tn a
reproducible format suttable for permanent. ftllng wtth the County
Road Department.
The developer shall post a landscape performance bond whtch shall
be released concurrently wtth the release of subdivision
porfomance bonds, gu&rantee!ng the viability of ell landscaping
whtch wtll be Installed prtor to the assumption of the maintenance
responsibility by the district.
4)
The developero the developer's successors-In-Interest or
assignees, shall be responsible for all parkway landscaping
maintenance untt1 such ttme as mintchance ts taken over by the
district.
The developer shall be responsible for mintchance and upkeep of all
slopes, landscaped areas and Irrigation systems untt1 such ttme as
those operations are the responsibilities of other parttes as approved
by the Planntng Director.
Prtor to recordation of the ftnal map, an Environmental Constraints
~4~eet (ECS) shall be prepared tn con~unctton ~tth the ftnal map to
delineate 1denttried environmental concerns and shall be pemanently
ftled ~tth the offtce of the County Surveyor. A copy of the £CS shall
be tr&nsmltted to the pllnntng Department for raytaw and approval.
The approved ECS shall be forwarded ~tth coptes of the recorded ftnal
nap to the Plamtng Department and the Department of gutldtng and
Safety.
f. The following note she11 be placed on the Envtronnmntal Constraints
Sheet: "County Biological lieport No. 160 ~as prepared for thts
~proper~Ly amd ts on ftle it the IHverstde County Planning Department.
The following note shall be placed on the Envtromaental Constraints
Sheet: .~itts I~opertj~ ts located wlthtn tht~ty (30) mtles of Hount
~PalomarO6~ervito~. A11 proposed out4oor 11ghtlng systems shall
-r,m~ly ~tth the Collfo~nla ]nstltute of Technology, Palomar
Observat~1~mmnendatlons dated February ]2, 1~88, e copy of whtch
~.~ts on' tn the lttve~stda Count~ Planntng Deportment and the
· , Ittveretde County Department of Butldtng end Safety.=
Prtor to the tssuance of ERAD~N$ PERHITS the follovtng conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prtor to the tssuance of gradtng permtts, clearance shall be obtatned
from the County Planntng Department that the recofinendatton for
biological mitigation as found tn County Biological Report No. 180 has
be_in completed. Thts mtttGBtton shall anti11 the relocatton of the
exlsttng bur~ovtng ovl to another suttable lociitoh and ts cartted out
so as to be tn compliance wtth all state and federal regulations.
cut slopes located adjacent to u~graded ~atural terratn and
exceeding ten (ZO) feet tn verttcal hetght shall be contour-graded
Incorporating the following gridtrig tochnlques:
The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the
angle of the natural torratn.
2) Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall re¢lect
the natural rounded terratn.
The toes ~d tops of slopes shall be rounded ~th curves vrlth
rid11 destgned tn proport. ton to the total hetght of the slopes
vhere dratnage and stability Permtt such rounding.
4) Where cut_or ftll slo~s exceed 300 feet tn horizontal length, the
horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved tn a continuous,
undulating fishton.
c. Prtor to the tssuance of gradtng Pemtts, the developer shall provtde
evtdence to the Director of Building and Safety that 811 adjacent
off-stte renulectured slopes hive recorded slope easements and that
slope ,mintchance responsibilities have been asstgned as approved by
the Director ~f Butldtng and hfety.
Prtor to the tssuance of gradtrig Permtts, a qualified paleontologist
shall be retatned by the developer for consultation end comment on the
roposed gradtrig wtth respect to potential Imlaontologtcal tinpicts.
hould the palaontologtst find the potential ts htgh for trapact trapact
to $tentftcent .reso.urces, I.. pre-gr.&de mettrig between the
paleontologist ano the excevstlon ano gr&dtng contractor shall be
&transed. ~hen necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall
have the authority to temporarily dtvert, redtrect or halt gradtng
Icttvtt~ to a11o~ recovery of fossils.
Prlor to the tssuance of BUILOZN$ PE~ZTS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
CoMtttm~ of Alqmwal
No butldtng Pemtts shall be tssued by the County of Riverside .for a?y
residential lot/untt wtthtn the project boundar~ untt1 the developer s
successor's-In-Interest provtdes evtclence of compliance ~tth publt.c
fact11_W ftnanct_ng measures. A cash sum of eee-~n. dr~d_ d?lla_rs (.$100!
Per lot/untt shall be deposited ~tth the Ittverslae ~ounTy uepermenT
of ~utldtng end Safety as litigation for publlc 11bra~ developant.
Prtor to the submittal of twtldtng plans to the Department of Butldtn9
and Safety an acoustical study shall be performed by in acoustical
engtneer establish appropriate adttgatton measures that shall be
applted ~o Mlltng untts ~tthtn the subdivision to reduce
Individual
arabtent tritertot notse levels to 45 Ldn.
c. The project shall he constructed so that tt ts tn substantial
conformance vrtth Exhtbtt A.
d. Faterials used tn the construction of all buildings shall be tn
substantial conformance wtth that sho~n on Exhtbtt B (Color
Elevations) and Exhlbtt C (Katerials Board). These ire is follows:
I~tertal
Roof Concrete S-Ttle
Walls Stucco
A~tng Canvas
Doors -Trtm
Factng- Trtm
Color
~t-~i'on Sunrtse No. ~08
Saltwater Taffy No. 4371 1~ Frazee
Aqua Hartne
Frazee COlor No. 5760 ~l
Frazee Color 4323 H
e. All d~elltngs to be constructed ~tthtn thts subdivision shall be
destgned and constructed ~th fire retardant (Class A) roofs as
&pproved by the County Ftre f4arshal.
Roof-mounted eClUlpment shall be shtelded from vtew of surrounding
property.
g. gulldlng separation betmean &11 buildings Including fireplaces shall
not be less than ten (10) feet.
Z~.. Prtor to the lssuance of OCCUPANCY PEI~!]TS the following conditions shall
be sat1 sft ed:
a. Ua11 and/or fence locations shall conform to attached Exhibits_.
All landscaping and trrlgatton shall be Installed tn accordance wtth
approved plans prtor to the tssuance of occupancy Permtts.
seasonal conditions do not Permtt planting, Intartm landscaping and
eroston control measures shall be uttllzed is approved by the Planntng
Dtrector and the Dtrector of Butldtng and Safety.
~ TENTATZVE TIIACT I~3. ~04
.l~e8
c. Not vlthstindtng the preceding conditions, vhereve? .in. Kousttca~
stud~ ts requlred for notse attenuation purposes, the heights of a~
requtred rolls shall be cletermtned by the ~cousttc&l stud~ ~here
Ippltcibl·.
GAIqcaea
3-30-88
Itvtrstde Count~ Planntng Comdsston
4080 Lemon Street
Iltverstde. CA
Iq/VERSIDE OOUNTY
I~.ANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: Tract 14~p 23304
Schedule A - Team
Ladles and Gentleran:
¥tth respect to the conditions of &pproval for the r~ferlnced ~ntattve land
dlvtston top, the Road Deparmnt recommends thlt the landdivider provtae .-~he
following street Improvements and/or road dedications tn accordance vtth
0 Itmlnce 460 Ind Riverside County ROld Zmprovement Standards (0rd~n&nce 46~).
it ts understood thlt the tanCattve map correctly shows all extsttng easemn'~s.
traveled rays, and dratnlge courses wtth appropfiato Q's. and that their
omtsston my reclut~ the nip to be resubmitted for further consideration. These
Ordinances and the folioring conditions are essant1&1 parts and a requtremen~
occurring tn ONE ts as btndtng as through occurring tn a11. They ire ~nten~ed
to be complementary. and to descrtbe the conditions for a complete destgn of the
Improvement. All questions regarding the true meantrig of the conditions shall
be referred to the Road Cclmtsstoner's Offtce.
The landdivider $hall protect do~st~eam properties from damges
clused by alterlemon of the dratnage pitterns, t.e., concentra-
tion of d~ve~s~on of nov. Protection $hall be provtded by
constructing adequate dr&~nage facilities Including enlarging
existtrig f&ctltttes or by securtng a dr&tnlge easement or~p
both. All dratnage easements sh&11 be shorn on the ftnal
and noted Is follow: ,~q~lratnage ~semnt -ao lwlldtng.
ob&tructtonso or enc~michaenta b~ 1~ndft115 are i11o~d'. The
protec~to~ shall be is approved by the Road Department.
The landdivider shall accept and properly dtspose of all offsite
dritmige flortrig onto or through the stta. In the event the
Road ComMsstoner Penntea the use of streets for dratnage
rposes, the provisions of ArUcle XZ of Ordtmince No. 46O
11 lpply. Should the quantities exceed the street
capactty or the use of streets be prohibited for dratnage
purposes. the subdivider sh&11 provtde adequate dratnage
facilities as approved b2 the Road Deparment.
Tract Pap 23304
· Fet)ruar.y 24, 1988
e
'N~1or 4rttuoge ts 1nvolved on thts landdivision and 1as resolution
sM11 be as approved by the Road Dip·freeze.
CoKrete sidewalks slu11 Im constructed along tinoho C411for~ta
Hoed Jfi accordance utah Count~ Standard No. 400 and 401
(curb stdevllk).
linch· tiltlorn1· ~ld she11 be taproved .vtth_cpncre~e .cu~? and
gutMr 1go·ted' 43 feet from conearline and ee~cn up lipha
concrete pavtng; reconstruct1·· Or !1surf&ting of extsttng pavtng
&s determined by the Road Commissioner vtthtn a SS foot
dedicated rtght of uiy tn accordance ~fith County Standard No. 100.
Prtor to the recordation of the ftnal alp, the developer $h&11
deposit Iflt, h the Rtve~tda County Road Diperr:merit, a cish sum of
~$140.00 per unlt as Bittie,ton for trafflc stg~al 1tinacts. Shou~.d
the developer choose to defer the ttee of poyment, he my enter
tnto a u~tt, te~ aguemint utth the County deferring $atd
te the ttme of tssuance of a bu~ldtn9 pemtt. (344 ui~tta
- S48,160.00)
improvement pla~s shall be based upon I centerline proftle
extending amtntmum of 300 feet be~ond the pro~ect boundaries at
a grade and altomerit as approved by the Riverside County
Commissioner. Completion of road Improvements does not tmpl~
accap~ince for maintenance by County.
Electrical and cormunit·at·ns trenches she11 be provtded
accordance ~th Ordtn&nce 461, Standard 817.
Aspbaltic emulston (fog sea1) shall be applted not less thin
fourteen days following placeulna of the asphalt surfactn. 9 and
shall be app11ed at & rate of O. OS gallon per square
Asphalt Imulston she11 confore to Secttons 37, 36 and 04 of the
State Standard Specifications.
~//~.0. - Lot access she11 be restricted ee Rancho Celtlorn1· Road and so
noted on the final mp vrlth the exception of three driveray
~ OI)entngs as approved by the Road conntssloner.
Trac~ flap* ,~33u4
Febr~ar~ ~4, ~988
Page )
·
11.
12.
13.
14.
16.
Limadivisions croattrig cut or ftll slopes adjacent to the streets
$hill provtcle eroston control, stght dtsLinca ~ontro1 and slope
elseMnts as approved by the Ilold Deplrtlint.
The 1&riddivider shall provtde "Ottltt~ c1#rince fram Rancho
Giltfor~t& alter Dtstrtct prtor to ~be recordation of ~he ftnal
lip.
Street trees she11 be planted tn confornlnce vtth ~he provisions
of Arttcle 13i of Ordinance 460.53 and ~hetr location(s) shall be
shovm on street tn~rovenent plans.
All drtve~lys shall conform to the applicable Riverside County
Standards and shall be $hMm On the street Improveaerie plans.
The street destgn and Improvement concept of thts project shall be
coordinated wtth tent&rive Tract 20735 and TR 2160G.-(--- ~'~'~'/'~',~ /5
Street 11ghttng shall be required tn accordance with Ordinance 400
and 461 throughout the subdivision. The County Service Area (CSA)
~dministrator deternines whether this p~oposal qualifies under in
existing assessment district or not. Zf no1;. the lind ovner
$hall ftle an application wtth LAFCO for annexation into or
croatton of a 'Lighting Assessment District' tn Iccordance with
Governmental Cocle Sectton 560C0.
GH:Ih
¥orytruly~oura,
Road Dtvtston £ngtneer
CNTY o~ --nmRl~DE- OEI~ARTMENT OF
HEALTH
liveraide County ?].snntui CostLesion
4080 lemon Street
liverside, CA 92502
1~: Tract Hap 2330&: BeLns · division of Lot 25 of Tract 333~ as shay· by
lisp on file in Book 5~, Poses 25 throush 30, ~nclusive of Hap, records of
liver·ida Courtrye CLliforuh.
(l I, o1:)
The l)eparcuent of Public Health has revieved Tentative Hap No. 2330~ and
recommends that:
&voter system shall be installed according to plans and specifications
as approved by the voter company and the Health Department. Permanent
prints of the plans of the racer system ohall be subsicced in tripli-
cate, rich · mini·u· scale uot less than one inch equals 200 feet,
along vith the arisins1 droving to the County Surveyor. The prints
shall ahoy the internal pipe diemeter, location of valves and tire
hydrants, pipe and Joint specifications and the size of the main
at the Junction of the hey system to the existinS System. The plans
oh·l! co·ply in all respects vLth ~Lv. 5, Parc l, Chapter ? of the
California Health and Safety C~de, california Administrative Code,
Title 22, Chapter 36, and General Order No. 103 of the Public
can·lesion of the State of California, vhen applicable. The plans
oh·l! be stoned by a resiotered ansinear and voter company rich the
follovinj certification: #! certify thac the desis· of the voter
system i~Tract Hap 233C~ is in accordanterich the voter system
expansion plano of the Rancho californl&Vater District and that the
water service, orsrase and dllCribution System vii! be adequate
yrovide vate~ service co such tract. This certificat~on does not
conat~tute a Snarancu that it vi~! anpply racer to ouch tract at any
specific quantities, flaws or pressures for fire protection or any
other purpooen. Thio certification shLU be sisned by a responsible
official of the voter coupany..The ~laneutbeoulmttted to the
County Surveyerrs Office to revievat lust crave·ha ~rior to the
request for the recordation of the final nap.
Thil Departneat has · itateuent for Rancho california Voter District
asree~ns to serve dosestic racer to each and every lot in the subdivision
on de·and, pr~vXdinS satisfactory financial arrangements are coupleted vith
the subdivider. Xt ~r/11 be necessary for the financial arrangesenos to
to hemde prior zo ~he recordation of the final nap.
RAver·~de County Planning Dept.
ATTH: GreS Heal
February 18, 1988
This Department has · statement ~rom the Eastern Hunicipal Wa=er District
alreeinl ~o ~ ~e o~divisi~ smsa oys~ ~o b ~ec~ to ~he
o~ero of the ~o~ric~. ~ o~er 02~ o~11 be installed according co
pl~ ~ ~cifl~i~ as appr~ed by the District, ~he ~y Su~eyor
nd ~he hl~h bparmn~. Pe~eu~ prin~s of ~he plans of ~he o~er
~scn o~11 be n~icCed in triplicate. al~g ~ch ~he orig~l dE~ng
to the ~ Sure,or. ~e ~riucs ohll oh~ the ince~l pi~ dimcar,
lo~ of ranholes, c~le~e prof~es, pi~ nd Jolu~
~d ~e size of ~he s~ers a~ ~he 3~c~ion of ~he n~ sys~ ~o ~he
~is~S sysco: A single pla~ indica~inS loca~i~ of o~er lines nd
wa~er lines shall be a portion of ~he s~ase plans and profiles. ~e
ylaus shall be si~ed by a resis~ered ~sineer and ~he a~er dis~ric~
~h ~he falling cer~ifica~ion: "~ certify ~ the desl~ of ~he
8~ew sys~ in Trac~ hp 2330~ is in accordance Wi~h ~he o~er sys~
e~au~n plans of ~he bs~em H~icipal Wa~er Dis~ric~ and ~ ~he waste
dispos~ sys~ is adeq~e a~ ~his ~iue ~o ~rea~ ~he an~icipa~ed
was~es fr~ ~he proposed ~rac~." ~e ~ns ~s~ be ou~i~ed ~o ~he
Su~eyor'o Office to r~i~ a~ leas~ ~o weeks ~rior ~o ~be reoues~ for
recorda~ion of ~he f~l
It will be necessary for the financial arrangements to be nade prior to
the recordation of the finalnap.
Sincerely,
, Sam Hartinez, St. ~ ~arian
Enviromnental Health "~iirvices
P.O. BO~ I081
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROl- AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
~ebruary 26° 1988
B/verside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
PAverside, California
Attentionz Regional Team Ho. 1
Greg Heal
I~dies 8n~ Gentlemen**
Rat Vesting Tract 23304
This is a proposal to ~onstruct 344 condomtniu~ units on a 21
acre site in the Temecula Valley area on the north side of Rancho
Cali£ornia Road, about 900 feet east of Moraga Road. This pro~-
act ~ms previously processed as ~ract 21608.
The site is bisected by Long Canyon Wash which conveys runoff
from east to west. Long Canyon Wash has a 100 year peak flow
rate of 1947 cfs. Runoff from about 12 acres approaches the
proJect*s northern boundary.
The applicant proposes to convey Long Canyon Wash through the
project in an unlined channel with drop structures. Oneitc run-
off ~ould be discharged into the channel.
The channel should be designed to convey a 100 year flow rate of
1947 cfs. It ehould be built to District standards and complete-
ly lined with rock or concrete. The channel should have properly
designed inlet and outlet transitions and t~o 12-foot wide main-
Following are the District's reeon~endationst
This tract is located ~ithtn the lt~aita of the Nurrieta
Creek/Taecula Valley ~rea Drainage Plan for which drainage
£eee have been adopted by the Board. Drainage fees shall be
paid as act forth under the provisions of the 'Rules and Reg-
ulations ~or Administration of Area Drainage Plans', ~aended
July $, * ~1~84,
Drainage ~ees shall be lmid to the Road Co~issioner
as part of the filing for record of the eub~ivision
final map or parcel map, or if the recording of a
final parcel map is ~aive~, drainage fees shall be
paid as a condition of the ~aiver prior to recording
a eertt£icate of compliance evidencing the ~atver of
the parcel ~aps ~r
R/verside County
Planning !:)spar tnent
Res Vesting Tract 23304
February 26, 1988
b. At ~he option of the land divider, upon filing a re-
~:~uired iTfAdavit requesting defercent of t~ ~ent
Build~g D~roc~r a~ ~b ~me of ~ssuance of a grad-
~g p~t ~ b~lding p~t ~r each a~rov~ ~r-
~1, w~cbver my b first shrined after tb
r~ord~ng o~ tb ouM~v~o~on final Mp or ~rcel map~
c..:~raimage fees shall be paid to the Road Connieeisner
as & part of the filing for record of the subdivision
£~nal map or parcel map, or before receiving a waiver
· o record a land division, for each Lot within the
land division where construction activity as evi-
denced by.he of the following actions has occurred
s~nceMay 26,
A grading permit or building permit has been
obtained.
(b) Grading or structures have been initiated.
,Long Canyon Wash should be collected from the adjoining
Box. culverts and conveyed through the tract. The channel
should be designed to convey a 100 year peak flow rate of
1947 cfs. It should be Built to District standards and
completely lined with either rock or concrete. The chan-
nel should be designed with an adequate outlet transi-
tion. A minimum o£ two 12-£oot wide maintenance roads
should be provided.
The 100 year storm runoff tributary to the north boundary
of the tract should be collected and ~onveyed to an ade-
quate outlet.
If the tract is built in phases, each phase shall be pro-
tected from the I ~n 100 year tributary storm flows.
Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented
immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition
of debris onto downstream properties or drainage
£acilities.
Development of this property ahould be coordinated with
the development of adjacent properties to ensure that
watercourses remain ~nobstructed and stormwaters are not
diverted from one watershed to another. This may require
the construction of temporary drainage facilities or
offsets ~onstruction and grading.
Riverside County
Planning Departneat
Rat Vesting Tract 23304
-3- February 26, 1988
7...0nolte drainage lucille/es located outside of road right
~.~£ way' should .l~e ~ontained within drainage easements
:S~ ~ ~
final mp g~tin9, "~l~e ~o~~ t~11 ~ kept ~ee
affected pro~rty ~er(o).
recordation
~ainege hc~litieo outletting u~p conditions o~uld be
designed ~ conve~ t~ ~butar~ 100 year oto~ flows.
