HomeMy WebLinkAbout011492 CC AgendaAGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER - 28816 PUJOL STREET
January 14, 1992 - 7:00 PM
EXECUTIVE SESSION: 5:30 PM Main Conference Room - Temecula City Hall, 43174
Business Park Drive. Closed Session. pursuant to Government Code Section No.
54956.9 a (Poltev. City of Temecula), b and c, to discuss potential litigation.
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 92-01
Resolution: No. 92-01
CALL TO ORDER:
Invocation
Reverend Joan Rich Egan
Church of Religious Science
Flag Salute
Jr. Girl Scout Troop No. 785, Kathie Miller Leader
ROLL CALL:
Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz, Parks, Birdsall
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Proclamation - January 15, 1992 - Ronald J. Parks Day
PUBLIC FORUM
This is a portion of the City Council meeting unique to the City of Temecula. At the
meeting held on the second Tuesday of each month, the City Council will devote a
period of time (not to exceed 30 minutes) for the purpose of providing the public with
an opportunity to discuss topics of interest with the Council. The members of the City
Council will respond to questions and may give direction to City staff. The Council is
prohibited, by the provisions of the Brown Act, from taking any official action on any
matter which is not on the agenda. If you desire to speak on any matter which is not
listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with
the City Clerk.
For all other agenda items a "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
before the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual
speakers.
2/e~ende/O 11492 1 01/09/92
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be
enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless
members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent
Calendar for separate action.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure
RECOMMENDATION
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
2
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of December 10, 1991 as mailed.
2.2 Approve the minutes of December 17, 1991 as mailed.
Resolution Aooroving List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
4
City Treasurer's Reoort for Period Ending November 30, 1991
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Receive and file report.
2/~gende/011492 2 01/0g/92
Comoletion and Acceotance of Sienal Construction at Towne Center and Rancho
California Road: City Project No. PW 91-02
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1
Accept the traffic signal at the intersection of the Towne Center
Driveway and Rancho California Road as complete and direct the City
Clerk to file the Notice of Completion;
5.2
Release the Performance Bond and accept a one-year maintenance bond;
5.3
Authorize the release of the construction retention 35 days after the
filing of the Notice of Completion and upon the filing of an adequate
warranty;
5.4
Authorize the release of the Material and Labor seven months after the
filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed.
6
Contract Agreement for Street Address Numbering
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Approve a contract agreement with Mr. Franklin Stuart to provide address
numbering services on an as-needed basis.
Acceptance of Public Improvements in Tract No. 21340-3
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Accept the Public Improvements in Tract No. 21340-3, authorize the
reduction of street, sewer and water bonds, accept the maintenance
bond in the reduced amount, approve the subdivision agreement rider
and direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors.
8
Solicitation of Public Bids for the Construction of Sidewalks at Rancho Elementary
School, Vail Elementary School and Temecula Elementary School along with Street
Improvements on Marearita and Moraaa Road adjacent to Temecula Elementary School
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1
Authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public bids for the
construction of sidewalks at Rancho Elementary School, Vail Elementary
School and Temecula Elementary School, along with the construction of
ultimate street improvements on Margarita and Moraga Road adjacent
to Temecula Elementary School.
2/a~enda/O 11492 3 01/09/92
9 Award of Bid to Remove Sediment in Emoire Creek From I-15 to Murrieta Creek
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1
Award a bid for removal of sediment and restoration of Empire Creek
Channel to Lewis Valley Contractors for the sum of $58,643.00.
10 Selection of Financial Advisor to Evaluate Bond Caoacitv
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1
Approve a $4,500 advance to the Redevelopment Agency for a bond
capacity study.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before a public
hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or in 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 or in written correspondences
delivered to the City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing.
11 Chanae of Zone 19 - ExPanSiOn Of Old Town Historic Area Boundaries
11.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 19 TO EXPAND THE OLD TOWN
HISTORICAL DISTRICT BOUNDARY
11.2
Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, EXPANDING THE OLD TOWN HISTORICAL DISTRICT
BOUNDARY
2/~genda/O 11492 4 01/O~B/g2
12
Vesting Tentative Tract Mao No. 23372. Buie Corooration. Margarita VillaQe Soecific
Pli~n
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1
Reaffirm Environmental Assessment No. 32547 for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 23372;
12.2
Approve the First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23372, based on the analysis and findings contained in the staff report,
and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
13
Vestino Tentative Tract MaD No. 23373, Buie Corooration, Margarita Village Specific
Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1
Reaffirm Environmental Assessment No. 32548 for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 23373;
13.2
Approve the First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23373, based on the analysis and findings contained in the staff report,
and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
14
Change of Zone 5631 - Tentative Mao No. 25320 - Bedford Prooerties
(Continued from the meeting of December 10, 1991 .)
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
Continue the Public Hearing to the meeting of January 28, 1992.
COUNCIL BUSINESS
15 Conversion of City Vehicles to Alternative Fuel Sources
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1
Direct staff on whether to convert additional vehicles to propane, and
if so amend the fiscal year 1992 budget for the cost to convert.
2/aOenda/011492 6 01/Og/92
16
Council and Committee APPointmentS to General Plan Technical Subcommittee
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1 Approve nominees to General Plan Technical Subcommittee.
17
Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Construction of Overland Drive
between Ynez Road and Jefferson Avenue; EA-6
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1
Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment
Number 6, the proposed construction of Overland Drive between Ynez
Road and Jefferson Avenue.
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: January 28, 1992, 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center,
28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
TEMECULA COMMUNITY"SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING- (To be held atS:00)
CALL TO ORDER:
President Ronald J. Parks
ROLL CALL:
DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz, Parks
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors, should
present a completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state
your name and address for the record.
2/a~lenda/O 11492 6 01 I10/92
CONSENT CALENDAR
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of December 1 O, 1991 as mailed.
1.2 Approve the minutes of December 17, 1991 as mailed.
2 Selection of Financial Advisor to Evaluate Bond Capacity
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Select Fieldman Rolapp and Associates as Financial Advisor to perform
bond capacity study.
DISTRICT BUSINESS
3
Desian Services - Community Recreation Center Proiect
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
Award contract to RJM Design Group, Inc. to provide conceptual
schematic design drawings, construction documents, and project
administration for the Community Recreation Center Project.
3.2
Appoint two (2) members from the Board of Directors to serve on the
Project Committee for the Community Recreation Center.
GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Dixon
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT:
Next regular meeting January 28, 1992, 8:00 PM, Temecula Community
Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
2/eOendalO 11492 7 01/10/92
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson J. Sal Mur~oz presiding
ROLL CALL:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks,
Mur~oz
PUBLIC COMMENT:
AGENCY BUSINESS
Anyone wishing to address the Agency, should present a
completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk. When you
are called to speak, please come forward and state your name
and address for the record.
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of December 17, 1991 as mailed.
2
Selection of Financial Advisor to Evaluate Bond Caoacitv
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve staff recommendation to select Fieldman Rolapp
Associates as Financial Advisor to perform a bond capacity study.
2.2
Approve a $4,500 draw from the City advance.
and
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting January 28, 1991,8:00 PM, Temecula Community
Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
2/eOenda/011492 8 01/09/92
PROCLAMATIONS
The City of Temecula
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, California was duly incorporated on December 1,
1989; and
WHEREAS, the voters of the newly incorporated City of Temecula elected Ronald J.
Parks to serve as a member of the City Council by the highest number of votes cast for a single
candidate; and
WHEREAS, his fellow members of the City Council elected Ronald J. Parks to serve
as the first Mayor of the City of Temecula on December 1, 1989 and re-elected him to serve
in that position for a second term in December of 1990; and
WHEREAS, Ronald J. Parks has served in the capacity of Mayor of the City of
Temecula for a period of two years with great distinction, wisdom and patience;
NOW, THEREFORE, I Patricia H. Birdsall, on behalf of the City Council of the City
of Temecula, in honor of this important citizen, distinguished colleague and friend, proclaim
January 15, 1992 to be:
RONALD J. PARKS DAY
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City
of Temecula to be affixed this 14th day of January, 1992.
ne S. Greek, City Clerk
ITEM NO.
ITEM NO.
2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR ,MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
HELD DECEMBER 10, 1991
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:38 PM in the Main
Conference Room, Temecula City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Mayor Ronald J. Parks presiding.
PRESENT 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore,
Mu~oz, Parks
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko,
City Attorney Scott F. Field, and City Clerk June S. Greek.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Parks declared a recess to an executive session pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.9(b) regarding potential litigation.
The meeting was reconvened at 7:06 PM in regular session by Mayor Parks.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor Simmons, Foursquare Church.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilmember Lindemans.
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Captain Rick Sayre introduced Temecula Police Department, Officers Leggett and Pino who
outlined the awards of the Bike Safety Poster Contest Winners. The winners were announced
as follows:
4th Grade Boys -
5th Grade Boys -
Brian McGavin -
John Hess -
Erin Douglas-
1 st Place - Bike
2nd Place - Safety Helmet
3rd Place - $50 Bond
J.R. Monalo-
Kevin Cohn -
Brian Simonson -
1 st Place - Bike
2nd Place - Safety Helmet
3rd Place - $50 Bond
Minute e\ 12\ 10%9 1 - 1 * 12/19/9 1
4th Grade Girls-
5th Grade Girls-
Amy Shaffer -
Abby Shaw -
Shannon Gilliano-
Erin Dryer -
Paula Rowlands-
Danielle Herrara-
I st Place - Bike
2nd Race - Safety Helmet
3rd Place - $50 Bond
1 st Place - Bike
2nd Place - Safety Helmet
3rd Place - $50 Bond
Kathy Zeitz, representing The Automobile Club of Southern California, presented the City
Council with a National AAA Award for pedestrian safety.
Mary Aliensworth, Rodeo Chairman, introduced Debre Richardson who will be serving as Miss
Temecula Rodeo and presented the City Council with a plaque thanking the City for their
participation in the PRCA Rodeo in Temecula.
Joe Hreha, Senior Management Analyst, introduced Ben Blackman, General Manager of Jones
Intercable who presented a $75,000 check to the City for the governmental access channel.
Another check was presented to the Temecula Unified School District for the Education
Channel.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Lynn Carpenter, 45701 Adler Lane, representing Union for River Greenbelt, addressed the
need for clearing the Murrieta Creek Bed. She also spoke against channelization of the creek
bed and requested that the City Council look into alternative methods of flood control.
James Marpie, 19290 St. Gallen Way, Murrieta, Murrieta Creek Greenbelt Committee,
addressed the City Council requesting a multi-purpose plan be implemented for use of Murrieta
Creek.
Councilmember Mur~oz announced that on December 14th there will be a Hazardous Waste
Round-up.
CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to approve
Consent Calendar Items 1-4 and 7-9. Councilmember Lindemans stated he would abstain on
Item No. 9.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~oz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Minutes% 12~ 10~91 -2- 1211 9/91
City Council Minutes
1.
Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure
1.1
December 10, 1991
Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
2. Minutes
2.1
2.2
2.3
3. Resolution Anoroving List of Demands
3.1
w
Approve the minutes of November 19, 1991 as mailed.
Approve the minutes of November 25, 1991 as mailed.
Approve the minutes of November 26, 1991 as mailed.
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-118
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Cancellation of the Regular City Council Meeting Scheduled December 24, 1991
4.1
Cancel the regularly scheduled meeting of December 24, 1991 and
reschedule it to take place on December 17, 1991.
Revised Vesting Final Tract Meg No. 23267-4
7.1
Approve Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-4, subject to the
Conditions of Approval.
Vesting Final Tract Mao No. 26861-1
8.1 Approve Vesting Final Tract Map No. 26861-1, subject to the
Conditions of Approval.
Authorization to Purchase Prooertv at Sixth end, Front Streets
9.1
Authorize staff to conduct detailed negotiations and execute all
necessary documents to purchase the vacant lot at the northeast corner
of the intersection at Sixth and F~ont Streets at a price not to exceed
~917,100, plus the customary buyer's share of closing costs.
City Council Minutes
9.2
December 10, 1991
RESOLUTION NO. 91-120
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 1991-1992 BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE
$925,000 FOR THE PURCHASE OF ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 922-023-
020
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Moore, Muf~oz, Parks
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
I COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans
e
Award of Bids - City Vehicles
Councilmember Mur~oz requested that some of these vehicles be converted to use an
alternative clean burning fuel, thereby setting the example for the community.
Councilmember Lind.mane requested this matter be placed on the next available
agenda.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
Award the bids to purchase three (3) vehicles for Public Works.
Increase the Fiscal Year 1991-1992 Budget for vehicles by $16,500
5.1
5.2
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~oz,
Parks
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Resolution Urgina the Establishment of a School Of Law at The University of California
- Riverside
Councilmember Moore suggested that the wording "ABA Accredited Law School" be
added to this resolution, thereby insuring the quality of this facility.
Minutee~ 12% 10~91 -4- 12119191
.~ Citv Council Minutes December 10. 1991
10.
Ed Nowakoski stated this is the intent of the committee to pursue an ABA Accredited
Law School
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to adopt
the resolution with the inclusion of the language in the fifth paragraph, "ABA
Accredited Law School".
The motion was carried by the following vote:
5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
AYES:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~oz,
Parks
None
None
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Ordinance Adooting Standard Drawings for Public Works Construction
Mayor Parks stated he would like to amend the ;Public Works Director's letter Exhibit
A, guidelines I and 4 changing the date for submitting plans to read prior to July 1,
1992.
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans to
read by title only and adopt the ordinance, with a modification on Exhibit A, guidelines
I and 4, changing the date to July 1, 1992.
ORDINANCE NO. 91-43
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REPEALING PORTIONS OF THE NON-CODIFIED RIVERSIDE COUNTY
ORDINANCE AND ADOPTING STANDARD DRAWINGS FOR PUBLIC WORKS
CONSTRUCTION
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~oz,
Parks
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
RECESS
Mayor Parks called a recess at 8:02 PM. The meeting was reconvened following the
previously scheduled CSD Meeting at 8:22 PM.
City Council Minutes
PUBLIC HEARINGS
December 10. 1991
11.
Channe of Zone 5631 -Tentative Mao No. 25320 - Bedford Prooerties
Mayor Parks announced that the applicant has requested that this matter be continued
to January 14, 1992.
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to
continue the Public Hearing to the meeting of January 14, 1992.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
None
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Mayor Parks stated that Public Hearing Items 12 and 13 would be heard concurrently.
12. Parcel Mao 24085 - Rancho California City Center Association No. 1
13. Parcel Mao 24086 - Rancho California City Center Association No. 1
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, presented the staff reports and advised that it is
staff's recommendation, based on advise from the City Attorney, to act on these items
tonight instead of continuing them further.
Mayor Parks closed the public hearings at 8:25 PM.
Mayor Pro Tam Birdsall suggested the following:
1. Streets and improvements not be deeded to the City for maintenance until 51%
of lots are sold.
2. Coordinate with the police department to barricade unfinished streets.
3. Address the need of dust control at the site.
Gary Thornhill stated he has suggested wording to address erosion control
Councilmember Lindemans stated that Tract 21382 and 21383 have been approved
in the past and these projects will be generating a large volume of traffic. He stated
-6- 1 2119191
M inutee~ 12~ 10%91
,- City Council Minutes December 10, 1991
he feels that these developments will create a; serious traffic problem without the
necessary conditions to mitigate the problem.
Mayor Parks advised that this development has already created jobs and made
improvements to the area.
Councilmember Lindemans stated he would like a full disclosure to future property
owners of what the development costs involved will be.
It was moved by Councilmember Muf~oz, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve staff recommendations with the additional conditions proposed by Mayor Pro
Tem Birdsall:
Planning Director Thornhill suggested wording for the condition dealing with erosion
control.
Director of Public Works/City Engineer Tim Setlet noted changes in the conditions
dealing with street grades and reimbursement agreements and suggested wording for
an additional condition which would require the developer to maintain roadways until
51% of the lots have been sold. These conditions and changes would apply to both
Parcel Map No. 24085 and 24086.
12.1
Adopt a Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24085
12.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-121
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 24085 TO SUBDIVIDE A 72.6 ACRE PARCEL
LOCATED ON THE WESTERLY SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE FUTURE
EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NO. 909-120-O22
Additional Conditions for Parcel Mao 24085:
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained;in a weed-free condition and shall be
either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures
as approved by the Director of Building and Safety.
The condition dealing with street grade shall have, "Or as approved by the City
Engineer", added.
The Conditions which call for Reimbursement Agreements shall have, "prior to
issuance of building permit".
A new condition was added to read, "Developer agrees to maintain all roadways until
51% of lots are sold.
City Council Minutes December 10.1991
13.1 Adopt a Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 24086.
13.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-122
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 24086 TO SUBDIVIDE A 69.7 ACRE PARCEL
INTO 49 PARCELS AT THE WESTERLY SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD NORTH OF THE
FUTURE EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 909-120-020
Additional Conditions for Parcel Mao 24086:
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free condition and shall be
either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures
as approved by the Director of Building and Safety.
The condition dealing with street grade shall have, "or as approved by the City
Engineer", added.
The Conditions which call for Reimbursement Agreements shall have, "prior to
issuance of building permit", added.
A new condition was added to read, "Developer agrees to maintain all roadways until
51% of lots are sold.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Moore, Mufioz, Parks
NOES: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Mayor Parks reordered the agenda to hear Public Hearing No. 15 and 16 concurrently.
15. Parcel Mao 25139 - 50 Center City Associates
16. Parcel Mao 25408 - Phillio T. See
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, presented the staff report.
Mayor Parks opened the public hearings at 8:50 PM
Max Harrison, Alba Engineering, representing both applicants, stated they concur with
additional conditions of approval.
Minutee~ 12% 10~g I -8- 1 211 9/91
_ City Council Minutes December 10. 1991
James Marpie, 19290 St. Gallen Way, stated !he believes this project will have a
negative environmental affect, due to sedimentation from the construction site.
Mayor Parks stated the City's Grading Ordinance does address erosion control
Mayor Parks closed the public hearings at 9:07 PM.
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve staff recommendation with modified conditions of approval for Items 15 and
16 as follows:
15.1
Adopt a Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25139.
15.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-123
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 25139 TO SUBDIVIDE A 97.3 ACRE PARCEL
INTO 66 PARCELS AND A 6.8 ACRE OPEN SPACE AREA LOCATED
SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF DIAZ ROAD AND
SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF CHERRY STREET AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-120-018
Additional Conditions of Aooroval for Parcel Ma0 ~5139
The condition dealing with street grade shall have, "or as approved by the City
Engineer", added.
The Conditions which call for Reimbursement Agreements shall have, "prior to
issuance of building permit".
A new condition was added to read, "Developer agrees to maintain all roadways until
51% of lots are sold.
16.1
Adopt a Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 25408.
16.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-124
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 25408 TO SUBDIVIDE A 36.2 ACRE PARCEL
INTO 20 PARCELS AND A 6.52 ACRE OPEN SPACE AREA LOCATED ON THE
WEST SIDE OF DIAZ ROAD AND SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE FUTURE
EXTENSION OF WINCHESTER ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NO. 909-120-026
City Council Minutes December 10, 1991
Additional Conditions of Aooroval for Parcel Mq~p :~5408
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free condition and shall be
either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures
as approved by the Director of Building and Safety.
The condition dealing with street grade shall have, "or as approved by the City
Engineer", added.
The Conditions which call for Reimbursement Agreements shall have, "prior to
issuance of building permit".
A new condition was added to read, "Developer agrees to maintain all roadways until
51% of lots are sold.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Moore, Muftoz, Parks
NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
14. Adootion of an Adult Business Ordinance
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, presented the staff report.
Councilmember Muf~oz questioned the wisdom of including a potential site in an area
such as Palomar Village, which is surrounded by residential usage.
Gary Thornhill stated that each application requires a Conditional Use Permit, which
must be approved on · case by case basis by the Planning Commission.
Mayor Parks opened the public hearing at 9:12 PM. Hearing no requests to speak
Mayor Parks closed the public hearing at 9:12 PM.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 91-44
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, REPEALING PORTIONS OF THE NONoCODIFIED RIVERSIDE
COUNTY ORDINANCE'$ AND ADDING CHAPTER 5.05 TO THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF ADULT BUSINESSES
Minutee~12%10~91 -10- 12119191
December 10, 1991
City Council Minutes
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCIL BUSINESS
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
17.
18.
Election of Mavor
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
None
None
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Mayor Parks to nominate
Patricia H. Birdsall as Mayor for the year 1992.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Election of Mayor Pro Temoore
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Mayor Parks to nominate Karel
Lindemans as Mayor Pro Tempore for the year 1992.
Councilmember Mufioz stated the Councilmember Lindemans was the City's first
Mayor Pro Tem and he feels these positions should be rotated among the rest of the
Councilmembers.
Mayor Parks called a brief recess at 9:18 PM to change the tape. The meeting was
reconvened at 8: 19 PM.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks
NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mufioz
ABSENT:
RECESS
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Mayor Parks called a recess at 9:23 PM to proceed with the Community Services District
election of officers. The meeting was reconvened following the election at 9:34 PM.
City Council Minutes December 10o 1991
19.
20.
Adjustment of City Council Compensation (Pursupnt to Government Code Section No.
36516)
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall stated she feels it is inappropriate to take this action due to
present economic conditions.
Councilmember Mufioz stated he concurs this is not the appropriate time.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to
take no action.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
None
None
Aooointment of Public Safety Commission Member
June Greek, City Clerk, presented the staff report.
Councilmember Mufioz spoke in favor of candidate Deborah Holliday, stating he feels
a female viewpoint would be useful on this Commission and he feels her experience
in Substance Abuse Programs would be valuable to the Commission.
Councilmember Lindemans spoke in support of Ron Perry, citing his vast experience
in the field of amateur radio. He also noted that the Council has received a letter from
the Chamber of Commerce in support of this candidate.
Mayor Parks stated that he supports Ron Perry, and pointed out that Mr. Perry set up
the Emergency Ham Radio Operation system for the City.
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to
appoint Ron Perry as a member of the Public Safety Commissioner for a term of three
years.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks
NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Mufioz
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Minutee~ 12~ 10%91 - 12- 1 211 9/91
,- City Council Minutes necember 10, 1991
21.
22.
Aooointment of Councilmembers of Various General Plan and Soecific Plan Committees
Mayor Parks requested that this item be continued to the meeting of December 17,
1991.
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, requested that Councilmembers be appointed to
the Old Town Specific Plan Selection Committee because interviews are scheduled the
following week.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tam Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
appoint Mayor Parks and Councilmember Lindemans to the Old Town Specific Plan
Selection Committee.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~oz,
Parks
None
None
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tam Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
continue selection of the General Plan Technical Subcommittee and the Old Town
Advisory Committee to the meeting of December 17, 1991.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz,
Parks
None
None
Chanaes in Policy Guidelines for Old Town HistOric Review Board
Mark Ochenduszko, Assistant City Manager, introduced the staff report.
Mayor Parks suggested that changes be made in the policy guidelines to appoint an
alternate to a full three year term, with the power to vote in the absence of any one
member, or if a member abstains.
City Manager Dixon cautioned the Council, stating that this alternate member should
be present and current on all matters if planning to vote.
City Council Minutes December 10. 1991
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to make
changes in the policy guidelines to appoint an alternate to a full three year term, with
the power to vote in the absence of any one member, or if a member abstains.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
23.
Acceptance of Offer of Dedication - Portion of Via Las Colinas
Tim Serlet, Director of Public Works, presented the staff report.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to
adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-126
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF DEDICATION OF A PORTION OF VIA LAS COLINAS
AND ACCEPTING SAME INTO THE CITY MAINTAINED STREET SYSTEM
24.
Status Reoort on French Valley Airport
City Manager Dixon presented the staff report.
Mayor Parks stated that since he only received this report tonight, he would like to
continue the matter for one week.
By consensus of the City Council, this matter was continued for one week to the
meeting of December 17, 1991.
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
None given.
CITY ATTORN;Y REPORTS
None given.
Minutee~12~'10~'91 -14- 12119191
Citv Council Minutes December 10.1991
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Moore announced she has been appointed to the League of California Cities
Housing Committee for the third year.
Councilmember Lindemans requested that Ron Perry be sworn in at the next City Council
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to adjourn
at 10:00 PM to an Executive Session on December 17, 1991 at 5:30 PM at the Main
Conference Room, City Hall.
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
HELD DECEMBER 17, 1991
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:30 PM in the City Hall
Main Conference Room, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. Mayor Ronald J.
Parks presiding.
PRESENT 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore,
Muftoz, Parks
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, City Attorney Scott F. Field, and City Clerk
June S. Greek.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mayor Parks declared a recess to an executive session pursuant to Government Code Section
54956 (b) to discuss potential litigation.
The meeting was reconvened in regular session at the Temporary Temecula Community
Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive, Temecula, at 7:00 PM by Mayor Parks.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Deacon Scholz of St. Catherine's Church.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilmember Peg Moore.
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor Parks introduced newly appointed Public Safety Commissioner, Ron Perry and asked
City Clerk June Greek to administer the Oath of Allegiance. The Mayor then presented Mr.
Perry with a Certificate of Appointment to the Public Safety Commission on behalf of the City
Council.
Mayor Parks read a proclamation declaring December 18, 1991 to be Temecula Valley High
School Golden Bears Day and presented it to High School Principal Glen England and Football
Coach Bud Kane.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments offered.
Minutes\ 12/17/91 - 1 - 12/23/91
City Council Minutes December 17. 1991
CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tam Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to approve the
Consent Calendar, items one through 12 as follows:
1. Standard Ordinance Adoorion Procedure
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Waive the reading of the text of all ordinance and resolutions included
in the agenda.
Resolution Aoorovincj List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-127
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Comorehensive Annual Financial Reoort for Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1991
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Receive and file report.
Authorization of Reduction in Bond Amounts for Tract No. 21675-5
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Authorize the reduction of street, sewer and water Faithful Performance
Bond amounts in Tract No. 21675-5.
4.2 Approve the subdivision agreements and direct the City Clerk to so
notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
Authorization of Reduction in Bond Amounts for Tract 21675-6
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Authorize the reduction of street, sewer and water Faithful Performance
Bond amounts in Tract No. 21675-6.
Minutes\ 1 2117/91 -2- 12/2319 1
City Council Minutes December 17. 1991
5.2
Approve the subdivision agreements and direct the City Clerk to so
notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
Acceotance of Public Imorovements in Tract N0. 21674-F
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Accept the public improvements in Tract No. 21674-F and authorize the
reduction in street, sewer and water bonds.
6.2 Approve the subdivision agreement rider and direct the City Clerk to so
advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
Acceotance of Public Improvements in Tract N0.21820
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Accept the public improvements in Tract No. 21820 and authorize the
reduction in street, sewer and water bonds.
7.2 Approve the subdivision agreement rider and direct the City Clerk to so
advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
Trade in of Xerox 1090 Copier
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Approve replacement of Xerox 1090 Model Copier with Xerox 5100
Model Copier.
e
Establishment of Retirement System for Project Employees
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 91-128
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ESTABLISHING A DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN FOR PROJECT
EMPLOYEES
Minutes\l 2/17/91 -3- 12/23/91
City Council Minutes Deoember 17. 1991
10.
Solicitation of Bids - Construction of Rancho California Road Widenins from Ynez to
Maraarita Road
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public bids for street
drains and traffic signal improvements on Rancho California Road
between Ynez Road and Margarita Road.
11.
Solicitation of Bids for Rancho California Road Overcrossing Imorovements
RECOMMENDATION:
1'1.
Authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public bids for the
construction of traffic signals, ramp widenings, median modifications,
lane reconfigurations and landscape improvements at the I-15/Rancho
California Road interchange.
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
12.
Adult Business Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION:
12. Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 91-44
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, REPEALING PORTIONS OF THE NON-CODIFIED RIVERSIDE
COUNTY ORDINANCES AND ADDING CHAPTER 5.05 TO THE TEMECULA
MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF ADULT BUSINESSES
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~oz,
Parks
None
None
Minutes\l 2/17/91 -4- 12/23/91
City Council Minutes December 17. 1991
COUNCIL BUSINESS
13. Consideration of City Promotional Proqram
City Manager David Dixon presented an oral staff report outlining the activities of the
Council Ad Hoc Committee comprised of Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall and Councilmember
Lindemans. He then introduced Merry Lee Olson and Ken Dodd of the firm of Olson
and Dodd to present a promotional plan developed for the Council's consideration.
Merry Lee Olson outlined the program objectives, promotional goals, marketing
strategies, and the approach.
Ken Dodd presented the suggested media plan.
Ms. Olson then outlined the proposed budget for the plan and introduced
representative of the firm of I.T.D. Productions who introduced a video presentation
which was produced for the City of Oceanside, RBF Company and the Rancho
California Water District.
Councilmember Mur~oz asked if this program is envisioned to be a one year program
or something more long-range. Ms. Olson responded that the program is designed to
be ongoing but the budget would not include production costs after the first year.
Councilmember Lindemans stated that the committee felt the program should be
looked at as a pilot program and the budget should not be considered to be a hard and
fast one.
Mayor Parks questioned if any other agencies have been requested to participate in this
promotional program. City Manager Dixon responded that the Economic Development
Corporation (EDC) has approached the City of Murrieta and, at this point, it appears
the funding will have to come from the City of Temecula. He also advised the
advertising will take a broad, regional approach but will be designed to highlight the
City of Temecula.
Kirk Wright, 28266 Front Street, speaking on behalf of the EDC stated that they agree
with the basic approach to a promotional campaign recommended by Olson and Dodd.
He presented the City Council with a summary of how the EDC would work with the
City in a marketing campaign. He also requested that the City Council consider
establishing an advisory committee to assist in developing the components of a
promotional plan.
Jane Vernon, 30268 Mersey Court, spoke in favor of the City offering any company
interested in locating in the City a timeline which would guarantee a completion date.
She suggested that a program of incentives could be offered to assure the timeline is
met.
Minutes\l 2/17/91 -5- 12123/91
CiW Council Minutes December 17. 1991
Bill Johnson, representing Johnson + Johnson, spoke in favor of an aggressive
marketing program for the area known as Rancho California featuring Temecula as the
centerpiece city.
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to direct
staff to proceed with the program at the proposed budget level of $260,000.
Councilmember Muf~oz stated he is concerned that the City should be consolidating
this effort through an organization such as the EDC. He also questioned if the program
should be approved when it has not been through the competitive bidding process and
indicated a concern that the City is the single funding source for this project when it
benefits the whole area.
Councilmember Moore stated she feels there is a very real urgency to begin this
process at this time to capitalize on any upswing in the economy as it occurs.
Mayor Parks asked that the advertising budget be studied very carefully to assure that
jobs are targeted and asked staff to prepare a report addressing the anticipated return
on the City's investment.
City Attorney Scott Field responding to a question from Councilmember Mufioz stated
there are no firm bidding requirements for professional services. He advised that
typically a Request for Proposals is issued for this type of service.
City Manager Dixon advised that the program proposal will be very carefully monitored
and it is the committee's intention to work closely with the EDC.
The motion on the floor carried unanimously.
RECESS
Mayor Parks called a recess at 8:20 PM to accommodate the previously scheduled
Temecula Community Services District meeting. The meeting was reconvened at 8:54
PM.
14. Selection of City Council Committee Assiqnments
City Manager David Dixon presented the staff report.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall suggested the Council consider simply polling the members to
determine if they wished to continue with their present assignments.
Councilmember Moore stated she feels the Redevelopment Agency (RDA)/Economic
Development Committee and the City Promotional Committee might be a duplication
Minutes\ 12/17/91 - 6- 12~23 19 1
City Council Minutes December 17. 1991
of effort. She suggested that the RDA Committee be a separate committee and that
the Economic Development and City Promotional Committees be combined.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to appoint Mayor Ronald J. Parks as primary
members and Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall as alternate to WRCOG. The motion was
unanimously carried.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
appoint Councilmember Muftoz and Mayor Parks to the RDA Committee. The motion
was unanimously carried.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to
appoint Councilmember Moore and Councilmember Lindemans to serve on the
combined Economic Development and City Promotional Committee. The motion was
unanimously carried.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to
appoint Councilmember Moore and Councilmember Lindemans to serve on the Finance
Committee. The motion was unanimously carried.
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to
approve the Council Assignments as amended. The motion was unanimously carried.
15.
Appointment of Councilmembers to Various General Plan and SpeCifiC Plan Committees
Planning Director Gary Thornhill presented the staff report. He asked that the
Councilmembers select two members of the Council to serve on the Committee to
forward the nominees for the Technical Subcommittees to the Council for
appointment. He also requested that each of the Councilmembers be selected to serve
as chairperson of one of the five Technical Subcommittees. Finally he advised that one
Councilmember should be designated to serve on the Old Town Advisory Committee
to provide input the Consultant in preparation of the Old Town Specific Plan.
At the suggestion of Mayor Parks, it was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded
by Councilmember Lindemans to have each member of the Council submit a nominee
for each of the five Technical Subcommittees. The recommendations are due to the
Planning Director no later than January 7, 1992. The motion was unanimously carried.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to
appoint Councilmember Moore to the Old Town Advisory Committee. The motion was
unanimously carried.
Minutes\l 2/17/91 -7- 12123/91
City Council Minutes December 17. 1991
16.
Consideration of Enhancina RTA Route 23 Service
Councilmember Mur~oz requested that the members of the City Council provide him
with some feedback regarding the current level Of service provided by RTA Route 23
or any desired additional service.
Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall suggested that the service be extended to serve Pujol Street
which would accommodate the apartment residents as well as the Senior Citizens,
VFW Facility and the Temecula Community Center which is scheduled to reopen in
January.
City Manager David Dixon suggested that consideration be given to some service to
and from the French Valley Airport and the local area.
17
Status Report on French Valley AirPOrt
City Manager Dixon reported that there has been some very recent new material
received on this subject.
Councilmember Lindemans stated that he would like to continue this matter to allow
time to study the new correspondence received within the past 24 to 48 hours.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall to
continue this matter to the meeting of January 28, 1992, with specific direction that
this be heard as the first item of Council Business. The motion carried by the following
roll call vote:
AYES:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mur~oz, Parks
NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
No report given.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
No report given.
Minutes\ 12/17/91 -8- 1 2123/91
~ CiW Council Minutes December 17, 1991
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Parks wished the Community a very happy holiday season and thanked the City
Council for giving him the opportunity to serve as Mayor for the past two years.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
adjourn at 9:42 PM to the next regular meeting to be held January 14, 1992 at 7:00 in the
Temporary Temecula Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive, Temecula,
California. The motion was unanimously carried.
ATTEST:
RONALD J. PARKS, MAYOR
JUNE S. GREEK, CITY CLERK
Minutes\ 12/17/91 -9- 1212319 1
ITEM NO.
3
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN
CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN
EXHIBIT A
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RF_~OLVE,
DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
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 amounts of
$1,147,264.48
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVEI) AND ADOPTED, this 14th day of January, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
3FR~sos 226
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
12./11/91 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
$11,018.41
12/19/91 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
$501,353.88
12/26/91 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
$115,770.90
12/30/91 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
$28,304.26
01/06/92 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
12/19/91 PAYROLL:
:$93,879.82
01/02/91 PAYROLL:
$97,982.11
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR THE 1/14/92 COUNCIL MEETING:
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
$1,147,264.48
CHECKS:
001
014
016
019
029
PAYROLL:
001
019
GENERAL
COMMUNITY DEV. BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUND (RDA)
TCSD
TCSD (CIP)
GENERAL (PAYROLL)
TCSD (PAYROLL)
$3,726.00
$163.56
$80,873.26
$49,282.38
$956,402.55
$191,861.93
TOTAL BY FUND:
$1,147,264.48
PREPARED BY KARMA MCINTYRE
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
01/06/92
Fiscal Year: 1992
City of Iemecu/a
Check Register
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/D Date Description
Bross
StatiQn:
Discount Net
00008849 12123191DOSBRINB DOS BRINBDS
122391 12123191 12/2~/91 BREAKFAST WITH SANTA
Check Totals:
00008851 121271910CHENDUS OCHENDUSZKO? MARK
122691----12/2&/9~ --12/26/91-REIMB.-LEABUE-CALIF-CIIIES
1,24~.00
1,243.00
.21hl)
0.00 I~243.00
0.00 1,243.00
0.00 211.17 .....
. O0008882-~I/06t92-ALLIED .... ALLIE~BARRICADE
119744-00 12/20/91 10980
Check Totals:
10/16/91SIBMS & MATERIALS AS NEEDED
211,17 0,00 211,17
124,56 0,00 124.56
Check-Totals=
00008883 01/06/92 AMERSPEE AMERICAN SPEEDY PRINTERS
000707 12118191 10974 09111191EMCRSCHHNT/EXCAVATIDN PERMIT
124.5& 0.00 124.56--- -
980.79 0.00 980.79
980.79 0.00 980.79
135,00 ..............0,00 ........ ~5,00---
Check Totals:
00008884 01/06/92 ATSSA ATSSA
--6582 ........ 12111191.i1080 .... iII15191-VIDEO--TAPES;ENB1NEERIN6 .........
Check Totals: 135.00 0.00 135.00
QO008885-OI/06192-CALIFLAN-CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE .............................................................................
308511224 12124191 11095 111201911NSTLL BACKFLOW DEVICEISAN HK 442.98 0.00 442.98
Check-Totals:----
00008886 01/06/92 CITICDRP CITICORP NORTH AMERICA
0128&97 01/03/92 0285 07/01/91 SERV. CALLIll13192 1,427.57 0.00
Check Totals: 1,427.57 0.00
00008887 01t06/92 COPYLINE COPY LINE CORPORATION
---62~77 ..... 10131/91~1151 .... 11115/918ERVICE--CALL;REPLACE-DRUH ........ 748,34 ..........
................ 442.98 ..... 0.00 ..... 442.98 ---
IJ27.57
1,427.57
748.34
Check Totals: 748.54 0.00 748.34
----00008888-01/06192 DAVLIN- DAVLIN .........................................................................
89-23:142 12/18191 I1001 10/08/91 DEC. 1B/COUNCIL NEETINB 130.00 0.00 130.00
....................................... Check.Totals~
00008889 01/06/92 DEANSPHD DEAN'S PHOTO
20877 11/29/91 11104 11/28/91 PHOTO PRDCESSINB
Check Totals:
00008890 01106/92 DELL COM DELL COHPUTER CORP.
................. 11732468 ..... 11/19/91-- 11/14/91 CARRYING CASE .......
1~0,00 - 0.00 !30.00
57.52 0,00 57.52
57.32 0.00 57.32
114,68 0.00 114.~8
00008891 01/06192 GRAIN6ER GRAINGER ---
4416027011 12/23/91 11130
Check Totals: 114.68 0.00 114.68
12/09191 BATTERIES:CONTROLLER CLOCK 166.48 0,00 166.48
.............................. Check Totals:
00008892 01106/92 GRAY BAR GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
159220997 12/20/91 11152 12/06/9! WIRINB TACKER;STAPLES
166.48 - 0,00 166.48
42.55 ~ 0.00 42.55
00008893 01106/92 HQUSEFAB HOUSE OF FABRICS
271090 11/07/91 10823
Check Totals:
09/05t91NYLON NETTING;FOLD FABRIC
42.55 0,00 42.55
5.71 0.00 5.7?
00008894 01/06/92 JOHNSON D.J. JOHNSON
Check Totals:
5.79 0.00 5.79
Fiscal Year: 1992 Check Register Station: 3569
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date DescriOtion Gross Discount Net
122391 !2/5/91 12/23/91REIMB.
.......................... Check-Totals:
00008995 01/06/92 OLSTENTE OLSTEN TEHPORARY SERVICES
19210921 12/1519! 11065 11113191TEMP IORktE 12115191
-t92~0881 12108191-LtO65----IltI~IB~*TENPINE-t210819~
30.14 0.00 30.14_~
......... S0,14 ............... 0.00 .......... ~0.14-
135.68 0.00 13~.68
..... 203.52 0.00 203.52 ....
--O0008896-OItO~t92-PCHABAZl P-CNAGAZINE
122691 12/26/91
Check Totals:
12/26/91NA6AZINE RENEMAL
339.20 0.00 339.20
29,97 0.00 29.97
00008897 01106192 RADIO
13310016
RADIO SHACK
11/27/91 11009
Check-Totals~ ........ 29,97-
10/28/91 CASSETTE DECK FOR POLICE RPTS 215.49
0.00 29,97 .....
0.00 215,49
Check Totals:
00008898 01/06/92 RIVERSID RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
~--~O~t92-O--t211919~-llt3&----1210~I91-STEP-LADDER-FOR-~P-ROO~
215,49 0.00 215.49
258.60 ......... 0.00 ....... 258.60 --
Check Totals:
~00008899-01/0~192 ROBERTBEROBERT-BEINr MM. FROST*&-ASSO .......
1-10057 I1101t91 0312 11101191 PROFESSIONAL FEES/OCT
258.60 0.00 258.60
850.00 0.00 850.00
.............. Check Totals: ......
00008900 01/06/92 SC~AF SCNAF
7371 12117191 !2/17/91 1992 E~BERSNIP
Check Totals:
00008901 01/0&/92 SECURITY SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN
----NOV,-199t-- 1t130/91 ...... ll/30191-BANK FEES .................
*- 850.00 ....... 0.00 ....... 850.00
15.00 0.00 15.00
15.00 0.00 15.0,
23~,58 --. 0.00 ........... 233,58 .-
Check Totals:
----00008902-01106t92 SHAFTONS SHAFTONS INC. - ..........................
4679 II/26/91 10827 08130191SPARKY SUIT; FIRE DEPT.
253.58 0.00 233,58
859,76 0.00 859.76
............................................. Check Totals: ........
00008903 01/06/92 SIRSPEED SIR SPEEDY
4579 12123/91 10928 10/02/91 BUS.CARDS FOR NEN ENPLOYEES
- -- 456& 12123t91 10928- 10/02/9! BUS,CARDS FOR NEN ENPLOYEES
859,76 .... 0.00 -'859.7&
28,77 0.00 28.77
- ~8.79 - 0.00 ~8,79
Check Totals:
..... 000~8904 01106/92 SO CAL-2 SO,CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO,- ..........