~d~t~ona~ ~er~ency esca~ s~uld also ~ provided.
10.
A copy of the ~mprovement plans, grading plans and final
map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic cal-
culations should be su~auitted to the District v~a the
Road Department for review and approval prior to recorda-
tion of the final mp. Grading plans should be approved
prior to issuance of grading permits. A registered en-
gineer must sign, seal and note his expiration date on
plans and calculations submitted.
Questions concerning this matter may be referred to Stuart
McKibbin of th/s office at 714/787-2333.
Very truly yours,
1) Phair Company
Attar Rodney Meyers
2) Rick Engineering
~NNETH L. EDWARDS
,*h%e~ Engineer ~
H. AS nA
Senior Civil ~gineer
~EM~pln
IN ¢B 0 PEK;TION wm, I THE
~kLIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORF~TRY
ItA¥ REBitARD
3-1-88
TR 23304
PIM & e.~ne,rb I Office
l~enld., CA OJS0I
f/l~ ~8t,4,606
Wl~h respect to the condit:Lonn of approval for the above referenced len~ d~vtsion,
the Fire EMpartuent raceamends the following fire protection measures be prov£ded
An accordance vLth P~tverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
The ~nter mains shall be capable of providing a potential ftze flow of 2S00 GPN
find an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be IS00 GI~ for 2
hours duration at 20 PS~ residual operating pressure.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy o£ the water system plans ~o the Fire
Department for review. Plans shall conform to f~re hydrant types, location and
spacing, and, the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be
signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company with
the £olloaing certification** '! certify that the design of the water syate~ is
:in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire
Dep~rYJuent."
The required water systmu, includ£ng f~re hydrants, shall be Installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being
~lacedon an individual lot.
Bo~ width Burrounding the fountain Ln the antrance irma :LB ~) be 24 foot
PLTTXGhTIOH
Prior to the recordd~lon of the f~nal map, the developer oh&el-deposit with the
P~Lvirside County Fire Department, a cash mm of $400.00 per lot~t as mitigation
~or fire protection ~,~acts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of
paysent, he/she may enter into a written agreement vLth the Count~ deferring said
~M~mtut to the t. Lue of issuance of · building parlit.
Fire Department P~annlng and tngineer~ng staff.
Coun 3
of
Re.teE*side
Greq Neal
Buildinq and Safety, Land Use Division
Vestins ?Fact 23304
Land Use has the following commentIt
Prior to the issuance of building perntits, the developer
shall obtain Planning Department approval for all on-site
and off-site signage advertising the sale of the subdivision
pursuant to Section 19.6 of Ordinance 348.
Fireplaces may encroach 1' into required minimum 5' side yard
actback.
Mechanical equipment may not be located in required minimum
5' side yard setback.
All pools shall be fenced in accordance
1988
RIVEES'..~E COUN'I"Y
PLANNING ~E~'ARTMENT
l,and Use Division
February 11, 1988
Eric ?raboula¥. Deputy Director. 6radinq ~,~4,.
Review o! Vestinq Maps
~hm Grading Division will not be reviewing precise 9rad£ng
plans for vesting maps prior to Plann£ng Departmnt approval.
Grading requiramnts and recon~endat£ons will be addressed
durLng appl£cat£on for 9rad£ng replay and pez~ait.
fications required o£ 9radin9 plans submitted to the Planning
Department for vesting purposes will be subject to Planning
Department zeviev and approvalo
.. -.. '.-.-Please'.~incorpo~e'.this p91icy.into your comment.s and cor-
· ' ' ~ po ~C 9r~:ye
-:' - ' es ride e. sting ;~ps at.~nd ~velopment C~ ee
~s~ ~':~-~-~,-'.-:- '"-~ " : "-' '
: ....' Neet~n ' . ~.. , "' ~ ' ' '-
- .'-.... .~-. . .~'..'~.;~ 5- ; yp ' - . .~ . · . . ;. ..~ . ~ ............
-' '~ '.~s/jp: ......~ ... : -
' . ' -- - f'AIq 0.7 1988
" " nfv s 6ouN'n,
' ' ' IDE
' PLANNING DEPARTMENT
%.
~OFI CONDITIONAL APFROV&L~ THE FOLLOWING GHDULD APPLY=
ThrN copies of the priding plin (qe-scile) con, orming
to Chiptit 78 of the Uniform Building Code and County
Ordinance 4~?.6q shill be submitted to this D~pirtment
for review and approvil before i grlding permit con be
issued.
Two copies of the Preliminlry ~eotechnicil report
addressing underlying soil conditions including soil
bearing and expinsive properties shill be furnished.
The report shill specificlily address site
geologic/seismic plrlmeters for building construction.
Recommendltions regarding footings, interior slobs on
grade; allowable active pressure for retaining wall
construction and clelring and priding ope~ltions ire to
be included. The report shall be submitted to this
Dep&rtment for review and approval.
Hydrology and hydrlultc cllculltions addressing offsite
tributlry areis and how flows will be conveyed through
the tract must be provided to this department for
revie~ and approval. The QI8 Ind 0188 must be shown at
all points of entry ind exit. Details of ill surflee
Ind subsuffice drlinlge ficilities ind protective
devices must be shown.
Provide building footprints on Ill
setblcks.
lots showing oil
Shem driveway details on the grlding plan along with
grides not to exceed
Slope stibility cllculltions with i factor of sifety of
it least one and five-tenths (1.5) shall be submitted
by I soils engineer for all slopes equal to or greater
than 38 feet.
Provide proper building setbacks on all pads from the
top or toe of slopes to the face of structure.
/
The fires of cut and. fill slopes shall be provided with
slope planting to ~inimize erosion.
a. Cut slopes equal to or grelter than 5 feet in
vertical height end fill slopes equil to or
greiter thin 3 feet in verticil height shill be
pllnted with grist or ground cover.
b. Slopes exceeding 15 feet in verticll height shall
be planted with shrubs, spiced not to exceed
feet on center; or trees, spiced not to exceed
~eet on centers or a combinltion of shrubs
trees it equivllent spicing.
c. All slopes required to be pltnted Ihlll be
provided with an irrigition system.
d. Provide Erosion Control-LIndscipe pllns prepared
by a registered llndsclpe lrchitect. Accomplnying
the plan shill be I cost estimlte detliling ill
costs essotilted with the project for bonding
purposes.
· ::IiVE::I iDE cOUnC.u
PLannin DE RClTIEnC
DATE: 3anuary 11, 3988
TO: Assessor
Butldtng Ind bfety
Surveyor - D~ve Duda
P.o~d Department
Health - Ralph Luchs :
Ftre Protection '~
Flood Control glstrtct
Ftsh & Game
LAFCO, S Patsley
U.S. Postal Service- Ruth £. Davidson
RECEIVED
ois :i o Y
Rancho Water
Southern Calif. Edison
Southern Calif. (;as
Genera 1 Telephone
£1sinore Union School
Temecula Union
Pit. Palomar
Temecula Chamber of Conferee
~o~issioner Bresson
TRACT 23304 - (Tm-1) - E.A. 32327 - The
Phair Company - Rodney Meyers/The Pair
Co. - Rancho California Area - First
Supervisorial District - North of Rancho
Calfornta Road, East of Moraga Road - R-3
Zone - 20.95 acres - Request TR 344 Unit
Condominium project - Related Case TR
2160B - Hod 120 - A.P. 921-370-001
Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Land
Division Committee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for February 25, 1988.
clears, it will then go to public hearing.
If it
Your c~nts and recommendations are requested prior to February 16, 1988 in order that
we ma~ include then in the staff report for this particular case.
Should lmu have any questions regarding this ltem, please do not hesitate to contact
Greg Neal at 787-1363
Planner
rd)MHENTS:
PLEASE SEE ATTACHE!)
DA~: 2/].2/88 SIGNA?UR£
PLERS£ prtnt name and t¶tle Dr. RobeFt J. Btucato/Asstatant Dttectot/Pa~onat
40~0 LEMON STREET. 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92501
4714) 787-~181
46-209 OASIS STREET. ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Olfl~lC[ OI ?N! DII[L"TO! FALOIdAR OBSI:RYATORY 1eS-~'4
This me ts viihim 30 miles of the Paleear Observatory m~d is therefore
viihim the zone requiring the use of lov-prstsure Bad turn vapor lmm~s for
street l~ghttns, st stipulated by the ILtveraide County Board of Supervisors.
We request that the design for other types of outdoor liRhting that nay be
employed on this property be made consistentvtth the spirit of the decision
of the Board of Supervisors vhich is intended to mitigate the adverse effects
such facilities have on the astronomical research at Palomar. Beneficial
steps to that end include:
Use the minimum amount of liRht needed for the task.
Orient and shield light to prevent direct upvard illumination.
Turn off lights at 11:00 p.m. (or earlier) unless, in connercial
applications, the associated business is oven past that time, in vb~ch
case the lights should be turned off at closing.
Use ivy-pressure aodiu~ la~ps for roadrays, ~alkwavs, equipment yards,
parking lots, security and other similar applications. These
need not be turned off at ll:00
For further information, call (818) 356-&035.
Robert J. Bruceto
Assistant Director
I~larch 29, 1988
Mr. Greg Neal, Associate Planner
Riverside County Planning Department
40BO Lemon Street, Ninth Floor
Riverside, California 92501
Subject: Club Valencia--Vesting Tentative Tract HaD Number 23304
Dear Mr. Neal:
The following summarizes our findings regarding the fiscal impact analysis
for the oroject identified above. The appendix attached summarizes the basic
assumptions used in analysis. Please note that these results reflect the
current levels of service provided by the County based on Fiscal Year
1986-1987 actual costs (per capita factors) and Departmental and
Auditor-Controller review of operations and facility costs for services
reviewed using case study analysis. Staff to the Growth Fiscal Impact Task
Force and Departments are currently reviewing service levels provided and the
need to increase the levels of service. Current findings are that existing
levels of service are not adequate in most cases. Should the desired level of
service be utilized in the fiscal analysis performed, it would significantly
increase the costs associated with this development.
COUNTY FUND
(Operations and Naintenance)
FISCAL IMPACT
AFTER BUILDOUT
CUMULATIVE FISCAL
IMPACT AT BUILDOUT
County General
Structural Fire
Free Library
($59.431) ($56,617)
($22,744) ($30,14g)
($ 3,473) ($ 4,603)
SUBTOTAL COUNTY
($B6,648) ($91,36~))
Road Fund
$ -o- $ -o-
GRAND TOTAL
($86,648) ($gl,369)
Ralam't T. Andre, sen AdmJnis~tive C.,entm'
44~01/MON~ · 12Tl.iFLOOR · ~, CAL.F-ORNIA~I · f'/14) 9B9-2544
The following special circumstances apply to thts project:
1. Flood Control staff has indicated that flood control facilities
constructed wtthtn Zone 7 are unltkely to be sufficiently funded for
maintenance costs. Current estimates tndtcate that funding shortages
should occur for the next ten years. Suggested mttiqation measures
include a cash deposit by the project developer or use of an assessment
mechanism. The amount of depostt would be determined by a present value
mnalysis and project ttming.
The cost of maintaining flood control facilities wtll not be known until
ftnal design phases, when facility needs have been fully identified.
Flood Control staff wt11, therefore, condition project approvals to
identify a means of financing facility maintenance and operation (if
necessary) prior to recordation of subdivisions.
2. This project will share in the cost of & proposed 15,000 square foot
library in Rancho California. A mitigation fee of $100.00 per unit is
required for capital facilities.
3. This pro~ect has only private streets. Thus, no impact is shown. Road
fund revenue generated from this project will go toward countywide road
costs.
Initial Review By
Review Approved By
OFFICIAL HEARING NOTICE
MAY AFFECT YOUR FROFERTY
RIVERSID£ COUNTY PLANNING D£PARTIqENT
COUNTY ADHINISTRATIVE CENTER, NINTH FLOOR
4080 LLqqON STREET
RIVERSIDE, C/~.IFORNIA 92601-3657
Roger S. Streeter, Pl&nntng I)trector
PUBLIC IEJIILtN6 has been scheduled before the PLANNING COlIIZSSZOII to constder
the &ppllcatton(s) deserthad below. The Planntng Department his tontattvely
found that the proposed project(s) vtll have no significant envtronmenta~
effect and his tontittvely completed Mgattve declaration(s). The Plann~n9
Conlatsston vtll constrict ~hether or not to adopt the ~egattve declaretton along
vtth the proposed pro3ect at thts hiartng.
Place of Heartrig: Bol~ Deem, 14th Floor, 4060 LImon Street, Riverside, CA
Date of Heartrig: ¥E])NESDAY, APRIL 13, 19~8
The ttme of heartrig 1s Indicated wtth each application 11sted below.
A~y person may sub~tt ~ttte~ cremefits to the Planntng Department ~fo~ the
heartrig or my Ip~ar and ~ ~ard tn support of or op~sttton ~ ~e Idoptlon
of t~ negattve McCaration and/or Ipp~val of thts p~ect it t~ ttm of
heartrig. If ~u challenge any of the pro~ects tn court, ~u my ~ 1trotted to
titstrig only_ those tssues you or someone else ratsad at the publlc hearth9
described tn thts nottce, or tn v~ttten correspondence delivered to the
Planntng Commission at, or prtor to, the pubItc heartng. The envtronmenta~
ftndtng along ~th the proposed project application my be vte~ed at the publtc
Infomarion counter 14onday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. unttl 4:00 p.m.
VESTING TRACT Iq~P 23304, EK. 32327, ts an application submitted by The Phai?
Compan~ for property located tn the Rancho California Area and Ftrst
Supervtsortal Dtstrtct ~htch proposes to dtvtde 20.95 acres tnto 344
u~tts condomtntu~ on property generally described as north of Rancho
California Rd, east of Horaga Rd
TIRE. OF HEARING: 10:16 a.m.
CZ&
·
A CZ 415e
I
I
I
I
&~Z4~40
I I ~. THE PHAIa CO. '~
u~. 20.95 AC. 344 UNIT ~S
Sec. T. 8 S.,R. 3W Aaseslof's Bk. g '
Circulatimt RANCHO CALIF. RDARTERIL 110'
Element S. GENERAL KEARNY RD. ARTERIAL 110'
--_..---, l ed. Bk.P;.56A O.t. 3114/88 Dr~m By D.G.T.
' I ~YI~'~~ ~ ~c~N/N$ ~EPARTMENT ~.o ~,ALE
/
!
I. OCAT~NAL MAP
3750 Univemity Avel~ue, Suite 260
Riverside, California 92501-3313
714-781-9000 ,, FAX 714-369-7251
June 25, 1990
A Cooperative Effort Supported By:
The East Valley Coalition The City of Riverside
The Economic Development Partnership Riverside County
The Greater Riverside Chambers of Commerce San Bernardino County
The Inland Empire Economic Council The Silver Eagles
The Monday Morning Group Southern California Edison
TheCity of Moreno Valley The Valley Group
The Southern California Gas Company
Mr. Dave Dixon
City Manager
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 3000
Temecula, CA 92390
Dear Dave:
As you are aware, our organization is coordinating the
efforts to attract the Space Systems Division to March AFB
and to keep the Ballistic Missile Organization at Norton AFB.
To date, over $100,000 has been committed by eight different
entities towards this effort.
Dick Burpee, the consultant hired for this project, has
spoken with Ron Parks. They agreed that Mr. Burpee would
meet with the City Council on July 10 to discuss the project.
Please consider this letter as an invoice for $5,000. It is
our understanding that this is the amount being considered by
the City of Temecula for support of this project. To support
your contribution to this effort, I am also enclosing the
budget and planning that has been done so far on this effort.
The group has been meeting on Monday mornings at 7:30 AM in
the offices of the County Economic Development Agency.
Harley Knox attends these meetings regularly representing the
Valley Group. Your input is welcome and is valued.
Thanks for your support. Please feel free to call me if you
have any questions.
Sincerely,
~en Albr'~~t, Chairman
Inland Empire Space Systems Division Relocation Group
SA/mlm
PROPOSED RELOCATION
OF THE
SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION
BACKGROUND
The Air Force has announced its intent to study the potential
relocation of its Space Systems Division from the Los Angeles
Air Force Base at E1 Segundo. This move would be made as a
result of a Defense Management Review initiative by the
Secretary of Defense Cheney. The Review is in response to
reduced Defense Department expenditures.
The Air Force is concerned about the quality of life for its
people in Los Angeles, both military and civilian. The cost
of living in the area is extremely high, and this prohibits
the assignment of lesser ranks. The high cost of living is
also a hardship on mid and senior level grades. Another
impact of the cost of living is the difficulty in attracting
qualified civilian contractor personnel. Furthermore, there
is no expansion capability at the present location, and the
existing operations'and administrative support facilities are
inadequate and need to be repaired or replaced.
A decision on the proposed relocation is anticipated to be
included in the Air Force recommendation to the FY92 budget
request, which is due to be released in January, 1991.
The mission of the Space Systems Division is to develop and
acquire space systems for the Air Force and other federal
agencies. The division consists of basically five units:
· the Ballistic Missile Operation based at Norton AFB;
· Rocket Boosters;
· Satellites;
· Research and Development Operations; and
· a Headquarters Staff.
This function of the Air Force is a vital one, and no
indication have been heard which would act to reduce or
eliminate the mission of the Space Systems Division.
ECONOMIC IMPACT
The Space Systems Division has the following personnel:
- 1,750 military
- 1,440 civil service
- 690 employees of support contractors, i.e.,
security, civil engineers, etc.
- 2,500 at the BMO at Norton AFB
The relocation would require nearly 489,000 square feet of
office and laboratory space. The annual operating budget is
$7.6 billion, $1.256 billion of which are personnel and
operations costs. The bulk of the budget goes to aerospace
firms for additional research and systems development.
The cost of the relocation has been initially estimated to
range from $720 million to $1.3 billion.
An integral part of the Space Systems Division is the non-
profit Aerospace Corporation. This corporation is under
contract to the Air Force to provide the technical skills and
engineering for the Space Systems Division. Air Force
personnel have stated that these two agencies should not be
geographically separated. The Aerospace Corporation employs
4,180 people and now occupies 1,640,000 square feet of office
and laboratory space at and adjacent to the E1 Segundo
facility. These personnel and spatial needs are in addition
to those indicated above.
RELOCATION ALTERNATIVES
The Air Force has selected four alternative locations to be
analyzed for this project:
MARCH AFB
Riverside, CA;
VANDENBERG AFB
Lompoc, CA;
KIRKLAND AFB
Albuquerque, NM;
PETERSON AFB/FALCON AIR BASE
Colorado Springs, CO.
Analysis of the alternative locations will also include the
potential of leaving the SSD at its current location at the
Los Angeles Air Force Base.
The analysis is planned to review these site alternatives and
also review the options associated with some partial
relocation of functions to all or some of the alternative
locations.
PROCESS
The process to relocate the Space Systems Division requires
an Environmental Assessment, leading to a Draft and then
Final Environmental Impact Statement. It also requires a
Title 10, USC 2687 Study which analyzes the economic impacts
of the proposed action.
The Environmental Assessment and 2687
will include:
Study process has and
Scoping meeting to publicly outline
held March 29, 1990, in Riverside.
the move was
A second Scoping meeting, held May 24, 1990, in San
Bernardino, to include in the Assessment the
relocation of the Ballistic Missile Office from
Norton AFB as a consideration in this project.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to be
issued for public comment in August, 1990.
Final EIS, with responses to the comments received,
to be issued in November, 1990.
- Record of decision by the USAF in December, 1990.
Budgetary' implications of the decision
included in the USAF budget proposal
President for FY92 in January, 1991.
to be
to the
The Title 10, USC 2687 study,
analysis with regard to:
will consist of an economic
Strategic assessment
Operational assessment
Budgetary assessment
Fiscal assessment
Local economic consequences at Los Angeles and
March AFB
After these documents have been completed, congressional
inputs/assessments will be made. When all completed, the
relocation costs will be entered into the proposal to the
President's budget, ultimately to be approved by Congress.
MARCH AIR FORCE BASE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
March AFB, situated in southern California's Inland Empire
adjacent to the cities of Riverside and Moreno Valley, is
being promoted as the best alternative site for a number of
reasons:
1. March AFB has the physical space (1650 acres)
accommodate the land requirements of the SSD..
to
2e
March AFB offer the continuity of operations within the
greater Los Angeles metropolitan region. It is only
seventy five miles from the existing facility at E1
Segundo.