34~54388 11/11/91 11111191 71~-3494438/0CT CHSS
3457422F 11111191 11/11/91 714-~45-7422/0CT. CHGS
2924020F 11111191 1111119~ 714-292-4020/0CT. CHGS
67.56 0,00 67,56
109.66 0.00 109,66
89,55 0.00 89.55
234.19- 0.00 254.19
00008905 01/06/92 TEM TROP TEMECULA TROPHY
12061 12113/91 10865 08/28t91
00008906 01/06/92 TEMCULAT TENECULA TOWNE ASSOC
DEC !991 12/51t91 0227 07/01/91
Check Totals: 4~3.40 0.00
PLAQUES;SOFTBALL ANARDS;TCSD 245,02 0.00 245.02
Check Totals: 245.02 0.00 245.02
DEC CLEANING/JAN RENT 360.00 0.00
00008907 01114/92 CALINS CAL-tNSURANCE ASSOCIATES,
1036425 12/01/91 12/01t91
Check Totals:
INC
12i01191-12101192 LIABILITY
560.00 0.00 560.00
34~855.00 0.00 34.855.00
"'glI0~I92 Page:
Fiscal Year: 1992 StatLon: 5369
City of iemecula
Check Register
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date Description
6ross Discount Net
103&424 12/01/91
1056&37 11/07/91
Check Totals:
00008908 01/14/92 GILLIS-I C. M. "MAP GILLIS
--OCT-,-199L--12112191,-0323. 12112191-ADHINISTERI~IOCI-.--B91
OCT 1991 10/31/91 0266 10/01/91 ADMINISTRATOR/OCT. 1991
NOV. 1991 12/12/91 0323 12112191ADHINISTRATING/NOV. 1991
Check Totals:
00008909 01/14192 ~AHRCONS NAHR CDNSTRUCTION CO
DEL1991--I21~lJt~-O28L---1OlOIItl-SPORTS-PRLCONSESSION..PR~lECT
100,897.15
12101191 12101191-121011921LIABILITY 66,012.00 0.00 66,012.00
11107191 ~128191-3128192 FLOATER 30.15 0.00 30,15
0.00 100,897.15
4J25,00 --0.00-- ....... 4J25,00
1~525.00 0.00 1,525.00
3,925.00 0.00 3,925.00
9~875.00 0.00 9,875.00
3,1~B,ll .00 --
Check Totals= 33~851.00
O0008910-01~141920RANGE*-.ORANGECOUNTY-STRIPINLSERVIC .......
0019242 12/06/91 0316 12/06/91 FURNISH AND INSTA 6UARDRAIL 600.00
0019290 12i06/91 0516 12/06/91 FURNISH AND INSTA GUARDRAIL 1,280.00
00008911 01/14/92 PLANNING THE PLANNING CENTER
15579 .......111~0191 0271 07101/91
15465 10/~1/91 0271 07/01/91
15335 10/01/91 0271 07101191
Check Totals: 1,880.00
PREPERATIONINOV, I-NOV, ~0 -.
GENERAL PLAN/OCT, >31
GENERAL PLAN/SEPT, 1-30
0.00 35~G31.00
0.00 600.00
0.00 1,280.00
0,00 1,880,00
17,978,58
57,057,99
43,374.22
0.00 .... 17~978,59
0.00 37~037.99
0.00 43,374.22
00008913 01/14/92 RIVERFIR RIVERSIDE COUNTY
.......... APRIL 91-10/01/91 '-
DEC. ~0 10/01/91
JAN 1991 10/01/91
Check Totals= 96,390.79
FIRE DEPART
10101/91 PLAN-CHECK/APRIL !991- 5,295.00
10/01/91 PLAN CHECK/DEC, 1990 954.00
10/01/91 PLAN CHECK/JAN 199i 1~827.00
HAY 1991 -~10101191 ......... IO/01191-PLAN CHECKI)IAY**1991
2,104.00
NAY-NOV.90 10/01/91
M~R. 1991 10/01/91
FEB 1991-10101t91
OCT 1991 10/01/91
JULY-1991 I0/01/91
SEPT 1991 10/0!/91
JULY 91CR 10101191
SEPT 91CR 10/01/91
OCT. 1991g 10101/91
JUNE 91 i0101191
JUNE 91CR 10/01/91
APRIL 91C 10101R1
FEB 1991CR 10/01/91
DEC 1990D 10/01/91
JAN !991C. 10/01/91
MAR. 1991C 10/01/91
MAY/NOV 90 10/01/91
AUGUST 91 10/01/91
I0101191 PLAN CHECK/HAY-NOV, 90 18,709.00
10101191 PLAN CHECK/NARCH 1991 6,445.00
10/01/91 PLAN CHECK/FEBRUARY 1991
10/01/91 PLAN CHECK/OCT. t991 &25.00
10101191 PLAN CHECK/JULY 1991 2~120.00
10101191 PLAN CHECK/SEPT. 1991 ..... 2,15,1.00
10/01/91 CREDIT EMD/aULY 1991 1~072.00-
10101191 CREDIT MEHO/SEPT 1991 451.00-
10101191 CREDIT END/OCT, 1991 531,00-
10/01/91 CREDIT NEHD/JUNE 19V1 407.00-
10/01/91 PLAN CHECK/JUNE 1991 1,221.00
-10/01/91 CREDIT MEI'IO/APRIL-1991 -978.00-
10/01/91 CREDIT MEND/FED 1991 2.00-
10/01/91 DEBIT MEND/DEC 1990 1,00
10101/91 CREDIT MEHO/JAN 1991 43&.00-
10/01/91 CREDIT MEHO/MARCH 1991 1,139.00-
10101!91 CREDIT fiEND/MAY-NOV 1990 31853.00-
10/01191 PLAN CHECKIAUBUST 1991 938,00
0.00 96,390.79
0,00 5,2%,00
0,00 954.00
0,00 1,827.00
- 0,00 ..... 2,104.00
0.00 18~709.00
0,00 6,445.00
0,00 -- 432.00
0,00 625.00
0.00 2,!20.00
0.00 2,153.00
0,00 1,072.00-
O,O0 431.00-
0,00- 531,00-
0,00 407,00-
O.OO 1.221.00
- 0,00 -97~.00-
0.00 2.00-
0.00 1.00
0.00 436.00-
0.00 I~139.00-
0.00 3.853.00-
O,O0 938,00
00008914 01114192 SYSTEH
50971
50972
SYSTEM SOURCE, INC.
12/06191 10905 10/01/91
12!06/91 10909 10/01/9t
12/06/91 10903 i0/01/9i
Check Totals: 53~975.00
CEILING SIGNS;BRACKETS
PLAN RACK;NAHEPLATES
KEYBOARD TRAYS; FINANCE
0.00 33~975.00
615.69 0,00 615,69
549,10 0.00 51~,10
188.57 0,00 188,57
Check Totals:
0.00 1,553,36
I~353.36
00008915 01/14/92 UNiSTRUT UNISTRUT
ul/ga/?2 City of lemecula Page:
Fiscal Year: 1992 Check Register Station:
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date OescriDtion 8ross Discount Net
0450675a~6 12/25R1 11087 I1/19/~1 TOOLS FOR PUDLIC WORKS DEPT. 5.162.50 0.00 5,162.3k
...................................................... Check Totals: ...................
00008916 01/14/92 WILLDAN
5009446 10/01191
5009397 101:~1/91
5009336 10/01/91
WILLDAN ASSOCIATES
10/01/91YNEZ CORRIDOR CFD/12/1-12/2B 701.50
lOI311-gl--YNEZ-CORRIDOR-CFDIX-tt:~OIgX 87h05-- -
!0/01/91 OLD VAIL RANCN/11/02/90 2,250.00
Check-TotaLs: ---S,822.55
Report Totals: 298,955.10
0.00 701.50
0.00 871.05---
0.00 2,250.00
0.00 -3,822.55-.
0.00 2VB,t55.10
Report Writer CHECK LISTING BY FUND Station: 33~
FUND CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
12127/91 ..... OCHENDUSZKO, HARK
01/06/92 ALLIED BARRICADE
01/06/92 AMERICAN SPEEDY PRINTERS
- 0110&192 ..... ATSSA ....
01106/92 CITICDRP NORTH AMERICA
01/06/92 COPY LINE CORPORAlION
REINB, LEAGUE CALIF CITIES 211.17
SIGNS & HATERIALS AS NEEDED 124.56
ENCROCHHNT/EXCAVATION PERHIT 9~.79
VIDEO TAPES~ENGIMEER]N6 ............ 135,00
SERV. CALLIIII3192 1.427.57
SERVICE CALL;REPLACE DRUM 748,34
----001, 00008851 001 O000BBB2
001 O000BBG~
...... 001- 00008884---
001 00008886
001 00008887
---001--000088~8 . 01/0~-92
001 00008889 01106192
001 O000BBSO 0i/06/92
---00t--00008892 ..... 01/06192-
001 00008893 01/06/92
001 00008895 01/06/92
-----~0L-00008895 .... 01106192 --
001 O000BB96 01/0&/92
001 00008897 01/06/92
--DAVLIN .................................... DEC,-1B/COUNCIL ~EETIN6-- --130,00
DEAN'S PHOTO PHOTO PROCESSING 57,32
DELL COHPUTER CORP. CARRYING CASE 114.68
GRAY-BAR ELECTRIC ....................... MIRIN6 TACKER~STAPLES ............ 42,55
HOUSE OF FABRICS NYLON NETT[NG)FOLD FABRIC 5,79
OLSTEN TEMPORARY SERVICES TEHP MORK/NE 12/15/91 135.68
OLSTEN-TEHPORARY~ERVICES
P C HABAZINE
RADIO SHACK
...... 001--00008898--.-01106/92 ......... RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY ..........
001 00008899 01/06/92 ROBERT BEIN, MR. FROST & ASSO
001 00008901 01/06/92 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN
..... --001--00008902 01106/92 ....... SHAFTUNS INC .....................
001 OOOOB903 01/06/92 SIR SPEEDY
001 00008904 01/06/92 SO,CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
00L 0000890& - 01106/92 ........... TEECULA-TOMNE ASSOC
001 00008907 01/14/92 CAL-INSURANCE ASSOCIATES, INC
001 00008907 01/14/92 CAL-INSURANCE ASSOCIATES, INC
...... TEHPIME-12108191 ........
.......... 201.52
HABAZINE RENEWAL 29,97
CASSETTE DECK FOR POLICE RPTS 215,49
STEP LADDER FOR NAP ROOH ..............258,60
PROFESSIONAL FEES/OCT $1 850,00
BANK FEES 231.58
SPARKY SUIT; FIRE DEPT ............. 859.76
BUS,CARDS FOR NEW EMPLOYEES 67,56
714-149-3438/0CT CHGS 109,66
DEC-CLEANING/JAN RENT ............. 360.00
12101191-12101/92 LIABILITY 34,855.00
3/28/91-~/28/92 FLOATER 30.15
---001--00008907 ....
001 O000BSOB
001 00008908
,-.,----001-O000BgOB---
001 00008910
001 00008911
---OOL 00008911 ....
001 00008911
001 00008913
........ 001-00008913
001 00008913
001 00008913
....... 001- 00008913 -
001 00008913
001 00008913
..... 001 00008915
O01 00008913
001 00008913
...... 00L--00008913 ---
001 00008913
001 00008913
-- ' 001 00008915
001 00008913
001 00~8913
001 00008913
001 00008913
001 00008913
001 00008913
001 00008913
001 00008913
001 00008914
001 00008914
001 00008914
001 00008914
-01114192 .........
01/14/92
01114/92
01/14192 -
01/14t92
01/14/92
01114/~2 ........
01/14/92'
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE
01/14/92 ........... RIVERSIDE
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE
01/14/92 .... RIVERSIDE
CAL-INSURANCEISSOCIATES~ INC .......... 12101191-I2101192/LIABILITY
C. H. 'HAX" BILLIS ADHINISTRATING/NOV, 1991
C, H. "MAX" BILLIS ADHINISTERING/OCT. 1991
C. H.-'HAX~ BILLIS ...................... ADHINISTRATDR/OCT. 1991
ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING SERVIC
THE PLANNING CENTER
THE-PLANNING CENTER ..................
THE PLANNING CENTER
COUNTY FIRE DEPART
COUNTY FIRE DEPART
COUNTY FIRE DEPART
COUNTY FIRE DEPART
FURNISH AND INSTA 6UARDRAIL
PREPERATION/NOV. 1-NOV. 30
GENERAL PLAN/OCT. 1-~1
GENERAL PLAN/SEPT. 1-30
PLAN CHECK/HAY-NOV. 90
PLAN CHECK/DEC, 1990 '-
PLAN CHECK/SEPT. 1991
PLAN CHECK/OCT. 1991
COUNTY-FIRE DEPART ..... CREDIT HEMOIJAN 1991 ....
01114/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/14192 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY-FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 ......... RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNIY FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/!4/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
0!/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01t14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARI
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPART
01/14/92 SYSTEM SOURCE, INC.
01/14/92 SYSTEH SOURCE, INC.
01/14/92 SYSTEH SOURCE, INC.
01114192 SYSTEM SOURCE, INC.
PLAN CHECK/JULY 1991
CREDIT HEHO/JUNE 1991
CREDIT HEHOIAPRIL 1991
PLAN CHECK/APRIL 1991
PLAN CHECK/FEBRUARY 1991
PLAN CHECK/HARCH 1991
CREDIT HEHO/FEB 1991
PLAN CHECK/HAY 1991
PLAN CHECK/JUNE 1991
CREDIT HEHO/JULY 1991
PLAN CHECK/JAN 1991
DEBIT HEHO/DEC 1990
PLAN CHECK/AUGUST 1991
CREDIT MEHO/OCT. 1991
CREDIT HEHO/MAY-NOV 1990
CREDIT HEHO/SEPT 1991
CREDIT HEMO/MARCH 1991
PLAN RACK~NAHEPLATES
KEYBOARD TRAYS: FINANCE
CEILING SIGNS~BRACKETS
PLAN RACK!NAMEPLATES
66,012,00
3,925.00
4,425.00
- 1.52~.00
1,880,00
17,978.58
- ~7,017.99
43,374.22
18,709.00
- - 954.00
2,151.00
625,00
436.00-
2,120.00
407.00-
978,00-
L295,00
452.00
6J45.00
2.06-
2,104,00
1~221.00
1,072.00-
1~827.00
1.00
938,00
531.0[-
5~ · nn
431.00-
4"0 o~
188.57
6i5.69
98.17
0110U92
Report Writer
Vouchsr Detaii
CHECK LISTING BY FUN)
Page:
Station:
FUND CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE
VENDOR NAME
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
---001--0000891~----- D1114192 ..... UNISTRUT ...............
001 00008916 01/14/92 NILLOAN ASSOCIATES
001 00008916 01/14/92 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES
.... 00t--~0008916 .... 01114/92 ............. WILLDAN ASSOCIATES
TOOLS FOR PUBLIC WORKS DEPT,
YNEZ CORRIDOR CFDI11130/91
OLD VAIL RANCH/11/02/90
YNEZ CORRIDOR CFD/12/1-12/2B
2, ~.00
701,50
001
019 00008849 12123191 DOS BRINBOS
019 00008885 01i0&192 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
---~19-00008891 -01106192 ........... GRAINGER
019 00008894 01/06192 D.J. JOHNSON
019 00008900 01/06/92 BC~AF
- 01-9--(u)008904 -OXJOble2 --SO. CALIFORNIA-TELEPHONE-CO,
019 00008904 01/06/~ SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
019 00008905 01/06/92 TENECULA TROPHY
282,657.74
BREAKFAST WITH SANTA !,243.00
INSTLL BACKFLOW DEVICE:SAM HK 442.98
.................... ~TTERIES)CONTROLLER CLOCK ...... l&b.4B
REIMB. I0.14
1992 MEMBERSHIP 15,00
714-~45-742210CT.-CHBS 89,55
714-292-4020/0Cl. CHBS 214.19
PLAGUES;SOFTBALL AtARDS;TCSD 245.02
019 2,4&6.36
---02~--00008909 .... 01114/92 ........ MAHR CONSTRUCTION CO ........................... SPORTS PRK.CDNBEBSIDN-PRD,.IECT ........ 33,811.00
1'2/5019i'
Fiscal Year: 1.q2
City of Teiecula'
Check Register
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date DescriUtion
CA PARK & RECREATION SOCIETY
12/24191
00008850 12/24/91CPRS
122491
12/24/91 ENTER BROSHURE FOR AMARD
Check Totals:
00008853 12130191BUILDBIA BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
t-2509~----12t-$0tql 12/-~t91--NONTHEY MEETING
O0008854-12/~I91-CADE;.---CADEI-UN[FORN
599613 12/20/91 10625
Check Totals:
08/09/91RUGS;CTY HALL;RNTLS;MASTE FEE
Gross
hoe:'" 1
Station: 3369
Discount Net
35,00 0,00 35,00
35,00 0,00 35,00
29,~0----0,-00 29~00
29.00 0.00 29.00
22.00 0.00 22.00
00008855 12/50/91CALIFORN CALIFORNIAN
08227 12116191 10626
Check Totals:
07101191PUBL,L6L NTC{PLAN,CDMRICOUNCL
22,00-- 0,00 22~00
13,94 0,00 13,94
00008856 12130191CPRS
123191
Check Totals:
CA PARK I RECREATION SOCIETY
- t2-/$tR1 12~-31191-REGISTRATtON-FOR~NFERENCE.----
13,94 0.00 13,94
t20,00--- 0,00 t20,00 .....
O0008857-12150191-DAVLZN-- DAVLIN
89-23:135 11/21/91 10992
Check Totals:
10108191 SAFETY CONNISSION/11/21
120,00 0,00 120,00
150,00 O,O0 130,00
-- Check-Totals{
00008858 12/30/91 FRANKLIN FRANKLIN SEMINARS
6502775 12/05/91 11089 10/21/91 DAYPLANNER; PLANNING DEPT.
00008859 12150191 6FOA
125091
Check Totals:
60VT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOC,
-42/30~91.-- .12150/-9t-SU!~ITTIN6CAFRICERTIFICATE
----150.00 -0.00
222.83 0.00 222.83
222.83 0.00 222,83
315.00-- 0.00 ......... 315.00
Check Totals:
O0008860-t2/50tSLGLENNIES 6LENNIESOFFtCE-PRODUCTG --
69902-0 12/02/91 11098 12/02/91 PAPER
315.00 0.00 315.00
27.96 0.00 27.96
00008861 12150191 6TEBILL 6TE
121691 12/16/91
-162~52E--- 12/16/91
1975854E 12/01/91
Check-Totals:--
12/16/91 714-162-5595/NOV, CHGS
--12116/91 ~14-162-60521NOV.-CHG9
12/01/91 714-197-S854/NOV, CH6
-27,96 ........ 0.00 ........... 27.98
437,37 0.00 437,37
299,90 ............ 0.00 ..........299.90 -
2~671.99 O.O0 2,671.99
00008862 12/50/91KAMASAK
5
Check-Totals;---
KAMASAKI OF TERECULA
12/04/91 10399 07/08/91 OPEN FOR MOTORCYCLE NAINT.
00008863 12/50/91 LEAGUE LEAGUE OF CALIF. CITIES
125091--- -12/30/91
........ 3,409,26 0.00 ..... 3,409.26 -*
476.10 0.00 476.10
Check Totals: 476.10 0.00 476.10
12t201-91-1116192-NEETIN6 ...................20,00 ............ 0,00 .........20,00-
-- 00008864.12/50/91LO-FAT.
121891
Check Totals:
LO-FAT CYCLES ..........................
12/19191 11141 ii/16/91 POLICE BICYCLES
20.00 0.00 20.00
3~904.86 0,00 3,904,86
.................................... Check Totals:
00008865 12/30/91RARILYNS NARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
1905 12/20t91 11173 12/17/91 BREAKROOM SUPPLIES
3,904.86 0,00 3,904,86
18,00 0.00 18.00
12130191
Fiscal Year: 1992
Check Date Vendor
Invoice
C~ty'of'Te~ecu~--
Check Re91ster
Name
Date P/O Date Description
Gross
Discount
Page~'
Station:
Net
00008866 12/30/91HAURICE
23608
Check Totals:
HAURICE PRINTERS QUICK PRINT
12f~2t9~-~1t0~ -!-2~03tGI-PAPEHTOCKICAFR
O0008867--12/~I~NRPA NRPA
122791 12/27/91
Check Totals:
12/27191 DUES OPR SON NENBERSHIP
Check-Totals;
00008868 12/30/91PERSRETI PERS ENPLOYEES' RETIRENENT
2PERR.60 12/05/91 12/05191 Nor. Payroll, 12/05
00008869 12130191PRINA
2992
Check TotaXe:
PUBLIC RIS[ NANAGENENT ASSOC,
121*20tqI-I-115&---t2+tOI91--T*ORT-L-tABIL.ITY-TGDAY
Check Totals:
O0008870-J,24~OtGL-RAN-CAL4AN-CAL-~ANITORIAL-SUPPLY
4717 12113191 11122 12/04/91TOMELS & TISSUE;CITY HALL
Check-Totl[4:
00008871 12/30191RAN-TEC RAN-TEC RUBBER STAHP NF6
006482 12119R1 11134 12105191 NAEPLATES;STAHPS
00O08872 12/30191SIBNARA SIGN A RANA
1296 121t6191-11054
Check Totals:
Ilt04191-NAGNE-TtC-SIGNS;POLICE DEPT.
O000BBT;-/~)/~/*G&-TARGET TARGEl-STORE
0;S05970359 12117191 11112
Check Totals:
12/03/91 CANON SORE SHOT TELBAX
00008874 01114192 ALLCITY
1172
Check--Totals:
ALL CITY NANAGEHENT
11130/91 0293 10108191 TRAFFIC CONTROLIIIII7-11130
Check Totals:
00008875 01114192 AHERAERI ANERICAN AERIAL SURVEYS9 INC,
27647 11t0&!91-~0842 09/24tVFAERIAL-PHOTGS
00(~08877'01~14192-'_._VOID_
00008878 01/14192 RIVERICE RIVERSIDE ICE
7%2 121t~/-91-1109~
Check Totals:
III27V-91-SMOi-FOR-CHRISTNAS-FROLIC
O000887-V-OllI4192-ROSE PUR[IGS-ROSE
6620 11130191 0175
Check Totals:
06130191 DEVELOPRENT OF NASTER PLAN
Check-Totals:
Report Totals:
18.00
--228.64
228.64
210,00
2t(h. O0
253.17
253.17
50,00
50.00
95,88
66.81
66.81
73.2~
73.27
128.85
128,85
3,773.84
~879'.O0
~,879.00
1,357.65
9,443.20
2830/+. 26
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
(bOO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0.00
O,O0
O;O0
n,o~
0.00
0,00
0,00
-0,00
0,00
.=~
18,0C
228.64
228.64
'210.00
210;00 : '
253.17
25,%17
50/00 ....
50.00
95.88
95.88 , .
66.81
bG.8I
7~,2}
73.27
128.85
126.85 ..
~:773.84
3,773.84
3,879~00---
$~879.00
1~57-,&5 -
1:357,65
9:443,20
9~443,20 . -
28304.26
Reg~rt ~riter
FUND CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE
VENDOR NAME
CHECK LISTING BY FUNO
DESCRIPTION
Page:
Station:
AMOUNT
.:.... 00L---0000885S--12/30/91 BUILDING'INDUSTRY'ASSOCIATION-
001 OOOOBB54 Z2!50/91 CADET UNIFORM
001 00008855 121~0191 CALIFORNIAN
-- 001---00008857 12/30191 DAVLtN
O01 00008858 12/30Ri FRANKLIN SEMINARS
001 00008859 12/~0/91 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ABSOC,
.. 00~---000088&0 12130~91 GLENN[ES-OF;[CE~RODUCTS
001 O0008B&l 12/~0R1 STE
001 000088&1 12/30/91 GTE
--00t---000088&1. 12130t91 -6TE --
001 000088&1 12130tfi GTE
001 000088&2 12/30/91 KANASAKI OF TEMECULA
~ 000088&.1-----~21,~01-91 LEAGUE-OF-CALIF-,-CIT-IES
001 000088&4 12/IOR1 LO-FAT CYCLES
001 000088&5 12/~0/tl BARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
O01--O00088&& 121-,.~0l~I NAURICE-PRINTERS-QUICK-PRINT
OOZ 000088&8 12130191 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT
001 000088~9 12/IOR1 PUBLIC RISK MANAGEMENT ASSOC.
~)0L-00008870 121~01-9t RAN-CAL*-,1AN[.TORIAL-SUPpLy
001 00008872 12/$0R1 SIGN A RAHA
001 00008871 !2/~0R1 TARGET STORE
~01--00008974--011141.92 ALL-CITY-HANAGEMENT
001 00008875 01114/92 AMERICAN AERIAL SURVEYS~ INC.
001 00008877 01/14R2 VOID
001
~ 01~ 00008850 12/24R1
HON'THLY-~EETING
RUBS;CTY HALL;RNTLS;NASTE FEE 22,00
PUBL~LGL NTC;PLAN,COMH!COUNCL 1L94
SAFETY-COMMISSION/Ill21--- 130,00 -
DAYPLANNER~ PLANNING D~=T, 222,8~
SUBMITTING CAFR/CERTIFICATE 315,00
PAPER 27,%-
714"197"5854/NOV, CHG
714-1&2'5595/NOV, CHGS 437.37
714-1&2-&O52/NOU,-CH65-- -299,90-
714-197-5834/NOV, CHG 997.47
OPEN FOR MOTORCYCLE MAINT. 47&,10
I~IS~92-~EET.IN6 20'00-
POLICE BICYCLES 3.,904,B6
BREAKROOM SUPPLIES 18,00
PAPER-STOCK;CAFR --- 228,64 -
Nor, Payrall~ 12/05 253,I7
TORT LIABILITY TODAY 50,00
TONELS-LTISSUE:CITY.-HALL -95,88
MAGNETIC SIGNS;POLICE DEPT, 7~,27
CANON SURE SHOT TELENAX 128,85
-TRAFF I C-CONTROL / 11717-11/;10 ............ 3 ~ 771, 84 -
AERIAL PHOTOS ~879,00
]-6703.
CA PARK & RECREATION SOCIETY ENTER BROSHURE FOR ANARD 35.00
01~ 0000885& 12/50/tl CA PARK & RECREATION SOCIETY REGISTRATION FOR CONFERENCE 120.00
----019--000088&I--121301~1 ----GTE
.................. 714-197-S8541NOV,-CHS .... 3&7,St
0i9 00008867 !2130RI NRPA DOES OFR SON MEMBERSHIP 210.00
Ol~ 00008871 12130/tl RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MFS NAMEPLATES;STAMPS 66,81
---01°'--00008878 .... 01/14/92 ........ RIVERSIDE ICE .......... SNON FOR CHRISTHAS FROLIC 1.357.&5
0!~ 00008879 01/14R2 PURKISS ROSE DEVELOPMENT OF MASTER PLAN %443.20
11~00.55
' ' 28304-;'26
12126191 City of Temecula Page:
Fiscal Year: !992 Check Register Station:
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice ...._Date ......PIO ..... Date ........ Description ......... 6ross ..... Discount ...... Net
00008729 12/17191 ROSEWOOD ROSEWOOD ESCRON
_ ----121791---12117~1~ 12116191 BEPOSIT/BTH-STREEI .5~000.00 ............ 0.00 ...... 5~000,0~
Check Totals: 5,000,00 0,00 5,000,00
000088?0 12J/0/91CPRS CA PARLLRECNEAIION_SOCiETY ......
122091 12120191 12/20191NENBERSHIP 325,00 0,00 325,00
ChecLTokals:
00008822 12/23/91AGRICRED AGRICREDIT ACCEPTANCE CDRP,
010192 01/01192 0230 10/01/9! LEASE 01101/92
325,00 O,O0 __325,00__
846,02 O,OO 846,02
00008823 12/23/91 BARNES BARNES, KENNETH
122091 12120/91
Check Totals:
12120_!qi REFnMn
846.02 0,00 846,02
145,00_ O.,OL 145.00
Check Totals:
__00008824 ~?/23191_BIRDSALL_DIRDSAl__q PATRICIA--
103191 101~1/91 10131191 REINS. PHONE BILL
145,00 0,00 145,00
33,73 O,O0 33,73
Check_Totals: _
00008825 12/S/91CALED CALEB
121991 12118191 12118191REBZSTRATIOll FEE 180.00 O.O0 180.00
Check Totals: 180.00 0.00 180.00
00008826 12123191 COUNTY6A COIS BYRD~ SHERIFF
2BARN,62_ _ 12120191 ......... 12/20J91. NAIIUALCY~i1666 ........................ 441,88 .......... 0,00 ........ 441,88
Check Totals: 441.88 O.O0 441.88
__00008827 I~I23/~LJ:.IRSIIP~P_~IRST_II~PRESSIDN-q ....
9104~6 11105191 10966 101111gl SNEATSHIRTSIT-SHIRTS.~TOURNIqNT 501.85 0.00 501.65
..... Check Totals: ....................... 501,85 .............. 0,00 .........501,85..
00008828 12/S/91 [CHA ICNA
2DFCN,60 12/05/91 12105191 Nor, Payroll~ 12/05 615,23 0,00 &15,23
20FCR,61 12119191 ........ 12119191. Normal_P/R_ 12/IL ................ 600,4~ .......... 0,00 ....... 600,4; .
122091 12/20/91 12120191DECENBER PRENIUI( 10~275,80 0,00 10~275,80
11~491.46
................................................ Check Totals: ............. 11J91,46 .. _ 0,00
00008829 12123191 [NLANDDI INLAND DISPOSAq INC.
8821902 12/01/91 12101191 DEC. SERVICE 739.75 O.O0 739.75
8825517 12101191 12IOL/BLDEC_SERVICE- ................ 149,3~ ......... O,OO 149,33 ..
9817506 12101/91 12101191 DEC, CHGS, 49,78 0,00 49,78
00008830 12123191 ~RFREENA ~. R. FREENAN CO.~ INC
42202 12109191 11076 111131911B~ 15~ TYPENRITER:CSD
Check Totals:
00008831 12123/91 PARTYPAL PARTY PALACE
....... 003118 12114/91 11115 12/03/91 PORTABLE PATIO HEATERES-XNAS
Check Totals: ................ 938,86 ..... 0,00 .... 938,86
524,74 O,OO 524,74
524,74 O,O0 524,74
160,46 O,O0 160.46
Check Totals: 160,46 0,00
___ 00008832 12/23/91 PENS PERS (HEALTH INSUR, PREHIUH)
2EDC.60 12/05/91 12105191 Nor. Payroll~ 12105 164.00 0.00 164.00
2NEDC.61 12119191 12/19/91Nor,al P/R 12/19 164.00 0.00 164.00
............ 121191 12/11/91 . 12111191 INSURANCE PRE~IUH/DEC. 1991 18,064.76 0.00 . 18,064.76
12126191 City of Temecula Paqe:
Fiscal Year: 1992 Check Register Station:
Check Date Vendor Name
................ invoice ..... Date .... PJO -Date -Sescription__ Sross ....... Discount ........ Net ......
Check Totals:
- 00008833 12/23191-PERORETl-PERS EIIPLOYEES~. RET[REENT-
19,392.76 0.00 18~392.76
121691 12/16/91 12/19/91 PAYMENT FOR RETIREENT/DEC 19 12~&17.57 0.00 12,617.57
2PERR.61 12/19/91 12/19/91 Normal P/R 12119 253.17 0.00 253.17
Check Totals: 12,870,74 0,00 12,870,74
00008834 12/23/91PETTYC PETTY CASH
12199! -12~191~1 1211~/~i--PfTTY C.q,qti 324,90 0,00 324,90
00008815 12/23/-91J>HlITOHKS PHOTO-NORES
00779 11125191 11085
Check Totals: 324,90 0,00 324,90
11/24/91 PHOT0 PRINTSI CSD 164,67 0,00 164,67
00008836 12/23/91PRESSENT PRESS ENTERPRISE
103191 10/31/91 10769
-- 10:5J31-I 11/.26/-9~ H!!n
103i~1-2 i0/31/91 10960
ChecLTotals:-__ 164.67
09/03/91 DISPLAY ADICONII,VACANCIES~9/6 31,20
~!/261.91 DISPLAY ADICONNUMLTI-MORiSHOP
10/10191 1/4 PG~COISI,SERV,FUNDO{ 10/20 12&,63
0..00 164.&7__ .
0,00 31,20
0,00 253,26__
0,00 126,63
Check Totals: 411,09_ 0,00_ .41109
00008837 12/23/91RANCHNTR RANCHO HATER
010401069E 11/12/91 11/12191 0104010692110/11-11/12 15,49 0,00 15,49
Check Totals: 15,49 0,00 15,49
00008838 12123191 RIVERSID RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
101649-0..-11/05191.~1013 ..... IOI23191-.OF-FlCE-SUPPLIESICSD ........................ 113,30 ..............0,00
103085-0 12/17/91 11135 12/05/fi CONPUTER PAPER{PLAgUES 418,92 0,00 416,92
101649-1 i1106191 11013 10123191 OFFICE SUPPLIES}CSD 21,99 0,00 21,99
101648=L_-11/05191_11012 .IOI281~LOFFiCE_SUPPLIES_FOILCSD ............. 8,19 ....... 0,00 .......... 8,19_
101648-0 11/03/91 11012 10/28R1 OFFICE SUPPLIES FOR CSD 131,72 0,00 131.72
--Check-Totals:___
00008839 12/23/91SCCCA SO CALIF CITY CLERKS ASSUC
121891 12118191 12/18/91SCCCA EETIN6
Check Totals:
00008840 12/23191 SO CAL-2 SO,CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO,
--~3457418E--12107191
3457422E 12/23/91
2924020E 12107191
3456005E 12107191
692,12
50,00
50,00
0,00 ....... 692,12
0.00 50.00
0,00 50.00
12107191--714~345~74181MOV. CHSS .............. 72.08 ......... 0.00 ........ 72.08
12123/91 7143457422/NOV, CHGS 84,38 0,00 84,38
12/07/91 7142924020/NOV, CH6S 135,23 0,00 135,23
121071fi-~14345&OOSIMOV, CHGS .............. 224,30 .... 0,00 .... 224,30 _
00008842-12/23/91SUUTHCED SOUTHERN
8797029E 12/05/91
208430094E 12/10/91
--85694374E---12107191.
308473761E 12/07/91
308426227E 12/07/91
.............. 208404529E 12/07/91
_ 708023136E 12109191
85689458E 12/07/91
........... 857620040 11/30/91
i0518569E 11/30/91
85674507D 11/30/91
................ 8685179D 11/30191
85572155D 11/30t91
0.00 515.99
Check Totals: 515.99
CALIF EDISON ...................................
12105191 55771267901030003/11/04-12/05 9,54 O,O0 9,54
12/10/91 59777992338030005111108-12110 9.~0 0.00 9,~0
12107191.57775650934020004111106-12107 ..... 9,30 ............. 0,00 - - 9,30
12/07/91 57777908742030007111105-12107 9.60 0,00 9.60
12/07/91 57777808740030009111105-12107 9.60 0.00 9.60
12107191 5777,%56701020002111106-12107 . 9,30 0,00 9.30
12109191 57775663324020005111106-12109 39,25 0.00 39.25
12/07/91 57777802489030007111105-12/07 9,60 0,00 ~.60
11130191 4377077534901110131-11130 20,82 0,00. 20,82
11/30/91 4377077534702110131-I1130 125,16 0,00 i25,16
11130191 4377077534202110131-11130 38,15 0,00 38.15
-I1130/91 4377077527002110131-11130 33,89 0,00 33,89
11130191 4377077526902110131-I1130 38,32 0,00 38,32
1212b/91 City of Tomecola Page: 3
Fiscal Year: 1992 Check Register Station: 3:~69
Check Date Vendor Naoe
.......... Invoice, _ 1)ate ..... P/O .... Date ......... Description 6ross. Discount ....... Net
.....................................................................................................................
857590541) 11130/91 11130191 4577077524B01/10/31-11/50 96.97 0.00
2084]&569D-Ill]O/tl ............ !I1~01914377077516202110/31-11130 ............. 41.47 ..............0.00 ......... 41.47
208434543D 11/30/91 ii/30/91 4]77077516002/10/31-iI/:~0 39.99 O.OO
208446988D 11/30/91 11/30191 4377077515902110131~11130 42.17 0.00 42,17
IO5!~AO~D Lt/3O/gi --1.11301~1_43770775157021101~1-11130 .......... 39.76 .......... ~.O0 39.76
2035&56D 11/30/91 11130/91 437707713~02110131-11150 37,46 0,00 37.4&
Check_Totals= _.__
00008843 12123191 STATENET STATE NET-LED[SLATIVE RPT
19060991-9 10/01191 10101191 STATE NET SERVICE
00008844 12123/91TAR6ET TARDET STORE
00291452_~110&191_109A9
Check Totals=
S 0 ~08 I~1 _CAllERAS; ~LD1). &SAFE~Y; PUB. N KS_ .....
_.. 659.95 .... 0.00 .... _j59.?5,__ _
484.50 0.00 464.50
484.50 O.O0 484,50
9AT..Z~._ _0.00 ~_4~.77____
Check Totals:
O000B8~*-12/2]/-tlTO=NACEILTO-_RAC_E!tDiNEERI!iG
Jtr2566 12110/91 12/10191 PROFESSIONAL SERV./COPIES
947.77 0.00 947.77
22.50 0.00 22.50
00008846 12/23191 MILLDAN MILLDAN ASSOCIATES
4004159 I0/31/91
00008847 01114/92 ASSURED
__910Z ....
9102-2
9106
9106-1__~
9106-2
_ChecLTotals:
10/31/91 CONTRACT SERVICES/OCT. 1991
Check Totals=
ASStIRED ELECTRICAL CONT. INC.
10/01191_0248 ..... 07101191 RETENTION
i0/01/91 0250 07/01/91 RETENTION
10101/91 0207 0&/30/91 RETENTION
10101111_0249 _~/Otlfi_RETENTION_
10101/91 0220 07/17/91 RETENTION
22.50 ......... O.OL ........ 22.50
42,041.94 0.00 42,041.94
42,041,94 0,00 42,041.94
98.76 ...... 0.00._ . 98,7b---~
1,600,00 0.00 1,600,0C
12,470.00 O.O0 12,470.00
1,282.62 ............ 0.00 .... 1,282.&2 .
282.60 O.O0 282.&0
00008848 01/14/92 CHURCHOF CHURCH OF CHRIST
1223~1 12123191
£heck-]otalsL___
12/20/91 REFUND
Check Totals:
.......... 15,733.98 ............ 0.00 ........15,733.98.
1,853.50 0.00 1,853.50
1,853.50 0.00 1~853.50
Report Totals: ............... 115,770.90 ........ 0,00 ..... 115,770.90
12126191
Report Nriter
Voucher Detail PaBe: 3
CHECK LISTINS BY FUND Station: 1786;
FUND CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE
001
001 00008824 12/23/91
. 001--00008825 .... 12123/9L
00008729 12117191 ROSEMOOD ESCROH DEPOS[T/6TH STREET
REIMB. PHONE BILL
............ RESISTRATION-FEE
001 00008826 12/23191
001 00008828 12/23/91
00! q00DB828
001 00008828 12/23191
001 00008828 12/23/91
00LO0008828 1212~i91--
001 00008832 1212~191
001 00008832 12/2~191
00] OOQOBBX~
001 00008832 12123/91
001 00008833 12123R1
----0~! 00008833 !?!1,~91
001 00008833 12/23/91
001 00008834 12/23/91
00! 00008836 12Z231~1-
001 000088~6 12/23/91
001 00008838 12/23/91
o0L00008839_ 12J23~91
001 00008840 12/23/91
001 00008843 12/23191
001 oO0088H !~!~II91
001 00008845 12/23/91
001 00008846 12123191
VENDOR NAHE DESCRIPTION AHOUNT
.............. -__---__~---__--~-_.~____,~_~__~ ....
,01114192 ............. CHURCH_OF_CHRIST
~_00L_00008848
5,000.00
BIRDSALL, PATRICIA 35.73
CALED-- -~180.00 *-
COIS BYRD, SHERIFF MANUAL CK 11666 441.88
ICMA DECEMBER PREHIUM 159.71
ICRA ..... Noc._Paycol]~ 17/05 571.65._
ICRA DECEMBER PREHIUN 2,260,25
ICNA Norma] P/R 12119 557,85
~CRA ; DECEIIERJ~dt[UN . -~5,71LI&_
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PREMIUH) Normal P/R 12/19 70.69
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PREMIUN) INSURANCE PRENIUNIDEC. 1991 4~I51.20
PER~ (HF~TH INCUR. PRF~U~) Nor. Paysall, I~105 70.69__
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRENIUN) INSURANCE PRER[~IDEC. 1991 10,196.90
PEAS ENPLOYEES' RETIREMENT PAYMENT FOR RETIREMENT/DEC 19 3,405.04
PF.~_ EMP-LOvEES' RETIREIIEMT -NormaLPIR !~!1~ ---253.17_
PEAS ENPLOYEES' RETIREMENT PAYMENT FOR RETIREMENT/DEC 19 6,707.31
PETTY CASH PETTY CASH 324,90
PRESS-ENTERPRISE D/SPLAY-AD~CD!~.VACARCZ~gI~ ~L20 ___
PRESS ENTERPRISE 1/4 PGICOffiI.SERV.FUND6~ 10/20 126.63
RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY COHPUTER PAPERIPLAOUES 416.92
SO CAt, TF CITY ct~RILq_ASSOC SCCCA_EETIN6 ....... 50,00
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO. 7143456005/NOV. CHGS. 224,30
STATE NET-LEGISLATIVE RPT STATE NET SERVICE 484,50
_TARGET STORE CA~F..P, AS4BU)G, BAFETY;PUR. MKS __94L77 ....
TO-RAC ENGINEERINS PROFESS[ORAL SERV./CQPIES 22,50
HILLDAN ASSOCIATES CONTRACT SERVICES/OCT. 1991 42~041.94
.... REFUND 1,853.50 ..
001
019 00008820 12/20/91
019 00008822 12/23/91
--019_00008823 ...... 12/23191
019 00008827 12/23191
019 00008828 12/23/91
-- 019.._00008828 ..... 12123191 ........
019 00008828 12/23/91
019 00008829 12/23/91
CA PARK & RECREATION SOCIETY
AGRICREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORP,
RAllES,_Y/ffiETH____
FIRST IMPRESSIONS
ICRA
ICRA ............................
ICRA
INLAND DISPOSAL, INC.
019-00008829 .... 12/23/91 .............. INLAND.DISPOSAL,._.IK.
019 00008829 12123/91 INLAND DISPOSAL, 1~,
019 00008850 12123/91 ~. R, FEERAN CO., ]NC
..... 019-00008831___,12/23/_91 ........ PARTY,PALACE
019 00008832
019 00008832
.... 019_. 00008832 ....
019 00008833
019 00008835
~019--000088~
01~ 00008837
019 00008838
.... ~19--00008838--*
019 00008840
019 00008840
-- 01~- 00008840
019 00008842
019 00008842
~-019--00008842 .....
019 00008842
12/23191 PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PRENIUH)
12/23/91 PEAS (HEALTH [NSUR. PRalUN)
12123191 .......... PERS _ {HEALTH INSUR~.,PRENIUH) ............. INSURANCE PRENIUH/DEC. 1991
12/23/91 PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREHENT
12/23/91 PHOTO NORKS
12123191 ........... PRESS-ENTERPRISE
12/23/91 RANCHO HATER
12/23/91 RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
12/23/91 ....... RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY_
12123191
12/23/91
12/23R1-
12/23/91
12/23/91
12123/91 .......
12/23R1
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO,
SO.CALiFORNIA.TELEPHONE CO.
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
DEC SERVICE
IBH 15~ TYPEHRITERICSD
PORTABLE_PATiO.HEATERES~XRA8
Nor. Payroll, 12105
Normal PIR 12119
86a96,39
NENBERSHIP 325,00
LEASE 01101/r2 846.02
REFUND 145.00.
SNEATSHIRTS~T-SHIRTS~TOURNNNT 501.85
Normal P/R 12119 42.58
Nor.. Payroll, 12/05 ........... 42.58
DECENSER PRENIUH 2,144.68
DEC. CH6S. 49.78
~EC. SERV]CL .......................... 739.75
149.~
524.74
......... 160,46
PAYMENT FOR RETIRENENT/DEC 19
PHOTO PRINTSI CSD
............ DISPLAY-AD~COHHUNITY NORKSHOP .
0104010692110111-11112
OFFXCE SUPPLIES FOR CSD
OFFICE SUPPLIES~CSD
7143457422/NOV, CHGS
7142924020/H0V. CHGS
714-345-7418/NOV. CHGS
57777808742030007111105-12107
4377077515902110131-11130
4377077515702110131-11130
5777780248~030007111105-12107
93.~1
3,716.66
2,505,22
164.67
253.26
15.49
139,91
135.29
84,38
155,2~
72.08
9.60
42.17
39,76
9,60
12/26/91 Voucher Detail P'a~:
Report lriter CHECK LISTING BY FUND Station= 178~
FUND CHECK NUNBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NANE DESCRIPTION ANOUNT
019 00008842 12/23191 S0UTHERN CALIF EDISON 4377077516002/10/31-11/30
019 00008842 12/251fi SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 55771267~010~0003/11/04-12/05
~-01~ 00008842~12123191 SOUTHERN-CALIF-EDISON ....... 57775~32402000511110&-~2109 ....... 25
019 00008842 12/25191 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 59777992338050005111108-12110 9.60
019 00008842 12/23191 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 57775656701020002111106-12107
019 00008842 t?/23191 GOUTERN_CNTF FOISON ...... __~3Z707152~902/10/3~-~/30
019 OO0O8842 12/25191 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 43770775162021101~1-11130 41.47
019 00008842 12123191 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5777565093402000411110~-12107 9.$0
019 0OOO8842 . 12123/91 SOUTHERILC~XF-EDISON 4377077138302110131--111.$0 ..... 37.46
019 00008842 12/21/91 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 43770775~4702/10/~1-11/~0 125.1&
019 00008842 12/23191 SOUTHERN CALIFEDISON 43770775~42021101~1-11130 38.15
0!~ oQOOOB47 t2173191 SO~ZSON (~770775~7002J~OJ.~l-tlZ30 __
019 00008842 12/23191 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5TI77808740030009111105-12107 9.60
019 00008842 12125191 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 4377077524801/101~1-11130 96.97
019 00008842 12123J91 SOUTHERII CALIF EDISON _433~07:2534901110/31=11/30 --20.82
019 00008847 01/14/92 ASSURED ELECTRICAL CONT. INC. RETENTION 282.60
019 14,02S.13
029 00008847 01/14/t2 ASSURED ELECTRICA~ CONT. INC. RETENTION 15,451.38
115,770,90
Fiscal Year: 1992 Check Register Station:
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date hscription
00008~72 12106191MENTZ IENTZ, ED
120~91 12106191
12106191 flUSIC FOR OPEN HOOSE
Gross
00008711 12/06191ZISLER 6All ZIGLER
120691 12106191
Check Totals:
12106/91REFRESHENTSIOPERHOUSE
Check Totals:
00008731 12/17/91 LUNCH&ST LUNCH I STUFF CATERIHO
121791 12117191 12117191DXlIRER FOR COUNCIL
Check Totals:
000087~ 12119191 ARC ABC
122091 12/20191 11125191 CONFERENCE
Check Totals:
00008734 12119191AE[ SECU AEI SECURITY INC,
101591 10115191 0309 10115191HOIIXTORING 10115-01/14
Check Totals:
00008735 L2119191AGRZCRED AGRICREDIT ACCEPTAlICE CORP,
120191 12/01/91 0230 10101191 LEASE FERGIJ50N TRACTOR/DEC,
Check Totals:
00008736 ~2119191ANERCODE ANERICAN ASSOC OF CODE EllcOliC
121091 12/10191 12110191 1992 REI~DERSHIP
00008737 12119191AT&T A T & T
112591 11125191
Check Totals:
11125191 732069&O~400011NOV, CHGS
00008738 12119191AVP AVP VISIOM PLAN
121191 12111/91
Check Totals:
12/11191PRERIUR FOR DEC.
000087~9 12/19/91 BARDIES
121291
BARDIES HOT DOGS
12112191
Check Totals:
12112191 REFUND KEY DEPOSIT
00008740 12119191 BENEFIT . BENEFIT ARER[CA
122091 12120191
121191 111~1191
Check Totals:
12120191DENEFITS FOR DEC, 1991
11131191 I~URANCE REXfiB, NOV,
00008741 12119191 CARET
595970
CARET UNZFORN
12106191 10625 ·
Check Totals:
08109191 SUPPLY FEES 12106191
00008742 12119191 CALlFORe CALIFORNIAN
01254 11125191 10626
3038/3085 12109191 10626
1Q~191 10/31/91 10626
1526 10/~0191 10626
Check Totals:
07/01191 LEGAL ADS 11/25
07/01/91 LEGAL ADSI12/05
07/01/91PUGL,LGL NTC;PLAN.COHMICDUNCL
07/01/91 LEGAL HOT[CESIOCT.
00008743 12119191CARTER CARTER, LISA
Check Totals:
Discount Net
250,00
250.00
375.0O
375.00
90,00
90.00
5.10
5,10
105.00
105.00
846.02
84,6.02
25.O0
25.00
646.03
646.03
594.15
584.15
40.00
40.00
1,755.86
2,492.85
4,246.71
22.00
22.00
40.27
H.O4
22.00
164.87
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.OO
O.OO
O.OO
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.OO
0.00
0.00
0.04)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
O,O0
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
250,00
250.00
375.00
375.00
90.00
90.00
5.10
5.10
105.00
105,00
846.02
846.02
25,00
25,00
646.03
646.03
584.15
584.15
40.00
40.00
1,755.86
2,492.85
4,248.7~
22.00
22.00
4O.27
53.04
22.00
49,56
164.87
12119191
Fiscal Year: 1992
City of Teoecula
Check Register
Page: 2
Stations 3~69
Check
Date Vendor
Invoice Date
P/O
Date Description
6ross
Discount
Net
121391 12/13/91
12113191NILEAUE 11125-12112
~2.45
0.00
00006744 12/19191CCCA
121391
Check Totals:
CA CONTRACT CITIES ASSOCIATIO
12113191 12/13191RE61STRATION NIIIUAL COWERENC
32.45
175.00
0,00
0,00
32.4~
175,00
Check Totals:
00008745 12119191 COLONIAL COLONIAL LIFE i ACCIDENT
121191 12111191 12/11191 INSURANCE DEC, 1991
175.00
986.50
0,00
0,00
175.00
986.50
Chock Totals:
00008746 12119191CONPUALE CORPUTER ALERT SYSTENS~ [NC,
0010731-IN 12/01/91 11082 10/01/91 ~OIIITONINO 1/1/92-3/31/~2
91~.50
135.00
0,00
0.00
986.~0
135,00
00008747 12/19191DAVLIN DAVLIN
89-23:131 11/12191 11112191
89-23:137 12110191 12110191
89-23:138 12102191 10942 09127191
89-23:139 12103191 10943 09127191
Chock Totals:
AUDIO/VIDEO NOV. 12
AUDIO/VIDEO DEC. 10
AUDIO/VII 1212191
AUDIO/VISUAL 12/03
135,00
696,~&
602,10
121,60
125.80
0.00
0.00
0,00
O.O0
0,00
135,00
696.36
602.10
121,60
125.80
00008748 12119191 DENT[CAN DENTICANE OF CALIFORNIA
121191 12111191 12111191
Check Totals:
INSURANCE PRENIONIDEC 1~1
1,545,8b
815,00
O.OO
0.00
1,545.86
815.00
00009749 12119191 FRANKLIN FRANKLIN SENTlIARS
6382666 11/07/91 11007 10109191
6442992 11116191 10952 10110/91
6315774 10/22/91 10952 10/10/91
Check Totals:
MYTIHER FILLER;PLNtNIN6 DEPT
CREDIT HENO/CKIH72
DAYTIER REFILLS;TCSD
00008750 12119/910FQA
122091
Check Totals:
GOUT FINANCE OFF[CERS ~S~,
12120191 12120191 REGISTRATION ANNUAL CDtNEN,
815.00
3q,32
130,27-
231,50
135,55
220,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0.00
815.
130,27-
231,50
135,55
220.00
Check Totals:
00006751 12119191 GRAY BAR HAY BAN ELECTRIC
159-218673 11/27/91 11044 10/14/91 PHONES FOR CITY HALL
220.00
156.0q
0.00
0.00
220,00
156.04
00008752 12119191 6RF. AT 6,R,E,A,T, TRUST
121191 12111191
Check Totals:
12111191 INSURANCE PRENIUN DEC, 1991
156.04
770.00
0 .OO
0.00
156.04
770.00
00008753 12119/91 6TEBILL 6TE
6998632F 12107191
6992~09D 11/28191
6953539D 11128/91
6760932F 12/07/91
6760932E 11/07/91
Check Totals:
12107/91 714-699-86321DEC,'
11/28191 714-699-23091NOV.
11/26191 714-695-35391NOV,
12/07/91 714-676-0~321NOV, CHGS
11107191 714-676-093210CT, CH6S
770.00
19,37
30,21
28,79
37,16
47.92
O,OO
0,00
O,OO
0,00
0,00
770.00
19,37
30,21
28,78
37.18
47,92
Check Totals:
00008754 12/19/91 HAULAllAY HAULAUAY CONTAINER
179967 11/26191 10542 08101/91 STORAGE CONTAINER RENT/NOV.
163.46
65,00
0,00
0,00
65.00
00008755 12/19/91HYATTSAC HYATT REGENCY
Check Totals:
65.00
0.00
65.00
12119191
Fiscal Year: 1992
City of Teeecuh
Check Register
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date Description
Gross
Discount
Page:
Station:
Net
3
$~69
12120191 12120191
12113/91 HOTEL ACCOIgIDATIONS
219.78
219.78
12119/911CHA ICRA
4827 10/01/91
Check Totals:
10101191 PLANNING GUIDE
219.78
24.45
0.00
0.00
219.78
24.45
Check Totals:
00008757 12119191 [NLANDD[ INLAND DISPOSAL, INC.
001103 11/01/91 11003 10124191 TO]LET REIITAI.;2-DAYS;TCSD
24,45
80.00
0.00
0.00
24,45
80.00
00008758 12119191 KINKO'S
00~872
KINKO'S COPIES
11119191 11121
Check Totals:
11/18/91P/tER, BLADES, IOIIFE
80.00
58.97
0.00
0.00
80.00
58.97
00008759 12119191 LEAGUE
121691
Check Totals:
LEAGUE OF CALIF. CITIES
12116191 12130191 REGISTRATION COIIFEREItCE
58.97
200.00
0.00
0.00
58.97
200.00
Check Totals:
000087&0 12119/91RARILYNS HARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
1878 12/16191 11063 10101191 COFFEE 51JPPLIES;CITY HALL
1878DR 12116/91 11063 10101191 COFFEE SUPPLIES;CITY HALL
1875 12/09191 11063 10101191 COFFEE SUPPLIES;CITY HALL
18&0 12102191 110~ I0101/91 COFFEE SUPPLIES;CITY HALL
1854 11125191 110&3 10101191 COFFEE SUPPLIES;CITY HALL
200.00
105.66
8.02
78.70
91.90
70.8&
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
200.00
105.66
8.02
78.70
91.90
70.86
00008761 12119/91 RARSH
30396
30196CR
30396-1
Check Totals:
HARSHALL AND STEVENS, INC.
10131191 0211 10120191 LAND P. PPRAISALIOCT.
101~1191 0258 07101191 CREDIT EHO/EXCEEDED P.O.
10151191 0256 07101191 LAND APPRAISALS FOR 5 PARKSIT
355.14
1,800.00
200.00-
4,700.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
555.14
1,800.00
200.00-
4,700.00
Check Totals:
00008762 12119191NCGAVRAN LORR[ ANN RCGAVRAN
120491 12/04191 11/29191 REINS. RILEAGE/RXSC.
6,300.00
155.57
0.00
0.~
6,300,00
155.57
000087~ 12119191 HORNIN6
121791
Check Totals:
HORNINGSTAR flUSIC PHODUCTIO~
12117191 12117191 H. HOUDAY PARTY
135.57
300.00
0.00
0,00
135.57
~00,00
00008764 12119/91 NELSON
111591
Check Totals:
SHANN NELSON
11115191 11/15/91 LUNCHEON
300.00
19.56
O.O0
0.00
3~,00
19.56
Check Totals:
00008765 12119/91 06DENC&S 06DEll, CHARLES i SHIRLEY
121~91 12/1~/91 12113/91 REFUND
19.5&
348.00
0.00
0.00
19.56
348.00
Check Totals:
00008766 121191910LSTENTE OLSTEN TEHPORARY SERVICES
19210852 12/01/91 11065 11/13/91TEHP.PUB.NORKS;RAZNT.NR[.
19210814 11/24191 11065 11/13/91TEHP.PUD.NORKS;NAINT.MR[.
346.00
203.52
~71.00
0.00
0.00
~48.00
20~.52
371.00
00008767 12/I9191 PARTYPAL PARTY PALACE
121691 12116191
Check Totals:
12121191 TABLE I CHAIRS/BREAKFAST SANT
574.52
109.90
0.00
0.00
574.52
109.90
12/19191
Fiscal Year: 1992
C/ty of Teeecula
Check Register
Page:
Station!
Check Date Vendor Nee
Invoice Date P/O Date Description
Gross
Discount
Net
hack Totals:
00008768 12119199 ~R~RET[ PER8 E~OYEES' RET[RBERT
12~91 12/06/91 12106/91K~I~BER OLqTItEENT
109.90
13,160.~
0.00
0.00
109
13,160.86
00(0)8769 12/19/91 ~TROLNI ~T~
493811 11/20191 1~94
Check Totals:
10/21/91 FUEL I~AIIE) DiS TR~K
13,160.86
49.52
0.00
0,00
13,160.86
49.52
~770 121191911qfiTOWKS P~WTD NGRKS
00690 12102191 11103
Check Totals:
12102191FILH PROCESSING;
49.52
38.&0
0.00
0.04)
49.52
36.60
00006771 12119191 POLL
121191
Check Totals:
ANI)RE~ VON KR POEL
12/11191 12111/91NILE~ REII~.
1212-12111
0.00
0.00
38.60
22,02
~772 12119191 ~K nO LOCK & KEY
2633 11118191 11~
2573 11129191 110~9
Check Totals:
11118191 ~ BOLT LOCK;INGTALL;SPT PK
11/28191 lIEKEY CONCESSION BUILDING
~.02
75,16
70.40
0.00
0.00
~.02
75.18
70.40
Check Totals:
00008773 121191910UICKCRE ORANGE CON~RCIAL CREDIT
18161 11122191 11~0 II!12191 URN FOR OlrrSl~ CITY HALL
145.~
167.01
0.00
0,00
167.01
Check Totals:
~8774 12119191R.B.EIPR R.N.~ESS NESSE~ ~VICE
4255 11/30/91 03~ 11/13191 PICKUP DELIVERYINOVENtER
4161DR 11113191 0304 11113191 PICKUP DELIVERY/OCT, I:::HGS
167.01
300.00
75.00
0.00
0,00
167.ok
300.00
75,00
04)008775 12119191R.C.P
6900509
Check Totals:
R,C.P, GL~K & BRICK
12117191 11111 11125191 CONCRETE PRRKING STOPS
375,00
350.19
0.00
0.00
375,00
350, 19
Check Totals:
00008776 12119191RAINCNN RAINBOld C~YON VILLAGES ~
121391 12/13191 10914 07101191 ~]~.~INIVE ~ & DFJRIS
121391-I 12113/91 10913 07101191REINB.RENQVE ~ I I)aiRIS
350.19
716.50
300.00
0.00
0.00
350,19
716.50
' 300.00
04)008777 12119191RliSEY
1063
1069
Check Totals:
RBSEY ~CKFLON & PLONBING
121HI91 110~ 11104191 TESTING OF 9-BAC~FLON DEVICES
11/~/91 11036 11104/91 TESTING OF 9-~CKF1.ON DEVICES
1,016.50
43.00
165.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1~016.50
43.00
165.00
Check Totals:
00008778 12/19191RAN-CN. RRW-CAL JANITORIN. ~Y
1766 11105191 11026 11/01/91 ROLL TONELS|POL]CE DEPT.
8476 11121191 11091 11121/91 ROLL TONELS;POLICE STATION
208.00
36.62
73,25
0.00
0.00
0.00
208.00
36,62
73.25
Check Totals:
00008779 12119/91RANCH(~IR RANCHO ARNY-NAVY STORE
6218 12111191 11118 12/10191 ~FETY ~TS
11120/91 10979 10/28191 SLICKERS;KNEE BOOTS;PUB,NORmS
109.87
161.58
312,26
0.00
0.00
0.00
109.87
161,~-,.
~12,~
00006781 12/19/91RANCHWTR RANCHO WAT~
D108001511 11114191
Check Totals:
11/14191 0108001511110122-11114
473.84
88,94
0.00
0.00
473.84
88.94
Fiscal Year: 1992 Check Register Station:
,,
Check
Date Vendor Nae
Invoice Date P/O Date
Description
8ross
0111704058 11118191 11118191
011050~848 11114191 11/14/91
0110503858 11114191 11/14/91
0111700018 I1118191 11/18191
0111700028 11118191 11118191
01117000~E 11118191 11118191
0111700098 11/18191 11118/91
0111702508 11118191 11118191
0104620008 11112191 11112191
0104630858 11112191 11/12191
0107600098 11113191 11113191
01077007~E 11113191 11113191
0104010608 11112191 11112191
0104040158 11112191 11112191
0104145118 11112191 11112191
0106272008 111~2191 11112191
0107600788 1111~191 11111191
0107600778 11113191 1111II91
0106279008 11112191 11112191
0102450028 11108191 11108191
0113202008 11119191 11119191
0113200028 11119191 11119191
0111704051/10117-11118
0110503842110117-11114
0110503852110117-11114
0111700012110117-11/18
0111700022110117-11118
01117000~2110117-11/18
0111700092110117-11118
0111702502110117-11/18
0104620002110111-11112
01046~0852110111-11112
0107600092110115-1111~
0107700732/10115-11/13
0104010802110111-11112
0104040~51110111-11112
0104145110110111-11112
010627200II10114-11112
0107600781110115-1111~
0107600T11110115-11113
0106279002110114-11112
0102450002110110-1118
0111202002110118-11119
011~200002110118-11119
00008782 12119191REIIEDY REREDY TENP
315593 10101191 10442 06130191
Check Totals:
2 CLERKS-PACK FTLES-CR & CC
Check Totals:
00008783 12119191 RIVERBID RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
102519-0 ,I2103191 11053 10129191 OFFICE SUPPLIES; TCSD
Check Totals:
00008784 12/19191RO~ERG ROHERQ~ LUCI
120991 12109191 12109191 ORAL BOARD LUNCH
Check Totals:
00008785 12119191SC SI6NS SC SZBNS
103191 10111/91 0110 0~130191 PROVIDE 175 PULHEAR NTC
Check Totals:
00008786 12/19/91 8DOFFSUP SAN DIE60 OFFICE SUPPLY
S310676 10108/91 10916 09118/91 STAPLES FOR XEROX COFIER
Check Totals:
00008787 12/19/91SECURXTY SECURITY PACIFIC NATIQNRL BAN
100191 I0101191 10101191 JULY DANK SERVICE CHGB
100191-1 10101191 10101191 SEPT. BANK CHARGES
103191 10/31191 101~1/91 OCTOBER BANE CHARGES
Check Totals:
00008788 12/19191SHAHEY SHAHEY, BALED NAASEH
121391 12/13/91 1211II91 NILEABE RE[fiB
Check Totals:
00008789 12119191SIHNONS BECKY NCLEAN Si~ONS
111591 11/15f91 11077 11115191MORDPERFECT TRAINING CLASS
Discount
177.79
135.2~
77.54
766.26
278.74
431.69
461.39
367.68
69.83
42.15
36.07
41.24
69.52
565,21
563.76
145.08
358.54
640,61
40.49
5,778.77
&0,I7
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Net
177.79
135.23
77.54
766.26
278.74
4~3.69
461.39
367.68
69.8I
373.64
~2.32
42.1~
36.07
41.24
13.03
69.52
565.2~
563.7&
145.08
358.54
640.61
40,49
5~778,77
60.37
60,37 0.00 60,37
I30,92 O.OO 338.92
3~,92 0,00 338.92
69.95 0,00 69,95
69,95 0,00 69.95
450.00 0,00 450.00
450.00 0,00 450.00
114.92 0.00 114.92
114.92 0.00 114.92
291.58 O.O0 291.58
197.88 0.00 197,88
217.03 0,00 217.0~
706.49 ~ 0.00 706,49
14.85 0.00 14.85
14.85 0.00 14.85
425.00 0.00 425,00
12119/91
Fiscal Year: 1992
City of Teeecula
Check Register
Page: 6
Staten: 3369
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date PIO Date
Description
8ross
Discount
Net
00008790 12119/91 SIRSPEED SIR SPEEDY
4510 11/29191 10958 10110191
4445 11/29/91 11047 11105191
4495 11/29191 11068 11/12191
Check Totals:
NONBERING OF 4-PART CAGH RCPT
PRINT[N6 OF CASH RECEIPTS
BUS.CARH;PLANNING DEPT.
425.00
73.03
355.39
115,08
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
425. ""'
355.39
115.08
Check Totals:
00008791 12119191SNITH SNITH, ZENAIDA D.
121291 12112191 12112191 NILEAGE REIHB.
543.50
34.65
0.00
0.00
543.50
34.65
Check Totals:
00008792 12119191 SO CAL-2 SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
34934358 12107191 12/07191
~4574258 12107191 12107191
345-7421 12107191 12107191
34934378 12107191 12107191
34934368 12107191 12107191
349~4~98 12107191 12107191
714-349-34381NOV. CH6S
714-345-74251NOV. CHBS
714-345.7421/NOV. CHGS
71434934371MOV. CHGS
714349343~INOV. CHGS
714-349-34391NOV. CHGS
34.65
112.11
66.I0
117.79
69.23
61.10
4L78
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
34,65
112.11
" 66.30
117.79
69.2~
61.10
43.78
00008793 12119/91SOUTHCED SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
7170507318 11120191 11120191
8801008342 12102191 12102/91
E826002930 12102191 12102191
857685498 12/05191 12105191
2083669578 12102191 12102191
208~669408 ~2102191 12/02191
8568066~E 12107191 12/07191
2081604258 ~2/04191 I2104191
88148258 ~ 11/23/91 11123191
868517RE 11127/91 11127191
3090202708 11127/91 11127191
2084345418 12/02/91 12/02/91
Check Totals:
t~7758580590100MI10119-11120
5.T/78132104010004/10/30-1212
5.TI78131120030004110130-1212
55771260500020004111104-12105
53778006659030007110150-12102
5377800623~20003110130-12102
5777565t~0203000911116-1217
3477828640402000211111-1214
69776781651020002110123-11123
51779059001020005110129-11/27
51779050101020003110129-11127
537780014010200001101~0-1212
470.31
380.56
1,117,55
1,459.62
9.30
10.14
9.90
9.30
17.50
259.52
249.01
70.92
348.85
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
470.31
380.56
1,L17.55
1,459.&2
9.30
10.14
17.50
259,52
249.01
70.92
348.65
00008794 12/19191STAD[ONP STADioN PIZZA
103191 10131/91 11020
10129191
Check Totals:
PIZZA'S OCT.31 LUNCHEON
3,942.17
273.00
O.O0
0.00
3,942.17
273.00
Check Totals:
00008795 12119191 STATECON STATE CONPENSATION [mS. Ftl~
31KCL.56 11107191 11107191 Mar Payroll5 11107
~KNA.56 11107191 11107191 Mar Payroll5 11/07
3NKOT.56 11107191 11107191 Nor Payroll5 11/07
3NKCL.57 11108191 11/08191VoLd/Nanual Check
~NKCL.58 11121191 11121191 Mar. Payroll5 11/21
3NKHA.58 11121191 11121191 Mar. Payroll, II/21
3NKOT.58 11/21191 11/21191 Mar. Payro]l, 11/21
3NKOT.59 11121191 11121191VoidlNanual Check
121191 12111/91 12111191 INSURANCE FOR DEC. 1991
00008796 12119/91 TEN PIPE TENECULA VALLEY PIPE
19268 11/12/91 11079 11112191
19702 11/12/91 11079 11112191
19172 11/12191 11079 11112/91
18945 11112191 11079 11112/91
18939 11112191 11079 11/12191
Check Totals:
IRRIGATION & NISC. EQUIP.CSD
IRRIGATION & RISC. EQUIP.CSD
]RRIBATION i NISC. EQUIP.CSD
IRRIGATION & HISC. EOU[P.CSD
IRRI6ATION & NISC. EGUIP.CSD
273.00
273 39
25425.91
698.97
275.67
2,456.06
564.98
81.58
168,78
65949.66
33.40
45.40
26.23
1.67
146.23
O.O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
27~.00
273.79
2,425.91
698.97
3.92
275.67
2,456.06
564.98
81.58
168.79
65949,66
4~.40
26.23
1.67
146.23
12/19/91
Fiscal Year: 1992
City of leeecula
Check Register
Page: 7
Stati2n: 3369
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date PIO Date Description
8ross
Discount
Net
18898 11/12191 11079 11/12191 IRRIGATION & HISC. EQUIP.CSD
16.45
0.00
16.45
00008797 12/19/91 TEN TROP TENECULA TROPHY
10140 10/10/91 10929
12029 11/22191 11078
Check Totals:
10/01191 7X9 PLAQUES;TOO TAX GENERATOR
10/09191 FLAGS FOR CITY FLA6 POLE
269.38
514.51
229.51
0.00
0.00
0.00
269.7~
514.51
229.51
Check Totals:
00008798 12119191TE~ULAT TENECULA TONNE ASSQC
112691 12101191 0227 07101191 HALL RENTICLEARIN6
744.02
210.00
0.00
0.00
744.02
210.00
Check Totals:
00008799 12119/91TERECULA TEWECULA CREEK INN
112691 11/26191 11126191 NOV. CNNGS
210.00
152.58
0.00
0.00
210.00
152.58
OOOOeBO0 12119/91TOMHAFF
121191
Check Totals:
TONN AFFILIATION ASSOCIATION
12111/91 12111/91NENBERSHIP
152.58
38O.00
0.00
0.00
152.58
380.00
00008801 121191910NU~
122091
Check Totals:
ON~ LIFE INS. CO. OF AHERICA
12116/91 12/16/91 LONG TEi~ PRERI~!DEC.
38.00
2,052.93
O.O0
O.O0
;580.00
2,052.93
00008802 12/19191NHITECAP MNITE CAP
F115287 11/12/91 11022
Check Totals:
10/28/91EERGENCY TOOLS & SUPPLIES
Check Totals:
00008803 12119/91 MINDSOR1 MINOSOR PARTNERS-RANCNO IND
010192 .~1/01192 0235 07/01/91 RENT/JAN 1992
010192-1 01/01/92 01/01/92 RENT/JAN. 1992
6900509CR 12/17/91 12/17191 CREDIT NEIqD/CONCRETE STOPS
2,052.93
26.77
26.77
200.00
28,527.11
350.19-
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O .00
0.00
2,052.95
26.77
26.77
200.00
28,527.11
350,19-
Check Totals:
00008804 01114192 ALLIED ALLIED BARRICADE
119174-00 11/26191 10980 10116/91 SIGNS
119449-00 11126191 109~0 10116191 SIGNS
119198-00 11/27191 10980 10116191 SIGNS
119281-00 11128191 109~0 10116191SI6NS
119591-00 12/11/91 10980 10/16/91 SIGNS
119561-00 12/09/91 10980 10/16/91SI6NS
& NNTERIALS AS HEEDED
I NATERIALS AS NEEDED
I MTERIALS AS NEEDED
& HATERIALS AS NEEDED
& MTERIALS AS NEEDED
& NATERIALS AS NEEDED
28,376.92
59.61
795.48
53.17
39.16
25.39
69.56
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
28,376.92
59.61
795.48
53.17
39.16
25.39
69.56
Check Totals:
00008805 01114192 BURKE,NN BURKE, NILLIA~ & 5QRENGEN
07290 10101/91 10101191PROFFESSIONAL FEES SEPT 1991
1,042.37
12,164.71
0.00
0.00
1,042.37
12,164.71
00006806 01/14192 CALIFLAN CALIFORNIA LARDSCAPE
3085111 11/31191 0252 08/28191
308511124 11/30191 11057 11/01191
308511130 11/30/91 11084 11/19/91
00008807 01114192 COUNTYOF COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
110591 I1/27/91 11096 11127191
Check Totals:
HAINTEHANCEINOVENBER
PLANT FLONERS;VETERANS PARK
IRRIG.REPLACIINT.RCHO VISTA
Check Totals:
ELECTION COSTS
12,164.71
29,026.40
680.00
741.58
30,447.g8
3,868.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.OO
12,164.71
29,026.40
680.00
741.58
30,447.98
3,868.20
Check Totals: 3,868.20 0.00 3,868.20
Fiscal Year: 1992 Statb:n: 3369
Check Register
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date PIO Date
Description
6ross
Discount
Net
00008808 01114/~ 6L08AL 6LOML CONPUTER SLIPPLIES
11113495 12110191 10984 10/17191
11114800 12112191 11120 12/04191
11104465 11112/91 10984 10117/91
11090694 10104191 10893 09118191
LEGAL SIZE TRAY
C2180 BY 4NN DOS DATA CART
LASER PRINTER TRM;ANS,NACHN
CLANP NOUNT; CRT
74,70
182.45
545.92
515.46
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
74,
182,45
545,92
515.46
00008811 01/14/92 MNKSHAR HANKS HARDflARE
117251 11122191 10993
10116/91
/17526 11125191 10993 10116191
115973 11/15191 10993 10116/91
116245 11/15191 10993 10116191
114079 11105191 10993 10116191
115734 11114191 10993 I0116191
115737 11114191 10993 10116191
116701 11120191 10993 I0116191
117138 11122191 10993 10116191
116730 11120191 10993 10116191
117928 11127191 10719 08127191
116578 11119191 10719 08127191
114798 11108191 10719 08127191
114291 11106191 10719 08127191
114216 11106191 10719 08127191
116032 11118191 10719 08127191
116865 11/20191 10719 08127191
117370 11125191 10719 08127191
113245 10/31/91 10719 08127191
113434 11101191 10719 08127191
115512 11113/91 10933 10104191
116735 .,11120191 1095S 10104/91
114035 11105191 10933 10104/91
113467 11101/91 i09~ 10/04191
116264 11119191 10933 10104191
117709 11127191 10682 08121191
114262 11106191 10682 08121191
117201 11122191 10682 08121191
116806 11121191 10682 08121191
114062 11/05191 10682 08121191
114036 11/05191 10682 08121191
113699 11104191 10682 08121191
116456 11119191 10719 08/27191
Check Totals:
STREET MINT.SUPPLIESIPUB.NKS
STREET MINT.SUPPLIESIPUB.NKS
STREET HAINT.SUPPLIES;PUD.HES
STREET MINT.OUPPLIES;PUD.NKS
STREET MIMT.SUPPLIESIPUB.N~S
STREET M[NT,SUPPL[ES;PUB,HKS
STREET MINT.SUPPLIESIPUB.NKS
STREET MINT.SUPPLIES;PUB.HKS
STREET ~AIMT.gUPPL]ES;PUB.NKS
STREET MINT.SUPPLIES;PUB.NKS
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITENS; CITY
ACCOUMTIREPA[R ITENS; CITY
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITENS;:CITY
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITENS; CITY
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITENS; CITY
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITENS; CITY
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITENS; CITY
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITERS; CITY
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITENS! CITY
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITERS; CITY
REPAIR & mINT. ITENS;TCSD
REPAIR & mINT. ITEWSITCOD
REPAIR & MINT. ITENS;TCOD
REPAIR & mINT. ITENS;TCOD
REPAIR i RAilft, ITENS;TCSD
H[SC,REPAIR i NAINT. ITERS
HISC,REPAIR & NAINT, ITENS
NISC,REPAIR & mINT, ITENS
~ISC,REPAIR & mINT, ITENS
HISC,REPAIR & MINT, ITENS
NISC.REPAIR & mINT. ITEHS
RISC.REPAIR & HAIHT. [TENS
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITENS; CITY
1,318.53
21.54
5.71
99.81
25.08
15.03
209.89
102.78
9.87
73,23
6.87
74.97
19.38
0,48
24.01
28.78
7.21
6.44
2.16
11.06
58.08
13.59
10,00
397.20
31.85
9.04
95.70
7.80
43.09
5,11
6.20
47.72
8,34
0.00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
O.O0
0.00
O.O0
0,00
0,00
0.00
O.OO
0,00
0,00
O,O0
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
O.OO
O.OO
1,318.53
21,54
5,71
99,81
25,08
15,03
289,89
102,78
9.67
73,23
6.87
74.97
19.38
0.48
24 ,Or
28.76
7.21
6.44
3.44
li.
58.08
13.59
10.00
397.20
31,85
9,04
95.70
7.80
43.09
5.11
6.20
47,72
8.34
Check Totals:
00008812 01114192 JJCCONST J a C CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
121391 12113191 12113191REFUI~
1,561.46
1,500.00
0.00
0,00
1,561.46
1,500.00
Check Totals:
00008e13 01114/92 NCTIGHEJ JOHN KTIOUE i ASSOCIATES
911257 12105191 0296 10124/91 STUDY COST RECOVERY/DEC,
i,500.00
4,590.00
0.00
O.OO
1,500.00
4,590.00
00008814 01114/92 ORANGE
0019243
Check Totals:
ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING SERVIC
11/21/91 11/21/91HAR6ARITA RD/STRIPPZNG
4,590.00
7,224.00
0,00
0.00
4,590.00
7,224 ""
00006815 01114192 PETROLAN PETROLANE
274601 12/10191 10977
Check Totals:
10/14/91 CONVERT TRUCKS TO PROPANE
7,224.00
1,051.96
0,00
0.00
7,224.00
1,051.96
L21Lg19% City of Teeec~ta Page: 9
Fiscal Year: I992 Check Register Station: T369
Check Date Vendor
Invoice Date
Name
P/Q
Date
Description
00008816 01/14192RANTEl: RANTEl:
3856 11/27191 0282
3857 11/27/91 0282
3a59 11t25/91 0282
Check Totals:
10114191 ROUTINE STREET NAINTENANCE
10114191 ROUT[fiE STREET NAINTENANCE
10114191 ROUTTIlE STREET NAiNTENANCE
Check Totals:
00008817 01/14192 RODER11E ROBERT liEIN, NIL FR0ST & ASSO
1-10021 10/31191 0308 10115/91NEND.COI2BO;SAN HICI:9 PANl:
00008818 01114192 GYSTE!I SYGTEI~ SOURCE, INC.
5091DCR 11107191 10727 08112191
50918 11107191 10727 08112191
50040CR 10118191 10618 08106191
50840 10110191 10618 08106191
50842CR 10104191 10484 07/17191
50842 10104/91 104~i 07117/91
Check Totals:
DIAGONAL SORTERS;HANGERS
DIA6ONAL SORTERS;HANGERS
CREDIT NERO/FABRIC FLAIl
TACKDOARD,FILES~PANELS~ETC..
CREDIT fiENDlITERS NOT SHIPPED
STORAGE,BRIDGE~ OVERHEAD,NISC
00008819 01/14192 MILLDAN MILLDAN A~SOCIATES
4004156 10131191 10131191
4004136 10101191 10/01/91
404121CR 10101/91 10101/91
4004121 10101/91 I0101/91
4004}31 10111/91 0224 07101191
4004037 10/01/91 10/01191
4004006CR 10/01/91 10101/91
4004006 CR I0101191 10101/91
4004006 10101/91 I0101/91
Check Totals:
OCT. SERVICESIEMGIEEIURS
bL°T. CHGSIEIIGIIIEERI~
CREDIT tiERS/AUG. CUG/ENGIfiEER
AUGUST CH6G/ENGINEERING
STUDY AVENIDA DE LA REINAIAUG
TR~FIC ENGINEERING SEW/eAR.
CREDIT NEllUNAUTHORIZED nOR[
CREDIT fiERQIOUPLICAT BILLING
ENGINEERINGI3AN. FED. CH6S
Check Totals:
Report Totals:
Gross
Discount
Net
1,051.96
3,675.14
11,354.60
46.60
15,076,~4
3,726.00
3,726.00
129.30-
258.60
662.66-
7,252.45
223.04-
2,861.84
9,357.89
35,269.00
65,791.84
14,451.13-
214,328.80
9,815.20
820.00
1~449.00-
585.00-
9,054.75
318,594.46
501,353,88
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.OO
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.08
0.00
1,051.96
3,675.14
11,354.60
46.80
i5,076.54
3,726.00
3,726.00
129.30-
258.60
662.66-
7~252.45
223.04-
2~861.84
9,357.89
35~269.00
65,791.84
14,451.13-
214,328.80
9,815.20
820,00
1,449.00'
585,00-
9,054.75
318:594.46
5019353.68
Report Iriter
FUND CHECK HUHHER
001 00008672
001 00008711
001 00008731
001 000087:~3
001 00008734
001 000087~6
001 00008737
001 00008T~
001 00008740
001 00008740
001 00008740
001 00008740
001 00008740
001 00008740
001 00006740
001 00008741
001 00008742
001 00008742
001 00008742
001 00008742
001 00008742
001 00008743
001 00008744
001 00008745
001 00008746
001 00008747
001 00008747
001 00008747
001 00008746
001 00008749
001 00008750
001 00008751
001 00008752
001 00008753
001 00008753
00! 0000875,~
001 00008754
001 00008755
001 00008756
001 00008758
001 00008759
001 00008760
001 00008761
001 00008761
001 00008761
001 00008763
001 00008765
001 00008766
001 00008768
001 00008769
001 00008770
001 00008771
001 00008773
001 00008774
001 00008774
001 00008775
001 00008776
001 00008778
Voucher Detail
CHECK LISTIN6 BY FOND
CHECK DATE
VEIlDOR NANE
12106191
12/06191
12117191
12119191
12/19/91
12/19191
12119/91
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12/19191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12/19/91
12/19/91
12/19191
12/19191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12119191
12/19191
12119191
12/19/91
12/19/91
12119191
12119191
12119191
12/19191
12/19191
12/19191
12119191
12/19191
12/19/91
12/19/91
12119/91
12119191
12119191
12/19/91
12119191
12/19/91
12/19/91
12/19/91
12119/91
ENTZ, ED
6AlL ZI6LER
LONCH & STUFF CATERING
ARC
AEI SECURITY INC.
AHERtCAN ASSOC OF CODE ENFURC
AT&T
AVP VISION PLAN
BENEFIT ANERICA
9ENEF]T AHERXCA
BENEFIT ARERiGA
9EHEF]T ANERICA
BENEFIT ARERIGA
9ENGF]T AHERICA
BEliEFIT ANER[CA
CADET ONIFURN
CALIFORII[AN
CN. IFORIrZAN
CAL[FOAN[AN
CALIFORNZAN
CALIFORNIAN
GARTER, LISA
CA CONTRACT CiTiES ASSOC[ATtO
COLONIAL LIFE i ACCt~EIIT
CONPUTER ALERT SYSTENG, tiC.
DAVLIH
DAVLZN
SAVLIN
DENTICARE OF CALIFURNtA
FRANKLIN SERtNARS
60VT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOC.
URAY BAR ELECTR]C
6.R.E.A.T. TRUST
6TE
GTE
6TE
HAULANAY CONTAINER
HYATT RESENCY
ICRA
KINKO'S COPIES
LEAGUE OF CAL[F. CiTiES
HARILYN'S COFFEE SERV]CE
fiNISHALL AND STEVENS, [HE.
HARSHALL AND STEVENS, INC.
NARSI~LL AND STEVENS, iNC.
HORNINGSTAR flUSIC PRODUCTIONS
OGDEN, CHARLES & SHIRLEY
OLSTEN TEHPORARY SERVICES
PERS EHPLOYEES' RETIREBENT
PETROLANE
PHOTO NORKS
ANDRE' VAN DER POEL
ORANGE CONRERC[AL CREDIT
R.B.EXPRESS HESSENGER SERVICE
R.B.EXPRESS NESSENGER SERVICE
R.C.P. BLOCK & ORtCK
RAiNNON CANYON VILLAGES HOA
RAN-CAL 3ANITORIAL ,~JPPLY
DESCRZPTiON
flUSiC FOR OPEN HOUSE
HEFHENHHENTSIOPEN HOUSE
DXlER FOR COUNCIL
CONFERENCE
HONITORING 10/15-01114
1992 HENDERSHIP
73206960340001/NGV. CHGS
PRERIUR FOR DEC.
INSURANCE REIND. NGV.