Long-established relationships with aerospace contractors
now present in the Los Angeles Region can be continue
uninterrupted.
e
Be
The site at March AFB is environmentally advantageous and
would be the least disruptive of the relocation
alternatives.
A relocation to March AFB would result in the east
disruption of people. It is estimated that approximately
60% of existing employees could continue to commute to a
new facility at March AFB. This rationale also is the
same for the employees of the aerospace contracting
firms.
The quality of life for Air Force and civilian employees
and their families would be improved. This can be
translated into increased discretionary income due to a
lower cost of living, more affordable housing, and
reduced commuting times. (Contractors now bus employees
from San Bernardino to Los Angeles at a departing time
of 4 am daily.
e
March AFB is close to Ballistic Missile Operation at
Norton AFB. Relocation to March would eliminate or
minimize disruption to the employees and mission of the
BMO.
There is easy access from March AFB to the Ontario
International Airport. It is estimated that 80,000 plus
commercial flights per year are generated by SSD
activities, and this number does not include visitors to
the Division.
e
The growth in the Inland Empire in recent years has
brought a talented and diverse labor pool to the region.
The work force in the two-County region of Riverside and
San Bernardino now approaches. l,000,000.
10. Accessibility to University of California at Riverside's
new School of Engineering and other higher educational
institutions in the Region will offer another potential
skilled labor supply.
ll. Excellent military-community relations exist between
March Air Force Base, a Riverside County, and the
adjacent cities of Riverside, Moreno Valley, and Perris.
12. Exceptional opportunities for industrial land and
facilities for contractors exist adjacent to March AFB
and in the entire Inland Empire.
13. March AFB offers an excellent geographical
relative to the functions of the Division.
location
14. This job-generating, clean industry type of activity is
what the Inland Empire needs, and therefore excellent
ongoing community and governmental support can be
anticipated.
APPROVED PROGRAM BUDGET
PROJECTED INCOME - CASH
REVENUES
Monday Morning Group
City of Moreno Valley
City of Riverside
Riverside County
San Bernardino County
Southern California Gas
The Valley Group
5,000.00
25,000.00
9,000.00
46,000.00
46,000.00
10,000.00
5,000.00
$146,000.00
PROJECTED NON-CASH CONTRIBUTIONS
Southern California Edison
Staff Support
Keep Riverside Ahead
Office Space, Consultant
Phone/FAX, Consultant
Parking
Miscellaneous
$15,000.00
48,000.00
4,000.00
2,400.00
800.00
800.00
$ 71,000.00
Note: Calculated hourly rates for staff support include
a pro-rated share of office space, materials and
supplies, telephone/FAX costs, postage, and
parking expenses.
TOTAL ........ $217,000
EXPENSES
CONSULTANT EXPENSES
Consultant, Fees
April, May (@ 1/2 time)
June, July (@ full time)
August-December (@1/2)
Consultant, Expenses
Consultant, Office Expense
$ 7,000
14,000
17,500
9,000
8,000
$ 55,500
STAFFING ASSISTANCE
Staff - Meetings,
Promotions, Etc.
Staff - Analysis Package
Development
Staff - Administrative,
Clerical
$ 18,000
25,000
5,000
$ 48,000
PROGRAM COSTS
Relocation Analysis Package:
Data Retrieval (Staff)
Data (Contractual)
Graphic Design (Desktop)
Graphic Production
Aerial/Ground Photography
Printing
Video
Travel
Local Promotions
CONTINGENCY
above
7,000
8,000
7,500
3,000
26,000
15,000
10,000
12,000
$ 88,500
$ 25,000
TOTAL ........ $217,000
PLAN OF ACTION
In preparing a strategy for recruiting the relocation of the
Space Systems Division to March Air Force Base, several
different concerns need to be addressed. The key to the
overall effort is to assure that a coordinated approach with
a common message is delivered.
In the solicitation of support for the relocation, the
following groups need to be lobbied regarding the competitive
benefits of a March Air Force Base location.
The Air Force. Decision makers at the Air Force need to be
convinced that a March location would best serve the needs of
the SSD mission. This includes the existing command at the
LA Air Force Base and the decision makers in the Pentagon.
Elected Leadership. The area's legislative delegation, both
at the State and national levels, need to offer a unified
front regarding the relocation to March. This should also
include Governor Deukmejian and his Department of Commerce.
Local elected officials should also be educated on the
positive economic impact of this project and be asked to pass
resolutions of support.
Contractors. Aerospace contractors potentially offer the
greatest support base. The level of involvement with the SSD
of each individual company should be assessed, and their
support for maintaining a Southern California location should
be solicited. These contractors are also potential
supporters in lobbying for the desired decision from the
Pentagon and from Congress.
Local Business and Citizenry. In our zeal to solicit the
needed political and business support for this effort, local
interest groups should not be overlooked. It would be
disastrous to have outspoken negative reaction from "the
community" on this project.
A strategy to address the anticipated concerns of each of
these interest groups needs to be prepared. The separate
strategies should address specific issues, financial
concerns, and perceived strengths and weaknesses of the March
location. A list of individuals and their role in this
efforts needs to be prepared.
In addition to the strategies for approaching individuals and
interest groups, a promotional package (or packages) must be
prepared. This package should receive the highest priority
at the early stages of this project. The package will be
titled the "Relocation Analysis Package", and its contents
will be outlined for the Group.
RELOCATION ANALYSIS PACKAGE
OUTLINE
PURPOSE
Prepare an information package that will promote March Air
Force Base (and the Inland Empire). as the best location for
the Space Systems Division of the United States Air Force.
AUDIENCES
There will be multiple audiences reviewing this analysis.
Care should be taken to present the information such that
each of the target audiences are convinced that their
concerns have been addressed.
The target audiences are:
· The United States Air Force;
· Military and Civilian Personnel in the Pentagon;
· The Current Command at the SSD in Los Angeles;
· The Current Employees of the SSD and the Aerospace
Corporation in Los Angeles;
· Aerospace Contractors in Southern California;
· The California Congressional Delegation;
· The Governor, Area State Legislators, and the
California Department of Commerce;
· Local Elected Officials in the Inland Empire; and
· Local Citizens.
CONCEPT
Design the entire package so that the information addresses
two basic areas of concern. First, issues and questions
raised by the Air Force in its scoping sessions will be
addressed. Second, information will be presented that is
timely, accurate and persuasive to encouraging decision-
makers to select the location at March Air Force Base.
To accomplish the above, there are options on how the package
can be designed. There could be a single document, either
bound or in a loose-leaf binder. There could be two
documents--one to address specific data needs of the
Environmental Impact Statement process and one to promote the
area. Or there could be multiple smaller documents that
could individually address either the concerns of the target
audiences or specific issue areas.
In either case, the package needs to be highly graphic, easy
to reference, and eye catching.
BASIC OUTLINE
Despite the organization of the package, at a minimum it will
need to cover the information in the following outline.
Basic Demographics
A. Population Profile
B. Population Projections
C.
II. Labor Force
A. Labor Force Profile
B. Historical Labor Force Growth
C. Specific Labor Force in regards to the SSD
III. Housing
A. Availability and cost
B. Various community lifestyles available
C. Area Recreation
D. Environmental Concerns
IV. Jobs/Housing Balance
A. Current Ratios
B. Resident vs. Civilian Labor Force Numbers
C. Furthering of Air Quality and Traffic Congestion
Goals
D. Distribution of Jobs to Housing Rich Area
Ve
Education
A. Local Public Schools System
B. Community Colleges and Trade Schools
C. Universities in the Inland Empire
D. Specific Engineering Degree Programs
E. Other Degree Fields of Interest to the
Aerospace Industry
VI.
Transportation Issues
A. Overview of the Complete System
B. Ontario International Airport
C. Measures "A" and "I"
D. Commuter Rail Plans
E. High-Speed Rail Plans
VII. Environmental Concerns
A. Air Quality
B. Water Quality and Supply
C. Traffic Congestion
D. Endangered Species
E.
VIII. Economic Considerations
A. Relative Property Values
B. Relative Lease Rates
C. Relative Cost-of-Living
D. Potential Local Incentives for Aerospace Companies
E. Lower Private Sector Business Costs
IX.
Local Business Climate
A. Pro-Business
B. Area Priority to attract New Clean Industry
C. Supportive of SSD Relocation
(Solicit Resolutions of Support)
Lifestyle Considerations
A. Recreation
B. Cultural Amenities
C. Central Southern California Location
XI.
Other Employee Relocation Concerns
A. Minimize Relocation Demands
B. Convenience for Many Existing Employees
XII. The SSD Mission at March Air Force Base
A. Availability of Suitable Land
B. Geographic Proximity to Aerospace/SSD Contractors
C. Mail and Telecommunications Quality
The outline for the "Relocation Analysis Package" will be
completed with the assistance of the partners in the Group.
As the outline is expanded and the actual work commences,
appropriate use of maps, charts, graphs, diagrams, etc. will
be determined. The purpose of the completed package will be
the promotion of the March Air Force Base site with the
identified target audiences.
The ambitious goal for completing the package should be
July 1, 1990. Prior to completion of the finished product,
information gathered or already available will be forwarded
to the Air Force in its preparation of the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).
SUGGESTED DRAFT RESOLUTION FOR CITIES AND CHAMBERS OF
COMMERCE IN THE RIVERSIDE AND SAN BERNARDINO AREAS
WHEREAS, The United States Air Force has announced its
intention to relocate its Space Systems Division from Los
Angeles AFB in an effort to consolidate its functions to
realize greater efficiency, provide for future expansion,
improve the quality of life for its military and civilian
personnel by providing access to affordable housing and
reducing commuter time. These efforts should allow the Air
Force to achieve its goal of attracting a professional
management team for future space systems development. Also,
the Air Force has announced its intention to relocate the
Ballistic Missile Organization from Norton AFB, in an effort
to improve operational efficiency.
WHEREAS, the Air Force has maintained an active facility at
March AFB since 1917 and the Ballistic Missile Organization
or similar agency at Norton AFB since 1962.
WHEREAS, California is a critical location for the entire
pacific area with respect to supporting all space defense
initiatives.
WHEREAS, the community leaders of the Riverside-San
Bernardino areas have joined together to relocate the Space
Systems Division to March AFB and to keep the Ballistic
Missile Organization at Norton AFB. Should the Air Force
decide to move the Ballistic Missile Organization, the
community leaders agree it should move to March AFB.
WHEREAS, March Air Force Base possesses the necessary
physical space, would provide continuity of operations within
the Los Angeles basin, would cause minimal environmental
disruption, has access to adequate and reasonably priced
housing, offers easy access to Ontario International Airport,
is close to a number of colleges and universities within the
Inland Empire, enjoys excellent military-community relations,
and has an excellent geographical location with adequate land
for base and industrial expansion.
RESOLVED, that the Riverside Chambers of Commerce
respectfully request the Department of the Air Force to
relocate the Space Systems Division from Los Angeles AFB to
March AFB, and to keep the Ballistic Missile Organization at
Norton AFB, or should it be moved, relocate the Ballistic
Missile Organization to March Air Force Base.
* Note: Each organization should substitute its name in
place of Riverside Chambers of Commerce.
SUGGESTED DRAFT RESOLUTION FOR CITIES AND CHAMBERS OF
COMMERCE IN THE RIVERSIDE AND SAN BERNARDINO AREAS
WHEREAS, the United States Air For.ce has announced its
intention to relocate the Ballistic Missile Organization from
Norton AFB, in an effort to improve operational efficiency
by maximizing the use of its existing property.
WHEREAS, the Ballistic Missile Organization or similar agency
at Norton AFB has been in existence for the purpose of
planning, programming, and managing of acquisition of
ballistic missile systems since October 1962. As a result, a
number of contractors associated with an in support of the
Ballistic Missile Organization have located in the area.
WHEREAS, California is a critical location for the entire
pacific area with respect to supporting space defense
initiatives; and
WHEREAS, the community leaders of the Riverside-San
Bernardino area have joined together to keep the Ballistic
Missile Organization at Norton AFB, CA, or should the Air
Force decide to move the Organization, it should be relocated
to March AFB, CA.
Resolved that the Riverside Chambers of Commerce respectfully
requests the Department of the Air Force to keep the
Ballistic Missile Organization at Norton AFB, or should it be
moved, relocate the Ballistic Missile Organization to March
Air Force Base along with its parent unit, the Space Systems
Division from Los Angeles.
Note: Each organization should substitute its name in place
of Riverside Chambers of Commerce, etc.
jec/AGD17631
CITY OF TEHECUL~
~GENDAREPORT
FROH:
D~TE~
MEETING DATEs
SUI~ECT~
CITY MANAGER/CITY COUNCIL
CAPT. RICK SAYRE, POLICE CHIEF;
SCOTT F. FIELD, CITY ATTORNEY
JUNE 27, 1990
JULY 10, 1990
CURFEW FOR MINORS ORDINANCE
RECOMMEND&TION~ That the City Council introduce and adopt
the enclosed Ordinance.
DISCUSSION: The City Council directed the City Attorney to
prepare an ordinance establishing a curfew in response to a
complaint regarding the situation where youths had been
congregating in front of an arcade.
Attached for the City Council's consideration is an
ordinance establishing a curfew for minors. This area of
the law has changed over the years and courts have
frequently invalidated these types of ordinances based upon
constitutional challenges. Consequently, the courts have
imposed constitutional limitations on curfew ordinances
whereby any proposed ordinance must enumerate exceptions to
the curfew so that presence alone is not violative of any
proposed ordinance. Moreover, courts have generally not
been receptive to a curfew to all individuals; rather a
curfew imposed on minors will be generally upheld based on
grounds that protection of minors is an important
governmental concern.
The enclosed Ordinance adopts the standards set forth by the
courts by creating curfew restrictions for minors, i.e.,
individuals under the age of eighteen (18) years, between
the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m. of the day immediately
following. We have created the following highlighted
exceptions to the curfew restriction:
The minor is accompanied by his or her parent,
guardian, or other adult person;
-1-
jec/AGD17631
A minor is returning directly home from a
public meeting or recreation events;
A minor is on an errand directed by his or her
parents or legal guardian; or
®
A minor is lawfully engaged in some business,
trade, profession or occupation.
The proposed Curfew Ordinance is complemented by existing
State trespassing provisions under the California Penal Code
Section 602 which enumerates the various forms of
trespassing on both private and public property. The
trespassing provisions of Penal Code Section 602 apply to
both minors and adults. It has been the Sheriff's
experience that vigorous enforcement of Section 602 will
address any loitering problems. (A copy of Penal Code
Section 602 is attached hereto for review.)
Finally, California Business and Professions Code Section
25662 can be utilized by the Police Department to enforce
the prohibition of the possession of alcohol by minors on
both private and public property.
The provisions of this proposed Curfew Ordinance, along with
the existing trespassing and alcohol possession laws should
be sufficient to resolve property owners' concerns.
FISCAL IMPACT=
Usual law enforcement costs·
ATTACHMENTS:
- Proposed Ordinance No. 90-
- California Penal Code Section 602
- California Business & Profession
Code Section 25662
-2-
j ec/ORD~7 631
ORDINANCE NO. 90-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA ADDING CHAPTER 11.10 TO
THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CURFEW FOR MINORS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE:- The City Council of the City of
Temecula has adopted this Ordinance in order to protect the
public health, safety and welfare.
SECTION 2. Chapter 11.10 is hereby added to the
Temecula Municipal Code, which shall read as follows:
"CHAPTER: 11.10
CURFEW FOR MINORS
Sections:
11.10.010
11.10.020
11.10.030
11.10.040
11.10.050
Intent.
Curfew Established.
Exceptions to Curfew.
Violation of Curfew by Minor.
Responsibility of Adult for Curfew
Violations.
11.10.010 Intent. In enacting this Chapter, it
is the intent of the City Council to protect children of
immature age, to promote the safety and good order in the
community, and to reduce the incidence of juvenile criminal
and other anti-social behavior.
11.10.020 Curfew Established. It is unlawful
for any person under the age of eighteen (18) years to
loiter, idle, wander, stroll, play or be present in or upon
public streets, highways, roads, alleys, parks, playgrounds,
places or buildings between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 5:00
a.m. of the day immediately following.
11.10.030 Exceptions to Curfew. The provisions
of Section 11.10.020 shall not apply in the following
circumstances:
-1-
jec/ORD17631
(a) When the person who is under eighteen
(18) years of age is accompanied by his or her-parent,
guardian or other adult person having the care and custody
of the person who is under eighteen (18) years of age.
(b) When the person who is under eighteen
(18) years of age is returning directly home from school or
from a meeting, entertainment, recreational activity, dance,
or place of lawful employment.
(c) When the person who is under eighteen
(18) years of age is going directly from home to school or
to a school-sponsored meeting or to a place of lawful
employment.
(d) When the person who is under eighteen
(18) years of age is accompanied by his or her adult spouse.
(e) When the person who is under eighteen
(18) years of age is directly en route from school or from a
meeting, entertainment, recreational activity, dance or
place of lawful employment to a place where food is served
to the public. This exception shall continue during the
time which is reasonably required to obtain and consume food
at such place and to proceed directly home from such place.
(f) When the person who is under eighteen
(18) years of age is performing, or is en route directly
home from'performing, an emergency errand pursuant to the
request or direction of an adult person who is charged with
the care and custody of the minor performing the errand.
11.10.040
Punishment.
Violation of Curfew by Minor.
(a) Each person under the age of eighteen
(18) years, who violates subsection (a) of Section 11.10.020
of this Chapter shall be guilty of an infraction and shall
be dealt with in accordance with State law and procedures
governing the prosecution of minors who are charged with
infractions.
(b) Nothing contained in this Section shall
be construed to prohibit the diversion of juvenile violators
of Section 11.10.020 or of this Section 11.10.040 to non-
criminal programs for disposition of such violations, such
as youth court proceedings.
-2-
j ec/ORDi7631
11.10.050 Responsibility of Adult for Curfew
Violations. Each parent, guardian or other adult person
having the legal care or custody of a person under the age
of eighteen (18) years, who causes, permits, aids, abets,
suffers or conceals the violation of any provision of
Section 11.10.020, or who conspires with any other person to
the end that any provision of Section 11.10.020 shall be
violated, shall be guilty of an infraction or a misdemeanor
in accordance with the provisions of Sections 1.01.200 of
this Code and, upon the conviction thereof, shall be
punished in accordance with the provisions of Section
1.01.220 of this Code."
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. The city Council hereby
declares that the provisions of this Ordinance are severable
and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction
shall hold any sentence, paragraph, or section of this
Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
SECTION 4. NOTICE OF ADOPTION. The City Clerk
shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall
cause the same to be posted as required by law.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall
be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of
this Ordinance and cause copies of this Ordinance to be
posted in three designated posting places.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this
, 1990.
day of
RON PARKS
MAYOR
ATTEST:
F. D. ALESHIRE
city Clerk
-3-
j ec/ORDI7631
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
ss.
I, F. D. Aleshire, City Clerk of the City of
Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance
No. 90- was duly introduced and placed upon its first
reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the
day of , 1990, and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City
Council on the day of , 1990, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
F. D. ALESHIRE
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field
City Attorney
-4-
jec/ORD17631
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, F. D. Aleshire, City Clerk of the City of
Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance
No. 90- was duly introduced and placed upon its first
reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the
day of , 1990, and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City
Council on the day of , 1990, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
F. D. ALESHIRE
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field
City Attorney
-4-
jec/ORD17631
Ordinance No.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
ss
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
FRANK D. ALESHIRE, being first duly sworn, deposes
and says:
That he is the duly appointed and qualified City
Clerk of the City of Temecula;
That in compliance with City Resolution No. 89-9 on
December 1, 1989, ORDINANCE NO. 90- was caused to be
posted in three (3) places in the City of Temecula, to wit:
Temecula Library
Temecula Chamber of Commerce
Temecula Post Office
F. D. ALESHIRE, CITY CLERK
-5-
§'598b PgSAL CODE
aires away, or aeeepts any ~ traditionally or commonly kept as a pot or companion with the sole
person use any part of the animal for food. '
any livestock, poultry, fin~, ahell ~ or any other agr/cultm-al commodfty produced in this state_
Nor. shall *hh 8ec~on be construed to interfere w2h the lawful HIIi.g of wi~!life, or the hwfitl
of.any. other animal under the laws of this State pe~,~g to game animals..