DEHEFtTS FOR DEC. 1991
IIISURANCE REIND. NOV.
8EHEFITS FOR DEC. 1991
INSURANCE REIND. NOV.
BENEFITS FOR DEC. 1991
INSURANCE HEINB. IOV.
SUPPLY FEES 12/06/91
LE6AL NGHCES/OCT.
LEGAL ADS 11/25
LEGAL A85/12/05
PURL,L6L NTC;PLAN.C~H;COUMCL
LEGAL ADS/12/05
HiLER6E 11/25-12/12
HE6[STILqTION ANNGAL CONFERENC
INSURRI~ DEC. 19~1
NDNITURING 1/I/92-3/31/92
AUDIO/VISUAL 12/2/91
NJDiO/VIBEO HOV. 12
AUDiO/VIDEO DEC. 10
[RSURNICE PRERIUII/BEC 1991
DAYTIHER FILLER;PLANDtNG DEPT
REGISTRATION ANI~L CONVEIl.
PHONES FUR CITY HALL
illDURANCE PREHION DEC. 1991
714-695-3.'~9/NGV.
714-699-2309/HOV.
714-699-8632/BEC.
STORAGE CONTAINER RENT/NOV.
HOTEL ACCOItRO!)RTIONG
PLqlelING GUIDE
PAPER, BLADES, KNIFE
REGiSTRATiON CONFERENCE
COFFEE SUPPLIES;CHY HALL
CREDIT HEllO/EXCEEDED P.O.
LAle APPRAISALS FUR 5 PARKSIT
LAND APPRAISAL/OCT.
0~. HOLIDAY PARTY
REFUND
.TE~P.PUD.8ORKS;HAINT.ilRK.
DECEHBER RETIRERENT
FUEL (PROPANE) B&S TRUCK
FtLN PROCESSiN6;'
MILEARE REIND. 12/2-12/11
URN FOR OUTS[BE CiTY HALL
PICKUP BELIVERY/OCT. CHGS
PICKUP DELIVERY/HOVENBER
CONCRETE PARKING STOPS
RE[ND.RE~OVE IIUD & DEBRIS
ROLL TONELB;POLICE DEPT.
ANOONT
250.00
'~00
,u'.O0
5.10
64~
4~ ,75
95.59
1,79'/.33
409.28
I~.43
395.40
40.27
10.45
:r2.oo
42.59
32.45
175.00
1:i5.00
121.60
696.~
""',,10
I~vl
34.32
220.00
156.04
600.00
28.78
30.21
19.37
65.00
219.78
24.45
58.97
200.00
~J55.14
200.00.
4,700.00
1,800.00
~00.00
3~8.00
574.52
10,697.73
49.52
38.60
22.02
300.00
3~0.19
1,016.50
36.62
1211~191
Report Mdter
FOND CHECK NUNBER
CHECK DATE
Voucher Detail
CHECK LISTING BY FUND
001 00008778 12119191
r' 001 00008779 12119/91
001 00008779 12/19191
001 00008782 12119191
001 00008784 12119191
001 00008785 12/19191
001 00008786 12119191
001 00008787 12/19/91
001 00008787 12/19/91
001 00808787 12/19/91
001 00008788 12119191
001 00008789 12119191
001 00008790 12/19191
001 00009790 12119191
001 00008790 12119191
001 00008791 12119191
001 00008792 12/19191
001 00008792 12/19191
001 00008792 12/19/91
001 00008792 12/19191
001 00008792 12/19191
001 00008792 12/19191
001 00008793 12119191
001 00008794 12119191
001 00008795 12119191
001 00008795 12119191
OOt 00008795 12/19191
~- 001 00008795 12/19191
001 00008795 12/19191
001 00008795 12119191
001 00008795 12119191'
001 00008795 12/19/91
001 00008795 12/19191
001 00008795 12119191
001 00008795 12/19/91
001 00008795 12/19/91
O01 00008795 12/19191
001 00008795 12/19191
001 00008795 12119191
001 00008795 12119191
001 00008795 12/19191
001 00008797 12119/91
001 00008797 12119191
001 00008798 12119191
001 00008799 12119191
001 00008800 12/19/91
001 00008801 12/19/91
001 00008802 12/19/91
OOt 00008803 12/19191
OOl 00008803 12119191
001 00008803 12/19191
001 00008804 01114192
001 00008805 01/14t92
/" 001 00008807 01/14192
001 00008808 01t14192
001 00008808 01/14/92
001 00008808 01/14192
001 00008808 01114192
VENDOR NANE
DESCRIPTION
RAN-CAL aANITORIAL SUPPLY
RANCHO ARHY-NAVY STORE
RANCHO ARRY-NAVY STORE
RENEDY TE~
RONERO, LUCI
SC SIGNS
SAN DIEGO OFFICE SUPPLY
SECURITY PAC]FIC NATIONAL BAN
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL DAN
SHAHEY, SAIED MAASSH
BECKY tiCLEAN SINflOeS
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
S~ITH, ZENGIBA B.
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHOE CO.
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
SO.CALIFONNIA TELEPHONE CO.
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHOE CO.
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
STADIUN PIZZA
STATE CO~ENBATION INS. FOND
STATE CONPENSATION INS. FUND
STATE CONPENGAT[ON INS. FOND
STATE CO~PENSATION INS. FOND
STATE CONPENBATION INS. FOND
STATE CONPENGATION INS. FUND
STATE CONPENSATION INS. FOND
STATE CO~ENSATION INS. FUND
STATE CONPENSATION INS. FUND
STATE CORPENSATION INS. FUND
STATE CONPENSATIII INS. FUND
STATE COHPENSATION INS. FOND
STATE COHPENGATION INS. FUND
STATE COHPENSATION INS. FOND
STATE COF_NGATION INS. FUND
STATE CO~PENGATION INS. FUND
STATE COffi°ENSATION INS. FUND
TEECULA TROPHY
TERECULA TROPHY
TEECULA TONNE ASSOC
TEHECULA CREEK INN
TOll AFFILIATION ASSOCIATION
ONUR LIFE INS. CO. OF ANERICA
NHITE CAP
MINDSOR PARTNERS-RANCHO INS
NINDSOR PARTNERS-RANCHO IND
NINDSOR PARTNERS-RANCHO IND
ALLIED BARRICADE
BURKE, NILLIANS & SORENSEN
COONTY OF RIVERSIDE
GLOBAL COHPUTER SUPPLIES
GLOBAL CONPUTER SUPPLIES
GLOBAL CONPUTER SUPPLIES
GLOBAL CONPUTER SUPPLIES
ROLL TONELS;POLICE STATION
SAFETY BOOTS
SLICKERS;KNEE BOOTS;PIJS.NORKS
2 CLERKS-PACK FILES-CH & CC
ORAL BOARD LUNCH
PROVIDE 175 PUB.HEAR NTC
STAPLES FOR XEROX COPIER
OCTOBER BAN[ CHARGES
SEPT. BANK CHARGES
3ULY BRNK SERVICE CHGS
NILEAGE REINB
NORDPERFECT TRAINING CLASS
BUS.CARDS;PLANNING DEPT.
PRINTINS OF CASH RECEIPTS
NONDERINS OF 4-PART CASH RCPT
~ILEA6E REIHB.
714-349-3438/NGV. CHGS
71434934~/NOV. CHGS
714349TA37/NGV. CHGS
714-345-7421/NGV. CHGS
714-345-7425/NGV. CHGS
714-349-3439/NOV. CHGS
6677H58059010004110/19-11/20
PIZZA'S OCT.31 LUNCHEON
Nor Payroll, 11/07
Nor. Payroll, 11121
INSURANCE FUR DEC. 1991
Void!Ranual Check
Nor Payroll, 11107
Nor. Payroll, 11121
Nor Payroll, 11107
Nor. Payroll, 11121
Nor Payroll, 11107
Nor. Payroll, 11/21
Nor Payroll, 11/07
Nor. Payroll, 11121
Nor Payroll, 1!/07
Nor. Payroll, 11121
Nor Payroll, 11107
Nor. Payroll, 11121
Nor Payroll, 11107
719 PLAGUES;TOP TAI 6ENERATUR
FLA6S FOR CITY FLAG POLE
HALL RENT/CLEANING DEC.
NOV. CHRGS
NEHDERSHIP
LONG TERN PREH[ONIDEC.
ENERGENCY TOOLS & SUPPLIES
CREDIT NENOICONCRETE STOPS
RENTI3AN 1992
RENT/JAN. 1992 ~
SIGNS i HATERiALS AS NEEDED
PROFFESSIONAL FEES SEPT 1991
ELECTION COSTS
C2180 SONY ANN DOS DATA CART
CLAHP ROUNT; CRT
LEGAL SiZE TRAY
LASER PRINTER TRAY~ANS.HACHN
Page:
Shtio~:
AROONT
73.25
161.56
312.26
60.37
69.95
450.00
114.92
217.0~
197.88
291.58
14.85
425.00
115.08
34.65
112,11
&1.10
69.23
117.79
66.30
43.78
380.56
273.00
99.08
499.46
168.78
81.58
4.71
311.12
718.34
116.79
194.63
334.48
316.65
435.63
67.90
161.44
40.8~
514.51
229.51
210.00
152.58
380.00
1,660.77
26.77
350,19-
200.00
28,527.11
1,042.37
11,653.90
3,868.20
182.45
515.46
74.70
545.92
121~1~
Report Mriter
FUND CHECK NUMBER
001 00008811
001 00008811
001 00008811
001 00008811
001 00008811
001 000011811
OOl 00008811
001 0000SOli
OOt O000SOIL
001 00008811
OOt O0008Gt2
001 0000SO13
001 00008814
001 00008815
001 O000SOt6
001 00008818
001 O000SOIS
001 00008818
oo1 O000BRIR
001 00008818
001 00008918
001 00008818
001 00008819
001 00008819
001 00008919
001 00008819
OOt 00008819
001 00008819
001 O000SOt9
001 00008819
001 00008819
OOl
014 00008817
016 00008805
019 00008735
019 00008738
019
019 00008740
019 00008740
019 00008740
019 00008745
019 00008747
019 00008748
019 00008749
019 00008749
019 00008752
019 0000875~
019 00008753
019 00008757
019 00008762
019 00008764
019 00008767
019 00008768
019 00008772
CHECK DATE
01114192
01/14192
01114192
01114/92
01114192
01/14/92
01114192
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14/92
01114192
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14/92
01114/92
01/14192
01/14/92
01114192
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14/92
01/14192
01/14/92
01114192
01114192
12/19191
12/19/91
12/19191
12/19/91
12119/91
12/19191
12119191
12/19/91
12/19/91
12/19/91
12/19/91
12/19/91
12/19/91
12/19/91
12/19/91
12/19191
12/19/91
12/19191
12/19/91
12/19/91
Voucher Detail
CHECK LISTING BY FUND
VENDOR NAHE
HANKS HARDMARE
HANKS HARDMARE
HANKS HARDMANE
HANKS HARDMARE
HANKS HARONANE
HANKS NARDMARE
HANKS HARNIARE
HANKS HARNffiRE
HANKS HARDMARE
HANKS HARDMARE
a J C CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
JOHN MCTISHE & ASS0CIATES
ORAN6E COUNTY STRIPING SERV[C
PETROLARE
RANTEN
SYSTEM SOURCE, INC.
SYSTEM SOURCE, INC.
SYSTEM SOURCE, INC.
SYSTEM SOURCE, INC.
SYSTEM SOURCE, INC.
SYSTEM SOORCE, INC.
SYSTEH SOURCE, INC.
HILLDAN ASSOCIATES
MILLDAN ASSOCIATES
MILLDAN ASSOCIATES
MILLDAN ASSOCIATES
HILLDAN ASSOCIATES
MILLDAN ASSOCIATES
MILLDAN ASSOCIATES
MILLDAM ASSOCIATES
MILLDAN ASSOCIATES
ROBERT BEIN, I~. FROST & ASSO
BURKEy NILLIARS i SORTJiSEN
AGRICREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORP.
AVP VISION PLAN
BARBIES HOT DOGS
BENEFIT AMERICA
BENEFIT AERICA
BENEFIT ANERICA
COLUNIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT
DAVLIN
DENT]CARE OF CALIFORNIA
FRANKLIN SEMIHANS
FRANrJ./N SEMIHANS
6.R.E.A.T. TRUST
6TE
GTE
INLAND DISPOSALs INC,
LORR[ ANN NCGAVRAN
SHAMN NELSON
PARTY PALACE
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREHENT
PRO LOCK & KEY
S~Rion: 3~
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITEMS; CITY 18.2;
STREET NAINT.SUPPLIES;PUB.NKS --,~8.2~
ACCOUNT;EPAIR ITEMS; CITY ,1.4l
STREET NAINT.SUPPLIES;PUB.NKS 120.5~
ACCOUNT;REPAIR ITEMS; CITY 0.4~
STREET NAINT.SUPPLIES;PULNKS T92.6]
ACCOUNT;REPAIR [TEllS; CITY 10.5(
STREET NAINT.SUPPLIES;PUB.NKS 25,0(
ACCOUNT;REPAIR [T~HS; CITY 75,63
STREET NAIN1.SOPPLIES;PUB.NKS 73.2:
REFUND t,500.0(
STUDY COST RECOVERY/DEC, 4,590.0(
MARGARITA RDISTRIPPIN6 7,224.0(
CONVERTTRUCKS TO PROPANE 1,051.9~
ROUTINE STREET MAINTENANCE ~ 15,076.54
DIAGONAL SORTERS;HANGE~ 129.3(
TACKSOAND,FILES,PANELS,ETC.
DIAGONAL SONTERS;HAN6ERS 258.6(
CREDIT NERO/FABRIC FLAN &62.6~
TACKSOAND,FILES,PANELS,ETC. 6,220.2(
CREDIT fiENO/ITEMS NOT SHIPPED 2210a
STORAGEsBRIDGE, DVERMEAD,HISC 2,861.8a
OCT. SERVICESIEN6INEERIN6 35,269.0(
CREDIT END/AUG, CHGIENGINEER 14J51.1;
CREDIT MENOIDUPL[CAT BILLING 585.0(
AUGUST CH6SIEN61NEERING 214,328.8(
STUDY AVEN[DA DE LA REINAIAU6 9,815,2(
CREDIT NERO/UNAUTHORIZED NORM J-"~.O(
SEPT. CHGSIENGIMEERING 6~
TRAFFIC ENGINEERINE SERVIMAN. 820.0t
ENGINEERING/JAN. FEB. CHGS 9,054.71
ANEND.COI280;SAM HICKS PARK
PROFFESSIONAL FEES SEPT 1991
LEASE FER6USON TRACTOR/DEC.
PREMIUM FOR DEC.
REFUND KEY DEPOSIT
BENEFITS FOR DEC. 1991
INSURANCE REINB, NOV,
BENEFITS FOR DEC. 1991
IMSORANCE DEC. 1991
AUD[O/VISOAL 12103
INSURANCE PREMIUHIDEC 1991
CREDIT NENO/CK!8372
DAYTIMER REFILLS;TCSO
INSURANCE PREN[~ DEC. 1991
714-676-0932/NOV. CHGS
714-676-0932/0CT. CHGS
TOILET REMTAL;2-DAYS;TCGD
REING. NILEAGE/MISC.
LUNCHEON
TABLE & CHAIRS/BREAKFAST SANT
DECEHBER RETIREMENT
REKEY CONCESSION BUILDING
447~115.7~
~,726.~
16:~.54
846.0:
144.4i
40.0~
22.11
408.7~
835.4
296.5,
125
208,0~
130.2'
231.5,
170
37,1~
47 .~
80.0
"'~.5
t09.9:
2,46.%1
70.4.
IZ/IWVl Voucher Detail Page:
Report Mriter CHECK LISTING BY FUND Station
FUND CHECK eBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NAHE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
019 00008772 12119191 PRO LOCK & KEY DEAD DOLT LOCK;]NGTALL;SPT PK 75.18
019 00008777 12119191 RARSEY BACKFLON & PLUMDIRS TESTING OF 9-BACKFLUN DEVICES 208.00
019 00008781 12/19191 RANCHO MATER 0113202002/10/18-11119 640.&1
019 00008781 12119191 RANCHO MATER 0107&00771110115-11/13 563.76
019 00008781 12119191 RANOIO MATER 0113200002110118-11119 40.49
019 00008781 12119191 RANCHO MATER 0106279002110114-11112 145.08
019 00008781 12119191 RANOIO MATER 0102450002/10110-1118 3f8.54
019 00008781 12119191 RANOIO MATER 0107&00781110115-11113 565.23
019 00008781 12/19/91 RANOIO MATER 0106272003110114-11/12 &9.52
019 00008781 12/19/91 RANCNO MATER 0104145110/10/11-11112 L3.03
019 00008781 12119/91 RANOlD MATER 0104040151110111-11112 41.24
019 00008781 12119191 RANCHO MATER 0104010802110111-11112 36.07
019 00008781 12119191 RANClIO MATER 0107700732110115-11/13 42.15
019 00008781 12/19191 RANOIO MATER 0107600092110115-11113 32.32
019 00008781 12119191 RANClIO MATER 0104b30852110111-11/12 ' 3~.b4
019 00008781 12119191 RANCHO MATER 0104620002110111-11/12 69.83
019 00008781 12119191 RANOlD MATER 0111702502110/17-11/18 367.b8
019 00008781 12119191 RANClIO MATER 0111700092110117-11/18 4b1.39
019 00008781 12119191 RANOIO MATER 01117000~2110117-1111D 4~.69
019 00008781 12119191 RANOIO MATER 0111700022110117-11/18 278.74
019 00008781 12119191 RANOIO MATER 0111700012110117-11118 766.2b
019 00008781 12119/91 RANCHO MATER 011050~852110/17-L1114 77,54
019 00008781 12/19191 RANCHO MATER 011050~842110117-11114 135.23
019 00008781 12119/91 RANOIO MATER 0111704051110/17-11118 177.79
019 OOO08781 12119191 RANGHO MATER 0108001511/10/22-11/14 88.94
019 00008783 12119191 RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES; TCSD 33e,92
019 00008793 12/19/91 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 53778006659030007110130-12102 10.14
019 '00008793 12/19/91 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 51779050101020003/10/29-11127 70.92
019 00008793 12119191 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5477828640402000211111-1214 17.50
019 00008793 12119191 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5777565~020S000911116-1217 9.30
019 00008793 12119/91 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 557712&0500020004111104-12105 9.30
019 00008793 12/19/91 SOUTHERN CAL[F EDISON ~1779059001020005110/29-11127 24L01
019 00008793 12119191 SOUTHERN CALIF ED]GON 53778001401020000110130-12/2 MI.85
019 00008793 12119191 SOUTHERN CAL[F EDISON ~3778131120030004110130-1212 1,451.62
019 00008793 12119/91 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5377800623302000~110130-12102 9.90
019 00008793 12/19/91 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 53778132104010004110/30-1212 1J17.55
019 00008793 12119191 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 69776781651020002110123-11123 251.52
019 00008795 12/19191 STATE COMPENGATION INS. FUND Nor Payroll, 11107 29.64
019 00008795 I2119191 STATE CD~EIGATION INS. FUND VoidlNanual Check 3.92
019 00008795 12/19/91 STME CUNPENGATIUN INS. FUND Nor Payrail, 11/07 564.32
019 00008795 12119191 STATE CUNPENGATIUN INS. FUND Nor. Payroll, 11121 431.48
019 00008795 12119191 STATE CONPENGATIUN INS. FUND Nor Payroll, ILl07 420.24
019 00008795 12119191 STATE CONPENGATION ILLS. FUND Nor. Payroll, 11/21 594.38
019 00008796 12119191 TERECULA VALLEY PIPE IRRIGATION a NISC. EGUIP,CSD 269.3G
019 00008801 12119R1 UleJ~ LIFE INS. CO. OF AMERICA LONG TERN PRENIU~IDEC. 392.16
019 00008805 01114192 BURKE, NILLIARS & SORERSEN PROFFESSIUNAL FEES SEPT 1991 347.25
019 0OOO88O6 01/14192 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE PLANT FLUHERS;VETERANS PARK 680.00
019 00008806 01114192 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE/NOVEMBER 29~02b.40
019 00008806 01114192 CALIFORNIA LANI)SCAPE 'IRRIB.REPLACNNT.RCHO VISTA 741.56
019 OO008811 01/14192 HANKS HARDMARE REPAIR & NAINT. ITENS;TCSD 10.00
019 00008811 01/14/92 HANKS HARDMARE MISC.REPAIR a NAINT. ITEMS 7.80
019 00008811 01/14/92 HANKS HARDMAHE REPAIR & NAINT. ITERS;TCSD 13.59
019 00008811 01114/92 HANKS HARDMARE MISC.REPAIR & HAINT. ITERS 57.24
019 00008811 01/14/92 HANKS HARDMARE REPAIR & MAINT. ITERS;TCSD 455.28
019 00008811 01/14/92 HANKS HARDMARE MISC.REPAIR & MAINT. ITERS 149,62
019 00008811 01/14/92 HANKS HARDMARE REPAIR & NAINT. ITERS;TCSO 31.85
019
50~350,56
12,'Ii./91 Sit,.' of 7s~ezula Pace:
Fiscal >ear: 1992 Check Rec:istar S::ior?.~ 3~
Check. Date Vandot Na~e
Invoice Date P/O Date Description 8ross Discount Ne~
00008715 12/11/9! AMERPLAN AMERICA~ PLAN~iNB ASSOC ""
120491 12/04/91 12/04/9i DUES 58¢.00 0.00 580.0C
Check Totals:
00008714 12/1i/9! BIRDSALL BIRDSALL, PATRiCIA
102191 !0/21/91 i0/21/91 REINS. LEAGUE I0/15-10/16
580.00 0.00 580.00
76.00 0.00 76.00
Check Totals:
00008715 12i11/91 CARROUSE CARROUSEL CARRIAGES
121291 12/12/91 12112/91 CARRIAGE RIDES
7~.00 0.00 76,00
650.00 0.00 650.00
Check Totals:
00008716 12/II/91 CHESHIRE CHESHIRE EMBROIDERY
120591 12105/9! 12105/9! EXPLORER PATCHES
650.00 0.00 650.00
456.59 0.00
00008717 !2/ii/91CSMFO
I~1~ol
Check Totais:
CA SO OF MUNI FIN OFFICERS
!2/15/9! !2/15/91 2 TICKETS FOR CSFMO
436.39 0.00 436.5!
76.00 0.00 76.00
00008718 12/!I191 DAYTIME DAY-TIMERS? INC.
120991 12/09/91
Check Totals:
12/09/91 FILLERS FOR DAYTIMERS
76.00 0.00 76.00
49.80 0.00 49.80
Check Totals:
00008?19 12/!!/91 ELECTRON ELECTRONIC MAIL ASSOC.
121691 12/16/q! 12/16/91 SOFTWARE 8UIQE
?/11'91 GREEK GREEK, jUNE
121691 !2/16i9!
Check Totals:
i0/!6/91REIMB. LEAGUE/SANFRANCiSCO
49.80 0.00 49.80
45.00 0.00 45.00
45.00 0.00 45.00
115.07 0.00 !15.07
Check Totals:
00008721 t2/Ii/91HARRINGT HARRINGTON, KEV!N
"~*Q~ ii/3!/91 11 ~1/ NILEAGE/NOVEMBER
115.07 0.00 !15.07
21.60 0.00 21.60
00008722 12/11/9i LINDEMAN KAREL LINOEMANS
101591 10/15/91
Check Totals:
10/15/91REIMB LEAGUE JULY ~r'-~
21.60 0.00 21.60
228.51 0.00 228.3!
Check Totals:
00008723 12/11/91 ~CCARTHY MCCARTHY, LORAINE - NGCIO
121!~I 12/11/91 12/11/91FCC LICENSING
285.00 fJ.O0 285.00
Check Totals:
0000872: 12/11/9! )~ELS[!)i SHAWN N;I 8 !
lC~2.-'~'i .... ~=~Q~ i0/25/9! REIMB
28B.00 0.00 ~q= r,,'.
00{'--08v25 12/ii/91 SCACEO S.C,A.C.E.O.
Check Totals:
12/11/91 MEETING *~
37.53 O. O0 37.55
25. ,9(~ 0.00
25.00 ,:'.i. 00 2.5. :!~:= <! ~
!~EO:j CHC-.-3 27.6C 0. O0 27.
OCT ~H~c' 2.55.59 C.Oi} ~ .....
~ ,.,, .',,:,.:,:-
jUriE CHr, S ...... ~,;r, =~
o.'.' CHGS ,::, ,".~c: 0..'.,'.,'-.'. i{:.o::.
~2'I1/~I ..... ' m
Fiscal Year: !092 Check Reai~ :"~:~'" ~3~:
....... Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date Description Gross
4%20 I0i31/?I '0/31/9~ 4798020000014262 OCT ~uc~ ~:~
0825D 10/51/91 I0151/91 1799020000010825 OCT CHGS 9~I.$0 e. OO ~31.30
08070 I0/31/91 !0/51/91 4798020000010807 OCT CHBS 725.98 G.~ 723,!S
n~,s 10/3i/91 !0/~1t91 ~w8AormOoQlOSl~ OCT CHSS 124.5(: C.g; ,n, ~n
08640 i0151/9i !013i/91 4798020000010864 OCT CHBS 175.40 C.CC' 175.40
ABo~: 11/30/91 Ii/30/01 4798020000010825 OCT CHSS ~O oc
....... C.O: 30.99
07750 10/31/91 10/51/91 479802000001077~ OCT CHSS I,~25.5~ C.OC 1.425.56
00008727 12t!1/9! SMART&FI SMART & FINAL
121191 12/11/91
12/11/91
Check Totals:
CANDY FOR CHRISTMAS FROLIC 164.69 C.O0 !~4.a?
00009728 12/11/91SOUTHCEO SOUTHERN CALIF EOISON
Check Totals: 164.69 * ^^ 164.69
85737116E 11123!91 11/25i91 69776780107020004 i0125-11/23 9.30 0.00 9.50
205005624E II/20/9! 11/20/91 6~777959913020005 I0/18-!I/20 281.16 0.00 281.1~
17012012E II119/91 '1'1°t~I 6~774050677020000/!0119-11/!9' 227 52 C.O.~ ~.~ ~n
208343~iOE 11/20/~I 11/20/91 208343010 lOllq-ll/20 ~ie :-
..... , C.OC ~o 57
208432!01E 1!/19/91 III!9/9! 66774051040020008 !0/!~-!I/!9 254.55 ¢.OG 234.55
85674508E 11/21/91 11/21/91 67778639414020002 i0/21-1!/21 2~5.7& C.OO 2~3.74
85484510E !1/20/91 11/20/91 a~7T7956482030009 I0/IE-!I/20 ~.90 ~.00 9.90
850829~4E II/201~1 11/20/91 667779584~2030009 iO!IS-!I/20 76.04 C.(,,:. 76.04
E5~84510~ !0/18/9! I0/le/91 5~777~b482050007 9/!S-i0/!8 ~.0i} ~.3.~. %00
85764790A i0i01191 i0/01i91 59774160080020005 S/9-g/10 i~i.:j C.CS 19!.30
1050184~6E !!/20/91 !I/20/9! 66777958080040000 i0/!8-ii/20 12.~i ~.0~ 12.5!
857~7~%D I0/~I/~! 10/~I/?I 24.2~ C.O~, 24.25
00008750 0!/i(/S! WILLDAN
4004017
~004017CR
4004!46CR
Check Totals: I~558.~i C.O~ 1.558.84
WILLDAN ASSOCIATES
10/01/91 10/01/91B''~' ~ & SAFETY/~ARCH CMGS 98~.~: C.O0 ~8n ~
10/51/9! 10/31!91 BUILD & SAFETY/OCT CHSS 1,504.5~ 0.00 1,304.56
10/01/91 10/01/91 CREDIT "=MOYMARr~U~ ~ & SAF 4.21- C.OC 4.2!-
i0/$!/91 10/3!/91 CREDIT ~E~O/OCT CHSS/8 & S 21.71- C.OO 21.91-
Report Totals: 11,0!~.4i ~.00 iI~018.41
L2/Li/?! Voucher u.~.~ i
Re~ort ~riter CHECK L!ST!N~ BY FUND Station: 5~6~
FUND ~Hc~k' NUHER CHECi-: n~c VEN~OR NAMc DESCRIPTION
w. uu~.~.~ 12/11/71 A~ERiCAN PLANNING ASSOC DUES
..... .~,~ ~.,~,~. P.,R~.. REINS. LEAGUE 10/13-10/16
u.c~HIk EMBROIDERY EXPLORER PATCHES
001 O00CG~!a 12/11/9! ~u-e, ,-
'0~,' 00008717 12/11/91 CA SO OF MUNI FIN OFFICERS 2 TICKETS FOR CSFMO 76.00
' , .....o FILLERS FOR DAYTIMERS
001 iZ!VOOB7i8 .~/~ .1 DAY-TiMERS. INC.
001 00008719 12/11/91 ELECTRONIC MAiL ASSOC. SOFTWARE GUIDE 45.06
001 00008720 12/11/91 GREEK, JUNE REINS. LEASUE/SANFRANCISCO !15.07
001 00008?22 12/!I/9! KAREL LINDEMANS REIMB LEAGUE JULY 10-12 228.%
00! 00008723 12/I1/71 MCCARTHY, LORAINE - N6CIO FCC LICENSING 295.00
001 00008725 12/11/91 S.C.A.C.E.D. MEETINB SCA 25.00
001 00008726 12/11/91 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN 4798020000014262 OCT CHBS 552.49
001 00008726 12/11/91 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN 4798020000010825 OCT CNGS 17.52
001 00008726 !2111191 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN 4798020000010864 OCT CHSS 175.40
00i 00008726 12/1t/91 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN 4798020000010825 OCT CHGS 72.28
001 00008726 12/11/91 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN 479802D00001077~ OCT CHSS ' 1~128.12
001 00008?26 12/11/~I SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN 4798020000010825 OCT CHGS 13.67
0 12/!i/~I SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL ~AN ~798020000010856 NOV CHGS 17.60
00i OOO 8726
00i 00008726 121!I/91 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN 47%020000010807 OCT CHBS 725.98
001 00008726 12/11/~1 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN ~7980200000108f6 OCT CHGS 10.00
001 00008726 12/!I/91 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN 4798020000010856 NOV CHGS !0.00
001 00008726 12/11/91 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN U98020000010856 JUNE CHGS 522.42
001 00008726 12/11/91 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN 47980200000108!5 OCT CHGS 124.30
001 00008726 t2/11/91 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN UgBO20DO0010799 OCT CHGS 285.89
001 00008726 12/11/9i SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN 4798020000010773 OCT CHBS 2~7.4~
001 00008726 12/11/91 SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN 4798020000010823 OCT CHGS 85%02
001 00008730 01/1A/91 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES CREDIT MEMO/OCT CHGS/B & S
001 00008730 31YI4/q! ~ILLDAN ASSOCIATES BUILD & SAFETY/MARCH CHGS 980.81
00i 00008730 01/14/91 ~ILLDAN ASSOCIATES BUILD & SAFETY/OCT CHSS
001 000087~0 01/1~/7i WiLLDAN ASSOCIATES CREDIT MEMO/MARCH/BUILD & SAF ..Zi-
001 ~ 8.585.75
019 00008715 12/1I/9! CARROUSEL CARRIAGES CARRIAGE RIDES 650.00
019 00008721 !2I!I/91 HARR1NGTDN~ KEVIN MILEAGE/NOVEMBER 21.6~
017 00008724 12/ii/91 SHAWN NELSON REIMB 57.55
017 00008727 12/ti/9! S~ART & FINAL CANDY FOR CHRISTMAS FROLIC L64.6~
01~ 00008728 12/~''"~ SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 667779580800A0000 I0118-Ii/20
0i9 00008728 !2/11/9! SOUTHERN-CALIF EDISON 66777758462050007 !0/18-11/20
¢i~ 00008728 12/11/71 SOUTHERN CA~ EDISON 66774051040020008 !0119-Ii/19 234
¢i? 00008728 12/1i/9! SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 208345010 10/19-11/20 2!9.5T
(il? 00008728 12/11/71 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 24.25
~i? 00008728 12/11/91 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 66774050677020000/!0/!9-11/i? 22?.52
01~ 00008728 i2/tl/91 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON &7778659414020002 10/2!-11/2i 265.74
0!~ 0000~728 !2/11/91 SOUTHERN CALIF E ICON 69776780107020004 10/2>!i/23
0!9 00008728 12/1!/91 SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 5?774160080020003 B/9-9/I0
Fjlg 00008728 12/!I/9! SOUTHERg CAL!F EDISON 66777%6482050009 9/18-10/18 9.00
I':i~ 00008728 i?/i'/Q~ SOUTHERN ~,,.c ' · 66777959913020005 !0/!8-II/20
.... i,,l u.~, EDISON
C19 ooeog72e 12/iL/9! SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON 6677795648203000? 10/18-11/20 9.~::
0!9 ~ "~ A'
ITEM
NO.
4
APPROVAI~R~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
January 14, 1992
City Treasurer's Report as of November 30, 1991
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's
report as of November 30, 1991.
DISCUSSION: Reports to the City Council regarding the City's investment
portfolio and receipts, disbursements and fund balance are required by Government
Code Sections 53646 and 41004 respectively. The City's investment portfolio is in
compliance with the Code Sections as of November 30, 1991.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
ATTACHMENT:
City Treasurer's Report as of November 30, 1991
City of Temecula
City Treasurer's Report
As of November 30, 1991
Cash Activity for the Month of November:
Cash and Investments as of November 1, 1991
Cash Receipts
Cash Disbursements
Cash and Investments as of November 30, 1991
Cash and Investments Portfolio as of November 30, 1991:
Type of Investment
Institution
Yield
Demand Deposits
Treasury Service Shares
Petty Cash
Certificate of Deposit
Deferred Comp. Fund
Local'Agency Investment Fund
Security Pacific
Pacific Horizons
N/A
Overland Bank
ICMA
State Treasurer
N/A
4.870%
N/A
5.250%
N/A
6.591%
Cash and Investments as of November 30, 1991
(1)-This amount includes outstanding checks.
Per Government Code Requirements, this Treasurer's Report is in compliance with
the City of Temecula's Investment Policy and there are adequate funds available
to meet budgeted and actual expenditures for the next thirty days of the City
of Temecula.
Prepared by Alicia Almanza, Senior Accountant
Maturity
Date
N/A
N/A
N/A
02/22/92
N/A
N/A
$ 13,222,637
985,504
(1,990,462)
$ 12,217,679
Balance
as of
November 30, 1991
(213,304) (1)
399,227
800
100,000
73,766
11,857, 190
12,217,679
w ~
0
ITEM
NO.
5
APPROVAL ~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER °
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
January 14, 1992
Completion and Acceptance of Signal Construction at Towne
Center and Rancho California Road; City Project No. PW91-02
PREPARED BY: Jack L. Hodson, Senior Public Works Inspector
RECOMMENDATION:
That City Council accept the traffic signal at the intersection of the Towne Center Driveway
and Rancho California Road as complete and direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of
Completion; release the Performance Bond and accept a one-year maintenance bond (5% of
Contract Amount); authorize the release of the construction retention 35 days after the filing
of the Notice of Completion and upon the filing of an adequate warranty (2% of Contract
Amount); and authorize the release of the Material and Labor seven (7) months after the filing
of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed.
BACKGROUND:
On September 24, 1991, the City Council awarded a Public Works Construction Contract to
Steiny and Company to construct a traffic signal at the Towne Center driveway on Rancho
California Road. The contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved
plans and specifications and it is now appropriate for the City to accept the project and file
a Notice of Completion.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The contract was awarded for $80,297.00. During 'the course of construction, one Change
Order was issued in the amount of $722.20 to delete the interconnect cable, bringing the final
cost of construction to $79,574.80. The LandGrant Development Company has submitted
a check to the City in the amount of $39,787.40 for their share of the construction with the
City's share being appropriated from the Public Works Street Maintenance Account
(165-5402).
pwOl\agdrpt\92\O114\pw91-O2.ncc 010692
RECORDIN(] REQUESTED BY
AND RETURN TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF TEMECULA
43174 Bueineee Peek Drive
Temecula, CA 92690
SPACE ABOVE TIll UNE FOR
RECORDER'I USE
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described.
2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
California 92590.
3. A Contract was awarded by the City of TemeCula to: Steinv & Comoanv to perform the
following work of improvement: Sional Construction at ToWne Center and Rancho California Road.
4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and
to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development of the City of Temecula and that said
work was accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on
January 14. 1992.
5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of
Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: Intersection of Towne
Center and Rancho California Road.
6. The street address of said property is: 2963: Rancho California Road, Temecula, CA.
Dated at Temecula, California, this 14Th day of January, 1992.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) ss
CITY OF TEMECULA )
JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty of
perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF
COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of
Riverside by said City Council.
Dated at Tamecula, California, this 14th day of January, 1992.
JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk
Forms/CIP-O01 Rev.
ITEM
NO.
6
APPROVAL:
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY:
City Council/City Manager
Building and Safety Department
January 14, 1992
Contract Agreement for Street Address Numbering
Anthony Elmo, Chief Building Official ~
RECOMMRNDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve a contract agreement with Mr. Franklin Smart,
570 Tolouse Street, Riverside, CA 92501, (714) 684-2920, to provide address numbering
services on an as-needed basis.
DISCUSSION:
The Building and Safety Department has utilized the services of Mx. William Slecter since
October 30, 1990, on an as-needed basis to provide address numbering for large development
projects within the City. Due to illness, Mr. Sleeter is not able to continue in this capacity.
Staff has contacted several agencies in its recruitment of an individual or finn to provide this
service in place of Mr. SleeteL Staff contactcM Mr. Franklin Smart, who has agreed to provide
this service on an as-needed basis, for compensation at the rate of twenty ($20) dollars per hour,
the same compensation awarded to Mr. Sleeter. Mr. Smart has had experience with the County
of Riverside and has provided street addressing under that program which has also been used
in the City.
Fiscal Impact: Monies have already been appropriated in the Fiscal Year 1991 - 1992 budget
in account//001-162-999-42-5248 for this service. Sufficient funds exist to complete this project
within this existing account.
v:\w~\lgcnda.q~t\cccml219
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES -_,
This Agreement was made and entered into this 15th day of January 1992, by and
between the City of Temecula ("City"), a municipal corporation, and Franklin C. A. Smart,
an address numbering service ("Consultant").
The parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
1. Services. Consultant shah perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A attached
hereto. Consultant shah complete the tasks according to. the schedule set forth in Exhibit A.
2. Performance. Consultant shah at all times, faithfully, industrially and to the
best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described herein.
3. Payment. The City agrees. to pay Consultant monthly, rams set forth in
Exhibit B attached hereto.
Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed. Invoices shall
be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, for services provided in the
previous month. Payment shah be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice.
4. Amendments. This Agreement may be mended so long as such amendment is
in writing and agreed upon by both the City Council and Consultant.
5. Ownership Of Documents. Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the event of
termination, suspension or abandonment of, this Agreement, all original documents, designs,
drawings and notes prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant
to this Agreement shah become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or
otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant.
6. Termination. The City may terminate this Agreement without cause so long as
written notice of intent to terminate is given to Consultant at least ten (10) working days
prior to the termination date. In the event of termination, Consultant shall be paid for the
services performed.
7. Indemnification. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save harmless the
City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and
all claims, demands, losses, defense cost, or liability of any kind or nature which the City,
its officers, agents and employees may sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them
for injury to or death of persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultants acts or
omissions under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising out of the sole
negligence of the City.
2/fonns/ARG-05 1 Revised 8/23/91
8. Status of Consultant. Consultant is an independent contractor in all respects in
the performance of this Agreement and shall not be considered an employee of the City for
any purpose. No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the
performance of this Agreement.
Except as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries, wages, or other
compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be
liable for compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising out of
performing services hereunder.
9. Term. This Agreement shall commence on January 15, 1992, and shall
remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later
than June 30, 1992.
10. Subcontracts. The Consultant shall not enter into any subcontracts for services
to be rendered toward the completion of the Consultant's penion of this Agreement without
the consent of the City. At all times, Franklin C.A. Stuart shall be primarily responsible
for the performance of the tasks described herein.
11. DefauR. In the event that Consultant is in defauR for cause under the terms of
this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating
Consultant for any work performed after the date of default. Default shall include not
performing the tasks described herein to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager of
the City. Failure by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder,
if such failure arises out of causes beyond his control, and without fault or negligence of the
Consultant, shall not be considered a default.
Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute
between the City and the Consultant arising out of this Agreement or breech thereof, shall be
resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be final.
Consultant shah select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three
retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The arbitration
heating shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1280, e_t
seq. City and Consultant shall share the cost of the arbitration equally.
2/forms/ARG-05 2 RBvised 8/23/91
12. Notices. Notices shall be given pursuant to this Agreement by personal service
on the party to be notified, or by written notice upon such party deposited in the custody of
the United States Postal Service addressed as follows:
a. City:
Attention: City Manager
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Franklin C.A. Smart
570 Tolouse Avenue
Riverside, CA 92501
The notices shall be deemed to have been given as of the date of personal service,
or three (3) days after the date of deposit of the same in the custody of the United States
Postal Service.
13. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and any documents or instrument attached
hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental
hereto supersede all negotiations and prior writing in respect to the subject matter hereof.
In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this
Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement
shall prevail.
14. Liability. Except as provided in the Agreement, City shall not pay salaries,
wages, or other compensation to Consultant for performing services hereunder for City.
City shall not be liable for compensation or in~cation to Consultant for injury or
sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.
Consultant shah maintain limits of insurance no less than as listed below. In
addition, insurance certificates and endorsements must be completed and attached.
Automobile Liability: $500,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily
injury and property damage.
2/fonm/ARG-0$ 3 Reviled 8/23/91
The parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year above written.
CONSULTANT
By:
Title
ATTEST:
CITY OF TEMEC~
By:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
2lfonnalARCv-05 4 Revi~d 8/23/91
EXI-IrRIT A
TASKS TO BE PERFORlV~r~
It is agreed that Mr. Franklin C. A. Stuart will provide address numbering on an as-needed
basis for residential and commercial development throughout the City of Temecula.