(Added byStm.1980, c. 490, §
§ 599aa. 8tizure d fighting animals and birds. pnraphemnUa, et,~ aHMavitofoffieu'; t'ustody
or seized property;, forfeiture and destruction or .redelivery
§ ~ ~'ew "t~"ng m;-dt.,.e-.,or~ enumeration
~ ' * No~wl"'u,siindi~ Section 6(~8, ever~ person who Willfully co~s · tresp~ by any of the
followins sets h gufity of ~ mbdeme~sor. "
(~) 8t~t~ time. cott~ dow~ &stroyin~,-or 'mjm~ any kind of wood or'timber stand~
(b) Carry~ away time. Carry~ away any kind of wood or timber ~ on tho~ lands.
(c) Injury to or mtmernn~ from I~id. M~3~'~ous~ ;'mjuring ~r severing from ~ frmehold'of
(d) SoU reme,~ Digging, t~idng, or carrying 8way from ny !or *situated within the limits*of any
incorporated '.c~.., without the !iee~me of the owner or legal occupant, ny earth, soD, or ,tone.
(e) Soil remo~ erom p~,Uc propo~. Digging: taking, o~ e~ng ,w~y f~om !and in ~ny city
~11ey, avenue, or pm~ without the license of the proper authorities, any.earth,. soft, oF stone.
(O Highway ~ .~. MaUc~mb tnr~g dow~ danu~ing, mumatin~, or &groying any ~
afgnboard, or notiee piacod upon, .or a~ to, any property belonging to the state, or to any city,
county, city and emma, town or village, or upon any property ot any person, by the state or by tu
mmmmbfie anoc~ which sign, signboard or notice is rutended to indicate.or designate a road, or
a highway, or is in_t~__ to dirt~t travelers f~om one point to another, or relates to ~res, ~ controt,
or any other nmttor involving the pzotection of the property, or putting up, L4Tndng, hstening,
vffinge, or ded~____t~!~ to the public, or upon any property o~ any pet~on, without Ueenso ~rom the
owner, any not~e, adt,J'-_ ~nt, or dewJgnat~on o~, or any nanhe for luly commodity, witether for
(g) Oyster lamb. Entering upon any lands owned by any other person whereon oysters or other
sheil~ are planted or growing;, or 'injuring, pthering, or carrying aw~y. any oy~tern or other
~ planted, gl~whg, or on any such lands, whether covered by water' or not, without the
!ieenne of the owner or iepl occupant; or deRtoying or r~moving, or causing to be removed or
destroyed, any st~__es, mazim, fences, or ~igns intended to designate the bounda_Hes and limits o! any
such lands.
(h) Fen~e~, g~am mul mlgn~ W/~rfu!ly oponing, tearing down, or other~ destroying any fence
open without the ~ pro'mission o~ the owner, or maliciously tetr~g down, routflaring, or
destzoying any sign, ~ or other notice forbidding shooting on private proport~.
(J) Firm& BufidJng :fires upon any lands owned by another where signs forbMd~ng aresprom are
dhplayed at intervals not greater than one nu*le along the exterior boundaz~es and at all roads and
~ ente~ng the lands, without first having obtahed written permition from the owner o! the
lnds or the owner's agent, or the person in law~ poue~ion.
4J) Purpose to ~ Entering any lands, whether unenelom~l or enclosed by fenco, for. the
pF, N&L CODE
oSstructing, or '~g any lawful bus~ _m?
owner's ~gent Or by the l~on in .lawful 1
(k) po~ed butds. ~ntering any lands
.... .I...a ~ entering the mmm
u,~t~ ~r fm'lln~ to leave the !and
O) ....s qenFor by t~e person
hunting on the lands, or
(3) p,~oving; '* "m~ng,'unlecking, or t~
lands, or
(4) D~r~ng Shy firearn~
(/) Oecupation. Entering tnd occupy
consent of the owner, the owner's agent,
- (m) Drivt. f on priv~ hnt
.,~- real oro~x~ty belonging to-or .
'~- * %. ~ith0ut the consent ox
general public,
structures.belon~ng to or mw~m;
bein~ .?p~.~t~l_,to leave by (1) · Peace
person in lawrut possession, and upon be'
the request of the owner, the owner;s
ownera qent, or the per,on. h.hw~. P
¼wt~l ~m~ou ~tudl mate a _~tTara~e. _ *
r----:. · ' w~h a tre
h ¼wfu] posms~.n ~s sbent from the
peaco offi~s asshm~ce maybe ~
Section 1140) of 'Dr~ionzm ua~
otherw~ ~uspocted of violating or
public and which has siL, M posr, e~ at
(r) Hoteb or motelL Refusing or:
PENAL CODE
~sing or having another person use any part of
sses, imports into this state, sells, buys,
~ kept as a pet or companion with the sole
for the purpose of using or having another
with the production, marketing, or dispozal of
agricul~ commodity produced in this state.
he lawful idllinE of wfldl~e, or the lawful id!iing
ruefloe or redeUvery
who wffifully co~mlts a trespass by any of the
r injur~ any kind of wood or'limber S~C~g
~ of wood or _~er lying on those lands.
PENAL CODE § 602
obstructing, or injuring any lawful business or occupation carried on by the owner of the land, the
owner's agent or by the person in lawful possession.
(k) Posted laad~ Entering any lands under cultivation or enclosed by fence, belonging to, or
occupied by, another, or entering upon uncul(ivated or unenclosed lands where signs forbidding
the owner o! the land, the
~11 ro~ds and muqz entering the mnus wnnout tae wrn~ l~.r-~ ·
owner's agent or of the person in lawful posse~ion, and
(1) Re~ing or failing to leave the lands immediately upon being requested by the owner og the
- !and, the owner's agnnt or by the person in lawful possession to leave the lands, or
(2) Tearing down, m'uhqating, or destroying any sign, signboard, or notice forbidding trespass' or
hunting on the lands, or
($) Removing, injuring, unlocking, or tampering with any lock on any gate on or leading into the
lallds, or
(4) Discharging any firenn~ . . f
., ,,~.~,A. k~rln~ and occuuving real property or structures 0 any kind without the
consent of the owner, the owner's agent, or the perso possess
'--' - ' or la occup)ea oy anomer &no Juwwu ..oo~ w ,~ vl~.,-~,
upon preper~..?~ ........ · o~- ^wner the owner's agent, or the person m lawful
: .(n) Rdmal to ienve pdvlte property. Refusing or ~._e. to leave land,' real pro .p~'ty, or
.. mllon in ~ ~~ ~d u~n ~m~ .. oy ............ : .... ~m ~ ~ ~e
~y ~m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'of ~F " ~ b~ ~ ~, d~ w~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ or ~e ~, o~s ~t or ~n
~,-or mrying away from land in any city _.;-- .~r..~....i~.w~_ rosy be ~e f~ a ~ no~ m ~ m ~ y~ ~ ~-~ ~
~. 11~) ~ ' '~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ............ ~- -~ for
~u~~~.~la ... ·
~., ~~u.tofa~t~~t~~~~
o~or~y~,m~,W~or ~ ~~. . ~ ......... or'~.
~ ~ ~ f~ ~y ~, w~ for .. '-~'- ...... ~- ~ *~ ~ ~ s~ ~ve ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~y ~ ~n ~n o~ or o~er ~, at k~ ~t ~ ~ o~ ~e ~ong me ~- ~----
~, ~ ~ a~X ~ o~ or o~ ~ ~h ~.~.
~ ~ by ~'~ ~ ~out ~e (p) ~ ~ ~ ~ b~. ~ or g~g~ ~ve a ~b~ b~ of a ~b~
~ ~ .... ~ s~ ~~ ~. su~
~~~~'~yfen~ ............ ~ ' '
~~~'~' (r) aMor~ ~~~hves~or~ ~b~sb~ob~
~ ~'2 (~~ ~*~ ~ ~ o~ 't~e ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ '~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~e.
~ d.bam. by ..t.d~ * *~ 29
§ 602' P~ COD~
owner, whether or not g~rally open to the publ~ after having been hiformed by a p~mce officer at
~ ~uest ~ ~ owner, ~ own~s ~ or mean in h~ ~~ ~ ~n ~
~o~ by ~ ~ o~ ~t ~ or ~e k ~ at ~ ~u~t of the o~, ~ o~$ ~n~
or ~ ~ h k~ '~~ ~t the ~ k not ~ to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
or ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~g ~ ~ ~ve.~ pm~ ~ ~e ~ ~ k ~
~~~~ffi~by~o~,~o~s~or~e~n~h~
IN~e
~okfffuJ~W~x~dwre. 7101~.GmL 22~, 7-7-88.
p~E CODE
TITLE 15. MI
(~) ',~~' means ~e U~ersi~ o:
any campus or ~' o~ ~
(~) ,,~~ ~11e~" m~ ~Y Pt
~n ~e. .
i~L ~ of hw'~
SSIONS CODE
~ ~rie~or for
~ .~ Under~
under 21
purchase any
'employee, is
aore than one
f this section
I fif~ dollars
36 hours of
~yed or is not
ervice, as the
· ~s defense
a document
,r subdiv~ion
fie operator's
rmed Forces,
;.cture of the
~r agent, de-
~' evidence in
by Sections
~- of any
any liceasee~
~ or her own
or otherwise
meanor and
· ($250),' 'no
I to perform
~vice during
school, or a
:.cottrt. ·
1SS4. ~
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE
§ 25663
1~3 Amendment: Doubled the fine.
~ Ammdment: Added (1) "or her" wherever it appears; and (2) "; or the person shall be'required to
pe~)nn not less than 24 hours nor more than 32 hours of co~mumllity service during hours when the
p~w~on is not employed and is not attending school, or a combination of fine and community service as
d~'mined by the court".
C~l lur ~d (Rev) Criminal Law § 71.
~ of 198] legislation. 15 Pac I.J
§ 25662. Possession by person under 21 years of age; Seizure, destruction,
sad impoundment by peace office·
(a) Any person under the age of 21 years who has any alcoholic beverage in
his or her possession on any street or highway or in any public place or in
any place open to the public is guilty of a misdemeanor. This section does
not apply to possession by a person under the age of 21 years making a
delivery of an alcoholic beverage in pursuance of the order of his or her
parent or in pursuance of his or her employment.-
(b) Unless otherwise'provided by law, where a peace officer has lawfully
rotered the 'premises, the' peace officer may seize any alcoholic beverage in
plain view which is in the possession' of, or provided to,-a person under the
age of 21 years at social gatherings, when those gatherings are open to the
public, 10 or more persons under the age of 21 years are participating,
persons under the age of 21 years are consuming alcoholic beverages, and
there is no supervision of the social gathering bya parent or guardian of one
or more of the participants. ~ ,
Where a peace officer has seized alcoholic beverages pursuant to this
subdivision, the officer may destroy any alcoholic beverage contained in. an
opened container and in the possession of, or provided to, a person under
the age of 21 years, and, with respect to alcoholic beverages in unopened
containers, the officer shall impound those beverages for a period not to
exceed seven working days pending a request for the release of.~those
beverages by a person 21 years of age or older who is the lawful owner or
resident of the property upon which the alcoholic beverages were seized. If
no one requests release of the seized alcoholic beverages wi~in~ the time
limits prescribed herein, those beverages may be destroyed.
~ S~ts 1988 ch 680 scc L
1988 A ~-~ -~ Added (I) subdivision d~sisnation (a); (2) ~o~ !m~'whe~ever it appears in subd (a);
mid O) subd (b).
Review of Selected 1988 l.,esishtion. 20 P~:ific LJ 68~.
§ 25663. Employment of person-under 21; .Employment of person under 18
by off-sale !icensee .-
(a) Every person who' employs or uses the services of any person under the
age of 2t years in or on that portion'of any ~ises, during business hours,
which are .primarily designed and used for the sale and service of alcoholic
beverages for consumption on the premises is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(b) Any off-sale licensee who employs or uses the services of any person
under the age of 18 years for the sale of alcoholic beverages shall be subject
to suspension or revocation of his or her license, except that a person under
the age of 18 years may be employed or used for those purposes if that
person is under the continuous .supervision of a person 21 years of age or
older.
[.to 8us & ~ cooel 49
r
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
AB#:
HTG: ?/zo/9o
OEPT:)~zB
TITLE:
C~%BLE TELEVTB~ON
CITY ATTY'
CITY MGR ~
RECOI,~END&TTON:
Waive further reading, read by title
only, and introduce an ordinance
entitled:
ORDINANCE NO.
An ordinance of the City of Temecula
governing Cable Television Franchises
hereinafter granted by the City of
Temecula.
BACKGROUND: At the May 15, 1990 City Council Meeting,
the City Council received and filed a Cable Television report by
staff, directed staff to reject all Cable Television license
applications, and directed the City Manager to hire a Cable
Television consultant to draft a new City Cable Television
Ordinance. The May 15, 1990 staff report was received and filed
and staff has rejected the one Cable Television license
application received from Jones Intercable on May 8, 1990. The
City Manager hired Mr. Carl Pilnick and Mr. Mike Friedman of
Telecommunications Management Corporation (TMC) to draft the new
City Cable Television Ordinance.
TMC provided a draft City Ordinance for City review by staff on
May 24, 1990. Staff reviewed the draft and forwarded comments to
TMC for discussion and incorporation into the Ordinance on June 4,
1990. On June 5, 1990, TMC provided the City with an updated
draft Ordinance incorporating the City's recommended additions and
clarifications. On June 7, 1990, copies of the draft Ordinance
were forwarded to Jones Intercable and Inland Valley Cablevision
for comments. The City requested their response by June 15, 1990.
Both Jones and Inland requested an extension until June 20, 1990,
and their request was granted. On June 20, 1990, Jones presented
their recommendations to staff and TMC. Inland Valley Cablevision
did not respond. On June 29, 1990, TMC and staff reviewed Jones'
comments and accepted the majority of their recommendations. The
draft Ordinance was once again updated on July 2, 1990 to reflect
Jones' recommendations.
Mr. Carl Pilnick and Mr. Mike Friedman of Telecommunications
Management Corporation are available tonight to either present to
the Council a short overview of the Ordinance or answer the
Council's questions.
FISCAL IMPACT: With the direct competition that the
Ordinance creates and with the addition of a second Cable
Television Operator within the City, it is anticipated that Cable
Television availability and expansion will occur. This action
will increase the City's franchise fee revenues. Additionally,
with the Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) access,
equipment and facility savings will also be realized.
ATT&CHMENT=
Ordinance No. : An Ordinance of the
City of Temecula governing Cable
Television Franchises hereinafter granted
by the City of Temecula.
6/5/90
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
GOVERNING CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISES
HEREINAFTER GRANTED BY THE CITY OF
TEMECULA.
- i -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Title Page
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.10
1.11
1.12
1.13
1.14
1.15
1.16
1.17
1.18
1.19
1.20
1.21
1.22
1.23
Intent .................. 1
Definitions ............... 2
Franchise to Install and Operate . . 7
Franchise Required ........... 8
Term of the Franchise ........... 9
Franchise Territory ............ 10
Federal or State Jurisdiction ...... 11
Franchise Non-Transferable ........ 13
Geographical Coverage .......... 16
Nonexclusive Franchise .......... 17
Multiple Franchises ......... 18
Franchise Applications .......... 20
Applications - Contents .......... 21
Solicitation of Applications ....... 22
Minimum Consumer Protection and
Service Standards ........... 23
Additional Service Standards ...... 30
Franchise Fee ............... 31
Security Fund ............... 33
Design and Construction Requirements . . 34
Technical Standards ............ 37
Hold Ilarmless ............... 38
Insurance ................ ~. 39
Records Required and Grantor's
Right to Inspect ............. 42
- ii -
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Section
1.24
1.25
1.26
1.27
1.28
1.29
1.30
1.31
1.32
1.33
1.34
1.35
1.36
1.37
1.38
1.39
1.40
1.41
1.42
1.43
Title ~age
Annual Reports ............ 43
Copies of Federal and State Reports .... 44
Public Reports ............. 45
Complaint Report and Opinion Survey .... 46
Privacy Report .............. 47
Reports - General ............. 48
Annual Review of System Performance .... 49
Special Review of System Performance . 50
Special Evaluation Sessions ........ 51
Remedies for Franchise Violations ..... 52
Grantor's Power to Revoke ......... 54
Procedure for Remedying Franchise
Violations ............... 55
Force Majeure; Grantee's Inability
to Perform ............... 57
Abandonment or Removal of
Franchise Property ............ 58
Restoration by Grantor:
Reimbursement of Costs .......... 60
Extended Operation and Continuity
of Services ....... 61
Receivership and Foreclosure ....... 62
Rights Reserved to'Grantor ........ 64
Rights of Individuals ........... 65
Separability ............. 67
ORDINANCE NO.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
The following Chapter is added to the City of T~mecula
Municipal Code:
CHAPTER CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISES
Section 1.1 Intent
A. The City of Temecula, pursuant to Government Code
Section 53066, is authorized to grant one or more nonexclusive
revocable franchises to construct, operate, maintain and
reconstruct cable television systems within the City limits.
B. The City Council finds that the development of cable
television and communications systems has the potential of
having great benefit and impact upon the residents of Temecula.
Because of the complex and rapidly changing technology
associated with cable television, the City Council further
finds that the public convenience, safety and general welfare
can best be served by establishing regulatory powers which
should be vested in the City or such persons as the City shall
designate. It is the intent of this Chapter and subsequent
amendments to provide for and specify the means to attain the
best possible cable television service to the public and any
franchises issued pursuant to this Chapter shall be deemed to
include this finding as an integral part thereof.
- 2 -
Section 1.2
Definitions.
For the purpose of this Chapter, the following terms,
phrases, words and their derivations shall have the meaning
given herein. Words used in the present tense include the
future, words in the plural number include the singular number,
and words in the singular number include the plural number.
Words not defined shall be given their common and ordinary
meaning.
A. "Basic Cable Service" means any service tier which
includes the retransmission of local television broadcast
signals.
B. "Cable Television System" or "System", also referred
to as "Cable Communications System" or "Cable System", means
a facility consisting of a set of closed transmission paths
and associated signal generation, reception, and control
equipment, that is designed to provide cable service which
includes video programming and which is provided to multiple
subscribers within a community, but such term does not include:
(1) A facility that serves only to retransmit
the television signals of one or more television broadcast
stations.
(2) A facility that serves only subscribers in
one or more multiple unit dwellings under common ownership,
control, or management, unless such facility uses any public
rights-of-way.
(3) A facility of a common carrier, except that
such facility shall be considered a cable system to the extent
such facility is used in the transmission of video prographing
directly to subscribers; or
(4) Any facilities of any electric utility used
solely for operating its electric utility system.
C. "Cable Service" means the total of the following:
(1) The one-way transmission to subscribers of
video programming or other programming service; and
(2) Subscriber interaction, if any, which is required
for the selection of such video programming or other programming
service.
D. "Channel" or "Cable Channel" means a portion of the
electromagnetic frequency spectrum which is used in a cable
system and which is capable of delivering a television channel
as defined by the Federal Communications Commission.
E. "Council" means the City Council of the City of
Temecula.
F. "Franchise" means an initial authorization, or renewal
thereof issued by the City Council, whether such authorization
is designated as a franchise, permit, license, resolution,
contract, certificate, agreement, or otherwise, which authorizes
the construction or operation of a cable system.
G. "Franchise Agreement" means a franchise grant ordinance,
or a contractual agreement, containing the specific provisions
of the franchise granted, including references, specifications,
requirements and other related matters.
- 4 -
If. "Franchise Fees" means any tax, fee or assessment
of any kind imposed by a franchising authority or other govern-
mental entity on a Grantee or cable subscriber, or both, solely
because of their status as such. The term "franchise fee"
does not include:
(1) Any tax, fee or assessment of general appli-
cability (including any such tax, fee, or assessment imposed
on both utilities and cable operators or their services, but
not including a tax, fee or assessment which is unduly discrim-
inatory against cable operators or cable subscribers);
(2) Capital costs which are required by the franchise
to be incurred by Grantee for public, educational, or governmental
access facilities:
(3) Requirements or charges incidental to the
awarding or enforcing of the franchise, including payments
for bonds, security funds, letters of credit, insurance,
indemnification, penalties, or liquidated damages; or
(4) Any fee imposed under Title 17, United States
Code.
I. "Grantee" means any "person" receiving a franchise
pursuant to this Chapter and under the gr~nting franchise
ordinance or agreement, and its lawful successor, transferee
or assignee.