2/forma/AR{3-O$ $ l~a~viaed 8/23/91
F. XI-I1RIT B
PAYMEN~ SCI-~-r~ULE
It is agreed that Mr. Franklin C. A. Smart, 570 Tolouse Avenue, Riverside, CA 92591,
(714) 684-2920, will provide address numbering on an as-needed basis for residential and
commercial development throughout the City of Temecula at the rate of twenty ($20.00)
dollars per hour.
21form~ARG-0,~ 6 Re~vi~l 8123/91
ITEM NO.
7
APPROVAL~~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER '
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
City Council/City Manager
/[~Department of Public Works
DATE:
January 14, 1992
SUBJECT:
Acceptance of Public Improvements in Tract No. 21340-3
PREPARED BY:
Albert Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council ACCEPT the Public Improvements in Tract No. 21340-3, AUTHORIZE
the reduction of street, sewer, and water bonds, ACCEPT the maintenance bond in the
reduced amount, APPROVE the subdivision agreement rider, and DIRECT the City Clerk to so
advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
BACKGROUND:
On August 4, 1987 the Riverside County Board of Supervisors entered into subdivision
agreements with:
Kulberg Ltd.
27710 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 301
Temecula, CA 92590
for the improvement of streets and installation of sewer and water systems. Accompanying
the subdivision agreements were surety bonds, issued by Developers Insurance Company as
follows:
1. Bond No. 948516S in the amount of $126,500.00 to cover street improvements.
2. Bond No. 948517S in the amount of $38,000.00 to cover water improvements,
3. Bond No. 948518S in the amount of $33,500.00 to cover sewer improvements.
Bond Nos. 948516S, 948517S, and 948518S in the amounts of $63,250.00,
$19,000.00, and $16,750.00 respectively, to cover material and labor.
Page 1 pwO2\agdrpt\92\114\21340-3 010392
The following items have been completed by the developer, or his engineer, in accordance
with the approved plans:
1. Required street, sewer, and water improvements.
The affected streets are a portion of Knollridge Road, Creative Drive, and Stone Gate Drive.
The inspection and verification process relating to the above items has been completed by the
County of Riverside Road Department and City Staff, and the Department of Public Works
recommends the reduction of the subdivision improvement bonds. Therefore, it is appropriate
to reduce these bonds as follows:
Streets: $113,850.00
Water: ~34,200.00
Sewer: $30,150.00
The remaining 10% of the original faithful performance bond amounts are to be retained for
one (1) year guarantee period as follows:
Streets: $12,650.00
Water: $3,800.00
Sewer: $3,350.00
TOTAL $19,800.00
The developer has submitted Maintenance Bond No. 948516S designating the City of
Temecula as obligee. City Council acceptance of this bond will permit the Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors to release the Faithful Performance bonds for these items of work. The
Material and Labor Bonds will remain in effect pending City Council exoneration.
AC:clh
Attachments:
Vicinity Map
Maintenance Bond
Subdivision Agreement
Page 2 pwO2\agdrpt\92\114\21340-3 010392
VICINITY
MAP
NOT TO If:ALl
AGREEMENT REGARDING
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into
CITY OF TEMECULA. hereinafter called "CITY", and
Construction, hereinafter called "CONTRACTOR".
between the
Kulber~ Ltd.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the County of Riverside and CONTRACTOR have
entered into a series of agreements and CONTRACTOR has submitted
a series of bonds in connection with consideration by the County
of Riverside of final map approval Tract 21340-3;
WHEREAS, The City of Temecula incorporated on
December 1, 1989;
WHEREAS, in order to expeditiously process the
acceptance of improvements pursuant to the final map, the CITY
has permitted subdividers to use the existing County Subdivision
Agreement and Bond forms in lieu of CITY forms;
WHEREAS, certain references in the County forms
incorrectly refer to County positions instead of City positions;
NOW, THEREFORE,
CONTRACTOR as follows:
it is agreed between CITY and
1. All references to the "County of Riverside"
contained in of the documents between CITY and CONTRACTOR
concerning Tract 21340-3 are now defined as referring to the
"City of Temecula".
2. All references to the "Riverside County Road
Commissioner" contained in any documents between CITY and
CONTRACTOR concerning Tract 21340-3 are now hereby defined to
refer to the "City Engineer".
Qn N~ V. ~8, / Y?/
said State, personally appeared,-
I
Jss,
}
, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for
L. /"ri)nkl .r"-
, personally known to me (or proved to me on the
basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the persons who executed the within instrument as
President aed
i'< uc~F,~c,- ~--rD.
the corporation therein named, and acknowledged to me that
such corporation ex i,.~cuted the within instrument pursuant to its
· :by-laws or a resolution of its board of directors,
WITI~I ESS my hand and official seal.
Slgnatu~.-,~ ~ ~' .,, ~ ·
S~eeWiry, on behalf of
ffhis area for off~ial notadal seal)
3. All references to any other Riverside County offices
or positions contained in the Agreements or Bonds concerning
Tract21340-3 now hereby refer to the equivalent CITY offices or
positions.
Dated: November 20, 1991
KULBERG LTD. CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACTOR'S NAME
BY:~~_~__~
JEFFREY L. MINKLER
(Print Signatore's Name)
Dated:
CITY OF TEMECULA
RONALD J. PARKS, MAYOR
Dated:
JUNE S. GREEK, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
SCOTT F. FIELD, CITY ATTORNEY
2
* STATE OF CALIFOP~IA, COUNTY OF
- me a Notary Public, within and for ~ne said County and S~a~e,
* Personally appeared ~/
* Personally known to me (or proved to me on ~he basis of satisfactory
- evidence)' to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within
instrument as the A~torney-in-Fac~ of and for the DEVELOPERS I~SU~XCE
* COMPANY and acknowledged ~o me that he subscribed the name of the
* DEVELOPERS INSU~NCE COMPANY thereto as surety, and his own name
* ~ OFFICIAL SEAL ·
, $ ·
e NOTARY ~BLIC - ~LIFORNIA
, · NOTARY BOND FILED IN ·
~ · ~N BERNARDINO COUN~
...
The tnsco/Dico Group
948516S
MAINTENANCE BOND BOND NO:
ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
PREMIUM: ,t NIL
[NCLL'DED tN PERFORMANCE BOND
THAT we. KULBERG LTD. . as Principal.
and DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY. a corporation organized and doing business under and by virtue
of the Mws of the State of Califo:'nia and duly licensed co conduct surer,,.' business in the State of California. as
Surety'. are held and firmly bound unto
CITY OF TEMECULA
as Obligee. in the sum of NINETEEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED & NO/100---{S lq,8O0.Dfi )
Dollars, for which payment. well and :ruly to be made. we bind ourselves. our heirs. executors and successors.
jointly and severally ~zTaly bv these presents.
THE CONDITION OF THE OBLIGATION IS SUCH THAT:
WHEREAS. the above named Principatenteredinto an agreementoragreementswith said Obligee~o:
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS FOR STREETS/DRAINAGE~ WATER SYSTE~
SEWER SYSTEm, TRACT 213~0-)
WHEREAS. said agreement provided that Principal shall guarantee replacement and 'repair of improvements as
described therein for a period of one year following final acceptance of said improvements; "
NOW, THEREFORE. if the above Principal shall :,ndemnify' the Obligee for all ioss that Obtigee may sustain by
reason of any defective materials or wor-kn~_anship which become apparen~ during the period of one year from and
after acceptance of the said improvements by Ob[igee, then this obligation shall be void. otherwise to remain in full
force and effect.
LN WITNESS WHERE OF. the seal and signature ,,>f said Principai is hereto affixed and the corporate seal and the
name of the said Surety is hereto affLxed and attested by its duly authorized Attorney-in-Fact
:his 26TH day of DECEMBER . 1991
Prmcipm
DEVELOPERS INSURANCE CO~[PANY
BY: JAY P FR~~I~/,~
· . ./[' Attorne,'. !n-
KULBERG LTD.
BY:
))
-)
FORM D "" ' ' ' '
POWER OF ATTORNEY OF
INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA
AND DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY
P.O. BOX 19725, IRVINE, CA 92713 , (714) 263-3300
No 076537
NOTICE: 1. All Dower and authority herein granted shall in any event terminate on the 31 st day of March, 1992. ~
2. This Power of Attorney is void if altered or if any portion is erased.
3. This Power of Attorney is void unless the seal is readable, the text is in brown ink, the signatures ere in blue ink end this notice is in red ink.
4. This Power of Attorney should not be returned to the Attorney(s)-tn-Fact, but should remain a permanent part of the obligee's records.
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that, except as expressly limited, INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA and DEVELOPERE INSURANCE COMPANY, do each
eaverslly, but nct Jolntly,!lm'eby make, conltlNte end sppolnt ***PHILIP E. VEGA, JAY P. FREEMAN,
KIM M. WALKER, ROBERT J. CULP, RICHARD P. CREAN, JOHN M. SCHACK, JOINTLY OR SEVERALLY***
the true and lawful Attorney(s)-in-Fact, to make, execute, deliver and acknowledge, for and on behalf of each of said Corporations es sureties, bonds, undertakings and contracts of
Suretyship in an amount not exceeding One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000} in any single undertaking; giving end granting unto Mid Afforney(s)-In-Fect full
power end authority to do and to perform every act necessary, requisite or propor to be done in connection therewith es each Of and corporations could do, but reserving to each of
said corporations full power of substitution end revocation; and all of the acts of Mid Attorney(s)-in-Fact, pursuant to these presents, are hereby ratified and confirmed.
The authority Ind powers Conferred by this Power of Attorney do not extend to any of the following bonds, undertakings or Contrsctl of Suretyship:
Bank depository/ponds mortgage deficiency bonds, mortgage guarantee bends guarantees of Installment paper, note guarantee bends, bonds on financial Institutions, leeea
bends, insursnea Company qualifying Ponds, eoif-inSurer's ponds, fidelity bends or ball bonds,
Thee Power of Attorney 18 granted and Is signed by facsimile under end by authority of the following reaolutlons adopted by the respective Soards of Directors of INDEMNITY COMPANY
OF CAUFORNIA and DEVELOPERI INSURANCE COMPANY, effective as of September 24, 1986:
RESOLVED, mat the Chairmen of the Board, the President end any Vice President of the Corporation be, end that each of them hereby is, authorized to execute POwers of Attorney,
quailtying the attorney(s) named In the Powers of Attorney to execute, on behalf of the Corporstlon, bonds, undertakings and Contracts of su rstyshlp; and that the Secretan/or any Assis-
tant Secrstary of the Corporation be, end each of them hereby is, authorized to attest the execution of any SUch Power of Attorney;
RESOLVED, FURTHER, that the signatures of SUch officers may be affixed to any Such Power of Attorney or to any certificate relating thereto by facsimile, end any such Power of Attor-
ney or certificate bearing such facsimile signatures shell be valid end binding upon the corporation when so affixed and in the futu re with respect to any bond, undertaking or contract of
SUretyship to which it is attached.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA and DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY have severally caused these presents to be signed by their respec-
tive Presidents and affested by their respective Secretaries this 2nd day of January, 1991.
INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA
Harry C. Crowell, President
ATTEST
By
Walter A. Crowell, Secretary
DEVELOPERS INSURANCE COMPANY
Harry C. Crowell, President
ATTEST
By
Walter A. Crowell, Secretary
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
O n Jan ua ry 2, 1991, before m e, the u nderstg ned, · Notary Public in and for Mid State. personally appeared NIfty C. Crowell and Walter A. Crowell, personally known to me (o r proved to
me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person8 who executed the within inetru sent ea President etd Secretary on lieheR of Indemnity Campiny of California end as President
end Secretary on behalf Of Developers Insurance Company, the Corporations therein named, and acknowledged to me that the corporations executed it.
WITNESS my hand end official
Signature ~ /'/ VIRGINIA M. LOUMAN
NOtll~/Public NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA
I~ OFFICE IN
{)eNf~ COUNTY
M~CNIImbil [xp. AN. 9, ]993
CERTIfiCATE
The undersigned, es Vice President of INDIMNITY COMPANY OF CAUFORNIA, and Vice President of DEVILSPEAl INIURANCE COMPANY, does hereby certify that the
foregoing end attached Power of Attorney remains in full tor~e end has not been revoked; end furthermore, that the provisions of the reaolutlone of the respective Boards of Dtrectel
f f ,199 .
INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA
LC. Fiebiger
Senior Vice President
Q DEVELOPIRa INSURANCE COMPANY
.,
L.C. Flebiger
Senior Vice President
ID,310 REV. 12/90
ITEM NO. 8
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICE~
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
January 14, 1992
Solicitation of Public Works Bids for the Construction of Concrete
Sidewalks at Rancho Elementary School, Vail Elementary School,
and Temecula Elementary School along with the Construction of
Ultimate Street Improvements on Margarita and Moraga Roads
Adjacent to Temecula Elementary School.
PREPARED BY:
Douglas M. Stewart, Deputy City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public bids for the
construction of sidewalks at Rancho Elementary School, Vail Elementary School, and
Temecula Elementary School; along with the construction of ultimate street improvements on
Margarita and Moraga Roads adjacent to Temecula Elementary School.
BACKGROUND:
During the formulation of the City's Capital Improvement Program, the sidewalk project was
combined with the proposed improvements to Moraga and Margarita Roads in anticipation of
obtaining lower construction prices. The proposed improvements (vicinity map attached)
consist of:
A. Rancho Elementary School
1. 11,500 square feet of sidewalk
B. Vail Elementary School
1. 8,900 square feet of sidewalk
-1- pwO2\agdrpt\92\Ol14\sdwlk.bid 0108
Temecula Elementary School
1. Street widening on Margarita and Moraga Roads
2. Storm drains under Margarita Road
3. Off-site channel grading adjacent to school
4. Sidewalk improvements from apartments on Margarita Road to south
end of Moraga Road school frontage.
Additional right-of-way on Margarita Road will be required from the Temecula Valley Unified
School District. The right-of-way documents have been prepared, and the right-of-way will
be conveyed prior to the start of construction.
FISCAL IMPACTS:
The Engineer's opinion of probable cost of construction is $293,676.00. The project will
'receive $21,388.00 in SB 821 funds from the Riverside County Transportation Commission
with the balance of the construction being funded through gas tax.
Attachments:
Vicinity Map
-2- pwO2~agdq~t~92\O114\sdwlk.bid 0108
ITEM NO. 9
APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
City Council/City Manager
4"J:)~ Department of Public Works
DATE:
January 14, 1992
SUBJECT:
Award of Bid to Remove Sediment in Empire Creek from I-15 to
Murrieta Creek
PREPARED BY:
Brad Buron, Maintenance Supervisor
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council award a bid for removal of sediment and restoration of Empire Creek
Channel to Lewis Valley Contractors, the lowest responsible bidder, for the sum of
$58,643.00.
BACKGROUND:
In November, 1991 the Public Works Department requested and received informal bids from
three local contractors for removal of sediment and restoration of Empire Creek Channel. The
bids received were as follows:
BIDDER
BID AMOUNT
1. Murrieta Development $65,550.00
2. Ramtek Contractors $62,500.00
3. Lewis Valley Contractors $58,643.00
Lewis Valley Contractors has performed the work in the past. In addition, they can proceed
with the work upon notification of Council award and completion of necessary contract
documents.
All necessary permits have been obtained by the City from the Department of Fish and Game.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds are available in the Public Works Department Street Maintenance Account
(No. 165-5402) for the removal of sediment and restoration of this creek.
pwO2\agdrpt\92\Ol14\bid.emp 010892
ITEM NO. 10
APPROVAL
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
January 14, 1992
Advance to Redevelopment Agency
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve a $4,500 advance to the
Redevelopment Agency for a bond capacity study.
DISCUSSION: The Redevelopment Agency (RDA) agenda includes a staff
report for selection of a financial advisor to prepare a bond capacity study for the
RDA. The RDA requires an advance of 94,500.
ITEM NO.
11
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER'
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
January 14, 1992
Change of Zone 19
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
John R. Meyer
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. ADOPT Resolution No. 92- approving Change of Zone No.
19; and
2. CONDUCT FIRST READING of Ordinance No. 92- read by
title only adopting Change of Zone No. 19.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USES:
City of Temecula
Expand Old Town Historical District Boundary.
Old Town Historic District, generally located between Murrieta
(River Street) Creek and Hwy 15, between 2nd and 6th Streets.
C-1
C-P
M-S
R-1
(General Commercial)
(Restricted Commercial)
(Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
(One Family Dwellings)
No Change Proposed
Commercial
Residential
Vacant
S\STAFFRPT~I 9-CZ.CC2 1
DISCUSSION:
The City Council determined to hold a Public Hearing for proposed Change of Zone No. 19 on
November 12, 1991. At that meeting the Council recommended the following boundary
expansion:
North: to include all four corners of the intersection of Rancho California and Front St.
South: to include the area south along Front Street to HWY 79, and the area west of
HWY 15.
East: No Change
West: to in .clude the lots that front onto the west side of Pujol Street and the lots that
front on the north side of Sixth Street (west of Murrieta Creek).
The existing and proposed boundaries are shown in Exhibit I.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS:
Consistent with Ordinance 578, a notice of Public Hearing has been mailed to every property
owner within the existing district and proposed expansion area. The notice contained the
information required by Ordinance 578, including the provision for written protest against the
expansion of the boundary. Should the Council receive written protest from owners of real
property within the proposed boundary expansion, the assessed value of which, as shown by
the last equalized assessment roll, constitutes more than 0ne-half of total assessed value of
real property within the proposed boundary expansion, the Council shall take no action on this
item. As of January 6th, 1992, only one written protest has been received by the City from
a person owning property within the existing boundary. However staff does expect to receive
additional protests prior to the meeting. Staff has also received a few calls regarding
clarification on the boundary expansion; these individuals were encouraged to attend the
meeting and/or submit a written statement. An update on the number of protests received
will be presented the night of the meeting.
FINDINGS
In order for the Council to approve the Old Town Historical District Boundary Expansion one
or more of the following findings must be made:
1. The area exemplifies or reflects significant aspects of the cultural, political,
economic or social history of the nation, state, county or city, or
2. The area is identified with historic personages or with important events in
national, state, or local history, or
The area embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant
architectural period which is inherently valuable for the study of architecture
unique to the history of the nation, state, county or city.
S\STAFFRPT~I 9-CZ.CC2 2
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92-__
S\STAFFRPT~I 9-CZ.CC2
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 19 TO EXPAND THE OLD TOWN
HISTORICAL DISTRICT BOUNDARY·
WHEREAS, The City of Temecula filed Change of Zone No. 19 in accordance with the
Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has
adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Change of Zone application was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Change of Zone on October 7,
1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or
opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Change of Zone;
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Change of
Zone on January 14, 1992, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either
in support or opposition to said Change of Zone; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff
Report regarding the Change of Zone;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings.
That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings:
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt a
general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation· During that 30-month
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted
or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if
all of the following requirements are met:
A. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general plan.
B. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including
the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
S\STAFFRPT~I 9-CZ.CC2 5
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed will be
consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which
will be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the
future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan.
(3) The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable requirements of
state law and local ordinances.
e
The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community Plan,
(hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General
Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside Countyl, including the area now within the
boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan
guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its
General Plan.
3. The City Council in approving the proposed Change of Zone, makes the following findings,
to wit:
The proposed Change of Zone will not have significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study performed for the project. The
proposed project is a Statutory Exemption per Section 15262 of CEQA.
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the fact that the project is compatible with
the surrounding proposed development, zoning, and SWAP.
C. The area exemplifies or reflects significant aspects of the cultural, political, economic
or social history of the nation, state, county or city, or
D. The area is identified with historic personages or with important events in national,
state, or local history, or
Ee
The area embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant architectural
period which is inherently valuable for the study of architecture unique to the history
of the nation, state, county or city.
4. The Change of Zone is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that the proposed project is a Statutory
Exemption per Section 15262 of CEQA.
S\STAFFRPT~I 9-CZ.CC2 6
SECTION 3. Expansion of Boundary
That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Change of Zone No. 19 to expand
the Old Town Temecula Historical District Boundary as shown in Exhibit I and incorporated
herein by reference.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of January, 1992
Patricia H. Birdsall
MAYOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 14th day of
January, 1992 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
JUNE S. GREEK
CITY CLERK
S\STAFFRPT%19-CZ.CC2 7
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
ORDINANCE NO. 92-_
S\$TAFFRPT~I 9-CZ.CC2 8
ATTACHMENT 2
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, EXPANDING THE OLD TOWN HISTORICAL DISTRICT
BOUNDARY.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFC~,~NIA, DOES
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Public hearings have been held before the Planning Commission and City Council
of the City of Temecula, State of California, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning law of the
State of California, and the City Code of the City of Temecula. The application land use
district as shownon the attached exhibit is hereby approved and ratified as part of the Official
Land Use map for the City of Temecula as adopted by the City and as may be amended
hereafter from time to time by the City Council of the City of Temecula, and the City of
Temecula Official Zoning Map is amended by placing in affect the zone or zones as described
in Change of Zone No. 19 and in the above title, and as shown on attached Exhibit I and
incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 2. Notice of Adoption. Within 10 days after the adoption hereof, the City Clerk of
the City of Temecula shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be posted
in at least three public places in the City.
SECTION 3. Taking Effect. This ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of its
adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this
day of ,1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
S\$TAFFRPT~I 9-CZ.CC2 9
CITY OF TEMECULA
CITY COUNCIL
MAP NO:
CHANGE OF ZONE NO:
ORDINANCE NO: 92-
19
ADOPTED:
EFFECTIVE:
$\$TAFFRPT'%l 9-CZ.CC2 10
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
BOUNDARY EXHIBIT
S\STAFFRPT~I 9-CZ.CC2 1 I
LEGEND
,, CD
l~-~isting Old Town Boundary
Proposed Old Town Boundary
t
\\
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
S\STAFFRP"I~I 9-CZ.CC2 12
APPROVAL
CITY MANAGER ~-----
r
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
November 12, 1991
Change of Zone 19
PREPARED BY:
John R. Meyer
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council:
DIRECT staff to establish boundary proposal for Old Town
Temecula Historical District expansion, notice all property
owners within proposed boundary, and schedule for public
hearing by the Council.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
City of Temecula
PROPOSAL:
Expand Old Town Historical District Boundary.
LOCATION: ·
Old Town Historic District, generally located between Murrieta
(River Street) Creek and Hwy 15, between 2nd and 6th Streets.
EXISTING ZONING:
C-1
C-P
M-S
R-1
(General Commercial)
(Restricted Commercial)
(Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
(One Family Dwellings)
PROPOSED ZONING: No Change Proposed
EXISTING LAND USES:
Commercial
Residential
Vacant
~ ' S\STAFFRPT~I 9-CZ.CC: 1
DISCUSSION:
The Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing for proposed Change of Zone No. 19
on October 7, 1991. Staff had recommended the following boundary expansion:
North: to Rancho California Road.
South: to First Street/Santiago Road.
East: No change
West: to include the area within the Murrieta Creek Channel.
In their deliberation of the project's merits, and in consideration of public testimony addressing
the proposed change of zone, the Commission voted 5-0 recommending approval of Change
of Zone 19. The Commission did increase the expansion area as follows:
North: to include all four corners of the intersection of Rancho California and Front St.
South: to include the lots along the west side of Front Street, south of First St.
East: No Change
West: to include the lots that front onto the west side of Pujol Street and the lots that
front on the north side of Sixth Street (west of Murrieta Creek)·
The existing and proposed boundaries are shown in Exhibit I. The Commission believed the
expanded boundary was necessary to include other historical structures and other areas that
could influence the character of old town.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS:
Subsequent to closing the Public Hearing for Change of Zone No. 19, the Planning
Commission voted 5-0 recommending approval as amended to expand the Old Town
Temecula Historical District Boundary. The Staff forwards the Commission's approval
recommendation to the City Council for their consideration.
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
DIIII:CT staff to establish boundary proposal for Old Town
Temecula Historical District expansion, notice all property
owners within proposed boundary, and schedule for public
hearing by the Council.
Attachments:
1. Boundary Exhibit
2. October 7, 1991, Planning Commi~ssion Report
3. October 7, 1991, Planning Commission Minutes
S%STAFFRPT~I 9-CZ.CC ~,
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
S\STAFFRPT~I 9-CZ.CC2 13
City Council Minutes
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mayor Parks called a brief recess at 11:31 PM to change the tape.
reconvened at 11:32 PM.
November 12.1991
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
None
None
The meeting was
It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to extend
the meeting to 11:45 PM. The motion was unanimously carried.
17.
18.
Aooointment of Old Town Historic Review Board
June Greek, City Clerk, introduced the staff report.
Councilmember Mufioz questioned the reason for recommending Christina Grina as an
alternate.
Councilmember Lindemans responded that the committee felt that Mrs. Grina would
serve better working on the Master Plan of Old Town where her expertise would be
fully utilized.
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve committee recommendation and directed the staff to place changes to the
policy guidelines on a future agenda.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
None
None
Chanqe of Zone No. 19 -Old Town Historical District Boundary
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, introduced the staff report.
Ninutes\11\12\91 -15- 11/19/91
City Council Minutes November 12. 1991
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to
direct staff to establish a boundary proposal for the Old Town Temecula Historical
District expansion with the addition of the lots on both sides of Front Street south of
First Street; the 96 acre Margarita Canyon parcel southwest of the I-15 interchange
and Front Street; and all of the lots located on both sides of Sixth Street west of the
creek; notice all property owners within proposed boundary and schedule for public
hearing by the Council.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
CITY MANAnFR RI=PORTS
None given.
CITY ATTORNEY RFPORTS
None given.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
After a brief discussion, it was decided by full concurrence that Council would fneet in
December on the 10th and 17th instead of the regularly scheduled meeting of December' 24,
1991.
ADJOURNMENT
It was 'moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to adjourn at
11:52 PM to the meeting on December 19, 1991, at 5:30 at City Hall, Main Conference
Room. The motion was unananimously carried.
Ronal/~d.P~~rks,r~Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Ninutes\11\12\91 -16- 11/19/91
ITEM NO. 12
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY MANAGER "7i..~
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
January 14, 1992
First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
Mark Rhoades
The Planning Department Staff Recommends that the City
Council:
REAFFIRM Environmental Assessment No. 32547 for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, and;
APPROVE the First Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 23372, based on the analysis
and findings contained the staff report, and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
Buie Corporation
Margarita Village Development Company
First Extension of Time for a 66 lot condominium map for
apartment or a congregate care facility with 469 total
dwelling units on 46.9 acres.
Northerly of Rancho California Road, on the west side of
Kaiser Parkway
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
S\STAFFRPT~23372VTM.CC
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
R-1 (Single-Family Residential)
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
PROPOSED ZONING:
Not requested
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant
Single Family Residential
Vacant
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Total Acreage:
No. of Lots:
Planning Area 40:
Planning Area 41:
Total Site Density:
46.9
66
25 D.U./AC.
6.2 D.U./AC.
10.66 D.U./AC.
BACKGROUND
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23372 and 23373 are portions of the Margarita Village Specific
Plan No. 199. The two maps were tentatively approved by the County of Riverside in
November of 1988. The City of Temecula Planning Commission recommended approval of
the First Extension of Time on November 4, 1991 by a vote of 5-0.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372 is an application to subdivide 46.9 acres of land into
a 66 lot condominium project which will include senior citizen apartments or a congregate care
facility, with a unit total of 469. The project is located northerly of Rancho California Road,
on the west side of Meadows Parkway. The project includes Planning Areas 40 and 41 of the
Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199. The project is surrounded on the north, south and
west sides by vacant land. To the east is an existing single-family residential tract. The
proposed product will be limited to senior citizen residents.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Issues which were raised by the Planning Commission relative to the project included parkland
and erosion control. The park issue is mitigated as a result of the appropriate condition of
approval for fee payment. Erosion control measures for the proposed project were completed
prior to the item being scheduled for a City Council hearing.
S\STAFFRFT~3372VTM.CC 2
FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY
The current SWAP designation for the proposed map is Specific Plan. The project is in
conformance with Specific Plan No. 199 and therefore will likely be consistent with the City's
future adopted General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Riverside County Environmental Assessment No. 32547 was previously adopted for the
proposed project. It is recommended that the City Council re-affirm the previous
environmental assessment.
FINDINGS
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance
with State law, due to the fact that the project is consistent with existing site
development standards in that' it proposes articulated design features and site
amenities commensurate with existing and anticipated residential development
standards.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the
future and adopted general plan, if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan, due to the fact that the project is in conformance with existing and
anticipated land use and design guidelines standards.
e
The proposed use or action complies with state planning and zoning laws, due to the
fact that the proposed use conforms with those uses listed as "allowed" within the
zoning designation of Specific Plan 199.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access, and density, due to the fact
that; adequate area is provided for all proposed residential structures; adequate
landscaping is provided along the project's public and private frontages; and the
internal circulation plan should not create traffic conflicts as design provisions are in
conformance with adopted City standards.
e
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or
welfare, due to the fact that the conditions stated in the approval are based on
mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate potential adverse impacts of the
project.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because it does
not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the area, due
to the fact that the proposed project is consistent with the current zoning of the
subject site.
S~STAFFRPT~23372VTM.CC 3
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the EIR for the project, due to the fact that impact
mitigation is realized by conformance with the project's Conditions of Approval·
The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the project currently proposes access
points from Kaiser Parkway which have been determined to be adequate by the City
Engineer.
The design of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed projects, due to the fact that this is clearly represented
in the site plan and the project analysis.
10.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference, due to the fact
that they are referenced in the attached Staff RepOrt, Exhibits, and Conditions of
Approval.
vgw
Attachments:
3.
4.
5.
6.
Planning Areas 40 and 41 Standards, Specific Plan No. 199 - page 5
Resolution - page 6
Conditions of Approval - page 14
Planning Commission Staff Report - page 16
Exhibits - page 17
Development Fee Check List - page 18
$\STAFFRF~2.3372VTM.CC 4 ~
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PLANNING AREAS 40 AND 41
STANDARDS, SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 199
S'~STAFFRFT~3372VTM.CC 5
V.~d Use and Deve~omnerrl:"Sl::srr~ls~ls';:
Please refer to
Flan ~one Oz~n~ce ~ab).
c,, Planninq-Sten~er~is'
,
,
Access into plq.ni-~,lL~ea'-&O"wiZI be p~v~lde~""fcrr an
access -r;ad t~ the south which c~nnects to
Parkway.
A landsaped bufferis'planned between PIann. ingAre~c
38 and 39 to help sep~~e.)=-f*~-~"l.-.ua~r~
the adjoining commercial useso~r..
A major recreation and activtty~.-.is:.
Village "A" adjacent to PTm""4~TArea'3'rtm setve~the
residents of the retirement'commu~ity. A variety of
facilities are planned$ the center may include tennis
courts, lecture halls, sw~na,
ties.
A Major Retiremen~ Entry.~"a~=
plannedI at the entrance t~ FT'~-~-~/'Aroi38"o=9
California Road. (See Figures'.'.-III&22"S'ITI-F3~ A
Minor 'Retirement Entry landscape treatment is planned
along Kaiser Parkway. (See Figures III-24 & III-25.)
Building heigh~ shall not exceed 3 stories, with a
maximum height of 40 feet.
Subject to approval by the Fire Chief and the
Department of Building
firelaces shall be a~loweitaencre~ int~sidsyards
a maximum of two (2) feet_'
encroachments shall be permitted in the front, side or
rear yard except as provicle/for in Section 18.19 of
Ordinance No. 348.2922.
Note: Numbers in
Conformance number 1.
italics..[1 _amended by
Substantial
-143-'
.e
Please .refer ~o pru~ect-Wi4a Deaigu
.or--,,,~t s.t:,,-a,,.~lz i5:: s ..Tt.4n-,:-II;m..v ",: fur -hu.t~-.-; 'I. az~"
use standards tha~'s~plY site-wide-
Please refer to Desig~-
design-related criteria.
-144 -
ho T~d Use and Develuu.t~xsL--S~mrsa~a~
Please refer to Ora~-~---
Plan Zone Ordinance Tab)
c.- P1 annJ:T~e- StaT~a~T
,
,
Access int~ p!~-~/Ar~s' 4I" viII" b'e ' lyr~vfded ' from ".
Fatset Farkway and a lo~l ~~. r~
(See Fi~e Ii-30.)
A major relation and
Village "A" adjac~cm'=~-~=~
resid~ts of the r~~U-'
facilities are pla~ed~
coups, lecture ~',- ~~,
ties.
A MaJ or Retirement Ent~ landscape treatment is
pla~ed at ~e entrance ~ pm~n.~ ~1~ ~.~~..
Minor Retir~ent En~.
along Kaiser Parlay.
Building heigh~ shallfn~'-'~~
m~im~ height of 40 feet.
S~J ect to approval by ~e Fire ~ief and ~e
Depament of Building and Safety, chineys and/or
fireplaces shall be allowed to encroach into sidey~
a maxim~ of two ( 2 ) feet. No other st~ctural
encroac~ents shall ~e.
rear yard except as pr~~
Ordinance No. 348.2922
The maxim~ ratio of ~O~ area to lot area shall not
be greater ~an two ~. ~, no~ . including bas~
floor area.
Note: Numbers in ira1 ice' [. 1
Conformance number 1.
amended by Substantial
-I45-
--146-
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
RESOLUTION NO. 92-__
S%STAFFRP"r~3372VTM.CC 6
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING THE FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23372 TO SUBDIVIDE
46.9 ACRES INTO A 66 LOT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT
LOCATED NORTHERLY OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD ON
THE WEST SIDE OF:MEADOWS PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 923-210-01 ~,.
WHEREAS, The Buie Corporation filed First Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 23372 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning,
Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map
application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said First Extension of Time
for Vesting Tentative Tract Map on November 4, 1991, at which time interested persons had
an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map;
WHEREAS, the City Council considered said First Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map on January 14 1992, at which time interested persons had an
opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing, the Council approved said
First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings.
That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings:
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt
a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation· During that 30-month
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted
or the requirements of state .law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan,
if all of the following requirements are met:
S~STAFFRPT~23372VTM.CC 7
Ae
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
plan.
The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed
will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted generali plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(3) The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community
Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the
General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now
within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of its General Plan.
The proposed First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent
with the SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the
Government Code, to wit:
A. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general plan.
The City Council finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including
the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following:
(1)
There is reasonable probability that First Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 23372 proposed will be consistent with the
general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be
approved unless the following findings are made:
S\STAFFRPT~23372VTM. CC 8
That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and
specific plans.
That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of
development.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
proposed density of the development.
That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not
likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and
unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are
not likely to cause serious public health problems.
That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will
not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through,
or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be
approved if it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will be
provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously
acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record
or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction.
The Council in approving the proposed First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map, makes the following findings, to wit:
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the
City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in
accordance with State law, due to the fact that the project is consistent with
existing site development standards in that it proposes articulated design
features and site a,menities commensurate with existing and anticipated
residential development standards.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with
the future and adopted general plan, if the proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that the project is in conformance
with existing and anticipated land use and design guidelines standards.
The proposed use or action complies with state planning and zoning laws, due
to the fact that the proposed use conforms with those uses listed as "allowed"
within the zoning designation of Specific Plan 199.
S\STAFFP, PT~3372VTM.CC 9
'G.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size
and shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access, and density,
due to the fact that; adequate area iS provided for all proposed residential
structures; adequate landscaping is provided along the project's public and
private frontages; and the internal circulation plan should not create traffic
conflicts as design provisions are in conformance with adopted City standards.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public
health or welfare, due to the fact that the conditions stated in the approval are
based on mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate potential
adverse impacts of the project.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because
it does not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of
the area, due to the fact that the proposed project is consistent with the
current zoning of the subject site.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or
natural environment as determined in the Negative Declaration for the project,
due to the fact that impact mitigation is realized by conformance with the
project's Conditions of Approval.
The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open
to, and us.able by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the project currently
proposes access points from Kaiser Parkway which have been determined to
be adequate by the City Engineer.
The design of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the resulting
street layout are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access
through or use of the property within the proposed projects, due to the fact
that this is clearly represented in the site plan and the project analysis.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental
documents associated with this application and her.in incorporated by
reference, due to the fact that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report,
Exhibits, and Conditions of Approval.
As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the First Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
s~sT~FFeP-r~aa72v'rM.cc 10
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the proposed project could
have a significant impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case
because the mitigation measures described in the Conditions of Approval have been added to
the project, and the Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby reaffirmed.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves the First Extension of Time for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372 for the subdivision of 46.9 acres into a 66 lot
condominium project located northerly of Rancho California Road on the west side of
Meadows Parkway and known as Assessor's Parcel no. 923-210-014 subject to the following
conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of January, 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDSALL
MAYOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the
City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 14th day of January, 1992 by the
following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
JUNE S. GREEK
CITY CLERK
$\$TAFFRPT'~.3372VTM. CC 11
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
$\STAFFRP'I~23372VTM.CC 12
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372
First Extension of Time
Council Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Unless previously paid, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall
comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set
forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by Ordinance
No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as
implemented by County ordi~nance or resolution.
No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential lot/unit within the
project boundary until the developer's successor's-in-interest provides evidence of
compliance with public facility financing measures. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars
($1 00) per lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library
development.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and
shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true
meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department
of Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer has correctly shown on the tentative map all existing
easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project
to be resubmitted for further review.
The Developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval as previously imposed or amended
and with the Conditions noted below.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
e
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part
of an existing Assessment District must comply With the requirements of said section.
Delete Condition No. 24 of Riverside County Road Commissioner letter dated September, 30,
1988, and replace it with the following:
S%$TAFt=~3372V'I'IVI'CC I 3
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department
of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards traffic signal
impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal
mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said
payment to the time of issuance of a building permit.
An erosion control and slope protection plan shall be submitted to the Department of
Public Works for review and approval. The installation shall be certified by a registered
Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and site conditions shall be maintained to
protect adjacent properties from damage due to runoff and erosion. Developer shall
post a performance bond for erosion control and slope protection in an amount
approved by the Department of Public Works.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area
Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is
payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If the full Area
Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already Credited to this property, no new
charge needs to be paid.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Rood Control District;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department; and
CATV Franchise.
Community Services
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent
to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street
improvements.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an
encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to
any other permits required.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT:
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed
upon the property of project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as
required for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time
of payment of fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not
been finally established by the date on which developer requests its building permits
for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute the Agreement for
s~s~Ar*mm2aa~2v*r~.cc 14
payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to developer.
Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post security to secure
payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the security shall be $2.00 per
square foot, not to exceed $10,000. Developer understands that said Agreement may
require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will
waive any right to protest the provisions from this Condition, of this Agreement, the
formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any
traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; orovided that developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
10.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C.
pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior
public streets.
11.
All street improvements striping, marking and signing shall be installed per the
approved plans and to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
12. Delete Condition No. 36 of Riverside County Road Commissioner letter dated
September 30, 1988.
13.
Traffic striping, marking and street name signing plans shall be designed as directed
by the Department of Public Works. Said plans shall include Rancho California Road,
Margarita Road and all streets conditioned under this subdivision.
14.
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour or other disruption
to traffic circulation as required by the City Engineer.
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT:
15.
Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant or his assignee shall pay the fair
market value of 5.49 acres of required parkland to comply with City Ordinance No.
460.93 (Quimby). The amount to be paid shall be determined by TCSD staff within
thirty (30) days prior to recordation of said map.
16.
Exterior slopes bordering an arterial street may be dedicated to the TCSD for
maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards and completion of the
application process.
S~STAFFRFT~23372VTM. CC 15
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
S\STAFFRP'T~23372VTM. CC 16
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 4, 1991
Case No.: First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff Recommends that the Planning
Commission:
ADOPT Resolution 91 ~ Recommending that the City Council
APPROVE the First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract
No. 23372, contingent upon the implementation of corrective
grading and erosion control measures to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer prior to the City Council approval, based on the
Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report, and subject
to the attached Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Buie Corporation
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
Margarita Village Development Company
First Extension of Time for a 66 lot condominium complex
and an apartment or congregate care facility with 469
total dwelling units on 46.9 acres.
LOCATION:
Northerly of Rancho California Road, on the west side of
Kaiser Parkway
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
North:
South:
East:
West:
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
R-1 (Single-Family Residential)
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
Not requested
EXISTING LAND USE:
V8cBnt
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant
Single Family Residential
Vacant
S\STAFFRFT~3372.VTM
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Total Acreage:
No. of Lots:
Proposed Density:
Planning Area 40:
Planning Area 41:
Total Site Density:
46.9
66
25 D.U./AC.
6.2 D.U./AC.
10.66 D.U./AC.
BACKGROUND
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23372 was originally approved by the Riverside County Board of
Supervisors on November 8, 1988· The First Extension of Time was filed in October of 1990.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372 is a portion of the Margarita Village Specific Plan No.
199. The Tentative Map encompasses Planning Areas 40 and 41.
Planning Area No. 40 proposes a 237 unit congregate care and/or apartment facility on 9.6
acres. The overall density of that project would be approximately 25 dwelling units per acre
at buildout.
Planning Area 41 is a 66 lot, 232 unit condominium development on 37.3 acres. The overall
density of Planning Area 41 is approximately 6.2 dwelling units per acre·
FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY
The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map is generally consistent with the approved Specific
Plan No. 199. The Southwest Area Plan designation for this project is Specific Plan. It is
likely that this project will be consistent with the future adopted General Plan·
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 202 was previously adopted by Riverside County for
Specific Plan No. 199. Staff has determined that said EIR still applies to this subdivision.
FINDINGS
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance
with State law, due to the fact that the project is consistent with existing site
development standards in that it proposes articulated design features and site
amenities commensurate with existing and anticipated residential development
standards.
e
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the
future and adopted general plan, if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan, due to the fact that the project is in conformance with existing and
anticipated land use and design guidelines standards.
e
The proposed use or action complies with state planning and zoning laws, due to the
fact that the proposed use conforms with those uses listed as "allowed" within the
zoning designation of Specific Plan 199.
S\STAFFRFT~23372,VTM 2
10.
11.
STAFF
vgw
shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access, and density, due to the fact
that; adequate area is provided for all proposed residential structures; adequate
landscaping is provided along the project's public and private frontages; and the
internal circulation plan should not create traffic conflicts as design provisions are in
conformance with adopted City standards.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or
welfare, due to the fact that the conditions stated in the approval are based on
mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate potential adverse impacts of the
project.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372 is compatible with surrounding land uses. The
harmony in scale, bulk, height, density and coverage creates a compatible physical
relationship with adjoining properties. due to the fact that the proposal is similar in
compatibility with surrounding land uses; and adequate area and design features
provide for siting of proposed development in terms of landscaping and internal traffic
circulation.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because it does
not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the area, due
to the fact that the proposed project is consistent with the current zoning of the
subject site.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the EIR for the project, due to the fact that impact
mitigation is realized by conformance with the project's Conditions of Approval.
The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the project currently proposes access
points from Kaiser Parkway which have been determined to be adequate by the City
Engineer.
The design of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed projects, due to the fact that this is clearly represented
in the site plan and the project analysis.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with is application and her.in incorporated by reference, due to the fact
that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, and Conditions of
Approval.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Department Staff Recommends that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution 91- Recommending that the City
Council APPROVE the First Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 23372, contingent upon the
implementation of corrective grading and erosion control
measures to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to
the City Council approval, based on the Analysis and
Findings contained in the staff report, and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
S\STAFFRPT~3372.VTM 3
Atachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution - page 5
Conditions of Approval - page 10
Staff Report-County of Riverside - page 14
Exhibits - page 15
S\STAFFRPT\23372 .VTM 4
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
S\STAFFRFT~23372.VTM 5
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-109
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME
FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 23372-A 66 LOT RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISION ON 46.9 ACRES AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S
PARCEL NO. 923-210-014.
WHEREAS, The Buie Corporation filed the Time Extension in accordance with
the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City
has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Time Extension application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Time Extension on
November 4, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Time Extension.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Rndings
That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings:
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt
a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-n~onth
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted
or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan,
if all of the following requirements are met:
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion .with the preparation of the general
plan.
The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that the Time Extension proposed will
be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied
or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the pla!n.
(3)
The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances. ·
S\STAFFRF1'%23372.VTM 6
The Riverside County General Plan. as amended by the Southwest Area Community
Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP")was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the
General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now
within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of its General Plan.
The proposed Time Extension is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements
set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general
plan.
The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the
following:
(1)
There is reasonable probability that the Time Extension proposed will be
consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or
which will be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use Or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no Time Extension may be approved unless the following
findings can be made:
The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with
all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances.
The proposed subdivision does not affect the general health, safety, and
welfare of the public. "
The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the proposed Time
Extension, makes the following findings, to wit:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with
the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable
time and in accordance with State law, due to the fact that the project
is consistent with existing site development standards in that it
proposes articulated design features and site amen,ties commensurate
with existing and anticipated residential development standards.
(2)
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or
interference with the future and adopted general plan, if the proposed
use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact
that the project is in conformance with existing and anticipated land use
and design guidelines standards.
S\STAFFRPT~3372.VTM 7
(3)
The proposed use or action complies with state planning and zoning
laws, due to the fact that the proposed use conforms with those uses
listed as "allowed" within the zoning designation-of Specific Plan 199.
(4)
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of
the size and shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access,
and density, due to the fact that; adequate area is provided for all
proposed residential structures; adequate landscaping is provided along
the project's public and private frontages; and the internal circulation
plan should not create traffic conflicts as design provisions are in
conformance with adopted City standards.
(5)
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the
public health or welfare, due to the fact that the conditions stated in the
approval are based on mitigation measures necessary to reduce or
eliminate potential adverse impacts of the project.
(6)
Vcsting Tentative Trac, t Mop No. 23;372 is compatible with 3urrounding
land use:. Thc harmony in soolc, bulk, height, density and covcragc
crcoto3 o compotiblc physical relationship with adjoining propcrtics, duc
to thc fact that the propo3~l ic ~imilGr in compatibility with surrounding
lend u,Jos; and odoquotc area nnd dcsign fcnturcs providc for siting of
propaced dcvolopmont in terms of landscaping and intcrnnl traffic
circulation. (Per Mark Rheades after the PC mtg. on November 4, 1991 )
(7)
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property
because it does not represent a significant change to the present or
planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed project
is consistent with the current zoning of the subject site.
(8)
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the
built or natural environment as determined in the EIR for the project, due
to the fact that impact mitigation is realized by conformance with the
project's Conditions of Approval.
(9)
The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which'is
open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the
project currently proposes access points from Kaiser Parkway which
have been determined to be adequate by the City Engineer.
(10)
The design of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the
resulting street layout are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the property within the
proposed projects, due to the fact that this is clearly represented in the
site plan and the project analysis.
(11)
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and
environmental documents associated with is application and herein
incorporated by reference, due to the fact that they are referenced in the
attached Staff Report, Exhibits, and Conditions of Approval.
As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 2, the Time Extension proposed conforms to the
logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future
development of the surrounding property.
S~STAFFRFT~3372.VTM 8
SECTION II. Environmental Compliance.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby determines that the previous
environmental determination Adoption of EIR No. 202 still applies to said Tract Map
(Extension of Time).
SECTION III. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council
approve the First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372 for a 66 Lot
residential subdivision on 46.9 acres and known as a portion of Assessor's Parcel No. subject
to the following conditions:
1. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION IV.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of November, 1991.
JOHN E. HOAGLAND
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 4th
day of November 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES: 5
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONER
S\STAFFRF~23372.VTM 9
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S\STAFFRPT~3372.VTM 10
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23372
First Extension of Time
Commission Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
Planning Department
Unless previously paid, prior to the issuance of a :grading permit, the applicant shall
comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set
forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by Ordinance
No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as
implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential lot/unit within the
project boundary until the developer's successor's-in-interest provides evidence of
compliance with public facility financing measures. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars
($100) per lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library
development.
Department of Public Works
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and
shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true
meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department
of Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer has correctly shown on the tentative map all existing
easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project
to be resubmitted for further review.
The Developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval as previously imposed or amended
and with the Conditions noted below.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part
of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section.
S\STAFFRPT~23372.VTM 11
Delete
1988,
PRIOR
Condition No. 24 of Riverside County Road Commissioner letter dated September, 30,
and replace it with the following:
Prior to recordat, on of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department
of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards traffic signal
impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal
mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said
payment to the time of issuance of a building permit.
An erosion control and slope protection plan shall be submitted to the Department of
Public Works for review and approval. The installation shall be certified by a registered
Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and site conditions shall be maintained to
protect adjacent properties from damage due to runoff and erosion. Developer shall
post a performance bond for erosion control and slope protection in an amount
approved by the Department of Public Works.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area
Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is
payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If the full Area
Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already Credited to this property, no new
charge needs to be paid.
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control District;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department; and
CATV Franchise.
Community Services
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent
to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CA'IV Standards at time of street
improvements.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an
encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to
any other permits required.
TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT:
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed
upon the property of project, including that for traffic and I~ublic facility mitigation as
required for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time
of payment of fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not
been finally established by the date on which developer requests its building permits
for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute the Agreement for
payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to developer.
Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post security to secure
payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the security shall be $2.00 per
square foot, not to exceed $10,000. Developer understands that said Agreement may
S~$TAFFRPT~3372.VTM 12
require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will
waive any right to protest the provisions from this Condition, of this Agreement, the
formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy,. or collection of any
traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
10.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C.
pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior
public streets.
11.
All street improvements striping, marking and signing shall be installed per the
approved plans and to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
12. Delete Condition No. 36 of Riverside County Road Commissioner letter dated
September 30, 1988.
13.
Traffic striping, marking and street name signing plans shall be designed as directed
by the Department of Public Works. Said plans shall include Rancho California Road,
Margarita Road and all streets conditioned under this subdivision.
14.
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour or other disruption
to traffic circulation as required by the City Engineer.
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT:
15.
Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant or his assignee shall pay the fair
market value of 5.49 acres of required parkland to comply with City Ordinance No.
460.93 (Quimby). The amount to be paid shall be determined by TCSD staff within
thirty (30) days prior to recordation of said map.
16.
Exterior slopes bordering an arterial street may be dedicated to the TCSD for
maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards and completion of the
application process.
$\STAFFRP1'~3372.VTM 13
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
STAFF REPORT FROM THE
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
S\STAFFRFT~23372.VTM 14
: KG :mob
-.~J~MITTAL TO TUE BOARD OF SUPER..jORS
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. STATE OF CAUFORNIA
FROM: Planntng Department
SUBMITTAL DATE: November 8, Z988
SU~ECt: VEST/NG TENTATZVE and TENTATZVE TRACTS located tn the
Iirgartta Vtllage Spectftc Plan (SP 19g Amendment No, 1) - First
and Thtrd Supervtsortal Dtstrfcts - Rancho California Zontng Area.
RECOMMENDEDMOTION:
Receive-and Ftle the.Planning C0~n~.ss~on act~on..of. 9"28-88.and.
: 10-5-M;. fo~. '... * · , · . ~ '- = .:
APPROVAL of Vesting Tentative Tracts 2337t Amended No. 1, 23372
Amended No. I, Z3373 Amended No. 1, 23470 and 23471 and Tracts
22915, 22916, 23Z00 Amended No. Z, 23]0~ 23102, and 23Z03 Amended
No. ~.
~~'~treeter, Fal~h~fh~l)~tor
RIVERSIDE COUNTY ROAD
& SURVEY DEPARTMENT
Prey. Agn. tel
Deists. Comment~
DIlL
AGENDA N
RIVERSIDE COUNI~/PLANNING COIqlqZSSZON HINUTES
OCTOBER 5, 1988
(AGENOA [T~S 5-Z, 5-3,.5-4 - REEL 1003, SZDE 1 - TAPE 6, SZDE 1)
VESTXNG TRACT leJkP 23373 AHENDED NO. i - EA 32548 - Hargartta Village
Oevelopment Company - Rancho California Area -First/Third Supervtsortal
Districts - south of Rancho California Rd, west of Kaiser Parkway - 348
units - 31~ acres - SP 199 Zone. Schedule A
VESTZNG'TRACT'.KAP 23371 .NqENDED NO. 1;-.:'EA 3~5'46 '- I~rgartt.a Village
Development Company - Rancho California Area - FIrst/Third Supervtsorlal
01strtcts - north of Rancho California Rd, east of Hargartta Rd - Z183 units -
398~ acres - SP 199 Zone. Schedule A
VESTING TRACT 23372 AHENDED NO..1 - EA 32547 '- Hargartta Vtllage Development
Company.- Rancho Callfo~nia. Area.- First/Third .SUpervisortal DIstricts -'north
of .Rancho. Celtfornta'Rd, west of Kaiser. Parkway - 469 units.on B6 lots ~ 44~
'acres - SP 199 Zone. Schedule A
The hearings were opened at 6:50 p.m. and closed at 7:11 p.m.
STAFF RECOHIJENDATZON: Adoption of the negattve declarations for'EA 32548, EA.
32546, and EA 32547, approval of Vesting Tract Haps 23373Amended No. 1, 23371
Amended No. I end 23372 Amended No. 1, all subject to the proposed condtttons~.'
Hs. Gtfford also recoeended approval of a watver of the length to width ratte
Hargartta Vtilage Specific Plan, and would create I 3
residential lots and a golf course on 254 acres. Staff had found the tract
maps to be consistent with the adopted specific plan. He. Gtfford recommended
several changes to the conditions of approval. Commissioner Purvtance asked
about a ftscal impact report, end was tnformed this report had been furnished
recently for Amendment No. 1 to the spectflc plan.
Jtm Resney, representing the applicant, briefly reviewed the development,
advising they were proposing a state-of-the-art adult retirement cemuntty
whtch included a championship golf course with a 37,000 square foot clubhouse
facility tn the center of the project. He then referred to Condition 33(f)
for all three tract eips, which reqUIred front yards to be provtded with
landscaping end automttc Irrigation, end requested that thts requirecent
deleted for larger lo13, as tt was hts optnton that these honeowners would
prefer to do their o~m landscaping. The CC&Its would require thee to coeply
with spectflc standards. Hr. Resney requested that this condition be aeended
by addtng to the end "or shall be tnstal]ed within 75 days after close of
escrow as prodded tn the CC&Rs tn the 45x100 square foot lot areas'.
Road Department Condition 21 for Tract Hap 23371 and Condition 14 for the
~ther two tract maps requtred a debris retention well where block walls were
requtred at the top of slopes. Hr. Resney requested that thts condition be
amended by addtng: "Zf applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
Road Conzntsstoner that a Hastar Homeowners AsSociation or other entity will
satisfactorily mtntatn the slopes, the Road Commissioner may, at hts option,
waive this requirement of a debrts retention wall." He thought that if they
could convtnce the Road Con~tsstoner that there would be no stlthng problems
and that the slopes would be maintained, the debrts retention w;ll would not
53
RZVEILSZDE COUNTY PLANNING COffiqZSSZON HZNUTES
OCTOBER 5, 1988
be needed. For aesthetic reasons, he felt tt would be better not to have the
small well,
Road Oeparment' Condition 22 for Tract. 23372 and. Condition 15 for the other
two'tract imps: related.to the mt'ntmum 30 foot.garage.Setback'from face'~f'.-
curb. Nr. Resney'felt this condition Conflicted with the specific 'plan
development standards which allowed 16 foot drheways with roll up doors,
setback either from the back of curb or the back ofsidewalk. He would prefer
to have the specific plan standards applied, but requested that the hearings
not be continued.
Lee Johnson.advlSed'the.'slumpwa11 'delineated:.tn Road Depertment Condition 21
was a wall' they h~d beeh r~qUtrtng for the past. three'o~'foUr years .when the'
Planntng Department required a block wall at the top of a slope. Depending on
the size of the slope, the Road Department Design Engineer could requtre a two
block high wall at the property 11ne to keep the debris washing down the slope
from crossing the stdewolk. They would be wt111ng to consider any other
alternative the developer might suggest, as long as'it accomplished the
purpose of thts condition, He requested that this condition be retained.
Commissioner Donehoe asked whether addtng to the ind "or as approved by the
Road Department" would give the developer the opportunity to provide an
alternative plan, and Nr. Johnson agreed that ttwo, ld.
Nr. johnson advised the garage setback required by Road Department Condition
22 for Tract 2337% (Condition %5 for Tracts 23372 and 23373) was the minimum
setback required by Ordinance 460. He had read the language requested by the
applicant, but would prefer to retatn the condition,as originally proposed tn
the Road Department letter. Nr. Resney explained they had been discussing the
possibility of providing a 4 foot sidewalk, and ~ould 11ke to have a 24 foot
setback rather than the.26 foot setback required by tht.s condition. However,
tf the Road Department preferred the extsttng language, they would accept tt.
Nr. Johnson advised the condition would not alter the width of the stdewalk in
any way.
Comtsstoner Beadling referred to Iqr. Resney*s request that front yard land-
scaptn and irrigation not be required for the la er lots, and stated she
felt t~ey should be required for all lots, Hr, ~or~deen requested that the
condition be retained as originally written,
There was no further testimony, and the hearing was closed at 7:11 p.m.
FZNDENGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Vesttng Tentative Tract Yaps 23371 Amended No. 1,
23372 Amended No. 1 and 23373 Amended No. I are loclted within Village A of
the Nargartta Village Spectftc Plan (No. 199); the three tract maps will
provtde 1763 dwelling units and a golf course on 254 acres; Tract 2337;
Amended No. I has been condtttoned with the specific plan's condition of
approval to mitigate tmpacts to the Stephens Kangaroo Rat habttat; the tracts
have been conditional to comply with Spectftc Plan lgg, Chang~ of Zone Case
S107, and Development Agreement No. 52 and a wetvet of the le~ length to width
ratio wtll be needed for Vesttng Tentative Tract 23371 Amended No. 1. All
environmental concerns have been addressed tn EZRs 107, Z02, and the tntttal
54
RIVERSZDE COUNTY'PLANNiNG COlea/SSZON HZNUTES
OCTOBER 5, 1988
studtes for these tract maps, and no significant tmpacts have been found; the
tract maps are consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan (as amended by
CGPA 150), Change of Zone Case SZ07, a?d SpectftC Plan 199 Amendment No. 1;
and conform to the requirements of Ord.nances 460 and 348. The proposed
project will not have a significant.effect. on the environment.
MOTZON: Upon motton'by'coanisstoner'D~nahoe, seconded by'Commfs~'tonerBr~ssOn
and unanimously carried, the Conmission adopted t.~e negattve declarations for
EA 32546, EA'32547 and EA 32548, and approved VeSttng Tentative Tract Maps
23371 Amended No. I with a watver of the lot length to width ratto, 23372
Amended o. 1, all subject to the proposed conditions
Amended No. 1, and 23373 N
amended as follows, basedon the above ftndtngs and conclusions and the
reconnendatt0ns of staff'. " -.
Tract No. 23371
9 - Amend to reflect the September 30, 1988 Road Department letter.
23(2) and 23(3) - Amend to require the developer to comply with the parkway
landscaping requirements as shown in Specific Plan No. 199
Amended No. I unless maintenance is provtded by a
homeowners association or other public entity.
26 - Delete the last sentence ('The final map for Vesttng Tract 23371 shall
show the park as a numbered lot').
33(c) o Roof-mounted mchanlcel equipment shall not be permitted within the
subdivisions except for the clubhouse whtch my have screened
equipment as approved by the Plannlng :Department; however, solar
equipment or any other ener saving devices shall be permitted wtth
Planning Department approval.
Condition 34(a) for Tracts 23371, 23372, and 33(a) for Tract 23373
Add "and may be phased with the project". (to clartfy that walls may be
phased wtth. the development of the tract.
Condition 33(d) for Tracts 23371 and 23372, and.3Z(d) for Tract 23373
Butldtng separation between all la~ldtngs including fireplaces shall not be
less than ten fat unless approved by the Department of 8utldtng and Safety
d
and the Ftre Oepartmnt per Spectftc Plan 199 Amende No. Z.
34(e) for Tracts 23371, 23372 end 33(e) for TraCt 23373 - Delete
Road Department Condition 21 for Tract 23371 and 14 for Tracts 23372 and 23373
Add to the end sot as approved by the Road Department"
55
RZVERSZDE COUNT/PLANNING COIeJZSSZON MZNUTES
SEPTEHBER 28, 1988
(AGENDA ITDI 1-2 ' REEL 1002' SlOE 1' TAPE rl}bSr~DE h1) v
AIq NO., I - EA 32318- Ha o oug De . Corp. - Rancho
TRACT HAP 23100 ENDED
California/Skinner Lake Area - First and
-of Butterfield Stage Rd, north.of Rancho Ca1 o 2.S
acres - li-llSP Zones; 'SchedUle A. ': ..' ".. .:. .'.
TRACT MAP 23101 - EA 32533 - Harlborough Dev. Corp. - Rancho
California/Skinner Lake Area - First and Third SUpervtsortal Districts - east
of Kaiser Pkwy, west of Butterfield Stage Rd - 265 lots - 87~ acres -
SP/R-2-6000 Zones. Schedule A
..TRAJ~I;*MAP '23t'02 - EA 32534.- Harlb~roUgh *Dev.,..COrp;: - Rancho* .. '
California/Skinner Lake Area-- First and Third Supervtsortal" O!strtCts ,"nortl~
of La Serena Nay, west of Butterfield Stage Rd - 37 lots - 16.4t acres -
SP/R-I .Zones. Schedule A
TRACT RAP 23103 ANENDED NO. I - EA 32535 - Harlborough Dev. Corp, - Rancho
California/Skinner Lake Area - First and Third Super.vtsortal DIstricts - west
of Butterfield Stage IM, north of Rancho California M - 18 lots - 29~ acres -
SP/R-A-1 Zones, Schedule A
The heartrigs were opened at 9:49 a.m. and closed at 10:08 a.m.
STAFF RECOle!ENDATION: Moptlon of the negattve declarations for EA 32318,
32533, 32534 and 32535, and approval of Tentative Tract Maps 23100 Mended
No, 1, 23101, 23102, and 23103 Amended No, I wtth a wetvet of the lot length
to width ratio, subject to the proposed conditionS, The subject tract maps
were located wtthtn Vtllage B of the Hargartta Vtllage Spectftc Plan, and
would dtvtde the 254 acres tnto 605 residential lots. Staff had found the
tract maps to be consistent wtth the Comprehensive General Plan, Spectftc Plan
199 Amendment No, 1, and the zontng whtch had been applled to the spectftc
plan through Change of Zone Case 5107. Hs, Gtfford recommended several
changes to the conditions for these tract maps, relating to requirements for
maintenance of the open space areas, park requirements, useable yard areas,
and fencing requirements, Hr. Klotz suggested tfytng the last condltton
for each tract map by bqtnntng wtth the phrase~veloPient of the".
Co,,dsstoner hsson requested that changes be made throughout to refer to
etther "publlc use trails" or "recreational tratlS" tnstead of "equestrian
trails'; he felt these terms would more accurately descrtbe their use.
Entry Burnell, representing the applicant, accepted the conditions as
amended. It was his understanding that in the event any portton of the
development agreement was held to be tnvaltd (for any reason), the conditions
requiring compliance wtth that agreement would be null and votd; thts was
confirmed by County Counsel.
There was no further testimony, and the heartngs were closed at 10:08 a.m.
FINOINGS ANO CONCLUSIONS: Tentative Tract Maps 23100 Amended No. 1, 23101,
23102, and 23103 Amended No. 1 are located wtthtn V~llage B of the Hargartta
2
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COHFIISSION HINUTES
SEPTEHBER 28, 1988
V411age Spectftc Plan; the four tract maps would dt;vtde the 254 acres tnto 605
residential lots; the tract maps have been condtttoned tn accordance with the
specific plan's conditions of approval to mittgate tmpacts on the Stephens
Kangaroo -'Rat; the tract maps have been' condtttoned to comply with. Spectft. c
Plan 1.99 Amendment NO'., '1, 'Cha.nge Of-Zone Case ' 5107, -*and -Devel opment,' * reement:
No, 5; a waiver for the lot length 'to" wtdth ratto wtll be needed forA~ract' '
23103 Amended No, 1, All environmental concerns have been addressed tn EIR
107, EIR 202, and the tnttlal studies for these tract maps, and no significant
impacts have been found; the tract maps are consistent with the Comprehensive
General Plan (as amended by General Plan Amendment No, 150),. Specific Plan 199
Amendment No, .1 and Change of Zone .Case 5107; the tract maps confore to. the
'requirements' of'OrdinanCes 348.and 460, T. he proposed pr. oJects..wt11 not have a
significant effect 'on the env4ronmen~. '
HOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Bresson, seconded by Conntss(oner
Beadlerig *and unanimously carried, the Commqsston adopted the negative
declarations for EA 32318, EA 32533, EA 32534 and EA 32535, and approved
Tentative Tract Paps 23100 Amended No. 1, 23101, 23102, and 23103 Amended
No. 1 wttha watver of the lot length to w~dth ratto, subject to the proposed
conditions, amended as follows, based on the above f(nd~ngs and conclusions
and the recommendations of staff.
Tract Nap 23100 Amended No. 1
22. Amend to confom to Condition 24 (to provide for maintenance of the
common open space area by e~ther a County Servqce Area or a Homeowners
Assodat~on).
23, Prtor to the tssuance of occupancy permtts for 160 untts on Tract
23100, the park area shall be developed per Spectftc Plan No,.Amended
No. 1.
24. Replace w~th the standard alternative condition providing for
maintenance of the conanon open space area by etther a County Service
Assoclat on.
Area or Homeowners I
37(b) kla11 and/or fence locations shall substantially confom to attached
Ftgure IZ:-28 of Spectftc Plan No, 199 Amendment No, 1,
38, The develoFment of Tentative Tract No, 23100 Amended No, I shall
comply wtth all provisions of Spectftc Plan No, 199 Amendment No, 1 and
Development Agreement No, 5
Tract Pap 23101
17(h) Rear yards and useable s~de yards shall have an average flat area of
2000 square feet,
22, Amend to conform to Condition 24 (to provide for ma(ntenance of the
common open space area by elther a County Serv(ce Area or a Homeowners
Association),
t
RXVERSZDE COUNTY PLANNZNG COt4HZSSZON HZNUTES
SEPTEHBER 28, 1988
23. Prior to the tssuance of occupancy pemttS for 160 untts on Tract
23101. the park area shall be developed per Spectftc Plan No. Amended
No. Z. .. ;... ..
24.' Repi:ace',i'th"'the standar'd"alter, attve condition providing for
maintenance of the common open space area !by either a County hrvtce
Area or Horn·owners Association.
37(b) t4a11 and/or fence locations shall substantially confom to attached
: Ftgure IZ.I-28 of Spec.tflc Plan No. %99 Amendment No. 1.
38. The develOlanent of TentatiVe' i~ract'No. '23101 s'h811 compl~f Wtth-all
provisions of Speclftc Plan No. 199 Amendment No. I and Development
Agreement No. 5
Tract Nap 23102
Amend to confomwtth Condition 33 (to provtde for maintenance of the
camon open space area by etther a County Servtce Area or a Homeowners
Association.
3·
Replace with the standard alternative condition providing for
maintenance of the common open space area by either a County Service
Area or Homeowners Association.
35(b) Wall and/or fence locations shall substantially confom to attached
Ftgure ZZZ-28 of Spectftc Plan No, 199 Amendment No, 1,
36. The development of Tentative Tract No. 23102 shall comply Wtth all
provisions of Spectflc Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1 and Development
Agreement No, 5
Tract Nap 23103 Amended No. I
21. Amend to confom to Condltton 22 (to provtde for Maintenance of the
common opan space area by etther a County=Service Area or a Homeowners
Assoctltton,
Replace with the standard alternative condition providing for
maintenance of the comeon open space area by either a County Service
Area or Homeowners Association.
34(a) Wall and/or fence locations shall substantially confom to attached
Figure ZZZ-28 of Spectfic Plan No. 199 Amendeent No. 1.
5e
The development of Tentative Tract No. 23103 Amended No. 1 shall
comply with all provisions of Specific Plan No, 199 Amendment No, 1 and
Development Agreement No, 5
4
RZVERSZDE COUNTY PLANNZNG CON4ZSSZON MZNUTES
SEPTENBER 28, 1988
(AGENDA [TENS 1-3 AND 1-4- REEL 1002, SZDE I -;TAPE 1, SZDE 1)
TRACT HAP 22916 - EA 32505 - Rancho California Dev. Co. - Rancho California
Area - First SupervJsortal DIstrict - north of Pauba Rd, wast of Butterfield.
Stage Rd - 259 1.ors -' !03.3~ 'acres. - R-R/SP* Zones. Schedule .A
TRACT HAP'22915 - EA' 32'504 -RanchO CaitfOrn~a .Devi** Co~*-~Rancho Cal'tfO';nia
Area - First Supervtsorta] Dtstrtct- south of Rancho Vista Rd, wast of
Butterfield Stage Rd - 287 lots - 91.6~ acres - R-R/SP Zones. Schedu]e A
VESTING TRACT HAP 23471 - EA 32518 - Kaiser Oevelopment Co. - Rancho
Ca1J fornJa Area -. Ftrst Superv. t sofia1 O! strJct - south of .Rancho Ca.]*t fornl.a
Rd, wast of fatset Pkwy.- 155 lots'- 44~ acres -*R-1/SP' Zones. SchedUle-A
VEST[riG TRACT HAP 23470 - EA 32517 - Kaiser Development Co. - Rancho
California Area - First Supervtsortal D1strtct - north of Rancho Vista Rd,
wast of Katser Pkwy - 325 lots - 106.3 acres - R-1/SP Schedule A
The hearings were opened at 10:10 a.m. and close at 11:10
STAFF REC(YlHENDATION: Adoption of the negative declarations for EA 32517, EA
32518, EA 32504, and EA 32505 and approval of Tentative Tract Naps 22915 and
22916, and Vesttng Tentative Tract Naps 23470 and 23471 subject to the
proposed conditions, and a waiver of the 1'or length to wtdth ratio for al1
four tract maps. These four tract maps ware located tn VIllage C of Specific
Plan 199 Amendment No. 1, and would divide the 345 acres into 1020 residential
]ors, provide a 10 acre school slte, a 5 acre park site and 3 tot lots. Staff
had found the proposed naps to be consistent with the Cceprehenstve General
Plan, the adopted spectftc plan, and the zoning which had been ap to the
applied
property through Chan e of Zone Case**5107. Hs. Gtfford recommended several
changes to the condttTons of approval; these changes related to the minimum
]ot size, lot length to width ratio requirements, park requirements,
landscaping/irrigation requirements, and a requirement for development of the
tract naps Jn accordance with the adopted specific plan and approved
development agreement. *
Commissioner kidling questioned Hs. Glfford's recommendation for deletion of
the conditions for Tract Naps 23470, 22915 and 22916 requiring landscaping and
trrlgatton. PIs. Gtfford explained these three tentative maps roposed minimum
7200 square foot lots and the County did not normally require ~andscaptng and
irrigation for lots of this size. fir. Streeter felt this condltton could be
retained, as it was County po]icy to require landscaping and irrigation for
7200 square foot lots in the Rancho California area.
Robert Ktmble, representing the applicant, advtsed they would prefer not to
provtde the front yard. landscaping and Irrigation, and requested that the
condition be deleted. Commissioner Beadltng asked whether Hr. Ktmble had seen
the let~er submitted by Hr. and firs. Ptpher objecting to the density proposed
tn the ~rea adjacent to their estate type homes. At her request, fir. K1mble
located Hr. Ptpher's subdivision whtch was next to Rancho Vista Road. They
were proposing the 7200 square foot lots a11owad by the spectftc plan for thts
area. t4s. Glfford advised the tract map was a reftltng of a previously
RIVERSIDE COUNTf PLANNING COleI[SSZON MZNUTES
SEPTEHBER 28, 1988
approved map, and there was no change tn the denstry; the proposed tract map
was within the density range allowed by the speciftc plan. Commissioner
Beadltng quotee from the letter. which requested that the density be reduced
to the density originally proposed by the specific plan. She wanted to know
and was informed t ere had. been .no change in the
what this density was, . h ...
density.- ' ~ .... "' .-'
Mr. Ktmble requested that Condition 4 of the Flood Control Distrtct's letter
for Tract Z3471 be deleted. Thts condition required; maintenance ramps in the
thts channel for their underlying map
-deletion'of.this condition..Mr.:~teb]e' then requestaed that. Road Department'
Condttto.n 16 for Tract"22915'ind .Condition 28 .for Trac't ;Zg16 be amended
adding to the end""or as approved'by the Road Coemisstoner"; Mr-. Johnsob
agreed to thts change for both tract maps.
Condition 20 for Tract 22916 requtred the park to be fully taproved and
Nr
developed prior to the Issuance of building permtts 'for 150 units, and. .
the IsSuance of occupancy for the 25gth lot. Providing the ful
park prtor to 150 units would be a burden to the developer. Ha. Gtfford
advtsed Mr. Ktmble's request would delay co~pletton of the park unit1 after
the enttre tract had been completed; staff felt 150 untts would afford the ·
applicant an opportunity to butld some untts, and at that Hint the Improve-
ments could be tted tnto road Improvements. The park would also be useful for
the tract to the north, which was betng developee by the sam developer.
Mr. Ktmble requested clarification of the new condition staff had sug estee
for Tract ZZgl6 regarding mitigation for the Stephens Kangaroo Rat.
Goldman explained thts condition referred back to the spectftc plan condt-
ttons, whtch requtree etaher a Memorandum of Understanding wtth the Department
· d r
of Ftsh and Game or that the applicant comply wtth the Countrdt · p ogram
being established by RIverside County.
Robert Oudonay, also representing the applicant, advised he was acttvely
tnvolvee with the task force appointee by the Board :of Supervisors regarding
the Stephens Kangaroo Rat program. Them was no set pro ram at the present
ttme, and he wanted to know whether they would be charg~ the $750 per lot
fee, or whether they would be held up unit1 a specific program was estab-
11shee. He dtd not want to be dela ed, as th_ey would be tea to INll
trig pareIts wtthtn the next few wee{s. Mr, ICIotz explained ~e Board build-
had
generally endorsee the concept of havtng a developer make a depostt of $750
per lot, accompanied by an agreement to pay the fee as ultimately adopted;
thts would allow the rd felt this optton woul be
project to go forte . He d
available to the developer. He explained this was not necessarily the
u]ttmate fee, but was on1 a securtty to be deposited a~atnst the ulttmat
m,ttgatton fee. Thts explanation satisfied Mr. DudOnay s concerns. e
Mr. Ktmble advtsee tt was their understanding.that tn the event Development
Agreement No. S should be held tnvalld at some time'In the future. the
approval of the four tract maps would sit11 stand, but the condition for
R[VERSZDE COUNT'f PLANNING CCI~4ZSSZON HINUTES
SEPTEHBER 28, 1988
compliance wtth the development a recreant would be null and void, Hr, Klotz
advised this was explicitly provt~ed wtthtn the development.agreement,
· OPPONENTS:.':, , .. .. .... , ..
Bob Ptpher, 41825 Greentree Road, Temecula, advtsed the development tn which
one-third of thts property. They had subettted the
letter requesting that the porttons of the subject tract mps adjacent.to
thetr area be requtred .to create lots strutlet .in size, Fir, Ptpher had. a map
of the Hatget1 ta' Y.tl 1. age Sped ftc Plan .dated FiarCh 30,' 1986, 'which 'showed. the
density'In this area to be approxtr4taly half of' the denstry Currently..
proposed, Hr, Ptpher advtsed this was an equestrian area, and people restdlng
In the area needed rldtng tratls, He requested a connecting tratl from Pauba
to Rancho Vtsta along the boundary between thetr subdivision and the subject
development or along Katser Parkway; thts would provtde an additional
1 andscaped buffer area. '
Hr. Ptpher advtsed they had no problem wtth the proposed school stte, but felt:.*
the circulation systm proposed to serve the school was 1nedequate. [n his
optnton, Street 'B" should be extended to Kaiser Parkway; this would then
provtde access to both the scheol site and the park froe Kaiser Parkway. At
the present ttee there was a steady flow of trafftc, and providing an access
to the park stte and school from Katser Parkway would help everyone in the
area, tn addttton to mktng the park more accessible, Because of the trafftc
on Katser Parkway, Hr, Pipher thought tt would be difficult for people ltvtng
on the other side to reach the park, He therefore suggested that one or two
parks be required on the' other stde 'of Ka'tser Parkway, to benefit residents tn
that area.
Fir. Pipher requested i solid wall along the bounder between thetr developcent
and the subject project. The poople restdtng tn th~s area were requesting a
buffer, and would appreciate anythtng the Co,mtsstoners could do to help
the. In answer to a questlon by Cemtsstoner Bresson, Fir. Pt her advtsed
there was no street betamen the area be was representing and tKe subject s e;
the lots free the subject tract mp were backtng up against the lots tn his
subdivision.
When Fir. Pipher qatn requested equestrian tratlS, Fis. Gtfford brterly
reviewed the proposed tretl system, whtch included a tratl along Rancho
California Road, gotrig up the Katser Parkway-and. klqi) easement; no tratls ware
proposed In the southern am as requested by Fir. Ptpher. Commissioner
Bresson requested that these tratls be designated as public access or
recreational tratls tnstead of equestrian trails. Fir. Burnell advtsed that an
equestrian trail had been established all along Pauba Road, going east and
west, and there was a north/south tratl in the Fietropolttan Water District
easement gotng by the sc,,ool administration stte, along Rancho California Road
to Katser Parkway. The ,estdents of the Green Tree area could use the trail
along Pauba, whtch connected to the tra~l alon Green Tree Lane. Thts ms a
regtonal ira11 system, established under the d~rectton of the Parks
Department.
7
I. I-~ LAND USE ~iP alg __MARGARITA VII. I. AGE I
"
_VACANT ORCHARD_
RE:S vac,.~ ' "'-
· ' AG "PR
VACANT e,~ u~ ,~, .e
HILLY
IIA; 80.
./
VACANT
'HILLY
u.C.
RE$1_D, EN'I~....A_L
VACANT
t
;L~'~": ~' vmcA,T /ACANT
Aplk KACOR __
Use SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE
Area RANCliO CAL 5up. O~d.
~:t:~i: ::~f::.::' Ass,,,,', 8k.9i23 ~.to.t,.:t
Circulation RANCHO CALIF. RD. ,tnGARi~ NO. riO'
(lament S0. G(NERAL ~ARNY, RANCHO VISTA
s:c, Crate 3-13-e6 Orarn ey m
Rd. Ok. PV. s
HILLY
VACANT
VACANT
/
/'
LDGAT|ONAle
NO StALl
~ANCHO t
;ALTIrORN &
lOAD
RZVERSTDE COUNTY PLANNTNG COI~ZSSZON HTNUTES
SEPTEMBER 28, 1988
Co,~ntsstoner Bresson requested Information on the type of buffer to be
provided. Mr. Burnell advtsed there would be masonry walls tn the area north
and south of Rancho Vtsta Road; he thought thts would satisfy Mr. Ptpher's
concerns.* Mr. Burnel! advtsed the Margartta Vtllage Specific Ptan had
or!gt hal ly been approved' wtth 'a sl ~ ghtly ht gh.er. denst:ty. t n. th't s' area..They
had added land with the 'ended spectftc plan but had not changed denstttes"In
the area of the subject tract maps. The exhtbtt presented by Mr. Pipher was
conceptual exhibit prepared by the engtneer for triterhal use only and had
never been presented to the County.
Mr. Ktmble responded to FIr. PIpher,s request 'for an additional park on the
other'side of Katser Parkway., b~.advtstng. Costatn Homs was prov~dtn a park.
· planned for Tract· 22715 to the'north; Hey were planning'to upgradegteth-parks
over and' above the requirements of the spectftc plan.
Commissioner Oonahoe asked whether staff was recomendtng that a condition be
added to require the wall as a buffer between the subject tract maps and the
area represented by Mr. Ptpher, and was tnfomed this was a condition of the
spectftc plan.
Lee Johnson referred to Mr. Ptpher's sug estton that "B" Street be ixtended to
t both he and ~hn JohnSon (Transportation Planning
Kaiser Parkway, and adv sad
Sectton of the Road Oepartment) felt thts was an excellent recommendation.
CIrculation tn this are might be taproved by mktng thts connection rather
t also gtve
than havtng the school served by a cul-de-sac street. Th s would
both the school and the park stte access frm a 66 foot wtde street. Men
Commissioner Bresson asked whether thts could be accomplished wtthout
redestgntng the map, Mr. Johnson reRlted he felt the nap would have to be
amended. Mr. Sireater felt thts provtde a much better access,
Commissioner Beadllng felt that a long cul-de-sac !street gotng tnto a school
was poor planning, as tt requtred the cars and school busses brtng!ng tn
children to wrap around and case back out the sam way. Extending the street
would allow the vehtcles to drop off the chtldren and go out a different way.
Commissioner Bratson was concerned about creattng a 4-way Intersectton, and
Mr. Johnson agreed that · 3-way Intersectton created lesi problems. However,
he st111 felt that providing access to Katser Parkway would result tn better
circulation servtce to the school stte.
Mr. Burnell dtd not feel tt was necessary to extend "B" Street to Katser Park-
way tn order to provtde adequate circulation for the school. He was concerned
that the change tn the roadway mtght cause proNems wtth regard to the sewer
11nes. Mr. Burnell was also concerned about a 4-way Intersectton at Katser
Parkway; he felt retaining the extsttng 3-way Intersection would provfde an
overall better circulation system for residents of the area. Commissioner
wou d not encourage through
Bresson preferred the cul-de-sac street because tt 1
traffic along.the school stte. Mr. Johnson potnted out that there would be
less opportunity to eventually obtatn stgnal~zatton for a 3-way Intersection
than for a 4-way Intersection.
8
RZVERSZDE COUNTY PLANNZli6 COI, e'IZSSZON MT. NUTES
SEPTEHBER 28, 1988
Hr. Ktmble advtsed they had met wtth the school dlstrtct and showed them the
tentative map; they were pleased with the conft uratton of the school stte as
well as the proposed street system. Hr. Burnel~ advised thetr ortgtnal design
showed*the school/park site adjacent Kaiser Parkway,. and.the school dtstrtct
had.'obJected*to this pl'an.because they 'dtd not mnt..the children' adjacent to a
major street. commissioner aresson supported the tract map as.currently
designed, as tt was satisfactory to the school district,
There was no further testimony, and the hearing was closed at 11:10 a,m.
FZNDXNGS AND 'CONCLUSXONS: Tentative Tract Paps 22915° and 22916, and Vesttrig
Tract Paps 23470 and.23471**are '!ocated wtthtn Vtilage .C of *Specific Plan 199'
Amendment No. 1 (the Hargartta Vtllage Specific.Plan); the four tract maps '.
would dtvtde the 345 acres ~nto 1020 residential lots; destgn manuals have
been prepared for Vesttrig Tentative Tract PaPs 23470 and 23471; the tract maps
have been condtttoned to comply w~th SpeCtftc Plan 199 Amendment No, 1, Change
of Zone Case 5107, and l)evelopment Agreement No, 52 a mtver for the ~ot
length to wtdth ratto will be needed for 811 four maps. All environmental
concerns have been addressed tn EXR 107, EXR 202, and the tntttal studtes for ~
these tract maps, and no significant tmpacts ware found; the tract maps are :
consistent wtth the Comprehensive General Plan (as mended by General Plan
Amendment 150), Spectftc Plan 199 Amendment No. 1 and Chan of Zone Case
51072 and confom to the requirements of Ordinances 348 an~e460.
Tentative Tract Paps 22915 and 22916, and Vesttrig Tract Paps 32470 and 23 1,
all wttha wetvet of the lot length to wtdth ratto, sub;~ect to thi proPOse47d
conditions and based on the above ftndtngs and conclusions and the recommenda-
ttons of staff'
Tract No. 23470
17(a) - All lots shall have a ,dn¶mum s~ze of 7200 square feet net.
17(b) - Delete enttrely
20 -Prtor to the tssuance of occupancy pemtts for 150 untts, one tot lot
shall be (mproved and fully developed.
21 - PHor to the tssuance of occupancy pamtts for 275 untts, the second
tot lot shall be tmproved and fully developed.
27 - Prior to the tssuance of butldtng pemtts (balance to remain the same)
36 - The development of Vesttn Tentative Tract Pap 23470 shall comply with
its Destgn Panual', wtth ;~1 provisions of Spectftc Plan No. 199
Amendment No. 1 and with Development Agreement No. 5
Tract No. 23471
RZVERSXDE COUNTY PLANNZNG COI~ZSSZON MZNUTES
SEPT!gqBER 28, 1988
20 - Prior to the tssuance of occupancy permits for 200 untts, one tot lot
shall be improved and fully developed.
26 -Prtor to the tssuance of butldtng permits (balance to remain the same)
32(f)- All 'front yards Shall be pro~tded".with landscaping and manually"
operated, permanent underground irrigation.