J. "Grantor" means the City of Temecula as represented
by the Council or any delegate acting within the scope of its
jurisdiction.
- 5 -
K. "Gross Annual Receipts" means the annual gross
receipts received by a Grantee from all sources of operations
of the Cable Television System within the City utilizing the
public streets and rights-of-way for which a franchise is
required in order to deliver such cable service, excluding
refundable deposits, except that any sales, excise or other
taxes collected for direct pass-through to local, State or
Federal government shall not be included.
L. "Initial Service Area" means the area of the City
which will receive service initially, as set forth in the
Franchise Agreement.
M. "Installation" means the connection of the system
to subscribers' terminals, and the provision of service.
N. "Person" means an individual, partnership, associa-
tion, joint stock company, trust, corporation or governmental'
entity.
O. "Public, Educational or Government Access Facilities"
or "PEG Access Facilities" means the total of the following:
(1) Channel capacity designated for public,
education, or governmental use; and
(2) Facilities and equipment for the use of such
channel capacity.
P. "Section" means any section, subsection, or provision
of this Chapter.
Q. "Service Area" or "Franchise Area" means the entire
geographic area within the City as it is now constituted or
may in the future be constituted.
- 6 -
R. "Service Tier" means a category of cable service or
other services provided by a Grantee and for which a separate
rate is charged by the Grantee.
S. "State" means the State of California.
T. "Street" means each of the following which have been
dedicated to the public or are hereafter dedicated to the
public and maintained under public authority or by others and
located within the City limits: streets, roadways, highways,
avenues, lanes, alleys, sidewalks, easements, rights-of-way
and similar public property and areas that the Grantor shall
permit to be included within the definition of street from
time to time.
U. "Subscriber" means any person who or which elects
to subscribe to, for any purpose, a service provided by the
Grantee by means of or in connection with the cable system.
- 7 -
Section 1.3 Franchise to Install and Operate.
A franchise granted by the City under the provisions of
this Chapter shall encompass the following purposes:
A. To engage in the business of providing cable television
service, and such other services as may be permitted by law, to
subscribers within the designated service area.
B. To erect, inst~11, construct, repair, rebuild,
reconstruct, replace, maintain, and retain, cable, lines,
related electronic equipment, supporting structures,
appurtenances, and other property in connection with the
operation of a cable system in, on, over, under, upon, along
and across streets or other public places within the designated
service area.
C. To maintain and operate said franchise properties
for the origination, reception, transmission, amplification,
and distribution of television and radio signals and for the
delivery of cable services.
D. To set forth the obligations of a Grantee under the
franchise.
- 8 -
Section 1.4 Franchise Required.
It shall be unlawful for any person to construct, install
or operate a cable television system in the City within any
public street without a properly granted franchise awarded
pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter. '
Section 1.5 Term of the Franchise.
A. A franchise granted hereunder shall be for a term
established in the Franchise Agreement, commencing on the
Grantor's adoption of an ordinance authorizing the franchise.
B. A franchise granted hereunder may be renewed upon
application by the Grantee pursuant to the provisions of
applicable State and Federal law and of this Chapter.
Section 1.6 Franchise Territory.
Any franchise shall be within all the territorial limits
of the City, and within any area added to the City during the
term of the franchise.
- 11 -
Section 1.7 Federal or State Jurisdiction.
A. This Chapter shall be construed in a manner consistent
with all applicable Federal and State laws. Whenever the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) or Public Utilities
Commission (PUC) of the State of California or any o~her Federal
or State agency shall now or hereafter exercise any paramount
jurisdiction over any specific provisions of this Chapter,
such paramount jurisdiction shall preempt or preclude the
exercise of like jurisdiction by the City. Any modification
of such Federal or State law shall to the extent applicable
be considered a part of this Chapter as of the effective date
of such modification.
B. In the event that the State or Federal government
discontinues preemption in any area of cable communication
over which it currently exercises jurisdiction in such manner
as to expand rather than limit municipal regulatory authority,
Grantor may, if it so elects, adopt rules and regulations in
these areas, provided that such rules and regulations shall
not apply to any franchise issued pursuant to this Chapter
prior to the adoption of such rules and re~lulations to the
extent they materially adversely affect such franchise, including
without limitation requirements with respect to system rebuilds,
channel capacity, system design, construction and performance
requirements, public, educational or governmental access
facilities, support for any such facilities, interconnect
commitments, activation of interactive capability or institutional
- 12 -
networks. Such new municipal regulatory powers may, however,
affect existing franchises with respect to franchise renewal
procedures, franchise fees, consumer protection provisions,
regulation of rates, technical standards and related provisions.
C. This Chapter shall apply to all franchises'granted or
renewed after the effective date of this Chapter. It shall
further apply to the extent permitted by applicable Federal
or State law to all existing franchises granted prior to
the effective date of this Chapter.
- 13 -
Section 1.8 Franchise Non-Transferable.
A. Grantee shall not sell, transfer, lease, assign,
sublet or dispose of, in whole or in part, either by forced
or involuntary sale, or by ordinary sale, contract, consoli-
dation or otherwise, the franchise or any of the rights or
privileges therein granted, without the prior consent of the
Council and then only upon such terms and conditions as may
be prescribed by the Council, which consent shall not be
unreasonably denied or delayed. Any attempt to sell, transfer,
lease, assign or otherwise dispose of the franchise without
the consent of the Council shall be null and void.
B. The requirements of Subsection A. shall apply to any
change in the control of Grantee. The word "control" as used
herein is not limited to major stockholders or partnership
interests, but includes actual working control in whatever
manner exercised. In the event that Grantee is a corporation,
prior approval of the Council shall be required where ownership
or control of more than ten percent (10%) of the voting stock
of Grantee is acquired by a person or group of persons acting
in concert, none of whom own or control the voting stock of
the Grantee as of the effective date of the franchise,
singularly or collectively.
C. Grantee shall notify Grantor in writing of any fore-
closure or any other judicial sale of all or a substantial
part of the franchise property of the Grantee or upon the
termination of any lease or interest covering all or a
- 14 -
substantial part of said franchise property. Such notification
shall be considered by Grantor as notice that a change in
control of ownership of the franchise has taken place and
the provisions under this Section governing the consent of
Grantor to such change in control of ownership shall apply.
D. For the purpose of determining whether it shall
consent to such change, transfer, or acquisition of control,
Grantor may inquire into the qualifications of the prospective
transferee or controlling party, and Grantee shall assist
Grantor in any such inquiry. In seeking Grantor's consent
to any change of ownership or control, Grantee shall have
the responsibility of insuring that transferee completes an
application in form and substance reasonably satisfactory to
Grantor, which application shall include the information
required under Subsections A. through H. of Section 1.13
of this Chapter. An application shall be submitted to Grantor
not less than sixty (60) days prior to the date of transfer.
The transferee shall be required to establish that it possesses
the qualifications and financial and technical capability to
operate and maintain the system and comply with all franchise
requirements for the remainder of the term of the franchise.
If, after considering the legal, financial, character, technical
and other public interest qualities of the applicant and deter-
mining that they are satisfactory, the Grantor finds that such
transfer is acceptable, the Grantor shall transfer and assign the
rights and obligations of such franchise as in the public interest.
The consent of the Grantor to such transfer shall not be unreason-
ably denied or delayed, provided that in the absence of overriding
- 15 -
reasons to limit the number of franchises to one (1) in the City,
Grantor shall presume that competition among at least two (2) cable
operators is beneficial to the City and its residents, and accordingly,
shall not consent to any transfer that would result in a reduction
in competition.
E. Any financial institution having a pledge of the
Grantee or its assets for the advancement of money f~r
the construction and/or operation of the franchise shall
have the right to notify the Grantor that it or its designee
satisfactory to the Grantor shall take control of and operate
the cable television system, in the event of a Grantee default
in its financial obligations. Further, said financial insti-
tution shall also submit a plan for such operation within
thirty (30) days of assuming such control that will insure
continued service and compliance with all franchise require-
ments during the term the financial institution exercises
control over the system. The financial institution shall not
exercise control over the system for a period exceeding one
(1) year unless extended by the Grantor in its discretion
and during said period of time it shall have the right to
petition the Grantor to transfer the franchise to another
Grantee.
F. Grantee shall reimburse Grantor for Grantor's reasonable
processing and review expenses in connection with a transfer
of the franchise or of control of the franchise, including
without limitation costs of administrative review, financial,
legal and technical evaluation of the proposed transferee,
consultants (including technical and legal experts and all
costs incurred by such experts), notice and publication costs
and document preparation expenses.
- 16 -
Section 1.9 Geographical Coverage.
A. Grantee shall design, construct and maintain the
cable television system to have the capability to pass every
dwelling unit in the City, subject to any line extension
requirements of the franchise agreement.
B. After service has been established by activating trunk
and/or distribution cables for any service area, Grantee shall
provide service to any requesting subscriber within that service
area within thirty (30) days from the date of request, provided
that the Grantee is able to secure all rights-of-way necessary
to extend service to such subscriber within such thirty (30)
day period on reasonable terms and conditions.
Section 1.10 Nonexclusive Franchise.
Any franchise granted shall be nonexclusive. The Grantor
specifically reserves the right to grant, at any time, such
additional franchises for a cable television system or
any component thereof, as it deems appropriate.
- 18 -
Section 1.11 Multiple Franchises.
A. Grantor may grant any number of franchises on a City-
wide basis. Grantor may limit the number of franchises granted,
based upon, but not necessarily limited to, the following
considerations: ,
(1) The capacity of the public rights-of-way to
accommodate multiple coaxial cables in addition to the cables,
conduits and pipes of the utility systems, such as electrical
power, telephone, gas and sewerage.
(2) The benefits that may accrue to cable subscribers
as a result of cable system competition, such as lower rates
and improved service.
(3) The disadvantages that may result from cable
system competition, such as the requirement for multiple pedestals
on residents' property, and the disruption arising from numerous
excavations of the rights-of-way.
B. In the absence of overriding reasons to limit the number
of franchises to one (1) in the City, Grantor shall presume
that competition between at least two (2) cable operators is
beneficial to the City and its residents. Each Grantee awarded
a franchise to serve the entire City shall offer service to
all residences in the City, in accordance with construction and
service schedules mutually agreed upon between Grantor and Grantee,
with a minimum to achieve thirty-three percent (33%) service to
existing residences by the expiration of one-third (1/3) of the
franchise term and one hundred percent (100%) service to remaining
residences by the expiration of one-half (1/2) of the franchise
term.
- 19 -
C. Developers of new residential housing with underground
utilities shall provide conduit to accommodate cables for at
least two (2) cable systems in accordance with the provisions
of Section 1.19.D.
D. Grantor may require that any new Grantee be responsible
for its own underground trenching and the costs associated
therewith, if, in Grantor's opinion, the rights-of-way in any
particular area cannot feasibly and reasonably accommodate
additional cables.
- 20 -
Section 1.12 Franchise Applications.
Any person desiring a franchise or franchise renewal for
a cable television system shall file an application with the City.
A reasonable nonrefundable application fee established by the
City shall accompany the application or renewal application
to cover all costs associated with processing and reviewing
the application, including without limitation costs of admin-
istrative review,.financial, legal and technical evaluation
of the applicant, consultants (including technical and legal
experts and all costs incurred by such experts), notice and
publication requirements with respect to the consideration
of the application and document preparation expenses. In the
event such costs exceed the application fee, the selected
applicant(s) shall pay the difference to the City within thirty
(30) days following receipt of an itemized statement of such
costs.
- 21 -
Section 1.13 Applications - Contents.
An application for a franchise for a cable television
system shall contain, where applicable:
A. A statement as to willingness to serve the entire City
of Temecul .~.
B. Resume of prior history of applicant, including the
expertise of applicant in the cable television field.
C. List of the l~artners, general and limited, of the
applicant, if a partnership, or the percentage of stock owned
or controlled by each shareholder, if a corporation.
D. List of officers, directors and managing employees
of applicant, together with a description of the background
of each such person;
E. The names and addresses of any parent or subsidiary
of applicant or any other business entity owning or controlling
applicant in whole or in part, or owned or controlled in whole
or in part by applicant;
F. A current financial statement of applicant verified
by a CPA audit or otherwise certified to be true, complete
and correct to the reasonable satisfaction of the City;
G. Proposed construction and service schedule.
H. Any reasonable additional information that the City
deems applicable.
Section 1.14 Solicitation of Applications.
A. The Council may, by advertisement or any other means,
solicit and call for applications for cable television system
franchises, and may deem and fix any date upon or before
which the same shall be received by the City, and may specify
any other times, terms, conditions, or limitations respecting
the soliciting and receiving of such applications.
B. Upon receipt of any application for a franchise,
the Council shall refer the same to the City Manager, who
shall prepare a report and make his recommendations respecting
such application.
A public hearing shall be set prior to any franchise
grant, at a time and date approved by the Council.
Within sixty (60) days after the close of the hearing,
the Council shall make a decision based upon the evidence
received at the hearing as to whether or not the franchise(s)
should be granted, and, if granted, subject to what conditions.
The Council may grant one (1) or more franchises, or may
decline to grant any franchise.
- 23 -
Section 1.15 Minimum Consumer Protection and Service
Standards.
A. Grantee shall maintain a local office or offices to
provide the necessary facilities, equipment and persgnnel to
comply with the following consumer protection and standards
under normal conditions of operation:
(1) Sufficient toll-free telephone line capacity
during normal business hours to assure that a minimum of
ninety-five percent (95%) of all calls will be answered before
the sixth ring and ninety percent (90%) of all callers for
service will not be required to wait more than thirty (30) seconds
before being connected to a service representative.
(2) Emergency toll-free telephone line capacity
on a twenty-four (24) hour basis, including weekends and
holidays.
(3) A business and service office, within the City
open during normal business hours at least eight (8) hours
daily, and at least four (4) hours weekly on evenings or
weekends, and adequately staffed to accept subscriber payments
and respond to service requests and complaints.
(4) An emergency system maintenance and repair
staff, capable of responding to.and repairing major system
malfunction on a twenty-four (24) hour per day basis.
(5) An installation staff, capable of installing
service to any subscriber within seven (7) days after receipt
of a request, in all areas where trunk and feeder cable have
been activated.
- 24 -
(6) Grantee shall schedule, within a specified four
(4) hour time period, all appointments with subscribers for
installation or service.
B. Grantee shall render efficient service, make repairs
promptly, and interrupt service only for good cause and for
the shortest time possible. Scheduled interruptions, insofar
as possible, shall be preceded by notice and shall occur during
period of minimum use of the system, preferably between midnight
and six A.M. (6:00 A.M.).
C. Grantee shall maintain a written log, or an equivalent
stored in computer memory and capable of access and reproduction
in printed form, for all service interruptions and requests
for cable service.
D. The Grantee shall maintain a repair force of tech-
nicians capable of responding to subscriber requests for
service within the following time frames:
(1) For a system outage: Within two (2) hours,
including weekends, of receiving subscriber calls or requests
for service which by number identify a system. outage of sound
or picture of one (1) or more channels, affecting at least
ten percent (10%) of the subscribers of the system.
(2) For an isolated outage: Within twenty-four (24)
hours, including weekends, of receiving requests for service
identifying an isolated outage of sound or picture for one (1)
or more channels.
(3) For inferior signal quality: Within forty-eight
(48) hours, including weekends, of receiving a request for
service identifying a problem concerning picture or sound
quality.
Grantee .shall be deemed to have responded to a request
for service under the provisions of this Section when a tech-
nician arrives at the service location and begins work on the
problem. In the case of a subscriber not being home when the
technician arrives, the technician shall leave written notifica-
tion of arrival. Three (3) successive subscriber failures to
be present at an appointed time shall excuse Grantee of duty
to respond.
No charge shall be made to the subscriber for any service
call unless the service request can be demonstrated to be
both repeated and non-cable system in origin, or to involve
subscriber negligence.
E. Unless excused, Grantee shall determine the nature
of the problem within forty-eight (48) hours of beginning work
and resolve all cable system related problems within five (5)
business days unless technically infeasible. Failure to
resolve cable system related problems within thirty (30) days
shall be a material breach of this Agreement.
F. Upon five (5) days notice, Grantee shall establish
its compliance with any or all of the standards required above.
Grantee shall provide sufficient documentation to permit Grantor
to verify the compliance.
- 26 -
G. A repeated and verifiable pattern of non-compliance
with the consumer protection standards of A-E above, after
Grantee receipt of due notice and an opportunity to cure, may
be deemed a material breach of the Franchise Agreement.
H. Grantee shall establish written procedures ~or receiving,
acting upon and resolving subscriber complaints without inter-
vention by the Grantor. The written procedures shall prescribe
the manner in which a subscriber may submit a complaint either
orally or in writing specifying the subscriber's grounds for
dissatisfaction. Grantee shall file a copy of these procedures
with Grantor.
I. Grantor may determine, upon a review of a subscriber
complaint and the Grantee's decision, if any, whether further
action is warranted. In the event the Grantor does not initiate
further proceedings within fifteen (15) days of the filing of
the complaint, the Grantee's proposed action or resolution
shall be final. If the Grantor decides to initiate further
investigation, the Grantor shall allow the Grantee and the
subscriber to submit, within ten (10) days of notice thereof,
a written statement of the facts and arguments in support of
their respective positions. The Grantee or the subscriber may
request in such statement that a hearing be conducted by the
Grantor. Grantor shall give notice in writing of the time
and place for such hearing. The hearing shall be conducted
informally, and the parties may offer any information pertinent
to the dispute. The parties shall provide any additional
evidence, including testing reports from the Grantee, which
the Grantor may deem necessary to an understanding and
determination of the dispute. The Grantor shall issue a
written decision within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the
written statements or, if a hearing is requested, within
fifteen (15) days of the conclusion of the hearing, setting
forth the basis of the decision.
J. The Grantor may establish an escrow account wherein
a subscriber may deposit a disputed portion of the subscriber's
monthly service charge. If a subscriber either continues to
make full and timely payment of all monthly service charges
to Grantee or deposits any disputed portion of such monthly
service charges into said escrow account, Grantee shall not
discontinue service during the pendency of a complaint submitted
under the provisions of this ordinance. Any amount deposited
in the escrow account shall be paid to the Grantee or subscriber
in accordance with a final determination of a complaint.
Grantee shall advise all subscribers, in writing, of these
escrow provisions.
K. It shall be the right of all subscribers to continue
receiving service insofar as their financial and other obliga-
tions to the Grantee are honored. In the event that the
Grantee elects to rebuild, modify, or sell the
system, or the Grantor gives notice of intent to terminate or
not to renew the franchise, the Grantee shall act so as to
ensure that all subscribers receive continuous, uninterrupted
service so long as the franchise remains in force.
- 28 -
In the event of a change of Grantee, or in the event
a new operator acquires the system, the original Grantee
shall cooperate with the Grantor, new Grantee or operator
in maintaining continuity of service to all subscribers.
During such period, Grantee shall be entitled to the 'revenues
for any period during which it operates the system.
L. In the event Grantee fails to operate the system
for seven (7) consecutive days without prior approval or
subsequent excusal of the Grantor, the Grantor may, at its
option, operate the system or designate an operator until such
time as Grantee restores service under conditions acceptable
to the Grantor or a permanent operator is selected. If the
Grantor should fulfill this obligation for the Grantee, then
during such period as the Grantor fulfills such obligation,
the Grantor shall be entitled to collect all revenues from
the system, and the Grantee shall reimburse the Grantor for
all reasonabl~ costs or damages in excess of the revenues
collected by the Grantor that are the result of the Grantee's
failure to perform.
M. Every officer, agent, or employee of the Grantee or
its contractors or subcontractors who come into contact with
members of the public shall wear on their outer clothing a
photo-identification card in a form approved by Grantor.
Grantee shall account for all identification cards at all times.
Every vehicle of the Grantee or its contractors or subcontractors
- 29 -
shall be clearly identified as working for Grantee. The
Grantee's telephone number shall also be clearly marked on
all such vehicles. All such identification shall be returned
on termination of service or permanently defaced on the sale
of vehicle.
- 30 -
Section 1.16 Additional Service Standards.
Additional service standards and standards governing
consumer protection and response by Grantee to subscriber
complaints not otherwise provided for in this Chapter may be
established in the Franchise Agreement, and Grantee ~hall
comply with such standards in the operation of the cable
television system. A verified and continuing pattern of
noncompliance may be deemed a material breach of the franchise.