.Flood Control Condition 4 - Delete enttrely
35 - The development .of Vesttng Tentative Tract Hap 23471' shall comply wtth
its DeSign 'Y4. qua.1; .with a1.i p~Oytstons .of 'Spectf.~c. Plan ,No.. !99 .
Amendment No. 1 and wtth Development Agreement Ito. 5
Delete Condition 4 of the Flood Control letter dated June 17, 1988.
Tract No. 22915
24 -Prtor to the issuance of INtldtng pemtts (balance to reeatn the same)
32 - The develolee_nt of Tentative Tract Hap 22915 shall compl.y vrlth all
r
p ovtstons of Spectftc Plan No, 199 Amendment No, I and Development
Agreement No. 5
Road Department Condition 26 - Add to the end "or as approved by the Road
Co...tsstoner".
Tract No. 22916
2 - Add the following: except for the lot length to width ratto.
20 - Prior to the issuance of occupancy pemtts for 150 units in Tentative
Tract 22916, the park shall be fully improved and developed.
25 - Prior to the tssuance of INtldtng pemtts (balanc.e to remain the same)
32 - The development of Tentative Tract Hap 23916 shall comply vrlth all
provisions of Specific Plan No, Z99 Amendment No, t and Development
Agreement No, 5
33 - Prior to tssuance of grading pemtts, tmpacts to the Stephens Kangaroo'
Rat Habitat shall be mitigated per the specific plan conditions of
approval,
Road Department Condltton 28 - Add to the end "or as approved by the Road
Commissioner".
10
Zoning Area: Ila'ncho California
Sulxrvlsortal DIstrict: FIrst and
E.A. NOS: 32546, 32547, 32548
Spectftc Plan Section
Vesting Tentative Tract Nos.: 23371 Amd.
No. 1, 23372 Md. No. 1, 23373 knd. Ito. ~
Planntng Coentsston: 10-5-88
Ageride Ztem No.: 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4
vasxoc cOunTY pumzns O[PMT X
f,
Q.
· 3· 7.
~8.
~ 9.
01
Appltcant:
Engineer:
Type of Request:
Location:
F.x.~sttng Zoning:
Surrounding Zoning:
SIte Characteristics:
Area Characteristics:
Comprehensive Gadera1 Plan
Land Division Data:
Vesting Tact
23372 And. No. i
23372 And. No. Z
23373 And. No. I
Acreage
394
37
31
nargarlta VIllage 0evelo;ent Co.
RIck Engineering Company
The ,3 tracts ~dll subdivide 472 acres
Into 1763 residenttiT 'units
East Of Hs4r arias hid, north of
CI11forntl ~ad Rancho
R-R (Chin e of Zone 5107 heard by the&
8olrd of ~pervtsors on 9-13-88 proposlle
SP Zgg AnKI. No. I zoning). :
Zontng to the north lad west ts R-4,
A-2-20, R-R, 9-1; Zontng to the south Is
R-R
Vacant land traverse with low htlls
Located on astern edge of Rancho
California coneunity
nancho Vtllages (General Plan Amendment
des1 nittOn ~f Specific P 199
Amn~nt No. 1)
'DenstaT (Du/k)
1183 3
232 6
:11. Agenc~ IlecamundatS ons:
2337X bd. No. :L
23372 knd. No. Z 23373 k,d. Re. Z
Road 9-22-88 3-22-88 9-22-88
Heal th 7-25-88 9-7-88 7-25-88
Flood 7-22-88 7-22-88 7-22-88
Ftre 8-17-88 84 7,88 8-17-88
Shaft ff 6-10.88 6-10-88 6-10-88
12. Letters:
13. Sphere of Influence
Influence
None received as of this .rttlng
ht wtthtn a Ctty sphere
ANAL. YSI5:
r on Se lenient: 13 !98
The~ tracts have ~en desfgn~
The bble ~lw suartH
'Specific Plan's plamtq a~as. ~ sh~. non of ~ trac~ exceed the
pe~4tted ~er of ~sldenttal ~tts.
Tract No.
No. of
Specific Irlan ·
Area '
Permitted
No. of Untts
VTT 23372 Jlaid. No. I 1183 33-37, 42-45 1197
vl'r 23372 Md. No. I 232 41 234-
VTT 23373 ked. No. I 348 38 348
A des1 n mnull Ms been prepared for a11' three vesting maps .hich F'ovtdes
studies ~ve ~en ~ ~ r are
ca1 turn1 resources end
Vest¶rig Tentative Tract 23371, ;mended No. I tncludes an 18 hole golf course.
bY the speclftc P an conditions, the tract has been
As also required 1
condtttoned to teerove the par~ tn Planntng Area~4S. in conformnce wtth the
specific plea Vesttrig Tentative Tract 23372, keendld No. Z has been condtttoned
for mitigation of teeacts to the Stephens Kangaroo'Rat.
it shou]d be noted that the number of untts for oong~egate cJre are on est~n~te
and will be revtewed at the develolanent plan stage.
Environmental assessments have been prepared m all three tracts.
Envtror~ntal teeacts are assessed tn EZR 101 and EZR 202 prepared for the
Itancho Vtllage Spectftc Plan and the I~rgartta Vtlllge Spectftc Plan.
Mallaloha1 environmental evaluat¶on has been provided by the reports prepared
for the specific plan amendment and the acoustical studies prepared for the
thm tracts. No significant environmental tapeeta have been found.
filetIS:
2. Vesttrig Tentative Tract No. 23371 Mended No!. 1, 23372 Mended No. :~, and
23373 Amended No. I are located tn Vtllage A: of the 14argartta Village
Specific Plan.
The three tracts v111 provtde 1763 dvelllng untts and golf course open
slac.e on ~S4 164 acres. (Aaended
3. Tract 23372 Mended No. I has been oondtttoned
4. ~e VIGtS ~ve ~en ~ndtttoned ~ ~ply ~th eGtflc Plan No. 199,
Change of ~ne No. S107 and ~vllo~nt ~re~nt No.~.
5. A ~ver for length ~ ~dth ratfo ~11 ~ med~ ~ Vestlng Ten~ttve
TrlGt 13371 ~nded No. 1.
COIICLUSIORS:
1. All environmental concerns hive been addressed tn EIP, s 107, 202 and the
tatIts1 stodtes for these tracts and no significant teeacts have been
found.
2. The tracts are consistent vith General Plan Mendmerit No. 1SO Change of
Zone No. S[O7, and Specific Plan No. 199, kneedmerit No... 1.
3. The tracts confore to the requtrments of Ordinances 348 and 460.
RECO~E:!IDATZOIS :
32 6, 32547, 32548 on a finding
ADOPTION of a Negattve Declaration for EA Nos. tff~ten the anvtronment.
that the pro:lects ,tll not have a significant
APPROVAL of Vesttrig Tentative Tract NOs. 23371 Amended No. 1, 23372 Amended No.
d t of approval.
2, and 23373 Mended No. I subject to the attached con ttons
KG:ecb:mp
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAIINING DEPARTRENT
SUBDIVISION"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
q,
0
'0
L_
0
VESTZN~ TENTATIVE TRACT NO. Z337~
AHENDED NO. 1
STANDARD CONDITIONS
g · frem any clate, action, or
proceeding agatnst the County of RIverside or tts agents, officers, or
e~plo~ees to ittack. set astde, votd, or annul In approval of the County
of RIverside, 1Is advtsory qenctest a peal boards or legislative body
concerntn Vesttn Tentative Tract 2337Z ~nded No. Z, ~htch actton ts
brought a~out wttRfn the ·1me pertod provtded for tn collfornte Sovernment
Code S4ctton 66499.37. The County of RIverside w111 promptly notify the
subdivider of an)' such clate, actton, or proceeding agatnst the County of
RIverside and wtll coo rate fu11J~ tn the defense. If the County fetls to
promptly no·try the su~fvtder of any such clatm, action, or proceeding o~
fa~ls to cooperate fully tn the defense, the subdivider shall not;
thereafter, be responsible to defend, tndemtf)', or hold hamless the
County of RIverside. "".
2. The tentative subdivision shall comply vtth the State of California
Subdivision Hap Act and to all the re trernents of Ordinance 460, Schedule
A, unless modtfted b)' the conditions T~sted be1·.
Thls conditionally approved tentative eap Vtll exptre twO years after the
Count), of RIverside Board of Supervisors approval date, unless extended as
provtded by Ordinance 460.
The final nap shall be prepare by I 11canSad land surveyor subject to
the requirements of the State of California Subdivision P4p Act and
Ordinance 460.
The subdivider shall sutmlt one copy of e Sotls report to the RIverside
County SurveJ~or's O~ftce led tm copies te the Department of ktldtng led
Safety. The report shall address the sot1· stability end geological
conditions of the site.
6. zr any Fading ts proposed, the sutxllvtder shall submit one print of
cgmprehenstve grading plan to the Department of Butldtng and Safety. The
plan shall compl:r ~th the Unitore Butldlng Code, Chapter 70, is amended -
by Ordinance 457 and as m~ybe additIOnal1), provtdad for tn these
conditions of approval.
Contit tt gas of AFproval
Tentative Tract No, 2337t kneaded No. Z
Page 2
7, A gradtag perrata shall be obtatned from the Department of Butldtng and
Safety prior to cQmmencement of any gradtag outstale of county mtntatned
:road rlght. o 'my,'.' ' . · · · :."' .. ..... -
8, My delfnquent property 12xes shall be pit:d prfor to rec~rdatton Of 'the
ftnal
g. The subdiVider shall comply vtth the street Improvement recoenendatSons
outltned tn the RIverside County Road Del~rtmnt'l letter dated
"' 9-30-88 a'copy. of uhlch ts attached, (.Amended by Planntng .Commission
10-5;88)' ' ' ' - -'" "..- .. : ' '
10, Legal access as requtred by Ordinance 460 shall be provtded from the tract
mp boundary to a County mlnta(ned road,
:21, M1 road easements shall be offered for dedICation to the tablac and shall
contanue tn force untt1 the governing body accepts or abandons sucl~
offers, All dedications shall be free frm lll encumbrances as approved~
tb~e the Road Comtsstoner, Street names shall be subject to approval oR
Re d Commtssloner, a
12. ~hen requtred for machey slopes, dratnage facilities,
etc., shill be sho~n on the ftnal mp tf they are located
land dhtston bo,ndary. Al1! offers of dedication and
shall be submitted end recorded as dtrected by the County
Easements,
utilities,
wathtn the
conveyances
Surveyor,
later and sever·g· dtsposal facilities shall: be Installed tn accordance
vtth the provisions set forth tn the RIverside County Health'l)epartment's
letter d~ted 7-25-88 · copy of ,htch ts attached.
The subdivider she. c_mp_lJr vtth the flood control recommendations
the Itlverstde County flood COntrol Dtstrtct's letter cited
outltned by
h If 11~ land dtvtston 11as vtthtn an
7-ZZ-88 · copy of witch Is lilac ed. '
adopted flood onntrol drainage am tarsgent to Sectton 10.25 of ~rdtnance
460 a prel~__tite fen for the construction of ira dr·tnage hctllttes
she11 ~ collected bJ~ the Road Comtsstone.
The subdivider shall cmply vtth' the fire 4reprovemeat recommendations
guiltned tn the County FIre Ihrshal's lette~ dated 8-X7-88 a copy of ~htch
ts attached.
Sutxlhtsto~ phistag, tncludt~ on:r Pro sad common open space area
Improvement phist , tf applicable, sh~l be subject to Planntng
Department approve. My proposed phastng shill provtde for adequate
vehicular access to all lot3 tn each phase, and shall substantially
conform to the 1agent and tarpose of the subally¶sign approval.
Conditions ef N val
Tentative Tract ~. 23371 Mended No. I
Page 3
LotS-created. by thts-subdivision shall Comp.ly. With the .fo!'.l.w!ng:- .. .
a. Corner lots and through lots tf any shall be rovtded with
Sect~io 3.88 · 0rdtnance B and so as
additional area pursuant to n ~ 46
n~t to contain less net area than the least Imount of net area tn
non-corner and through lots.
".. b.~ Lots Created by thts. SuMtVtSt~n'Sha11-;be. tn...'conformeric..vtth 'the
development' 'startbards of 'the ..Specific Plln No. 1~9 Amendment 'No. '1
zone,
c. ion lots are crossed bymJor publtc utility easements, each lot
fe
shall have a net usable are of not less than 3.600 square
exclusive of the uttltty easement.
d~' Graded but undeveloped 1aM shill be mtntatned tn i veed-fre~
condition and shall be .1thor planted vlth tat.rim landscaping or
royteed with other eroston control tonsures as epproved by the
B!rector of gutldtng and
e. Trash bins. loadtrig areas and Incidental storage areas shall be
located ave and vtsually screened from surrounding areas with the use
of block ~(ls and landscaping.
Prtor to liECON)AT:ON of the final mp the foil,ring conditions shall be
satisfied:
a. Prior to the recordatton of the ftnal imp the applicant shall submit
~ltten clearances to the RIverside County Road and Survey Department
that all lartlnent requtrments outlined In the attached approval
letters frm the fo11Mng agenctea hive been met.
· :. tar Otst..
Ceenty;He~,~:Oe
CoUnt/'. Pli~ifing
bncl~ :'liBtar 0t strict'
zone ultimately applied to the proper~y.
Cendtttons of Mproval
Tentative Tract No. 23371 4nandad No. 1
Page 4
19. All eststtng structures. on the subject property shall be removed prtor. to · recorditS on. of .the fSnal mp. .. ..
20. l~e Comma epen Space area'shill'be She~n U a numbi~ed.lot ea the'-' final
sap and shall be Benaged by a master preparty wears association.
21., Prior to recorderten of the final NbdtVtStH! map, the subdivider ... shall
'snail the felledit documents to the Plinntn '
'the office of. the Coun,.ty. Conhie1 :.. .~. --.
1) A declaration 'of covenants, cOnditions and restrib:lions; led
2) A saml!_le documnt conveyed title to the purchaser of an Individual lot
or untt uhlch provtdes that the doclaratton of covenants, conditions
and restrictions is Incorporated theretn by reference.
raytee shall (a) provide for a a~n¶mum term. of 60 ~ears, v
for the establtsleent of a property annits': association comprlsed of the
owners of each individual lot or unit, (c) rovtde for oanershtp of the
consson and (d) contain to folioring provtstSns verbatim:
· NoahWithstanding any provision tn thts Declaration to the contrary,
shall app y:
the folloetng provision 1
The property whirs' association established herein shall nanage and
continuously antneath the 'common area'!, more perttcularly described
on Exhtbtt 'ZXZ-Z7' of the sl~..tftc plan etaached hernia, and shall
not sell or transfer the comaon Ires'l, or any pert therat, absent
the pr(or written consent of the Planntn Director of the County of
RIverside or the COunty's successor-in-t~terest.
The proLarty mmer's association shell: have the right to assess the
owners of each tnd¶vSdual lot or unit for the reasonable .cost of
mintsin¶rig the 'common area' and shill have the right to lien the
prepert~ bf any such ounar ~ho defaults tn the payee. ha o a
fb
maintenance assessment. An assessment lien, once created, shall ·
prior to 811 other liens recorded sUbsequent to the notice of
assessment or other document creating the assessment lien.
This Declaration shall not be laminated 'substantially' amended or
raperay deannixed therefrom absent tht prior wrttten consent of the
I~lanntng Director of the County of Riverside or thl County's
successor-in-~nterest- & proposed knendment shall'he considered
'substantial* tf ~t affects the extent, usage or mintchance of the
'common area'.
Conditions of AF royal
Tentative Tract ~. 23371 Mended No. I
Page 5
'24.
in the..event of an)' .conft.lct between.this 'Declaration'and the Art.tcles.
Once a proved, the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions
shall ~ recorded It the same time that the ftnal map ts recorded,
Prior. to'retardation of-the final 'rap, ..clearance shill. be .Obtained from
llet:rolmlltan :lllte..Dtsgrtct. rilelive to the" .pt'ote~tton of .applicable
easemats affecting the subject propert),. Lot line adjustments shall ilso
be completed.
The developer shall camp1), with the following
~"~treeenll as shwn t~ Specific Plan No, X99
er~nnhlntqF I~-. a HOR' or other INbllC enttt),: (Amn~ed
bY Pllnn~g
Cmml satan Z0-5-88)
Prtor to mcordatton of ~he ftnal asp the developor shall file
application with the Count~ for the formilan of or ~ Zl IM-:t~,~
Anondad No. I In accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of
Z972, unless the project ts withtn an extsttng parkvU ,etntenence.
2) Prtor to the tssuance of tNtldtng pemtts, the developer shall secure
approval of proposed landscaping and Irrigation plans from the County
Rod and Irlanntng Departmot, All landscaping and Irrigation plans
and specifications shall be prepared tn a reproducible format sattable
for Fernanent fI11ng with the County ROad Departmat.
3) The developer shill post a landscape perromance bend whtch shall be
released concurrlntlJr with tim release of subdivision performance
bends, quarantoelng the vtab1111), of all landscaping which will be
1natalled prior to the assunCtion of the maintenance responsibility by
the district.
4) 1111 developer, the devoloper's successors-In-Interest or assignees,
shall be rosponstble for mll arbmy landscaping maintenance unit1
such tim as maintenance ts taken over b), the district.
The developer shall he responsible 'for maintenance and upkeep of all
slopes, landscaped Irene lad Irrigation systems until such tin as those
Street ltghts ~:hall be prov~d within the subdivision tn accordance Vith
the standards of Ordinance 461 and the following:
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract IIo, 23371 Mended No. Z
Page 6
z)
cgmcvrrentl~ ~ith the"fll.tng of subdivision .improvement plans vlth the
Road Oelar~int; the deVelOPer shall" secure approval. of the .. proposed
street 11ght leTout first from 'the' Road Deparlaent's trefftc engtneer
and then frm the ·pproprtate vttltty larve~or.
2) Following approval of the street lighttrig layout by' the Road
Dep~_rtaent's traffic engineer, the developer shall also ftle ·n
· application utah. LAFCO for the .forestton of· street 11ghttng
"'. district, ..: or..' annexation .to an extsttng 1.tgh~tng' district', unless .'the
stte ts Vlthtn an extsttng 11ghttng districtS"' · ' ·
3) PrtOr to record·lion of the. final rap, the developer shall secure
conditional approval of the street 1lightTrig · p11catteq h LAFCO,
unless the sttats wfthte on extsttng l!Ighttng d[:trtct. ....
4)--All street lights and othe~ outdeer 11ghttng shall be shown m
IUvarstde County Ordinance No. 655 end the RIverside County
Comprehensive 6·hera1 Plan.
The perk are· (Planning Are· Ro, 45) of' the spectftc plan shall be
traproved paltoo~ vlth ell road Improvements prtor to the tssuance of
building' s for 800 dwelltrig units tn Tract 23371 Me dad No, :Z,
n
f~na}- --for-Vesttng-Tract-2337t-shaTT-shew-the-park-as-a-nuebered-tet~
(Amended~. Planning Commission ZO-S-88) - ·
Prlor to the tssuance of GRADXN6 PERHITS the folloWrig conditions shall be
sat1 sfted:
Prior to the Issuance of. grading permits, deistled common open space
are I?arkt_ng landscaping end trrtgattonl plans shall be sulatttad for
Planning Dip·fluent approval for the phase of develoixnent ¶n process.
The plans shill be carttiled bY a landscape arch¶tact, and shill
provtde for the following.,
Permanent automatic Irrigation systems shall be Installed on all
landscaped areas requiring Irrigation.
2)
3)
Landscape screenlng where roqutred shall be designed to be opaque up
to a mtntmum height of six (6) feet at mturity.
All uttltty servtce areas and enclosures shill be screened from vtew
vtth landscaping and decorative barrters or baffle treatments, as
approved bJr the Planntng DIrector. Utilities shall be placed
underground,
a
%
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23371 Mended No. I
Page 7
's),
6)
7)
8)
Parbrays" and landscaped... buildtrig '- Set~icks: '. shill 'be landscaped...to · ..
provide visual 'screening era t, ranstt'on into the prJ'mr/use area of .'
the site. Landscape elements 'shall Include earth hemant, round
cover, shrubs and specimen trees in conjunction vSth meandiStant
stdevalks, benches and other pedestrian amenareas where approprSate as
epproved the Planntng Department and Speciftc Plan No. :L99
La ScapingSha : nCorporate "se 'eect 'n accent 'tr.S
at keJr visual focal patrite w4thtn the prOJect.
Where streets trees cannot he planted v4thtn right-Of-ray of SnterSor
streets and project parkeys due to insufficient road right-of-ray.
the~ shall be planted outside of the road rtght-o -vaJf.
Landscaping plans shall Incorporate nattve and drought tolerant plants
vhere appropriate.
All extstfng specSmen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the
sub act pro rty shall he sho~n on: the proJect's radtng plans and
she~l note ~ose to be removed, relocated end/or reta~rned.
All trees shall he adntaue double staked. Weaker and/or slo~ gro~tng
trees shall be steel staked.
10. Parktng layouts shall coeplJ~ w4th OrdinanCe' 348, Sectton 18.12.
28. All extsttng nattves ectmn trees im the subject property shall be
preserved wherever feasttie. Were they cannot he preserved the shall be
relocated or replaced vtth s 1man trees as approved by t~e Planntng
Director. Ileplacment trees sha~che mted on appreved landscaping plans.
29. if ovlral~ conceptual phased, prtor to the a prove1 of grading. perutie,
en the pro act ts to be grading plan shall ~ submitted to the P1anntng
Director for ap val. The plan shall he used as a gutdellno for
subsequent detal~T°e~ redtrig plans for Individual phases of devllopaent and
shall Include the foFlow ng: -'
Techniques which vtll be uttlfzed to prevent eroston and sedtmentatton
during end after the grading process.
2) ~proxtmate tie frames far grading and Identification of areas which
my be graded during the htgher prohabtltty ratn ~onths of danuar~
through IMrch. :~ ' ~
3) Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
Conditions of' Approval
Tentative Tract leo. 23371 kneaded No. :Z
Page 8
4) Areas of. bmpO. rar)' grading outside of'a particular phase.:
30. "Srsdt'n~ PTsnS shilT'confO'rs"tO"Bosrd"adopted"Hg1~sf'de'Development
Standards: A1 cot and/or fill slopes, or Individual c~nbtnattons
31. "All CUt 's~opes' iOtated adjacent to'ungrlded natural te'ltn and exceedlng'-
~ vertical hetghts shill be contour-graded Incorporating
tee (XO) .. eat tn
the folioring grading techniques:
l) The angle of the graded slope shall be gradual1)' adjusted to the angle
"' of tl~ natural terrain,
2)' Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall reflect the
natural rounded firrata.
3)
4)
The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with
designed tn proportion to the total hetght
drainage and stability pemtt such rounding.
curYes with radtt
of the slopes where
lihere cut or ftll slopes exceed 300 feet tn horizontal length, the
horizontal contours of the slope shall be corved tn a continuous,
undulattng fashion. ..
32. Prior to the Issuance of grading peaIts, a qualified paleontologist shall
be rotatned by the developer for consultation and conanent on the proposed
gradtAg with aspect to potential peleontologtcal tapacts. Should the
paleontologist rIM the potential tl high for Impact to significant
resources, a Ire-grade mottrig between; the paleontologist and the
excavation and gradtrig contractor shall be arranged. i/hen necessary, the
Paleontologist or representative shall have the authorit), to temporaft1),
dtvert, redlroct or halt gradtrig acttvlty to a11w recovery of fosstls.
33. Prtor to the Issuance of BUiLDiNG PERNITS the follovfng conditions shall
be satisfied:
a. In accordance wtth the .written request of the developer to the County
of RIverside, a cop), of vhlch ts en ftle', and tn furtherance of the
agreement between the develo r and the County of RIverside, co
butldtng mtts shall be ffsued bJr the County of RIverside for any
parcels v~thin the subject tract unit1 the developer, or the
develo er's successors-In-Interest provided evtdence o~' compliance
wtth ~e tams of sa1~ D~ve'ioi~ent Agreement No. S for the financing
of public facilities.
Conditions of A; val
Tentative Tract ~.. 23371 Mended No. 1
Page 9
'b. -Idith :the submittal of latldt'ng plans to' ~, Department.of k:fldtng and.
Safety 'the developer WtI~ denstrata compl fence 'wtth the ' acoustical
noise levels to 45 Ldn end exterior noise levels belov 65 'l. dn.
c. Roof-mounted metban.Ice1. aquilacent. shall not be Peeltied vtthtn the
.. sulxlIvtsiOn, except 'for. the clubhouse 'd!lCh lay 'hive screened ...
.equtment as Ipproved bY' Pllnntng DIrector. 'HOwever~ Solar I "tpmen~
· any other energy flYIng devices shell be permitted' ~th ~llnntng
~erPartaent approval. (Mended bY Pllnnt.ng Gomtsston
d. Building separation betveen ali latldtngs Including fireplaces shall
"'; not be less than ten (ZO) feet unllls approved bY Delartment
· ' 8utldtng . and Safety end FIre Department Per $ ectftc Pain No.
Mendmerit No. 1. (Mended by Pllnntng CoBmission ~;-5-88
)
e. All street stale yard setlacks shall be a ftnfmum of 10 feet.
f. All front yards shell be preyfried vtth landscaping and automatic
t rrtgation.
Prtor to the Issuance of OCCUPANCY PEaITS the folioring conditions shall
be satisfied:
e. Prior to the ftnal butldtng Inspection' approve1. by the 8utldtng and
Safl.ty De rant, yells shall be constructed along Kaiser Parkray and
RantWo Ca~fornJl Road, LI Serene ida),, ;Kaiser Plrk ~y end Ihrgarita
Road per the Deaf IMnuel. The required ~all shall be subject to the
apprOVal Of the OrreCtor Of the Departaent of Butlding end hf ty and
the Planning 04rctor end be phased ~lthin the preJect T~ended
b}, Planning Coralssloe ZO-S-~. ·
4
b. II111 and/or fence locations shall confOe to attached Ftgure I11-17 of
Speclftc Plan IIo. 199 Mendent No. 1.
c. All landscaping and Irrtgetio6 shall be 1natalled tn accordance ~tth
epproved plans prtor to the Issuance of occupancy permt ts. 1f seasonal
-conditions do not rmft lintfag, tntertm landsca tng and eroston
control ensures shelFabe utt~ized as approved'bJf the PF:nntng DIrector
end the Otrector of Butldfng and Safety.
d. All Perktrig landscaping and Irrigation shell be Installed tn
accordance vtth approved plans and she1!1 be ver(*fed bY e Planntng
Department field Inspection.
Contit ttons of A~proval
Tentative Tract NO. 2337X Mended No. Z
Page 10
e, .. ~ane re te.. ~ 4 dewa ] ks- aka ~ ~ . m-te~ t rvc ted-tkrevgkevt- tke~ ~bd~ v4 t 4 e~ 4 a
aCcordan ee -w4 ~ -the ~'s and, ?do - of- O~d 4 nane~46t- and - Spee4
'tgg-be~mnt-~,-t, .(Deleu ~.' Plann. lng .~tsS4On' XO-S~)' ~'..
f. Street trees shall be planted throughout the su~tvtston In.accordance
utah the standards of Ordinance 460 and Spectftc Plan No. Xg9
Amendment No. 1.
35'. DevelopCent of Vesttng .Te,.tatlve .Tract. No. Z337X Mended'No...1.sha11 .
comply wtth 811' provisions of' Spec;tftC'.Pl'an 'No,-tg9 Amndment' No,'....1. 'and.
Development Agreement 'No. S,
:i
| EXISTING ZONING
..,---R-A-I/L
dip~l
I sP
RalmJ
· ' A-l-In ·
· ~. R-A-20
'%
· A-I-IO
RoR
APlk KACOR -'
i'lT SPECIFIC PLAN OF LAND USE
~¥:1~[-]:[,
["]~Z'~[':'T]T-T, RANCHO CALIK lID., MARGARLTA nO. mYd* '
Elemefd SO. GENERAL KEARNY, RANCHO VIST~ OR'
~"'5~fe'3-13-86 I:kawn ey M
RA/L'RSlOkr CCX/iVTY" Pf. AiVNIN~' 06P, iR TMETV r ,No SC,LW
,..T../"
LOCATIONAk MAP
RNIA
ROAD
OFFICE OF ROAD COliNISSIONER & COUNTY SURVEYOR
RIverside County Irlannlng Commission
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA I2SOZ
September 30, 1988
*I'I,I~IeNIN, I IIt41 t11'-1114'.
Re:' Tract Nap 2337t - Amend tl - had CotreCite
-. ·" -; .: SChedule A - Team SP Nap.
Ladies and Gentleme: '
Illth respect TO the' conditions of approve1 for the referenced tentative land
dhlslon amp, the bed Department recommends that the landdivider provide th#
follovtng sirlet improvement plans and/Or road'dedications In accordance viii!
0-41hence 460 and RiIverslde County Road herovent Standards (Ordinances: 4tit),
l~" IS understood that the tentative map: correctl~ shows acceptable cent~t llndl
profiles, all existing easements, traveled vlys, end. drainage coursaf~ wltk
appropriate Q's, and that their omission Or unacceptablll~y ,~Y require the map
to be resulaitted for further consideration. These Ordinances and the followin
conditions are essential parts and a requirement occurring In ONE Is as bind~
as though occurring in a11.' They are Intended to be complementary and ..
describe the conditions for a complete design of the Improvement. All questions-
regarding the ~;rue meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Road
CommtsSlonlr'S Off cl, " ..
-t, The land~lvlder shall protect dwnstream prepa~.les fr;m damages
caused by alteration of the drainage letterns, I.e., concentra-
tion of diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by
constructing adequate drainage hcllltles Including enlarging
existin facilities or by lecurln a drainage easement or by
lath. 111 drainage easements shiT1 be shorn on the final nap
and noted as rollors: "Oralhate Easesant- no building,
d
obstructions, or encroach,ants bY land ftlls are allowe ": The
protection shell be as allproved bY the had Department.
The landdhider shall accept and properly dispose of all offsite
drainage floetel onto or through the site. in the event the
bad Coenlssloner pennies the use of streets for drainage
pu oses, the provisions of 'Art' cle XI of Ordinance lio. 460
vllrT app13f. Should the quantt t' el exceed the street
capacity or the use of streets be prohibited for drainage
a
purposes, the subdivider shall Frovide edequ te drainage"
feel1 Itles as approved by the bad Department.
TJ~ct~.l~"23371 - bend IX - J~...Correctton Nip t:L
' btm/r 30. 1988 '
Pag~ !
NiJor drainage Is Involved on this landdivision and its resolution
shall+ be as approved by the Road Department.
eioer Pa .'Shal l;.k.' wed M' fi'tile dedicated right Of vault"
MKcordlece with CXun . ndarl lOT, (38,1S0').' ·
S. La brena IY shall be feeroved vlt~n the dedicated right,of
In accordance with County Standard . 10l. (3Z*/44*);~' ','~
6.. 'Street 'k', 'e' (fern Street 'C'..to "l)°l-aha11 IF fapr~ed as
' .approved t~ 'the:bd .CoBfaStener. (g/g")." -. · '.:~" '
raiser Perkvs},) shal~ be leereyed ta accordance villa Nodlflld
County Standard No. 103o SectIon A. (48'/48*).
:8. Street "C" (700'~ wsterly of raiser llrkNU) Shall be lapraved
, in accordance with lldifled County S~4ndard No. 102. (10:./60'). :~
9. Street "X". Street "B" (ire Street "l" Ily). Street "lit... (free
h r
Street .r to street "s$") I Ill M :lap oved In accordance with
Modified County Standard No, 103, Section A, (44'/44'),
Street at'. shall be Sapraved tn acCordance with lidif led County
Standlrd No. Z04. Section A. (40'/40'). .
Sellers IDa thru anew mime le]m thru mQmm rose thrlJ Nee lye thru "DO"
Street, "EE", Street °FFam "6G" thru "LI.", Street "HH" (free Street
"See Sly). Streets aNNe. thru "AAAw led two annmad streets runnln~
betvein Street age Slid air and betvein Sirlit abe and Street "CO
shall be laproved in Iccordanct with lidiliad County Standard No.
105, Section A. (36'/H'), .
So~h:'rd&e~""~"' "~ Roed.Jlie11 ,k improved within the dedlcel;ed
12. ~eceoFilani:i with 'Cwnty Standard No. 103~. ,Section
1he 1leddivider shall Frovide .utll lt~ clearance from Illecho Cal lf.
liltor District; ;rlor to the recordallen of the Ins1
"'~C~t'Nap 23371 - bend I~,_, Road Correction
Septattar 30, ~988
14. 1he maxim centerline gradient shall not' exceed XSZ.
IS. The miniram centerline radii' ~he11 be as epproved b~y the bad
Oeparbmnt.
16.'. Itsache Cal lf.. Ilond"and.Me_rgerite Ikad' shell M leFrev. ed.vlth
.: 'cobrata curt; .end gutter l~cated 4~"feit .free centerTIM. and mich.
eF as 11 concrete layin; reconstruction; or resurfecin9 of
Standard No.
%7.. ~lo.r te' thW.-fll ing of the final asp with .the Co.n~ Recorder*s,
Offlce,'the. developer: shll I provide! eVade.rice of conl;t~oUs'
ma I ntenehce of el I propas ed pr I vetO; '~troeta aI th I n the. develoi~eht'
as approved by the had Coenlssloner,
28. Sldevalks viibin the developvent shell'be as epproved by the Reed
Coenlssloner.
"Zg. The mininee lot frontages along the cul-de-sacs end knuckles shells-'
be 3S fat unless othervise specified in the particular zoning
classification.
All driverays shall conform to the applicable RIverside C~unty
Standards end shall be shown on the:street improvement plans.
A minimum of four feet of full height curb shall be constructed
between driveways.
k~en blockells are required to be Constructed on top of slope, e
debris retention ~11::sha11 be constructed st the street right of
way line to prevent silting of sldevalks es epproved IW the Reed
Camel i
SS fir.
~he minimum garage setback shell be 30feet masured from the face
of curb. Should the developer provide evidence of roll up doors on
the taildiet plans, a reduction of 4' ely be ellared but in no case
shell thega age be closer than 20 f elf ran back of sldavalk or
I
! r n
curb n the abse ce of sidewalk. '
Prlmr/and seconder~ access rHds te the nearest paved road mln-
telnlNI ~7 thl Coun~ shill be constructed within the public rl ht
Of W in ICCOrdlnCl with County Ste.nderd No. tO6. Section B, ~32'1
/60') It · grade end alignment Is ·ppreved by the bed Co,ntssloner.
4e
Prier tot he recorderfen oft he fine1 asp, the developer shall
de sltkdth the RIverside County ROid Department, e cash sum of
$Z~.O0 f
per Iot as mitigation for tr·f Ic signs1 JnFacte. huld
: ."Tr~c~lkp D171 - bend IZ - ad Correc~lo~ Ikp IZ
~' i;lenf~ s;~1'1' be' bash 'upOn .e centerline'profile eXtending
· u of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at e grade and
Illgreene Is approved b~y the liverside Counter Road Connlslloner.
Ceepletfon of road Improvements does not Imp1), acceptsMe for
maintenance b), Count3r.
H-. E!ectrfcal and conearticle.lofts trenches shall be provided In
accordance NIgh 0rdf'nancl 461, $tln'dird .817, '~
27. Asphlltfc emulslon (fog seal) shall be applied not less thin .
fourteen da~s folloNIn placement of the asphalt sufficing and shall
be appl led at a rate ;~ O.0S gallon r squire ~ard. AspMlt
emulsfo~ shall conform to Sections 3~, 3~ and 94 of the State
Standard Spect flcat Ions.
28. Standard cul-de-sacs. and knuckles ud other cul-de-secs sM11 ~
constructed throghout the landd iv I s Ion.
2g. Corer cutlacks In conformrice with Counter Standard No~,80S shill
be sheen on the final mp and offered for dedication ere
appl fable.
Lot Icclss shell be restricted on Itancho Cal lfornle.'lCoid, Ibrgerlt/;,
lead. Irafief Parkey and LIhre. a'lle, y and sO noted be't h e final
Landdivlilons creating cut or f111 slopes adjacent to the streets
shill provide erosion control, sight distance control and slope
easements IS approved b~ the had 0epertmnt.
32. AI1 cantorline Intersections shell be at
33..lke. e~reetdeslgn and fKorovemnt Concept oft his project aM11 be
'agedfated vlthTR23372 end TitS1373.
4t
Street 11 being she)) be tred In accordance with Ordinance 460
and 4gZ t~roughout the suHro~vvisfon.
The County Service Area (CSA)
kSmtnlstrator determines ~hether
:h s proposal qualifies under an
,%
· :' ~j~lar 2337X o Mend fZ o Road Correction IMp ft
· 30, 1988 ~,/
· flee S
existing essessmnt district or Rot. If not, the land Ok~er She11
file an application vtth LAFC0 f. or annexation Into or creation of
All. prl'Vete..and public entrances and/er:'-Intersectl;nS opposite this
h
project s all be cooKieted rich' ibis project and shorn on the
street Improvement plans.
36. A strlpfn plan Is required for Itancho California bad. The removal
of the exTstlng striping shall be the responsibility of the
applicant. Traffic SIgning and striping 'shall be done bY Count),
forces 'vlth'. 411. :Incurred costs- berne 'by ghe ~ppl IcOnS;.
37. The mfn 'entrance gate she11 be located a minimum 0f Z/0" from the
flov line of Rancho California bad.
GH:lh
Y truly ur
bad DTvtston Engineer'
.C unty of Riverside
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLAtOfINS DEPARTMENT
J,,Iy 2S. 1ell
Attn: ,Ceth~LgJ_f_ford ;
TitOil[: ~ ~ S Environment.-1 Health Service,
Tract 2))71. Amended No. I
The Environmental Health Services has revleved TraCt Nap 2J371, Amended Nap'
llo. I dated July 19, 1988. Our current codeanti rill remain ms previously
stated in our letter dated June 13~ 1988
' JUL ~ 't 1988
RiVEnS:D.~ CO,Jr, rr~
PLAr~.~l~6 ~EpART;~,=~,T
' "C'OUNTY I: IVERSIDE:
.Of, a&mlf,
metal
:OBQ~IN 91611
mall, r,~ MSd~
el.lie i I111rl
l&s lalel
tall ILlliege
wile LestOleo
$lll Itlll01e ~19,
t01NSel, &i sites
June 13, lose
DEPARTMENT
of HEALTH
IeIVERSIIXCOUI4TY pLAHNII4ODD'r,
40S0 Lemon Street
Ri. verside, CA'OJS02 '.
Attnz Kathy 01fford '
RIVEH:;tUE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
K; TRACTMAP JILTS: ThAt certain land situated in the
smtncorporsted territory of the County of Riverside, SLits
of cilirornia, being PArcels Z, J,3,4 And S of Parcel Map
~1884 As shove on I map thereof filed in Book Z44, Pages _14
through 33 of Psrcel Maps in the Office of the County , ~
Recorder of said Riverside County together vtth a portion of
the R&ncho Temecull griLLed by the Government of the United
StAtes of America to Lute Yignes by patent dsted 3anntry 18,
1860 and recorded in the Office of the County ~ecorder or
Sin Diego County, California
{1,029 Lots)
Gentlemem:
The Department of Public Health has roylOved TentsLive Map
No- ~3371 itd recommends that:
A vaLor system shall be instilled according to
plato itd specificsLion as approved by the valor
tompity And the Health DepArtment. Permiteat
prints of the pleas of the valor system shall
be submitted in triplicate, vith s minimum Wc&le
not less that one inch equals a00 foot, &long vith
the erieansi drsving to the County Surveyor- The
prints shill shov the internil pipe dismiter,
d
location of viIYes-sAd fire hy rittsS pipe and
Joint specifications, itd the size of the main
At the Junction of the nov system to the
existing system- The pleas shall comply in
All respects vith DaY. S, Part 1, Chapter 7 of
the California Health And Safety Code, California
Administrative Code, Title JJ, Chapter lS, sad General
Order No. 103 ;f the Public Utilities Commission of the
StiLe of CalifOrniA, yhen.~pplicable.
·
, }
Mireraids County PItnningDep.t.
PAgO Tvo .:.
ALL.at Kirby sirlord ""'
Juno 11, 1988
The Films shall be signed bye registered engineer and
rarer company vtth the Foliovine certtftclt.tons °I :
certify'tALL the. des'fen Of the'utter lye. LoB in
'Tract. Map 233.71'.ts'accord&nc-e vf~h the v&tef oyste~'-"."
expansion pitAS 'OF the ltAcho California Valor District
And that the valor service,storage and distribution
syst.em viii be adequate to provide visor service to
such tract, This certtftcitton does not constitute A
.guArantee that it viii supply visor to ouch tries at
· any specific quantities, liovo or pressures for Fire
protection or any other purposes, This certification
shall be signed by I responsible oFltctll of the utter
company, 2bt-nliul-uvlL-kt_lviS~l&td,~g_&bt_~gVO~x_
iv£ztxe£:l-f}LList- g-£t it .i ._ til ._kyg._vttbl_i£ig£_Lg
&bt-£tgvtl&-tg£-&bt rtse£di&igo_gt_&bt_giuil_isg.,,
This Department has a statement from the Ranthe California
Voter District agreeing to serve domestic valor Lo each and
every Jot in the subdivision on demand providing
satisfactory ftnsnctll arrangements are completed vith the
subdivider, It will be necessity. for.the finlnctai
Arrangements to be made prior to the recordsties of the
final map.
This Department has A statement From the Eastern Muntctpii
VALOr District seresing to alloy the subdivision sev&ge
system to be connected to the severs or the District, The
sever system shill be installed Iccording to piano Lad '
specifications as opproYed by the District, the County
Surveyor sad the Health Department, Permanent prints of the
pitne st the sever system shall be submitted in triplicate,
&long vith the originil driving', to the County Surveyor, The
prints shill ohov the internal pipe diameter, locities of
mkuholee, complete profiles, pipe and Joint specifications
sad the size or the severs at the. Junction st the hey system
to the existing system, A single pitt indicating locities
of sever lines tAd valet lines shall be a portion st the
sevage piano and profiles, The plans shill be signed by s
registered taginset sad the sever district vith the
foilsvine rJrtiFtcatton: el certify that the design of the
sever system in Tract Map 23373 is in accord&ace vith the
sever system expansion plans of the Sistern Municipal Valor
District tad tAAt the viito disposal system is adequate &t
Riverside CourtLy Plinning DopL,
Page Three
Lr&ct,'
"Zbl-eX'lO't-mwl _bf_tVbei Ltd_ e_ bt etro x_lv. xtXg£' t,9 ist
· ~rLtnes, Ir.~snttartkn
Environmental Health letvices
viii be necessary for financial arrlngements
prior.to..t.he recordaLton or the final map.
to be Bade
; . -
IMst&c
~: ~ L. B~WAB
Riverside County
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FI, OOD, CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRIG'r
P1 arming Department
County Admlnl.stratlve*Centlr .. ...