Section 1.17 Franchise Fee.
A. Following the issuance and acceptance of the franchise,
the Grantee shall pay to the Grantor a franchise fee in the
amount set forth in the Franchise Agreement.
B. The Grantor, on an annual basis, shall be furnished a
statement within sixty (60) days of the close of the calendar
year, either audited and certified by an independent Certified
Public Accountant or certified by a financial officer of the
Grantee, reflecting the total amounts of gross receipts and
all payments, deductions and computations for the period
covered by the payment. Upon ten (10) days prior'written
notice, Grantor shall have the right to conduct an independent
audit of Grantee's records, in accordance with Generally
Accepted Accounting Procedures, and if such audit indicates a
franchise fee underpayment of two percent (2%) or more, the
Grantee shall assume all reasonable costs of such an audit.
C. No acceptance of any payment by the Grantor shall be
construed as a release or as an accord and satisfaction of any
claim the Grantor may have for further or additional sums payable
as a franchise fee under this ordinance or for the performance
of any other obligation of the Grantee.
D. In the event that any franchise payment or recomputed
amount is not made on or before the dates specified herein,
Grantee shall pay as additional compensation:
(1) An interest charge, computed from such due date,
at an annual rate equal to the average rate of return on invested
funds of the Grantor during the period for which payment was due; and
- 32-
(2) If the payment is late by forty-five (45) days
or more, a sum of money equal to five percent (5%) of the amount
due in order to defray those additional expenses and costs
incurred by the Grantor by reason of delinquent payment.
E. Franchise fee payments shall be made in accordance
with the schedule indicated in the Franchise Agreement.
- 33-
Section 1.18 Security Fund.
A. Grantor may require Grantee to deposit into an interest
bearing account established by Grantor a sum established in
the Franchise Agreement as a security fund. This sum shall
be maintained on deposit for a term as provided in the Franchise
Agreement, with any interest payable to Grantee.
B. The security fund shall be available to Grantor to
satisfy any and all claims, liens and/or taxes due Grantor
from Grantee which arise by reason of construction, operation,
or maintenance of the system, and to satisfy any remedies or
liquidated damages arising out of a franchise breach, subject
to the procedures and amounts designated in the Franchise
Agreement.
C. Subject to Grantor approval, the security fund
requirements may be satisfied by conveyance of an irrevocable
letter of credit to the Grantor, or by provision of a corporate
surety bond, in a form approved by Grantor.
- 34 -
Section 1.19 Design and Construction Requirements.
A. Grantee shall not construct any cable system facilities
until Grantee has secured the necessary permits from Grantor,
or other cognizant public agencies.
B. In those areas of the City where transmission or
distribution facilities of the public utilities providing
telephone and electric power service are underground, the
Grantee likewise shall construct, operate and maintain its
transmission and distribution facilities therein underground.
C. In those areas of the City where Grantee's cables
are located on the above-ground transmission or distribution
facilities of the public utility providing telephone or electric
power service, and in the event that the facilities of both
such public utilities subsequently are placed underground,
then the Grantee likewise shall reconstruct, operate and
maintain its transmission and distribution facilities under-
ground, at Grantee's cost.
D. In the event of multiple franchisees desiring to
serve new residential develol~ments in which the electric power
and telephone utilities are underground, the following procedure
shall apply with respect to aceess to and utilization of under-
ground easements:
(1) The developer shall be responsible for contacting
and surveying all franchised cable operators to ascertain which
operators desire to provide cable television service to that
development. The developer may establish a reasonable deadline
to receive cable operator responses. The final development map
- 35 -
shall indicate the cable operators that have agreed to serve the
development.
(2) If one (1) or two (2) cable operators wish to
provide service, they shall be accommodated in the joint utilities
trench on a nondiscriminatory shared basis. If fewer than two
(2) operators indicate interest, the developer shall provide
conduit to accommodate two (2) sets of cable television cables
and dedicate to the City any initially unoccupied conduit.
The developer shall be entitled to recover the cost of such
initially unoccupied conduit in the event that Grantor sub-
sequently leases or sells occupancy or use rights to any Grantee.
(3) The developer shall provide at least ten (10)
working days notice of the date that utility trenches will be
open to the cable operators that have agreed to serve the
development. When the trenches are open, cable operators shall
have forty-eight (48) hours to begin the installation of their
cables, and five (5) days after beginning installation to complete
insta 11a tion.
(4! The final development map shall not be approved
until the developer submits evidence that:
(a) It has notified each Grantee that underground
utility trenches are to open as of an estimated date, and that
each Grantee will be allowed access to such trenches, including
trenches from proposed streets to individual homes or home sites,
on specified nondiscriminatory terms and conditions; and
(b) It has received a written notification from
each Grantee that the Grantee intends to install its facilities
during the open trench period on the specified terms and conditions,
or such other terms and conditions as are mutually agreeable to the
- 36 -
developer and Grantee, or has received no reply from a Grantee
within ten (10) days after its notification to such Grantee, in
which case the Grantee will be deemed to have waived its
opportunity to install its facilities during the open tJench period.
(5) Sharing the joint utilities trench shall be
subject to compliance with Public Utilities Commission and
utility standards. If such compliance is not possible, or if
three (3) or more cable operators desire to provide service to
the development, the developer shall provide a separate trench
for the cable television cables, with the entire cost shared
among the participating operators. With the concurrence of the
developer, the affected utilities and the cable operators,
alternative installation procedures, such as the use of deeper
trenches, may be utilized, subject to applicable law.
(6) Any cable operator wishing to serve an area where
the trenches have been closed shall be responsible for its own
trenching and associated costs.
(7) 'Phe City reserves the right to limit the number
of drop cables and/or pedestals per residence, or to require
that the drop cable(s) and/or pedestal(s) be utilized only by
the cable operator selected by the resident to provide service.
(8) The City reserves the right to grant an encroach-
ment permit to a cable franchise applicant to install conduit
and/or cable in anticipation of the granting of a franchise.
Such installations shall be at the applicant's risk, with no
recourse against the City in the event the pending franchise
application is not granted. The City may require an applicant
to provide a separate trench for its conduit and/or cable, at
the applicant's cost. The construction of such a separate
trench, if provided, shall be coordinated with, and subject to,
the developer's overall construction schedule.
- 37 -
Section 1.20 Technical Standards.
A. The Grantee shall construct, install, operate and
maintain its system in a manner consistent with all applicable
laws, ordinances, construction standards, governmental require-
ments, FCC technical standards, and any detailed standards set
forth in its Franchise Agreement. In addition, the Grantee
shall provide to the Grantor, upon request, a written report
of the results of the Grantee's annual proof of performance
tests conducted pursuant to FCC standards and guidelines.
B. Failure to maintain specified technical standards
shall constitute a material breach of the franchise.
- 38 -
Section 1.21 Hold Harmless.
Grantee shall indemnify, defend and hold Grantor, its
officers, agents and employees harmless from any liability,
claims, damages, costs or expenses, including reasonable
attorneys' fees, arising from injury to persons or damages to
property to the extent caused by any conduct undertaken by the
Grantee, its officers, agents or employees, by reason of the franchise;
Grantee shall at its sole cost and expense, upon demand of
Grantor, appear in and defend any and all suits, actions or
other legal proceedings, whether judicial, quasi-judicial,
administrative, legislative or otherwise, brought or instituted
or had by third persons or duly constituted authorities, against
or affecting Grantor, its officers, agents or employees, and
arising out of or pertaining to any conduct of the Grantee,
its agents or employees which is within the scope of this
indemnity.
- 39 -
Section 1.22 Insurance.
A. On or before commencement of franchise operations,
the Grantee shall obtain policies of liability, Workers' Compen-
sation and property insurance from companies authorized to
transact business in California by the Insurance Commissioner
of California.
B. The policy of liability insurance shall:
(1) Be issued to Grantee and name Grantor, its
officers, agents and employees as additional insureds;
(2) Indemnify for all liability for personal and
bodily injury, death and damage to property arising from
activities conducted and premises used pursuant to this Chapter
by providing coverage therefor, including but not limited to
coverage for:
o Negligent acts or omissions of Grantee
and its agents, servants and employees,
committed in the conduct of franchise
operations, and/or
° Use of motor vehicles;
(3) Provide a combined single limit for comprehen-
sive general liability and comprehensive automobile liability
insurance in the amount provided for in the Franchise Agreement.
Such insurance policy shall be subject to the review and
approval of Grantor's legal counsel; and
(4) Be noncancellable without thirty (30) days
prior written notice thereof directed to Grantor.
C. The policy of Worker's Compensation Insurance shall:
- 40 -
(1) Have been previously approved as to substance
and form by the California Insurance Commissioner;
(2) Cover all employees of Grantee who in the course
and scope of their employment are to conduct the franchise
operations; ,
(3) Provide for every benefit and payment presently
or hereinafter conferred by Division 4 of the Labor Code of the
State upon an injured employee, including vocational rehabilita-
tion and death benefits.
D. The policy of property insurance shall provide fire
insurance with extended coverage on the franchise property used
by Grantee in the conduct of franchise operations in an amount
adequate to enable Grantee to resume franchise operations
following the occurrence of any risk covered by this insurance.
E. Grantee shall file with Grantor prior to commencement
of franchise operations either certified copies of these insurance
policies or a certificate of insurance for each of the required
policies executed by the company issuing the policy or by a
broker authorized to issue such a certificate, certifying that
the policy is in force and providing the following information
with respect to said policy:
(1) The policy number;
(2) The date upon which the policy will become
effective and the date upon which it will expire;
(3) The names of the named insureds and any additional
insured required by this Chapter or the Franchise Agreement;
(4) The subject of the insurance;
- 41 -
and
insurance.
Fe
(5) The type of coverage provided by the insurance;
(6) Amount or limit of coverage provided by the
Conduct of franchise operations shall not 6ommence
until Grantee has complied with the aforementioned provisions
of this Section.
G. In the event Grantee fails to maintain any of the
above-described policies in full force and effect, Grantor
shall, upon forty-eight (48) hours notice to Grantee, have the
right to procure the required insurance and recover the cost
thereof from Grantee. Grantor shall also have the right to
suspend the franchise during any period that Grantee fails to
maintain said policies in full force and effect.
If. No more than once during any three (3) year period,
Grantor shall have the right to order Grantee to increase the
amounts of the insurance coverage provided herein. Such order
may be made by Grantor after complying with the hearing procedure
provided for in Section 1.32 herein. Increases in insurance
coverage shall be based upon current prudent business practices
of like enterprises involving the same or similar risks.
- 42 -
Section 1.23 Records Required and Grantor's
Right to Inspect.
A. Grantee shall at all times maintain:
(1) A record of all complaints received and inter-
ruptions or degradation of service experienced for t~e preceding
two (2) years, provided that such complaints result in or require
a service call.
(2) A full and complete set of plans, records and
"as-built" maps showing the location of the cable television
system installed or in use in the City, exclusive of subscriber
service drops and equipment provided in subscribers' homes.
(3) A record of service calls, identifying the
number, general nature and disposition of such calls, on a
monthly basis. A summary of such service calls shall be sub-
mitted to the Grantor within thirty (30) days following the end
of each month in a form reasonably acceptable to the Grantor.
B. The Grantor may impose reasonable requests for
additional information, records and documents from time to time,
provided they reasonably relate to the scope of the City's
rights under this Chapter or the Grantee's Franchise Agreement.
C. Upon reasonable notice, and during normal business hours,
Grantee shall permit examination by any duly authorized representative
of the Grantor, of all franchise property and facilities, together
with any appurtenant property and facilities of Grantee situated
within or without the City, and all records relating to the
franchise, provided they reasonably relate to the scope of
Grantor's rights under this Chapter or the Grantee's Franchise
Agreement.
- 43 -
Section 1.24 Annual Reports.
Within ninety (90) days after the end of the calendar year,
Grantee shall submit a written annual report to Grantor with
respect to the preceding calendar year in a form approved by
Grantor, including, but not limited to, the following
information:
A. A summary of the previous year's (or in the case of
the initial reporting year, the initial year's) activities in
development of the cable system, including but not limited to,
services begun or discontinued during the reporting year;
B. A current statement of costs of construction by
component categories;
C. A list of Grantee's officers, members of its board
of directors, and other principals of Grantee;
D. A list of stockholders or other equity investors
holding five percent (5%) or more of the voting interest in
Grantee and its parent, subsidiary and affiliated corporations
and other entities, if any;
E. An indication on a map of those areas where service
is planned and a schedule describing the planned implementation;
F. Information as to the number of homes passed, subscribers,
additional television outlets, and penetration of basic and pay
service in the service area.
G. Any other information which the Grantor shall reasonably
request.
- 44 -
Section 1.25 Copies of Federal and State Reports.
Grantee shall submit to Grantor copies of all pleadings,
applications and reports submitted by Grantee to, as well as
copies of all decisions, correspondence and actions by any
Federal, State or local court, regulatory agency, or'other
governmental body which are non-routine in nature and which
will materially affect its cable television operations within
the franchise area. Grantee shall submit such documents to
Grantor simultaneously with their submission to such court,
agency and/or body; or within five (5) days after their receipt
from such court, agency and/or body. Information otherwise
confidential by law and so designated by Grantee, which is
submitted to Grantor, shall be retained in confidence by Grantor
and its authorized agents and shall not be made available for
public inspection.
- 45 -
Section 1.26 Public Reports.
If Grantee is publicly held, a copy of each Grantee's
annual and other periodic reports and those of its parent, shall
be submitted to Grantor within forty-five (45) days of its
issuance.
- 46 -
Section 1.27 Complaint Report and Opinion Survey.
A. The Grantee shall furnish to the Grantor the results
of any opinion survey conducted by the Grantee which identifies
satisfaction or dissatisfaction among subscribers within the
City with the Grantee's cable service. The results 6f such survey
shall be furnished to the Grantor within thirty (30) days
following completion of the survey.
B. Upon request of the Grantor, but not more
than once annually, the Grantee shall conduct a subscriber
satisfaction survey pertaining to quality of service, which may
be transmitted to subscribers in subscriber statements for cable
services. The form and content of such survey shall be reason-
ably acceptable to the Grantor. The cost of such survey shall
be borne by the Grantee.
- 47 -
Section 1.28 Privacy Report.
Upon Grantor's request, but no more than annually, Grantee
shall submit to Grantor an annual report indicating the degree
of compliance with the privacy provisions contained in Section
1.42 herein and all steps taken to assure that the privacy
rights of individuals have been protected.
-48-
Section 1.29 Reports - General.
A. All reports required under this Chapter, except those
confidential by law, shall be available for public inspection in
the Grantor's offices during normal business hours.
B. All reports and records required under thi~ Chapter
shall be furnished at the sole expense of Grantee, except as
otherwise provided in this Chapter or the Franchise Agreement.
C. The willful refusal, failure, or neglect of Grantee
to file any of the reports required as and when due under this
Chapter, may be deemed a material breach of the Franchise
Agreement if such reports are not provided to Grantor within
thirty (30) days after written request therefor, and may subject
the Grantee to all remedies, legal or equitable, which are
available to Grantor under the franchise or otherwise.
D. Any materially false or misleading statement or repre-
sentation made knowingly and willfully by the Grantee in any
report required under this Chapter or under the Franchise
Agreement may be deemed a material breach of the franchise and
may subject Grantee to all remedies, legal or equitable, which
are available to Grantor under the franchise or otherwise.
- 49 -
Section 1.30 Annual Review of System Performance.'
Each year throughout the term of the franchise, if requested
by the Grantor, Grantor and Grantee shall meet publicly to review
system performance and quality of service.
The various reports required pursuant to this Chapter,
results of technical performance tests, the record of subscriber
complaints and Grantee's response to complaints, and the informa-
tion acquired in any subscriber surveys, shall be utilized as
the basis for review. In addition, any subscriber may submit
comments or complaints during the review meetings, either
orally or in writing, and these shall be considered. Within
thirty (30) days after conclusion of a system performance
review meeting, Grantor may issue findings with respect to
the adequacy of system performance and quality of service.
If the Grantee is determined not to comply with the
requirements of this Chapter or the Grantee's franchise, Grantor
may direct Grantee to correct the areas of noncompliance within
a reasonable period of time. 'Failure of Grantee, after due
notice, to correct the areas of noncompliance within the period
specified therefor or to commence compliance within such period
and diligently achieve compliance thereafter shall be considered
a material breach of the franchise, and Grantor may exercise
any remedy within the scope of this Chapter and the Franchise
Agreement considered appropriate.
- 50 -
Section 1.31 Special Review of System Performance.
When there have been complaints made or where there exists
other evidence which, in the judgment of the Grantor, casts
reasonable doubt on the reliability or quality of cable service
to the effect that the Grantee is not in compliance with the
requirements of this Chapter or its franchise, the Grantor shall
have the right to compel the Grantee to test, analyze and report
on the performance of the system in order to protect the public
against substandard cable service. Such test or tests shall be
made and the report thereof shall be delivered to the Grantor
no later than thirty (30) days after the Grantor notifies the
Grantee that it is exercising such right, and shall be made at
Grantee's sole cost. Such report shall include the following
information: The nature of the complaints which precipitated
the special tests; what system component was tested; the
equipment used and procedures employed in said testing; the
results of such tests; and the method by which such complaints
were resolved. Any other information pertinent to the special
test shall be recorded.
- 51 -
Section 1.32 Special Evaluation Sessions.
The Grantor may hold special evaluation sessions at any
time during the term of a franchise, provided such sessions are
held no more often than once every three (3) years. The Grantee
shall be notified of the place, time and date thereof and the
topics to be discussed. Such sessions shall be open to the
public and advertised in a newspaper of general circulation at
least thirty (30) days before each session. The sessions may
include an evaluation of any items considered relevant to the
cable system, the subscribers and the City. Either the
Grantor or the Grantee may propose items for discussion or
evaluation.
Section 1.33 Remedies for Franchise Violations.
If Grantee fails to perform in a timely manner any obliga-
tion required by this Chapter or a franchise granted hereunder
following notice from the Grantor and an opportunity to cure such non-
performance in accordance with the provisions of Section 1.35 of this
Chapter, Grantor may at its option and in its sole discretion:
A. Cure the violation and recover the actual cost thereof
from the security fund established herein if such violation is
not cured within five (5) days after written notice to the Grantee
of Grantor's intention to cure and draw upon the security fund;
B. Assess against Grantee liquidated damages in an amount
set forth in the Franchise Agreement for any such violation(s)
if such violation is not cured within five (5) days after written
notice to the Grantee of Grantor's intention to assess liquidated
damages. By acceptance of a franchise hereunder, Grantee hereby
agrees to pay any assessment to be levied against the security
fund hereinabove provided and collected by Grantor immediately
upon such assessment. Such assessment shall not constitute a
waiver by Grantor of any other right or remedy it may have under
the franchise or under applicable law, including without limita-
tion, its right to recover from Grantee such additional damages,
losses, costs and expenses, including actual attorneys' fees,
as may have been suffered or incurred by Grantor by reason of
or arising out of such breach of the franchise;
C. For violations which have materially degraded the
quality of service, order and direct Grantee to issue rebates
or credits to subscribers, in an amount to be determined by
Grantor to be reasonably related to the nature of the degradation
in service and measured by the period of the degradation, to
provide monetary relief substantially equal to the reduced quality
of service resulting from Grantee's failure to perform.
- 54 -
Section 1.34 Grantor's Power to Revoke.
Grantor reserves the right to revoke any franchise granted
pursuant to this Chapter and rescind all rights and privileges
associated with it in the following circumstances, each of which
shall represent a default by Grantee and material breach under
the franchise grant:
A. If Grantee shall default in the performance of its
material obligations under this Chapter or under such agreements,
contracts or other terms and provisions entered into by and
between Grantor and the Grantee;
B. If Grantee shall fail to provide or maintain in full
force and effect the insurance coverage or security fund as
required herein;
C. If Grantee shall violate any order or ruling of any
regulatory body having jurisdiction over the Grantee relative
to the Grantee's franchise, unless such order or ruling is being
contested by Grantee by appropriate proceedings conducted in
good faith;
D. If Grantee attempts to evade any provision of this
Chapter or practices any fraud or deceit upon Grantor;
E. If Grantee persistently fails to remedy defaults for
which lesser penalties have pre¥iously been imposed;
F. If Grantee becomes insolvent, unable or unwilling
to pay its debts, or is adjudged a bankrupt;
~he termination and forfeiture of the Grantee's franchise
shall in no way affect any right of Grantor to pursue any remedy
under the franchise or any provision of law.
- 55 -
Section 1.35 Procedure for Remedying Franchise
Violations.
Prior to imposing any remedy or other sanction against
Grantee specified in this Chapter, Grantor shall give Grantee
notice and opportunity to be heard on the matter, in accordance
with the following procedures:
A. Grantor shall first notify Grantee of the violation
in writing by personal delivery or registered or certified mail,
and demand correction within a reasonable time, which shall not
be less than five (5) days in the case of the failure of the
Grantee to pay any sum or other amount due the Grantor under
this Chapter or the Grantee's franchise and thirty (30) days
in all other cases. If Grantee fails to correct the violation
within the time prescribed or if Grantee fails to commence
correction of the violation within the time prescribed and dili-
gently remedy such violation thereafter, the Grantor shall then
give written notice of not less than twenty (20) days of a
public hearing to be held before the Council. Said notice
shall specify the violations alleged to have occurred.
B. At the public hearing, the Council shall hear and
consider all relevant evidence, and thereafter render findings
and its decision.
C. In the event the Council finds that Grantee has
corrected the violation or has diligently commenced correction
of such violation after notice thereof from Grantor and is
diligently proceeding to fully remedy such violation, or that
no violation has occurred, the proceedings shall terminate and
no penalty or other sanction shall be imposed.
- 56 -
D. In the event the Council finds that the alleged
violations exist and that Grantee has not corrected the same in
a satisfactory manner or has not diligently commenced correction
of such uiolation after notice thereof from Grantor and is not
diligently proceeding to fully remedy such violation, the Council
may impose one or more of the remedies specified herein as it,
in its discretion, deems appropriate under the circumstances.
- 57 -
Section 1.36 Force Majeure; Grantee's Inability
to Perform.
In the event Grantee's performance of any of the terms,
conditions or obligations required by this Chapter or a franchise
granted hereunder is prevented by a cause or event not within
Grantee's control, such inability to perform shall be deemed
excused and no penalties or sanctions shall be imposed as a
result thereof; provided, however, that such inability to perform
shall not relieve a Grantee from the obligations imposed by'
Section 1.33.C, pertaining to refunds and credits for inter-
ruptions in service. For the purpose of this Section, causes or
events not within the control of Grantee shall include without
limitation acts of God, strikes, sabotage, riots or civil dis-
turbances, restraints imposed by order of a governmental agency
or court, explosions, acts of public enemies, and natural dis-
asters such as floods, earthquakes, landslides, and fires, but
shall not include financial inability of the Grantee to perform
or failure of the Grantee to obtain any necessary permits or
licenses from other governmental agencies or the right to use
the facilities of any public utility where such failure is due
solely to the acts or omissions of Grantee, or the failure of
the Grantee to secure supplies, services or equipment necessary
for the installation, operation, maintenance or repair of the
cable communications system where the Grantee has failed to
exercise reasonable diligence to secure such supplies, services
or equipment.
- 58 -
Section 1.37 Abandonment or Removal of
Franchise Property.
A. In the event that the use of any franchise property
or a portion thereof is discontinued for a continuous period of
twelve (12) months, Grantee shall be deemed to have abandoned
that franchise property.
B. Grantor, upon such terms as Grantor may impose, may
give Grantee permission to abandon, without removing, any system
facility or equipment laid, directly constructed, operated or
maintained under the franchise. Unless such permission is granted
or unless otherwise provided in this Chapter, the Grantee shall
remove all abandoned facilities and equipment upon receipt of
written notice from Grantor and shall restore the street to its
former state at the time such facilities and equipment were
installed, as near as may be, so as not to impair its usefulness.
In removing its plant, structures and equipment, Grantee shall
refill, at its own expense, any excavation that shall be made by
it and shall leave all public ways and places in as good condition
as that prevailing prior to such removal without materially inter-
fering with any electrical or telephone cable or other utility
wires, poles, or attachments. Grantor shall have the right to
inspect and approve the condition of the public ways, public
places, cables, wires, attachments and poles prior to and after
removal. The liability, indemnity and insurance provisions of
this Chapter and the security fund as provided herein shall
continue in full force and effect during the period of removal
and until full compliance by Grantee with the terms and conditions
of this Section.
- 59 -
C. Upon abandonment of any franchise property in place,
the Grantee, if required by the Grantor, shall submit to the
Grantor an instrument, satisfactory in form to the Grantor,
transferring to the Grantor the ownership of the franchise
property abandoned.
Do At the expiration of the term for which the franchise
is granted, or upon its revocation or earlier expiration, as
provided for herein, in any such case without renewal, extension
or transfer, the Grantor shall have the right to require Grantee
to remove, at its own expense, all above-ground portions of the
cable television system from all s~treets and public ways within
the City within a reasonable period of time, which shall not be
less than one hundred eighty (180) days.
E. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth
in this Chapter, the Grantee may abandon any underground franchise
property in place so long as it does not materially interfere
with the use of the. street or public rights-of-way in which such
property is located or with the use thereof by any public utility
or other cable Grantee.
- 60 -
Section 1.38 Restoration by Grantor: Reimbursement
of Costs.
In the event of a failure by Grantee to complete any work
required herein or by any other law or ordinance, and if such
work is not completed within thirty (30) days after receipt of
written notice thereof from Grantor or, if more than thirty (30)
days are reasonably required therefor, if Grantee does not commence
such work within such thirty (30) day period and diligently
complete the work thereafter (except in cases of emergency
constituting a threat to public health, safety or welfare),
Grantor may cause such work to be done and Grantee shall reimburse
Grantor the costs thereof within thirty (30) days after receipt
of an itemized list of such costs, or Grantor may recover such
costs through the security fund provided by Grantee.
- 61 -
Section 1.39 Extended Operation and Continuity
of Services.
Upon either expiration or revocation of the franchise,
the Grantor shall have discretion to permit Grantee to continue
to operate the cable television system for an extended period of
time not to exceed twelve (12) months from the date of such
expiration or revocatJ~on, unless extended by resolution of
Grantor. Grantee shall, as trustee for its successor-in-interest,
continue to operate the system under the terms and conditions
of this Chapter and the franchise and to provide the regular
subscriber service and any and all of the services that may be
provided at that time. It shall be the right of all subscribers
to continue to receive all available services provided their
financial and other obligations to Grantee are honored. The
Grantee shall use reasonable efforts to provide continuous,
uninterrupted service to its subscribers, including operation of
the system during transitional periods following franchise
expiration or termination.
- 62 -
Section 1.40 Receivership and Foreclosure.
A. A franchise granted hereunder shall, at the option of
Grantor, cease and terminate one hundred twenty (120) days after
appointment of a receiver or receivers, or trustee or trustees,
to take over and conduct the business of Grantee, whether in a
receivership, reorganization, bankruptcy or other action or
proceeding, unless such receivership or trusteeship shall have
been vacated prior to the expiration of said one hundred twenty
(120) days, or unless: (1) such receivers or trustees shall
have, within one hundred twenty (120) days after their election
or appointment, fully complied with all the terms and provisions
of this Chapter and the franchise granted pursuant hereto, and
the receivership or trustees within said one hundred twenty (120)
days shall have remedied all the faults under the franchise or
provided a plan for the remedy of such faults which is satis-
factory to the Grantor; and (2) such receivers or trustees shall,
within said one hundred twenty (120) days, execute an agreement
duly approved by the court having jurisdiction in the premises,
whereby such receivers or trustees assume and agree to be bound
by each and every term, provision and limitation of the franchise
herein granted.
B. In the case of a foreclosure or other judicial sale
of the franchise property, or any material part thereof, Grantor
may serve notice of termination upon Grantee and the successful
bidder at such sale, in which event the franchise herein granted
and all rights and privileges of the Grantee hereunder shall
cease and terminate thirty (30) days after service of such notice,
- 63 -
unless: (1) Grantor shall have approved the transfer of the
franchise, as and in the manner that this Chapter provides; and
(2) such successful bidder shall have covenanted and agreed
with Grantor to assume and be bound by all terms and conditions
of the franchise.
- 64 -
Section 1.41 Rights Reserved to Grantor.
A. In addition to any rights specifically reserved to
the Grantor by this Chapter, the Grantor reserves to itself
every right and power which is required to be reserved by a
provision of any ordinance or under the franchise, and the Grantee
by accepting a franchise hereunder agrees to be bound thereby and
to comply with any action or requirement of the Grantor in its
exercise of any such right or power.
B. The Grantor shall have the right to waive any provision
of the franchise, except those required by Federal or State
regulation, if the Grantor determines (1) that it is in the
public interest to do so, and (2) that the enforcement of such
provision will impose an undue hardship on the Grantee or the
subscribers. To be effective, such waiver shall be evidenced
by a statement in writing signed by a duly authorized representa-
tive of the Grantor. Waiver of any provision in one instance
shall not be deemed a waiver of such provision subsequent to such
instance nor be deemed a waiver of any other provision of the
franchise unless the statement so recites.
- 65 -
Section 1.42 Rights of Individuals.
A. Grantee shall not deny service, deny access, or other-
wise discriminate against subscribers, channel users, or general
citizens on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin,
age or sex. Grantee shall comply at all times with all other
applicable Federal, State and local laws and regulations, and
all executive and administrative orders, relating to nondiscrmina-
tion, including without limitation Section 51 of the California
Civil Code which is incorporated in this Section by reference.
B. Grantee shall adhere to the applicable equal employment
opportunity requirements of the FCC, State and local regulations,
as now written or as amended from time to time.
C. Neither Grantee, nor any person, agency, or entity
shall, without the subscriber's consent, tap, or arrange for the
tapping, of any cable, line, signal input device, or subscriber
outlet or receiver for any purpose except routine maintenance
of the system, detection of unauthorized service, polling with
audience participating, or audience viewing surveys to support
advertising research regarding viewers where individual viewing
behavior cannot be identified.
D. In the conduct of providing its services or in pursuit
of any collateral co~,ercial enterprise resulting therefrom,
Grantee shall take reasonable steps to prevent the invasion of
a subscriber's or general citizen's right of privacy or other
personal rights through the use of the system as such rights
are delineated or defined by applicable law. Grantee shall not
- 66 -
without lawful court order or other applicable valid legal
authority utilize the system's interactive two-way equipment or
capability for unauthorized personal surveillance of any sub-
scriber or general citizen.
E. No cable line, wire, amplifier, converter, or other
piece of equipment owned by Grantee shall be installed by Grantee
in the subscriber's premises without first securing any required
consent. If a subscriber requests service, permission to install
upon subscriber's property shall be presumed.
F. The Grantee shall credit or refund to the subscriber
upon request, for interruptions in service, as provided in the
Grantee's Franchise Agreement.
G. The Grantee, or any of its agents or employees, shall
not sell, or otherwise make available to any party:
(1) Any list of the names and addresses of subscribers
containing the names and addresses of subscribers who request in
writing to be removed from such list; and
(2) Any list which identifies the viewing habits of
individual subscribers, without the prior written consent of
such subscribers. This does not prohibit the Grantee from
providing composite ratings of subscriber viewing to any party.
- 67 -
Section 1.43 Separability.
If any provision of this Ordinance is held by any court
or by any Federal or State agency of competent jurisdiction, to
be invalid as conflicting with any Federal or State %aw, rule or
regulation now or hereafter in effect, or is held by such court
or agency to be modified in any way in order to conform to the
requirements of any such law, rule or regulation, such provision
shall be considered a separate, distinct, and independent part
of this Chapter , and such holding shall not affect the validity
and enforceability of all other provisions hereof. In the event
that such law, rule or regulation is subsequently repealed,
rescinded, amended or otherwise changed, so that the provision
hereof which had been held invalid or modified is no longer in
conflict wit]] such law, rule or regulation, said provision shall
thereupon return to full force and effect and shall thereafter be
binding on Grantor and Grantee, provided that Grantor shall give
Grantee thirty (30) days written notice of such change before
requiring compliance with said provision or such longer period
of time as may be reasonably required for Grantee to comply
with such provision.
- 68 -
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this
1990.
day of
Mayo r
ATTEST:
City Clerk
VENTURA COUNTY OFFICE
:~310 PONDEROSA DRIVE
SUITE I
CAMARILL0, CALIFORNIA 93010
(805) ~ ~.7-34~8
LAW 0 F FIC I:"$
BUR~rE, WILLIAHS ~ SORENSEN
COSTA ~ESA,
July 5, 1990
LOS ANGELES OFFICE
ON;' WILSHIRE BUILDING
e;'4 SOUTH GRAND AVENUE, IITM FLOOR
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017
(:='13} 236-0600
TELECOPIER: (213} ~36-2700
Honorable Mayor Parks and
Members of the City Council
CITY OF TEMECULA
43172 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92390
Re: Division of Decisionmaking Authority For Land Use
Applications
Honorable Mayor Parks and Councilmembers:
In response to Council inquiry, the following is a
discussion on the division of authority for approving land
use applications among the City Council, the Planning
Commision, and the Planning Director.
I. Introduction
Under the State Planning law, each city must adopt
a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical
development of the city. The plan must consist of a
statement of development policies and must include a diagram
or diagrams and a text setting forth objectives, principals,
standards, and plan proposals. The general plan is, in
short, a constitution for all future development within the
City.
Subordinate to the general plan is the zoning
ordinance, which regulates the geographic allocation and
uses of land and provides standards for development, and the
subdivision ordinance, which regulates the the design and
improvement of subdivisions. Both the zoning and
subdivision ordinances must conform to the adopted general
plan.
Pursuant to State law, ordinances and resolutions
which propose to establish or modify the general plan or the
zoning ordinance, must be adopted pursuant to a public
hearing in which the Planning Commission is the advisory
agency which make recommendations to the City Council for
Honorable Mayor Parks and City Councilmembers
July 5, 1990
Page 2
approval or disapproval. The subdivision ordinance must
also be adopted by the Council under State law.
On the other hand, state law allows each city the
discretion to decided what body -- be it the Council,
Planning Commission, or Planning Director -- may approve
individual development application. In this regard, it
should be noted that under the City's present subdivision
and zoning ordinances, virtually every development requires
some type of permit. There are two broad categories of
development permits necessary: subdivision, and land use
approvals.
II. Subdivision Approval
The Subdivision Map Act grants authority to the
City to regulate and control the design and improvement of
land subdivisions within its boundaries.
A. Tentative and Parcel Map Applications.
Subject to certain exceptions, tentative maps are
required for all subdivisions creating five (5) or more
parcels, or five (5) or more condominiums. A tentative map
is made for the purpose of showing the design and
improvement of the proposed subdivision and the existing
conditions in and around it. The tentative map approval
typically includes conditions requiring the subdivider to
construct public purpose improvements such as streets and
sewers, and to donate land or money for public uses, such as
parks and schools.
A parcel map is required for subdivisions for which
tentative maps are not otherwise required. Thus, a parcel
map is required for subdivisions consisting of four (4) or
fewer parcels, and condominium projects consisting of four
(4) or fewer units. Like the tentative map, the parcel map
is also approved subject to design and improvement
conditions.
Under the present County subdivision ordinance,
which the City has adopted by reference, the Planning
Commission has authority to approve, conditionally approve,
or disapprove a proposed tentative map following a public
hearing. The Planning Director has authority to approve,
conditionally approve, or disapprove residential parcel maps
Honorable Mayor Parks and City Councilmembers
July 5, 1990
Page 3
without the necessity of a public hearing unless such a
hearing is requested by the applicant or other affected
person or the Planning Director determines that a public
hearing is required in the best interest of the community
health, safety and welfare.
In the event that any interested person is
dissatisfied with the decision of either the Planning
Commission or the Planning Director with respect to
tentative maps or parcel maps, the party must file an appeal
with the City Council within ten (10) days after the action
by the Planning Commission or Planning Director appears on
the Council agenda. The City Council must set the matter
for hearing within thirty (30) days after the date of filing
the appeal. (However, we must note that to be entirely
consistent wit the State Map Act, the appeal period should
run from when the matter is decided by the Planning
Commission or Director, and not when it appears on the
Council agenda. Consequently, as is discussed further
below, we recommend that the Commission either be an
advisory body, with all applications going to the Council
for final action, or the final decisionmaking body with the
Council only considering appeals.)
B. Final Subdivision Maps.
After the approval or conditional approval of the
tentative map and prior to the expiration of such map, if
the tentative map conditions have been met or bonded for,
the applicant may cause the property to be surveyed, and a
final map prepared for approval.
The City Council has the authority to approve or
disapprove final map applications.
C. Reversion To Acreage.
Reversion to acreage is a procedure whereby
previously subdivided property may be reverted to
unsubdivided acreage. Reversion to acreage proceedings may
be initiated by the City Council on its own motion, or by
petition of owners of record of real property that is
proposed to be reverted to acreage.
Honorable Mayor Parks and City Councilmembers
July 5, 1990
Page 4
The Planning Commission is the advisory agency to
report and recommend to the City Council for approval,
conditional approval, or disapproval of the proposed
reversion to acreage. Thereafter, the City Council sets the
matter for public hearing wherein the City Council makes the
final decision of approval, conditional approval, or
disapproval.
D. Lot Line Adjustments.
The lot line adjustment is a minor alteration to
adjust a lot line or lot lines. It is not a subdivision or
resubdivision procedure and is intended to be used only in
those situations where the provisions of the Subdivision Map
Act or any applicable local ordinance do not apply.
The Planning Director has authority to approve,
conditionally approve, or disapprove a lot line adjustment
application.
E. Certificate of Compliance.
A Certificate of Compliance is issued when the real
property is in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act and
any applicable ordinance.
The Planning Director has the authority to approve,
conditionally approve or disapprove an application for a
Certificate of Compliance.
The decision of the Planning Director regarding a
Certificate of Compliance may be appealed to the Planning
Commission within ten (10) days after the date of the
decision by the Planning Director. The Planning Commission
renders its decision pursuant to hearing not less than ten
(10) days nor more than sixty (60) days thereafter and the
decision by the Planning Commission is considered final.
III. Land Use Approvals
Under the City's zoning ordinance, a developer must
obtain one or more discretionary permits before he may
construct a project. These permits enable the City to
regulate the design of the project and insure that any
negative impacts, such as traffic, parking and aesthetics,
will be mitigated.
Honorable Mayor Parks and City Councilmembers
July 5, 1990
Page 5
1. Plot Plans.
Most every commercial or industrial project
requires approval of a plot plan before it may be
constructed. Plot plans which involve projects exempt from
CEQA may be approved by the Planning Director without a
public hearing. However, typically, the projects will
require a negative declaration or an EIR; these may be
approved by the Planning Director after public hearing.
Finally, commercial projects in excess of 30 acres require
Planning Commission approval.
2. Conditional Use Permits.
Under the zoning ordinance, there is established a
list of uses in each zone. Most industrial or commercial
uses require a plot plan; those that do not require a
conditional use permit.
The Planning Commission has the authority to
approve, conditionally approve or disapprove an application
for a conditional use permit pursuant to a public hearing.
Any person may appeal the conditional use permit to the City
Council within ten days after the notice of decision appears
on the Council agenda.
3. Variances.
A variance is a permit issued to a land owner to
construct a structure not otherwise permitted under the
zoning regulations. The justification for a variance is
that the owner would otherwise suffer unique hardship under
the general zoning regulations because his particular parcel
is different than the others to which the regulation applies
due to size, shape, topography, or location.
The Planning Commission has final authority to
approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove an application
for a variance. Any interested person may appeal the
variance to the City Council within ten (10) days after the
notice of decision appears on the Council's agenda.
4. Second Unit Permits.
A second unit is defined as an attached or detached
dwelling unit that provides a complete, independent living
Honorable Mayor Parks and City Councilmembers
July 5, 1990
Page 6
facility for one or more persons and that includes permanent
provisions for living, sleeping, cooking, and sanitation on
the parcel or parcels in which the primary unit is situated.
The Planning Director has authority to approve or
disapprove a second unit application unless a public hearing
is requested before a decision is made. In the event that a
public hearing is requested, the Planning Director has the
authority to approve or disapprove an application for a
second unit and the decision of the Planning Director is
considered final unless an interested party appeals within
ten (10) days to the Planning Commission. Any decision by
the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council.
5. Public Use Permits.
A public use permit allows certain delineated uses
within any zone classification. Such permitted uses
pursuant to the issuance of a public use permit includes
educational institutions, churches and other places of
religious worship, public utilities or government uses to
name a few.
The Planning Commission has authority to approve or
disapprove a public use permit subject to an appeal to the
City Council.
6. Large Family Day care Home Permits
Pursuant to California Health and Safety Code
Section 1597.46, cities and counties may not prohibit large
family day care homes on lots zoned for single-family
dwelling, but may require an applicant for large family day
care homes to apply for a permit. A large family day care
home means a home which provides family day care to seven to
twelve children, inclusive, including children who reside at
the home.
The Planning Director has authority to approve,
conditionally approve or disapprove an application for
permit on family day care homes.
An applicant or any interested person may file an
appeal from the decision of the Planning Director to the
Planning Commission pursuant to a public hearing.
Honorable Mayor Parks and City Councilmembers
July 5, 1990
Page 7
Thereafter, an interested party may file an appeal to the
decision by the Planning Commission with the City Council.
IV. Recommendations
The above procedures were designed by the County in
light of the very large number of development applications
that it had to process. Consequently, a significant number
of decisions were delegated to the County Planning Director
and Planning Commission. By contract, City Councils in
small cities typically will either grant final approval
authority to the Planning Commission or retain it with the
Council.
Accordingly, as we see it, there are four (4)
options available to the City Council regarding the
development approval process:
1. That the Planning Commission be authorized to
hear and approve, conditionally approve, or
disapprove all subdivision and development
applications, with right of appeal to the City
Council;
2. That the Planning Commission act as an
advisory agency only and be authorized only to make
recommendations to the City Council as to approval,
conditional approval, or disapproval;
3. That there be a mix whereby the Planning
Commission is authorized to hear and approve
subdivision and development projects which are
limited in scope or size. For example, residential
projects under 50 acres and commercial projects
under 50,000 square feet could be approved by the
Commission. This would enable the City Council to
control those projects which are of a greater scale
yet grant to the Planning Commission authority to
approve smaller projects.
4. That the Planning Commission have the
authority to approve, conditionally approve, or
disapprove maps with an appeal process to the City
Council set forth in option number 1, but with the
addition that any Councilmember may appeal the
decision by the Planning Commission without payment
Honorable Mayor Parks and City Councilmembers
July 5, 1990
Page 8
of any fee for the appeal. Council members would
receive copies of the Commission's approvals within
a few days of the decision, so there would be ample
time to exercise the appeal.
We would ask direction from the City Council as to
which option it would feel most comfortable with and direct
the City Attorney to prepare the appropriate legal
documentation to reflect the Council's directive.
jec/LTR14366:vlk
Sincerely,
Scott F. Field
City Attorney for
CITY OF TEMECULA
TBII~'I~.,~ ~'~I)~I'Z'L~ 8BRTZOBB DZ~RZOT
~TUMB 3.0~ 3.~90 - I:00 Z~
LindeBans, Moore, Mufioz,
Perks, Birdsall
RECOIe(ENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of June 19, 1990 as mailed.
1.2 Approve the minutes of June 26, 1990 as mailed.
A~pe~ls ProReJs ~or T~n Rates An~ ChArqo~.
RELATION:
2.2 Receive and File report.
~.rA~SRBPORT
DXRBt'L~PJmORTS
Next Beeting:
July 24, 1990, 7:00 PM, TeBec~le Co~jmunity
28816 Pujol Street, TeBecula, California
Center,
MXNUTES OF KM~DJOURNED REGUIJ, R MEETXNG
OF TEN~CUXJ, COIO~UNXT¥ SERVXCES DXSTRXCT
HELD 0~ME 19v 1990
A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was
called to order at 8:45 PM, Vice President Mufioz presiding.
PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
ABSENT: i DIRECTORS: Birdsall
Also present were City Manager Frank Aleshire, City Attorney Scott
F. Field and June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk.
CSD BUSINESS
1. TCSD Budget (Revised)
City Manager Aleshire reported that the purpose of this
meeting is to approve the budget (Item 1), and to approve the
engineer's report, assessing and levy of charges for the
operation of the Community Services District. He recommended
continuing this meeting for one week to allow staff to make a
full presentation at the next meeting on the implications of
adopting the fee schedule.
Mr. Aleshire discussed some of the problems as follows:
This is a proposal to levy charges on the entire City of
Temecula. Last year 4,000 parcels in the City paid a
fee. Next year 10,000 parcels will pay a charge.
The levying of fees has been changed to provide for each
parcel in the City to pay for Parks and Recreation
services and those properties having street lights and
landscape maintenance programs will also pay for these
services.
City Manager Aleshire outlined the method of assessing fees
included in the Engineer's Report prepared by Willdan. He
stressed the importance of understanding how the charges are
being levied, since protests are to be expected at the Public
Hearing on July 10, 1990.
Mr. Aleshire recommended spending some time working over
formulas that would spread the assessments differently· He
suggested raising the assessment on single family houses and
lowering the assessment on vacant land, particularly
agricultural land. He suggested appointing a committee made
C~DMIN~19\90 - 1- 07106/90
CSD Minutes
June 19. 1990
up of two members of Council to meet with the City Manager,
Bill Holley and the Assessment Engineer to work out two or
three different approaches to be brought back at the next
meeting. The public hearing would need to be rescheduled for
later in July.
Director Lindemans stated he supported a work session to
further examine this issue.
Director Parks expressed concern with the method of assessing
rates and charges for the various real estate categories.
John Dedovesch, 39450 Long Ridge Drive, strongly opposed an
increased tax on homeowners, stating that usage of park space
was very limited.
Director Lindemans asked if the City staff can determine how
many parks are coming on line for the coming year, and when
they will be completed.
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Moore to
appoint an ad hoc committee of Director Lindemans and Director
Parks to work with staff re-evaluating the weighted factors
and make recommendations on June 26, 1990, for a more
equitable assessment spread.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall
Enqineer's Revised Report on Fees and Charges for District
Se~ices
Director Moore moved, Director Parks seconded a motion to
continue Items I and 2 to the meeting of June 26, 1990.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Lindemans, Moore, Muhoz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: i COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall
CSDMIN%6%19%90 -2- 07/06/90
June 19. 1990
CSD Minutes
MANAGERS REPORT
None given.
CXTY ATTORNEYS REPORT
None given.
DIRECTORS REPORTS
None given.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Parks to
adjourn at 9:15 PM.
Patricia H. Birdsall, President
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, Deputy city Clerk
CSDMIN~6\19~90 -$- 07/06/90
MINUTES OF ANADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF TEMECUL~ COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
HELD ~ 26; xggo
A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was
called to order at 8:45 PM, President Pat Birdsall presiding.
PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS:
Lindemans,Mufioz, Parks
Birdsall
ABSENT: i DIRECTORS: Moore
Also present were City Manager Frank Aleshire, City Attorney Scott
F. Field and June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk.
CSD BUSINESS
1. Minutes
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Lindemans
to approve the minutes of June 12, 1990 as mailed.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mufioz,
Parks
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None
2. Agreement for Maintenance of Parkways, Tracts 23100 and 23101
City Manager Aleshire recommended approval of an agreement for
maintenance of parkways between Marlborough Development
Corporation and CSD. He stated this is a routine requirement
for a tract development.
Director Parks moved, Director Mufioz seconded a motion to
approve the Agreement for Maintenance of Parkways between
Marlborough Development Corporation and CSD.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mufioz,
Parks
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: i DIRECTORS: Moore
CSD Minutes
June 26. 1990
I:)e4ioation Tr&ot 20879
City Manager Aleshire reported this is similar to the previous
action whereby the conditions for tract approval require an
easement be dedicated to the CSD.
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Mufioz to
authorize the CSD President to execute the Deed acceptance.
TCaD Budget (Revised)
City Manager Aleshire reconnended approval of the preliminary
budget as amended which includes City staffing. He stated the
CSD will contract with CSA-143 initially to meet staffing
needs.
Director Lindemans pointed out that citizens are funding an
improved park and recreation system, not simply more money for
the same program. City Manager Aleshire stated that for the
first time, $500,000 is appropriated for capital outlay, which
should make a substantial difference in the quality of Parks
and Recreation within the City.
Director Parks moved, Director Mufioz seconded a motion to
receive and review the Temecula Community Services District
Budget as revised in connection with Zone A.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Muhoz,
Parks
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: i DIRECTORS: Moore
lngineer's Revised Report on Fees and Charges for District
Services
City Manager Aleshire reported on a report from the Assessment
Engineer which showed 10,000 parcels in the City which will be
assessed. He stated a single family residence will be
assessed $33.40 a year. Acreage prices would range from $133
per acre to $200 per acre.
Mr. Aleshire stated at the previous meeting, a committee
composed of Director Parks, Director Lindemans and the City
Manager, was appointed to review assessment spreads. This
report reflects the recommendations of this committee.
CSD Minutes June 26. 1990
John Dedovesch, 39450 Long Ridge Drive, asked the City to
consider additional parks on the West side of town. He
suggested setting a fee for those who use the sports park, and
not assess those that do not, expressing his lack of access to
the Sports Park.
City Manager Aleshire reported that a system is being set up
at City Hall to answer questions prior to the public hearing.
In addition, he reported that an appeal procedure is also
being developed.
President Birdsall stressed that all citizens calling City
Hall should have their parcel number available to assist in
looking up the assessment fees.
Director Mufioz stated this assessment is the best plan
possible to be fair and equitable to all property owners. He
emphasized the improved service levels that will be provided
as well as additional parks.
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Mufioz to
receive and review the Engineer's revised report prepared by
Willdan & Associates relating to fees and charges in the
Temecula Community Service District for District services
during Fiscal 1990-1991, and set this matter for Public
Hearing on July 24, 1990 at 7:00 PM, at the Temecula Community
Center.
6. TCSD Contract &~ministration
City Manager Aleshire recommended approving an agreement
between the TCSD and the County of Riverside for
administration of CSD functions and authorize the President of
the CSD Board to sign the documents.
Mr. Aleshire reported this agreement will provide for staffing
of the City program at a cost of $16,000 per month and may be
terminated anytime the City is ready to take over. He said
the City is moving forward to hire a Director and staff for
this department.
Director Mufioz moved, Director Parks seconded a motion to
approve staff recommendations.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Muhoz,
Parks
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
CSD Minutes
ABSENT:
i DIRECTORS: Moore
June 26. 1990
NAN~GEP~ REPORT
None given.
CITY ATTORNEYS REPORT
None given.
DIRECTORS REPORTS
Director Mufioz reported the decorative lights on Rancho California
Road have not worked for quite some time and asked how the City can
get them turned on.
City Manager Aleshire stated these lights are operated and
maintained by Bedford Properties and he will check on having them
turned on.
President Birdsall asked the status of the Sam Hicks Park Deed.
City Manager Aleshire this is planned for the July 3, 1990 Agenda.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Mufioz, seconded by Director Parks to
adjourn at 9:10 PM. The motion was unanimously carried.
Patricia H. Birdsall, President
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk
sff/AGD14422
TEMECUL~ COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
PROM~
DATE =
MEETING DATE
SUBJECT **
BOARD OF DIRECTORS/GENERAL MANAGER
SCOTT F. FIELD, DISTRICT COUNSEL
JULY 5, 1990
JULY 10, 1990
APPEAL PROCEDURE FOR CSD RATES AND CHARGES
P~COMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors receive and
file this Report.
DIBCUSSION: The Board of Directors will be considering
adoption of rates and charges for the Community Services
District at its public hearing on July 24, 1990. Along with
approving the rates and charges July 24, the Board also will
be asked to establish an appeals procedure to allow
individuals to appeal their rates and charges. Attached
please find a copy of the proposed appeal procedure.
Procedurely, an appeal may be brought within 30 days after
the tax is paid. If the appeal is successful, the refund
will be paid by the City directly to the resident. There
will be no credit of the property tax payment. Rather, the
resident would first pay the tax and then seek a refund from
the City. The only possible exception to this procedure
would be if the appeal was filed before the tax rolls were
confirmed on August 10, 1990.
The appeal initially will be heard by the General Manager.
He will be given the discretion to approve or deny the
appeal based upon the grounds set forth in the appeal
procedure. If the Manager cannot successfully resolve the
appeal, then the property owner would have the right to
appeal his decision to the Board of Directors.
There will be two classes of appeals:
Hardship.
Classification and
The grounds for an Appeal of Classification are set forth at
Section l(e) of the Appeals Procedure. In essence, there
are three grounds for classification appeals. The first is
if the property was incorrectly classified. For example, if
-1-
sff/AGD14422
the Assessor classified the property as vacant commercial,
but it was actually agricultural, then it only should pay
the agricultural charge.
The second type of Classification Appeal would be if the
charges levied exceeded the charge that would have been
levied if the property had been developed at its highest and
best use. For example, there may be large lot subdivisions
that are still undeveloped. If the lots are two-acre lots,
they will be paying the equivalent charge for eight dwelling
units. However, if developed, there only would be one
dwelling unit on the lot. Consequently, this resident would
be entitled to a reduction in charge.
The third Classification Appeal would be for persons
claiming the service and benefit received from the CSD is
less than the charges paid. This could amount to a broad
challenge to the fairness of the charge. If the Board were
to consider reducing the number of grounds for appeal, we
would recommend the elimination of this one, particularly
because the landowner would still retain the right to
judicially challenge the charge.
The second classification of appeals is the Hardship
Appeal. This would allow appeals for taxpayers who claim
that the amount of the charge would deny them the ability to
pay for the necessities of life. This classification is
meant to address senior citizens and handicapped individuals
who may be on fixed incomes and are unable to pay the
charges. In such cases, the charge would only be deferred
to the following year.
-2-
APPEALS PROCESS
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
1. Appeal of Classification
Where a property owner (including an individual, or
business entity) subject to the rate or charge questions the
classification or application of any fiscal year's rate or
charge to his, her or its property, that property owner may
utilize the appeals procedures set out here.
(a) The property owner shall file a written
statement with the General Manager of the Community Services
District, stating in detail the reason that the property
owner seeks a review of the classification of his property
for that fiscal year. The statement shall be accompanied by
the parcel number, proof of ownership, proof of payment of
property taxes including the rate and charge amount and any
other information the property owner believes to be
relevant. The written statement must be submitted within 30
calendar days from the date of payment of property taxes and
rates and charges.
(b) The General Manager shall review the written
appeal. He may request from property owner, in writing, any
additional information needed to make a decision, and shall
make a determination whether or not to grant such appeal
within 30 days of receipt of the completed statement,
including all necessary information, the General Manager
sff/OUT13494
-1-
shall give the property owner written notice of his
determination of the appeal.
(c) In the event the property owner disagrees with
the General Manager's determination, the property owner
shall have 10 days to appeal that determination to the
Community Services District Board. The property owner shall
file a written request for reconsideration with the
Community Services District Secretary, containing the
information set out in subsection (a) and the reasons for
requesting reconsideration within the 10-day period.
(d) Upon receipt of a timely appeal, the Secretary
shall place the matter on the agenda for the next regularly
scheduled Community Services District meeting. The
Community Services District Board shall review the written
statement and General Manager's determination and itself
determine, on the materials before it, whether or not the
appeal should be granted. The Community Services District
decision shall be provided to the property owner in writing
within 15 days of the Community Services District's
determination. The decision of the Community Services
District shall be final.
(e) In granting such an appeal, the General
Manager and Community Services District Board shall
consider: (i) whether the property in whole or in part is
used for the purpose intended for that classification,; (ii)
sff/OUT13494
--2--
whether the classification adequately reflects the service
received~ (iii) whether the rate or charge levied on vacant
property exceeds the rate or charge if the property were
developed to its highest and best use~ and (iv) whether
unique or special circumstances of that property or land use
regulations affecting it support a modification of the
classification. In granting an appeal, the General Manager
and Community Services District Board may reclassify the
property, in whole or in part, may grant a refund (without
interest) of all or a portion of the rate or charge paid for
any fiscal year and will determine for what period of time
the relief granted shall be in effect.
2. ADDeal for Hardship
Where an individual property owner subject to
payment of the rate or charge believes that payment of all
or a portion of the rate or charge would create a hardship
for that property owner during that fiscal year, the
property owner may utilize the following procedures. A
hardship appeal must be renewed annually unless otherwise
specificially determined by the Community Services District
Board.
(a) No later than 60 days before a property tax
payment is due in any fiscal year, the property owner shall
sff/OUT13494
--3--
file a written statement with the General Manager of the
Community Services District, stating in detail the reason
the property owner needs such relief. The statement shall
be accompanied by the parcel number, proof of ownership, and
any relevant proof of hardship.
(b) The General Manager shall act on such
statement as set out in Section i (b) and his determination
may be appealed as set out in Section i (c) and (d).
(c) In granting a hardship appeal, the General
Manger and Community Services District Board shall consider
whether payment of the rate or charge during that fiscal
year would impact on the property owner's ability to provide
necessities of life..The General Manager and Community
Services District Board shall determine to grant such
hardship appeal on a case-by-case basis by providing for the
deferral of any rate or charge to a subsequent fiscal year.
sff/OUT13494
-4-
APPEALS PROCESS
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
1. APpeal of Classification
Where a property owner (including an individual, or
business entity) subject to the rate or charge questions the
classification or application of any fiscal year's rate or
charge to his, her or its property, that property owner may
utilize the appeals procedures set out here.
(a) The property owner shall file a written
statement with the General Manager of the Community Services
District, stating in detail the reason that the property
owner seeks a review of the classification of his property
for that fiscal year. The statement shall be accompanied by
the parcel number, proof of ownership, proof of payment of
property taxes including the rate and charge amount and any
other information the property owner believes to be
relevant. The written statement must be submitted within 30
calendar days from the date of payment of property taxes and
rates and charges.
(b) The General Manager shall review the written
appeal. He may request from property owner, in writing, any
additional information needed to make a decision, and shall
make a determination whether or not to grant such appeal
within 30 days of receipt of the completed statement,
including all necessary information, the General Manager
sff/OUT13494
-1-
shall give the property owner written notice of his
determination of the appeal.
(c) In the event the property owner disagrees with
the General Manager's determination, the property owner
shall have 10 days to appeal that determination to the
Community Services District Board. The property owner shall
file a written request for reconsideration with the
Community Services District Secretary, containing the
information set out in subsection (a) and the reasons for
requesting reconsideration within the 10-day period.
(d) Upon receipt of a timely appeal, the Secretary
shall place the matter on the agenda for the next regularly
scheduled Community Services District meeting. The
Community Services District Board shall review the written
statement and General Manager's determination and itself
determine, on the materials before it, whether or not the
appeal should be granted. The Community Services District
decision shall be provided to the property owner in writing
within 15 days of the Community Services District's
determination. The decision of the Community Services
District shall be final.
(e) In granting such an appeal, the General
Manager and Community Services District Board shall
consider: (i) whether the property in whole or in part is
used for the purpose intended for that classification,; (ii)
sff/OUT13494
-2-
whether the classification adequately reflects the service
received~ (iii) whether the rate or charge levied on vacant
property exceeds the rate or charge if the property were
developed to its highest and best use~ and (iv) whether
unique or special circumstances of that property or land use
regulations affecting it support a modification of the
classification. In granting an appeal, the General Manager
and Community Services District Board may reclassify the
property, in whole or in part, may grant a refund (without
interest) of all or a portion of the rate or charge paid for
any fiscal year and will determine for what period of time
the relief granted shall be in effect.
2. Appeal for Hardship
Where an individual property owner subject to
payment of the rate or charge believes that payment of all
or a portion of the rate or charge would create a hardship
for that property owner during that fiscal year, the
property owner may utilize the following procedures. A
hardship appeal must be renewed annually unless otherwise
specificially determined by the Community Services District
Board.
(a) No later than 60 days before a property tax
payment is due in any fiscal year, the property owner shall
sff/OUT13494
-3-
file a written statement with the General Manager of the
Community Services District, stating in detail the reason
the property owner needs such relief. The statement shall
be accompanied by the parcel number, proof of ownership, and
any relevant proof of hardship.
(b) The General Manager shall act on such
statement as set out in Section i (b) and his determination
may be appealed as set out in Section I (c) and (d).
(c) In granting a hardship appeal, the General
Manger and Community Services District Board shall consider
whether payment of the rate or charge during that fiscal
year would impact on the property owner's ability to provide
necessities of life. The General Manager and Community
Services District Board shall determine to grant such
hardship appeal on a case-by-case basis by providing for the
deferral of any rate or charge to a subsequent fiscal year.
sff/OUT13494
-4-