He.have raylaved this case and have the tel!wing cants:
'EXcept For nutsince nature local rUnoff ~htch-, my tra.verse'porttons'of the
property the project tl considered free from ordinar store floOd hazard.
However, a storm of' unusual magnitude could cause some ~amage. 'Nay construc-
tion should cornSly utth 811 applicable ordinances.
The topography of the area coastsis of uli defined ridges and natural Mater-.
courses vhlch traverse the re roy. Theq Is adequate ares outstde the
natural valorcourses for buridT~ng sites. The natural Matercourses sho'~d be
kept free of buffdin s and obstructions tn order to mainOath the natural
dratnage patterns of ~e ares and to prevent flood damage to nn buildings.
A note should be placed on. an environmenteli constraint sheet startrig, "All new
buildings shall be floodproofed by elevating the fiatshed floors a minimum of
18 Inches above adjacent trnund surface. Eraston prntectton shall be provtded
for mobtle home supports.
This 'proJect 'ts'tn the ' Area
drainage plu fees sha I be accordance vtth the applicable r~les and
regulations.
The proposed sentrig ts consistent vtth eXtstln flood hazards. Seen flood
control facllltlec or floodproofing a~y be required to fully develop to the
taplied density.
The DistrTct'a report dated :Funuse. lift ts s1111 current for t~ls project.
The District des eel object to the proposed atnor change.
The attached cants appl~.
VerTtruly yours,
CO:
KENNE'H L. EWARDS
n or Civil Engineer
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOC) CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
20, lg88
Riverside County "
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
X.~tenLions.. Specific
F,.at..hy' Gi fford .... ·
LadLes' and Gentlemen: Bet Vesting Tract 23371
This So · proposal .to divide about 400 acres in the Tomscala
Valley area, The site is ·long the east side of Mergerit·
betwe. on Sancho California Road ted La= Serene Way, This pro]ec~
ks · portion of Specific plan lgg (MarSerif· Village). :'
Of re,re flows from two major watersheds ·re tributary to the
siteee northeast end southeast corners, The applicant proposes
to accept end convey t~e flows from the northe·st with · storm
drain system, end the flows from the southeast viths golf course
grnee channel from where the flows cross under P~ncho california
Road ~n · culvert,
to their natural dr·image pat-
tern, According to the applicant, the site ~ould be roughly
graded with offsite and oneits flows directed into the proposed
golf course end temporary drainage facilities, This is allowable
If the natural drainage patterns are preserved ted the temporary
facilities have the 100 year storm capacities,
following are t,,be District*s recommendations:
This tract is located within the limits of the Nutfists
C~eeZt/Temeculs galls7 Area Drainage Pln for ~Alch
drainage fees have been adopted t~ the Roerd, Drainage
fees shall be paid as set forth under the provisions of
the "Rules and Regulations for Administration of Ares
Drainage Plans", amended February 16e 19888
Drainage fees shall be paid to the Road Commissioner
as Part of the filing for record of the subdivision
final map or parcel map, or if the recording of a
final parcel map is waived, drainage fees sha:l be
paid as a condition of the Waiver prior to recording
· certificate of compliance evidencing the waiver of
the parcel maPz or
Riverside Courtly
Planning Department
Rot Vesting Tract 2337l
At the option of the land divider, upon filing a re-
quAred affidavit requesting defermeat of the Pennant
of bee, the drainage foes my be paid to the
Building Dirertar at the tim of issuance of a grad-
ins Parstit or building persalt for each approved par-
' .cel...vktC.laever. my 'be .first Obtained. after-'.the.
provided however, the foes may
not be exercised for any rcel where grading or
structures have been initiated on the parcel within
the prior 3 year periods Or perills for either ac-
tivity have been issued on that parcel which remain'
Pads should be elevated at 'least I fo~t above the ~100
year flood plain in the adjacent drainage facilities.
Erosion protection mhould be provided for all flXX slopes
exposed to the potential erosion haserda,
,
If~droXogicaX and h~drauXlc calculations for beth the ~
persty and ultimate drainage facilities should be suet-
ted to the District for approval. -~
Oneits drainage facilities located outside of road right
of way should be contained within drainage easements
shown on the final map. A note should be added to the
final map stating, !~Drsinsge easements Shall be..kept..free
of buildings-and,obstruct/snow.
Offsite drainage facilities should be located within
publicly dedicated drainage easements obtained from the
affected property m mere. The documents should be
corded and · m31~7 submitted to the District prior to
recorda~ton of the final map,
AXX lots should be graded ~o drain to the adjacent street
or an adequate outlet, .
tie 10pmr rtorm flow should be contained within the
ourb and the 100 year storm fX~w should be contained
within the street right of way. When either of these
criteria to exceeded, additional drainage facilities
should be installed,
DrainAge foellities outletting: sump conditions should be
designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows.
Additional emergency escape should axes be provided,
~iverside County -3- Juno 20, lg88
Planning
Rot Vesting Tract 33371
9- ~he l~o~erty*s street and lot grading should be designed
· in a manner that perpetuates the =existing
drainage patternS' with respect tO tributary drainage
eros, ou~l-et~ointS and 'outlet c?ndi;Llons,' otherwise, ·
drainage easement 'Should be "obtained f~om the;. arbctad~.
property Mere for the release Of concentrated or
verted storm floes. A cow of the recorded drainage
· District for review
easement should be eubmit%ed ~o ~nal map-
prior ~o the recordslion of the
2 ·°
xf the tract i's built in .phases, each phase shall.~ pro-
tooted from the' 1. In 100 year tributary Storm. flows. ...
Temporary erosion control measur*s should be' implemented
immediately foilssing rough gradlug to l~avent deposition
of debris onto downstream properrids or drainage
facilities*
Development or this property should be coordinated with
the development or adjacent properties to ensure that .
watercourses remain unobstructed and stormwaters are not
diverted from one watershed to another, This may require
the construction of temporary drainage facilities or
oftsite construction and grading*
Evidence of a viable maintenance mechanism should be sub-
misted to the District and Cosnay rot review and approval
prior to recordslion of the final map*
A copy of the improvesant plans, grading plans and final
map along with supporting hydralogic and hydraulic cal-
culations should be submitted to the District via the
Road Department for review and approval prior to records-
lion of the final map, OrsdinS plans should be approved
prior to issuance of grading permits,
~uestions concerning this matter may be referred tO
this office at 714/787-2333,
Very truly yours,
COs
lttck Engineering Company
i~~.~.~ i~
Civil Engineer
ltCspln
NCFBEFOOlh'IION
lAYm3tAXD
lIKes7
&-XY-ll
Ff, AWNZBG DDAITHZF:
4mOimmbut. Sdt llL
gbedd~ CA in01
TRACT 23371 - Au.D~)ED. iX, ROAD COtfiCTiON #I
'With respect to the' conditions of approval for the 'above referenced land division,"
the/ire Department rotmends the following firs protection measures be provided
in accordance with Livers/de County Ordinaucse and/or recoilLead fire protection
standardst
RItZ pitorzc'rzol
~!se water maine 8hall be capable of providing · potential f/re flay of 2500 GHf
and an actual fire flay available free any one hydrant shall be IS00 GPH for 2
hours duration at 20 PiT :maidmaX operating pressure,
ipproved super fire hydrants, (6wxQex2|x2|) shall be located at each. street
intersection and spaced not sore than 330 feet apart in any direction with as
portion of an7 lot frontage sore than 10S feet free a, hydrant,
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of fie eater system plans ~o the fire
Department for review, Plea shall codere to fire hydrant types, location and
spatial, and, the s~lteu shall meet the fire flay requiresonto, Plans shall be
signed/approvod by a telLstared c/eL1 emiLuser and the local valor company v~th
the following' certifications oZ certify that the design of the valor system b
in accordance with the requirements preacribad by the Liveraide Count7 fire
Departalum.e
fire floes for fie eountt7 club vial be determined whoa plot plan LU .reviewed,
The requiraf valet eyetee, hclud/ng fire .hydrants, shall be installed and accepted
by the appro~tiate valor agency prior to an7 cesbustibh buildlaB uateria~ bales
~laced an an individual lot, '*
JOA bullfLute shall be constructed vLth fire retardant roof Let ut~rial as
described in Section 3203 of the hirere Buildlet Code, Any vend chinSleo
or shakes shall have .a Class el" rating and shall be approvsd b7 the firs
'Department ~rior to lutallaties,
;"* *'
t"ratt 233?,1, k...., --.-}
hie 2
RATIII~D l. IIGZl
'lYhorle' I'. Tara,- lXenal, aS Of'fAcet
-q
Development Review
OS-RIv-IS-Q
Tour Reference:
VT 23371, 23372, end
'23373
Related t0:'SP 199
Mariarite Village
Planninl Department
Attention .Kathy Qifford..:
County of. Riverside
nO80 Lemon Street'
Riverside, CA 92501
Dear He. Oilfords
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed Vestin2 -~
Tracts R3371, 233?2, sad 233?3 leested easterly of Z-1S end i~
Hurlerits Road between Ranabe California Road and Ls Serene s~
In Ranthe California.
Please refer to the attached material on which our cements have
been indicated by the itess checked and/or by those items noted
under additional oomments,
If any work l's necessary within the state highway right of way,
the developer Bust obtlin"sn encroachment permit from the Celtrims
Disfriar 8 Perxtt'Offioe prior to beginning work.
additional information is desired, please call Mr, Patrick M.
Cormally st (?ll) 383-q38a,
Tory truly yourso
n. I. LL"dANI~O WSE:t
District Formits Engineer
att,
oos Lee Johnson, Riverside
County Road Department
litto pa=tlcn oF state hlSlwaY Is .included In the California Nast~' Plan. of State
li121~ays Eligible fo~ .Offlolsl Scenic H~21~aP/lksl2nsticn, end .in 'tho future you"
agency may. wish to have this route officially deslfnsted as · state scenic hiS~Y
This poetim cf state hi21~ay has been ~fflcislly desi[nsted ssa state seehie
hf2h~sy, and development In tltts eceridc~ should be
It.' Is ~ec~2nlzsd that thee Is emsidereble Imblie
sdJeeent ~ heavily trsvelsd ld2b~eys. Lend ~evelcpment, in cede' t~ be~'ec~patib2
with this ccncrn, may require speclel n~ise ettenuaticn measures. Dsvelcl~ent of
property should Include any necessary noise Ittenumtlcn.
knsl fi2ht ~f ~sy dsdlcmticn ~ provide hslf~dth cn the state hl2~ay.
Nc~ssl street ~s~s~vssents t~ provide ,, hslf'-w'idth m the stste hi2b~ay.
C~b end 2~tts~, 2tste 2tandsrd alert2 the stste hi~sSy.
Farkin2 be prohibited m3,cnl the st4te hi21~ay by psintin2 the c~rb red
snd/~r by the 2rc~r placement .~f sno perkin2w siN,
fedSue earls reWns line Is~svidsd st intersections with the state hiSIssy.
positive vddeulsr brrier alms the prcgsrty frontsp be provided to limit'
PWsSesl seesee to the stste hilly. ·
YahSoul Jr m not be develc~sd d~r~ly t~ tl~ stste hi21~sy.
~fehiculsr m to the state I'd,~"'~ be Is~vide~ by ex~stin2 public read
Tehim~sr seeess t~ tie stste hl&~Sy be Irovidod by
d~l ve4ys.
Td~cular seeess shell n~t be I~ovided within
the intersection st
Vdticulsr access to the state Itlpsy be provided by a road-type connection.
· 'Form &-:I'D1.9 CRew. S/O?) (C~nt~med co reverse)
bideration be given to the provision, er future I:rovtskn of signallzatlon and
Ztt~htlng of the lnt4rseotlm of '
and
a truffle study gridSouting ~- 1rid eft site flee ~~ and vol~s, ~able
FsrkSn~ lot be developed in · runner that will not osuse any vehA~dar movment
. oanflSets, including parking stall entrance and exit, within of the
mtranoe frem l~e state highway.
Handicap parkin& not be developed In the buay drlvrduy anttahoe area.
__~ Care be taken When developing this I~c~ert to Ireserve and Perpetuate the existing
drainage pittern ef the state hlihvly. ~tlcullr consideration should be given
cts~lstlve increased stars runoff to insure that · highway drainage
. areSted. ·
Any necessary njlse attenuation be provided ss part cf the develc~ent ~f this
propetite
· a eapy of any eendltZms of sppronX er re~tM appeoval. ·
I oop,y of any documnts lrov~dZnl ed~ltZmsZ state Mlh~y ri&ht of way ulxm
· ,gem datSan c~' the rap.
...~~ lropcsals to firthor develop this IrolMrt7.
a eopy of the trarrxo ~r envzromentml *~JT, ff req~2red.
a cheek print of the Pmrz~ ~r ~me~ Nape ~f rq~md.
· ~ck print of the ?lmns far xn7 ~n;rovemnts within the state hf2h~y right of
way, If required.
----_ · check print cf the Oradin2 and Drainsp Plans for this Proi~erty vhen aVails~!e.
Attention= Fathy 21fford, Planner
Regax~dinS: Vestin2 T~acts= 23371, 25372 ~d
H~2~i~a Village
De~ 'Ha. G~ffo~:
We &Pc'in receipt of you~ letters dated June 1, lllll received by
this 'office on June !, 1981. St. Deputy SniJders hal reviewed the "'-
Raterail, and we offe~ the followin2 information for your upcom~n2 :-~
~J~t 2337~, w~21 ~crease the ~pulat~on ~h by app~x~tely
q,7883 p~Ject 23372 rill increase t~e population by approx~i~ely
1,936~ ud p~Ject 23373 w~ll ~ease the population by approximately
1,392. ~e c~b$ned FoJectl, u~n completion will ~pact the hncho
2 ncel have a minim~ o~
bed~~t by ass~n that all ~side
The desirable resident/deputy..ratio is 1.S deputies per 1,000 persons.
T~ls p~oJect, upon Cc~pletion of all three phases, will require 12.1
deputies to fac~litate law'enforcement
It Is of ~r~ance ~o no~s ~hat ~his area Is w~hin ou? desolated
Beat ~1 aa, wi~ ~ o~s~2 ~pula~ion
so~. At ~es~t, we hve one depu~ to cove~ ~s ~a; -
you have any further quistions o~ concex~s in ~egaFds to the
info~mation offered, please do not hesitate' to contact th~s off~ce,
Sincerely,
Iaks glsinora Station
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
EXHIBITS
S\$TAFFRPT%23372VTM. CC 17
CITY OF TEMECULA
To San O.ego
VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.
(v.'T:'r~. 2---~)i 2-
CASE NO.~13~ti&lZ
EXHIBmT NO.
~P.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA
TA
SP
. / ~,/·
TY PARK
r~s,
/
T~E MEADOWS .""
SP 21g/"' ~/
\ \
CASE
EXHIB: f NO.
~P,C, DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA
I"BR
!lllllll~
· _]JJlll 1,
)CASE NO.%/1'1~;;2,3~'12.
,,X~s,T NO.
,?.C. OAT': )~-~-ql ~/
CITY OF TEMECULA
~888R!
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
$\STAFFRPT~3372VTM.CC 18
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23372
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
F66
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Library)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition of ADDrOval
Condition No. 1
Condition No. 15
Condition No. 9
Condition No. 3
Condition No. 2
Condition No. 6
Condition No. 5
S\STAFFRP'~23372VTM.CC 19
ITEM NO. 13
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEYR~ _
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Subject:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
January 14, 1992
First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
Mark Rhoades
The Planning Department Staff Recommends that the
Planning Commission:
REAFFIRM Environmental Assessment No. 32548 for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, and;
APPROVE the First Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 23373, based on the analysis
and findings contained the staff report, and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
Buie Corporation
Margarita Village Development Company
First Extension of Time for a residential/commercial
subdivision on 29.3 acres with 348 dwelling units
proposed.
Northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Kaiser
Parkway.
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
S\STAFFRFT~3373VTM.CC 1
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
R-1 (Single-Family Residential)
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
PROPOSED ZONING:
Not requested
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Single Family Residential
West: Vacant
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Commercial Acreage: 7.5
Total Acreage: 29.3
No. of Lots: 8
Residential Acreage: 21.8
Proposed Units: 348
Density: 14.8 D.U./AC
BACKGROUND
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23373 is located within the Margarita Village Specific Plan No.
199. The map as tentatively approved by the County of Riverside in November of 1988. The
City of Temecula Planning Commission recommended approval of the First Extension of Time
on November 4, 1991 by a vote of 5-0.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373 is an application to subdivide 29.3 acres of land into
7 condominium lots with 348 units and a 7.5 acre commercial lot. The project is located at
the northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows Parkway. The project includes
Planning Areas 38 and 39 of the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199. The project is
surrounded on the north, south and west sides by vacant land. To the east is an existing
single-family residential tract.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Issues which were raised by the Planning Commission relative to the project included parkland
and erosion control. The park issue is mitigated as a result of the appropriate condition of
approval for fee payment. Erosion control measures for the proposed project were completed
prior to the item being scheduled for a City Council hearing.
FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY
The current SWAP designation for the proposed map is Specific Plan. The project is in
conformance with Specific Plan No. 199 and therefore wil"l likely be consistent with the City's
future adopted General Plan.
S\STAFFRPT~23373VTM.CC 2
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Riverside County Environmental Assessment No. 32548 was previously adopted for the
proposed project. It is recommended that the City Council re-affirm the previous
environmental assessment.
FINDINGS
e
e
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance
with State law, due to the fact that the project is consistent with existing site
development standards in that it proposes articulated design features and site
amenities commensurate with existing and anticipated residential development
standards.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the
future and adopted general plan, if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan, due to the fact that the project is in conformance with existing and
anticipated land use and design guidelines standards.
The proposed use or action complies with state planning and zoning laws, due to the
fact that the proposed use conforms with those uses listed as "allowed" within the
zoning designation of Specific Plan 199.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access, and density, due to the fact
that; adequate area is provided for all proposed residential structures; adequate
landscaping is provided along the project's public and private frontages; and the
internal circulation plan should not create traffic conflicts as design provisions are in
conformance with adopted City standards.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or
welfare, due to the fact that the conditions stated in the approval are based on
mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate potential adverse impacts of the
project.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because it does
not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the area, due
to the fact that the proposed project is consistent with the current zoning of the
subject site.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the Negative Declaration for the project, due to the fact
that impact mitigation is realized by conformance with the project's Conditions of
Approval.
The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the project currently proposes access
points from Kaiser Parkway which have beed determined to be adequate by the City
Engineer.
S%STAFFRPT~3373VTM.CC 3
10.
The design of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed projects, due to the fact that this is clearly represented
in the site plan and the project analysis.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with this application and herein incorporated by reference, due to the fact
that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, and Conditions of
Approval.
vgw
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Planning Areas 38 and 39 Standards, Specific Plan No. 199 - page 5
Resolution - page 6
Conditions of Approval - page 12
Planning Commission Staff Report - page 16
Exhibits - page 17
Development Fee Check List- page 18
S\STAFFRFT~3373VTM.CC 4
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PLANNING AREAS 38 AND 39 STANDARDS, SPECIRC PLAN NO. 199
S~STAFFRF'r~3373VTM,CC 5
37 ,-- 'p'l ...,,..,.,.t w~..J. Area 38
= dzz/mC) ,. ~Lts .ln,,,'mt-~I L.--aa' ~ be'- 4axi~m~:ad'. f. Dr. Ve~T~. ' '
,crex, Typical' building elevations and
9uidalines a.t~.dspicted inSect-ion rlT. C.2,
h.. T~nd Use and Develv~m.f~L S"csrVl'wrdar-''
Please refer to Or~4nA-eo Xu.- ~48.28a2. (See SF4Pt-'
Plan Zone Ordinance Tab )
Planx~iF~ 5tar~erds
Access into Pq~n-~ng Area 38 will be provided Zrcm &
local access road ru:rnxincJ'-" L..Le,_..,. Plantd. ncJ" 'areas' '3"g
arid 40.
A landscaFedbuffer is planned b_t~.e.~nPlxnn{~gAreas.
38 and 39 to help Se~a'r"--;---~'t:bS_"riri'Rm,e~xT
the adJoinin~ commercial---,--.-'--
A major recreation and a~L~Lt~ ~-.ts' FT,w1"m'e~' in '~'-
Village 'A" adjacent to Plannin~Area 37 to serve the
residents of the retirement community. A variety of
facilities are planned; the center may tnclude.tlnnis
--.courts, lecture halIS, -swimming, and ~ini~g
facilities.
A Major Retirement En=r[-l~gl-u_~_ L._=L~=,,L ia
planned at the entrance to Planning Area 38 on Rancho
California Road. (See Figures III-22 & III-23.) A
Minor Retirement Entry landscape treatment is planned
along Kaiser Parkway. (See Figures III-24 & III-25.)
Building height shall. zu3t -y~--4.a .st:(n-'t--,.. with -a
maximum height of 40 fee~.
Subject to approval by the F~re Chief 'and the
Department of Building and Safety, chimneys and/or·
fireplaces shall be allowed to encroach into sideyards
a maximum of two (2) feet. No other structural
encroachments shall be.p~rmitted in the front, side or
rear yard except as provided for in Section 18.19 of
Ordinance No. 348.2922.
-140-
Pllasw refer 'to ProJe~tde Design and Textual Devel--
qman~'-. 8+m-~-~ds .in .2~-IT.'B,Z., for firrther-lan~
use standards that appZl_ aita-~ida~.
Please refer to Design-~idelines in' Section
design-related crit~-Aa.
--I41-
b. r~fid Use ~nd Development
Please refer to Ordtnan=eNo!. 348.2922. (See Speci=ic.
Plan Zone Ordinance Tab )
c. p1 ann1 ng Standards
Access into Planning Area 39 may be provided from both
Paxncho Californ/~ lXcad:..ausd'~XaJ~er'---'x_,k~..-
Figure I I--30.)
A landscaped buC~er...ia. pls~nedbet~menP1anning~~
38 and 39 to help sep-~+.v;fJxemia.-w~im/.;.Mm~}eg~ma..
the adjoining commer~is3j. umea.---
Please refer to ProJect-Wide~~'.ssn2Textns/:'DevelJ~'
opment Standards in s~-rr.B.2.~ for further land
use standards that apply site-wide.
Please re~erto.-Dee~,.~r~d~t~=e~-'in'~ec~f~n llI, for
design-related criteria.
--142-
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
RESOLUTION NO. 92-,_
S\STAFFRPT'%23373VTM. CC 6
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. 92-_.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA APPROVING THE FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME FOR
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23373 TO SUBDIVIDE
29.3 ACRES INTO 7 LOTS WITH 348 CONDOMINIUM UNITS
AND 1 COMMERCIAL LOT LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND MEADOWS
PARKWAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 923-
210-014·
WHEREAS, The Buie Corporation filed the First Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 23373 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning,
Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map
application was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said First Extension of Time
for Vesting Tentative Tract Map on November 4, 1991, at which time interested persons had
an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map;
WHEREAS, the City Council considered said First Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map on January 14, 1992, at which time interested persons had an
opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing, the Council approved said
Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings.
That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings:
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt
a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted
or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan,
if all of the following requirements are met:
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
plan·
S\STAFFRFI'~3373VTM.CC 7
Bm
The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed
will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(3) The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
The Riverside County General Ran, as amended by the Southwest Area Community
Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the
General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now
within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of its General Plan.
The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the SWAP and meets the
requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
A. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion With a preparation of the general plan.
The City Council finds, in approving projects and taking other actions, including
the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the following:
(1)
There is reasonable probability that the First Extension of Time for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373 proposed will be consistent
with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which will
be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be
approved unless the following findings are made:
That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and
specific plans.
That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
S%STAFFRFT~3373VTM.CC 8
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of
development.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
proposed density of the development.
That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not
likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and
unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are
not likely to cause serious public health problems.
That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements will
not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through,
or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be
approved if it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will be
provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously
acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record
or to easements established by judgment 0f a court of competent jurisdiction.
The Council in approving the proposed First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map, makes the following findings, to wit:
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the
City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in
accordance with State law, due to the fact that the project is consistent with
existing site development standards in fiat it proposes articulated design
features and site amenities commensurate with existing and anticipated
residential development standards.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with
the future and adopted general plan, if the !proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact that the project is in conformance
with existing and anticipated land use and design guidelines standards.
The proposed use or action complies with state planning and zoning laws, due
to the fact that the proposed use conforms with those uses listed as "allowed"
within the zoning designation of Specific Plan 199.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size
and shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access, and density,
due to the fact that; adequate area is provided for all proposed residential
structures; adequate landscaping is provided along the project's public and
private frontages; and the internal circulation plan should not create traffic
conflicts as design provisions are in conformance with adopted City standards.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public
health or welfare, due to the fact that the conditions stated in the approval are
based on mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate potential
S\STAFFRPT~3373VTM. CC 9
adverse impacts of the project.
Fe
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because
it does not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of
the area, due to the fact that the proposed project is consistent with the
current zoning of the subject site.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or
natural environment as determined in the Negative Declaration for the project,
due to the fact that impact mitigation is realized by conformance with the
project's Conditions of Approval.
The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open
to, and us.able by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the project currently
proposes access points from Kaiser Parkway which have been determined to
be adequate by the City Engineer.
The design of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the resulting
street layout are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access
through or use of the property within the proposed projects, due to the fact
that this is clearly represented in the site plan and the project analysis.
Je
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental
documents associated with this application and her.in incorporated by
reference, due to the fact that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report,
Exhibits, and Conditions of Approval.
As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the First Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the proposed project could
have a significant impact on the environment. there will not be a significant effect in this case
because the mitigation measures described in the Conditions of Approval have been added to
the project, and the Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby reaffirmed.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves the First Extension of Time Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 23373 for the subdivision of 29.3 acres into 348 condominium units
and 1 commercial lot located at the northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Meadows
Parkway and known as Assessor's Parcel no. 923-210-014 subject to the following
conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
S\$TAFFRPT~23373VTM. CC 10
SECTION 4.
The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of January, 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDSALL
MAYOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the
City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 14th day of January, 1992 by the
following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
JUNE S. GREEK
CITY CLERK
$\$TAFFRPT'~3373VTM. CC I 1
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S%STAFFRPT~?3373V'TM.CC I 2
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373
First Extension of Time
Commission Approval Date: November 4, 1991
Expiration Date:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Unless previously paid, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall
comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 663 by paying the appropriate fee set
forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by Ordinance
No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as
implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential lot/unit within the
project boundary until the developer's successor's-in-interest provides evidence of
compliance with public facility financing measureS. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars
($100) per lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library
development.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and
shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency· All questions regarding the true
meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department
of Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer has correctly shown on the tentative map all existing
easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project
to be resubmitted for further review.
The Developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval as previously imposed or amended
and with the Conditions noted below.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, ar~y subdivision which is part
of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section.
S\STAFFRPl'~3373Vl'M.CC 13
Delete condition no. 15 of Riverside County Road Commissioner letter dated September 22,
1988 and replace it with the following:
Prior to recordat,on of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department
of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards traffic signal
impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal
mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said
payment to the time of issuance of a building permit.
An erosion control and slope protection plan shall be submitted to the Department of
Public Works for review and approval. The installation shall be certified by a registered
Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and site conditions shall be maintained to
protect adjacent properties from damage due to runoff and erosion. Developer shall
post a performance bond for erosion control and slope protection in an amount
approved by the Department of Public Works.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area
Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is
payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If the full Area
Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to this property, no new
charge needs to be paid.
As deemed necessary by the department of Public Works, the developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control District;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department; and
CATV Franchise.
Community Services District
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent
to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street
improvements.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an
encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to
any other permits required.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT:
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed
upon the property of project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as
required for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time
S\STAFFRFT~23373VTM.CC 14
of payment of fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not
been finally established by the date on which developer requests its building permits
for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute the Agreement for
payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to developer.
Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post security to secure
payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount' of the security shall be ~2.00 per
square foot, not to exceed ~ 10,000. Developer understands that said Agreement may
require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will
waive any right to protest the provisions from this Condition, of this Agreement, the
formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any
traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; orovided that developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
10.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C.
pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior
public streets.
11.
All street improvements striping, marking and signing shall be installed to the
satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
12.
Traffic striping, marking and street name signing plans shall be designed as directed
by the Department of Public Works.
13.
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer for any street cllosure and detour or other disruption
to traffic circulation as required by the City Engineer.
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT:
14.
Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant or his assignee shall pay the fair
market value of 4.07 acres of required parkland to comply with City Ordinance No.
460.93 (Quimby). The amount to be paid shall be determined by TCSD staff within
thirty (30) days prior to recordation of said map.
15.
Exterior slopes bordering an arterial street may be dedicated to the TCSD for
maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards and completion of the
application process.
$\STAFFRPT~23373VTM. CC 15
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
S\STAFFI~3373VTM.CC 16
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 4, 1991
Case No.: First Extension of Time Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff Recommends that the Planning
Commission:
ADOPT Resolution 91-__ Recommending that the City Council
APPROVE the First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract
No. 23373, contingent upon the implementation of corrective
grading and erosion control measures to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer prior to the City Council approval, based on the
Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report, and subject
to the attached Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Buie Corporation
REPRESENTATIVE:
Margarita Village Development Company
PROPOSAL:
First Extension of Time for a residential/commercial
subdivision on 30 acres with 348 dwelling units
proposed.
LOCATION:
Northwest corner of Rancho California Road and Kaiser
Parkway.
EXISTING ZONING:
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
R-1 (Single-Family Residential)
Specific Plan 199 (Margarita Village)
PROPOSED ZONING:
Not requested
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant
Single Family Residential
Vacant
S\STAFFRFr~3373.VTM
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND
Total Acreage: 30
No. of Lots: 8
Residential Acreage: 23.5
Proposed Units: 348
Density: 14.8 D.U./AC
Commercial Acreage: 7.5
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23373 as originally approved by the Riverside County Board of
Supervisors on November 8, 1988. The First Extension of Time was filed in October of 1990.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23373 is a portion of Specific Plan No. 199, Margarita Village.
The Tentative Map includes Planning Areas 38 and 39.
Planning Area 38 is a 7 lot subdivision on 23.5 acres. Three hundred forty eight condominium
units are proposed. The density of the resident project portion will be 14.8 dwelling units per
acre. Planning Area 39 is a 7.5 acre commercial lot. The proposed lot will provide
neighborhood commercial and retail facilities, as identified in the Specific Plan. A plot plan
will be required when development is proposed.
FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY
The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the approved Specific Plan No.
199. The Southwest Area Plan designation for this project is Specific Plan. It is likely that
this project will be consistent with the future adopted General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 202 was previously adopted by Riverside County for
Specific Plan No. 199. Staff has determined that said EIR still applies to this subdivision.
FINDINGS
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the City's
future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and in accordance
with State law, due to the fact that the project is consistent with existing site
development standards in that it proposes articulated design features and site
amenities commensurate with existing and anticipated residential development
standards.
e
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the
future and adopted general plan, if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan, due to the fact that the project is in conformance with existing and
anticipated land use and design guidelines standards.
The proposed use or action complies with state planning and zoning laws, due to the
fact that the proposed use conforms with those uses listed as "allowed" within the
zoning designation of Specific Plan 199.
S\STAFFRFT~3373.Vl'M 2
10.
11.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land-use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access, and density, due to the fact
that; adequate area is provided for all proposed residential structures; adequate
landscaping is provided along the project's public and private frontages; and the
internal circulation plan should not create traffic conflicts as design provisions are in
conformance with adopted City standards.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or
welfare, due to the fact that the conditions stated in the approval are based on
mitigation measures necessary to reduce or eliminate potential adverse impacts of the
project.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373 is compatible with surrounding land uses. The
harmony in scale, bulk, height, density and coverage creates a compatible physical
relationship with adjoining properties, due to the fact that the proposal is similar in
compatibility with surrounding land uses; and adequate area and design features
provide for siting of proposed development in terms of landscaping and internal traffic
circulation.
'l'lle proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property because it does
not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the area, due
to the fact that the proposed project is consistent with the current zoning of the
subject site.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the EIR for the project, due to the fact that impact
mitigation is realized by conformance with the project's Conditions of Approval.
The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the project currently proposes access
points from Kaiser Parkway which have been determined to be adequate by the City
Engineer.
The design of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed projects, due to the fact that this is clearly represented
in the site plan and the project analysis.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with is application and herein incorporated by reference, due to the fact
that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, and Conditions of
Approval.
S\STAFFRPT~23373.VTM 3
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
vgw
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
The Planning Department Staff Recommends that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution 91- Recommending that the City
Council APPROVE the First Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 23373, contingent upon the
implementation of corrective grading and erosion control
measures to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to
the City Council approval, based on the Analysis and
Findings contained in the staff report, and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
Resolution - page 5
Conditions of Approval - page 10
Staff Report-County of Riverside - page 14
Exhibits - page 15
S\STAFFRPT~3373.VTM 4
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-__
S\STAFFRPT~3373.VTM 5
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-108
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME
FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 23373-A 8 LOT RESIDENTIAL AND
COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION ON 31 ACRES AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 923-210-014.
WHEREAS, The Buie Corporation filed the Time Extension in accordance with
the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City
has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Time Extension application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Time Extension on
November 4, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommlnded approval of said Time Extension.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Findings
That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings:
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt
a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted
or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan,
if all of the following requirements are met:
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
plan.
The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that the Time Extension proposed will
be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied
or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
S\STAFFRPT%23373 .VTM 6
(3) The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community
Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the
General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now
within the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its
General Plan guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of its General Plan.
The proposed Time Extension is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements
set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general
plan.
The Planning Commission finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of the
following:
(1)
There is reasonable probability that the Time Extension proposed will be
consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or
which will be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(3) The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no Time Extension may be approved unless the following
findings can be made:
The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and with
all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances.
The proposed subdivision does not affect the general health, safety, and
welfare of the public.
The Planning Commission, in recommending approval of the proposed Time
Extension, makes the following findings, to wit:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with
the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable
time and in accordance with State law, due'to the fact that the project
is consistent with existing site development standards in that it
proposes articulated design features and site amen,ties commensurate
with existing and anticipated residential development standards.
S\STAFFRP~3373,VTM 7
(2)
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or
interference with the future and adopted general plan, if the proposed
use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to the fact
that the project is in conformance with existing and anticipated land use
and design guidelines standards.
(3)
The proposed use or action complies with state planning and zoning
laws, due to the fact that the proposed use conforms with those uses
listed as "allowed" within the zoning designation of Specific Ran 199.
(4)
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of
the size and shape of the lot configuration, circulation patterns, access,
and density, due to the fact that; adequate area is provided for all
proposed residential structures; adequate landscaping is provided along
the project's public and private frontages; and the internal circulation
plan should not create traffic conflicts as design provisions are in
conformance with adopted City standards.
(5)
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the
public health or welfare, due to the fact that the conditions stated in the
approval are based on mitigation measures necessary to reduce or
eliminate potential adverse impacts of the project.
(6)
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property
because it does not represent a significant change to the present or
planned land use of the area, due to the fact that the proposed project
is consistent with the current zoning of the subject site.
(7)
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the
built or natural environment as determined in the EIR for the project, due
to the fact that impact mitigation is realized by conformance with the
project's Conditions of Approval.
(8)
The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is
open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the
project currently proposes access points from Kaiser Parkway which
have been determined to be adequate by the City Engineer.
(9)
The design of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the
resulting street layout are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the property within the
proposed projects, due to the fact that this is clearly represented in the
site plan and the project analysis.
(10)
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and
environmental documents associated with is application and herein
incorporated by reference, due to the fact that they are referenced in the
attached Staff Report, Exhibits, and Conditions of Approval.
As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 2, the Time Extension proposed conforms to the
logical development of its proposed site, and is compatible with the present and future
development of the surrounding property.
S\STAFFRPT~23373.VTM 8
SECTION II. Environmental Compliance.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby determines that the previous
environmental determination Adoption of EIR No. 202 still applies to said Tract Map
(Extension of Time).
SECTION III. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council
approve the First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373 for an 8 Lot
residential and commercial subdivision on 30 acres and known as a portion of Assessor's
Parcel No. 923-210-014 subject to the following conditions:
1. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION IV.
_ P~A. SSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of November, 1991.
JOHN E. HOAGLAND
'-,-' .,, ,' i, '!= CHAIRMAN.
........ ,I HE~REBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 4th
day of November 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES: 5
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONER
S\STAFFRPT~3373.VTM 9
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S\STAFFRPT'~3373,VTM 10
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23373
First Extension of Time
Commission Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Unless previously paid, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall
comply with the provisions of Ordinance No. 66;3 by paying the appropriate fee set
forth in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions
of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fee required by Ordinance
No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as
implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
e
No building permits shall be issued by the City for any residential lot/unit within the
project boundary until the developer's successor's-in-interest provides evidence of
compliance with public facility financing measures. A cash sum of one-hundred dollars
(~100) per lot/unit shall be deposited with the City as mitigation for public library
development.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and
shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true
meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department
of Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer has correctly shown on the tentative map all existing
easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project
to be resubmitted for further review·
The Developer shall comply with all Conditions of Approval as previously imposed or amended
and with the Conditions noted below.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part
of an existing Assessment District must comply with the requirements of said section.
S\STAFFRPT~3373.VTM I 1
Delete condition no. 15 of Riverside County Road Commissioner letter dated September 22,
1988 and replace it with the following:
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department
of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards traffic signal
impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal
mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said
payment to the time of issuance of a building permit.
An erosion control and slope protection plan shall be submitted to the Department of
Public Works for review and approval. The installation shall be certified by a registered
Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and site conditions shall be maintained to
protect adjacent properties from damage due to runoff and erosion. Developer shall
post a performance bond for erosion control and slope protection in an amount
approved by the Department of Public Works.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area
Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is
payable to the Flood Control District prior to issuance of permits. If the full Area
Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to this property, no new
charge needs to be paid.
As deemed necessary by the department of Public Works, the developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control District;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department; and
CATV Franchise.
Community Services District
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent
to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards at time of street
improvements.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an
encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in addition to
any other permits required.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT:
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed
upon the property of project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as
required for the project. The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time
of payment of fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or district has not
been finally established by the date on which developer requests its building permits
for the project or any phase thereof, the developer shall execute the Agreement for
payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been provided to developer.
S\STAFFRPT~23373.VTM 12
Concurrently, with executing this Agreement, developer shall post security to secure
payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount of the security shall be e2.00 per
square foot, not to exceed ~ 10,000. Developer understands that Said Agreement may
require the payment of fees in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement, developer will
waive any right to protest the provisions from this Condition, of this Agreement, the
formation of any traffic impact fee district, or the process, levy, or collection of any
traffic mitigation or traffic impact fee for this project; provided that developer is not
waiving its right to protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and the
amount thereof.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
10.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C.
pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights on all interior
public streets.
11.
All street improvements striping, marking and signing shall be installed to the
satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
12.
Traffic striping, marking and street name signing plans shall be designed as directed
by the Department of Public Works.
13.
A construction area traffic control plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer for any street closure and detour or other disruption
to traffic circulation as required by the City Engineer.
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT:
14.
Prior to recordation of the final map the applicant or his assignee shall pay the fair
market value of 4.07 acres of required parkland to comply with City Ordinance No.
460.93 (Quimby). The amount to be paid shall be determined by TCSD staff within
thirty (30) days prior to recordation of said map.
15.
Exterior slopes bordering an arterial street may be dedicated to the TCSD for
maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards and completion of the
application process.
S\$TAFFRPT~3373.VTM 13
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
STAFF REPORT- COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
S\STAFFRFT~23373.VTM 14 '
PL,tnnih - " '
' "' --/--'" · ~...' '--.J · ~ 4
DEPA:I ITIEfi[
DATE:
November 23, 1988
RE:
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23373 A~d. 1
E. A. NLNBER: 32548'
REGIONAL TEA~ NO. ~peciflc Plans Leam
Dear Appltcant: :
The, Riverside County Board of SJpervtsors has taken the followin action the above
referenced tentative tract map at its regular meeting of November i) on
, 1988 .
x- APPROVED tentative map subject to the attached conditions.
- '-DENIED tentative map based on attached findings..
"' ";"!':~:' APPROVED 'Withdrawalb.of. tentative maP."-.':"'i:'-: .,....:.c .... :.
.-- .. -~ . -. . . . ..,
The tract. map has been-found to be consistent with all pertinent elements of the
Riverside. County' General.-Plan.- and. ts'-.tn canpltance~'wtth the California Environmental
QJaltty Act of 1970. ~e p, uJe.;t will' not have a significant effect on 'the environment
and 'a. Negative Declare' ion'has ~Je dopted..: -
' C'onditionally'appr" t 'v;.ta: ac 'map·'s all expire' months after the approVa at
Prior..-to: the expiration d -' ' ~w(jtVJ/z'aIpp '- · ' g for an- extensicrx, of
time. · '. Application shall ' ' e. Plan~rt ' ' (30) days prior t~ .Che
Very truly.-y~urs.
· RIVERSIDE 'COUNT~. "PUNNING DEPARTMENT
.. Roger. S. Streeter. Planning Director
RG:mp ' Ron ~oldman. Principal Plann'er
FILE- WHITE
APPLICANT- CANARY
ENGINEER- PZNK
295-3) (~,4v. 10/S3)
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
FROM: Planning Department SUBMIllALDATE: November 8, 1988 :"/' "": ~'
SUBJECT: VESTING TENTATIVE and TENTATIVE TRACTS located in the
Margartta Village Specific Plan (SP 199 Amendment No. 1) - First
and Third $upervisorial Districts - Rancho California Zoning Area.
RECOMMENDEl) MOTION:
- Receive and File the Planning Comtsston action of 9-28-88 and.
10-5-88 for ·
y
APPROVAL of Vesting Tentative Tracts 23371 Amended No. 1, 23372:
Amended No. 1, 23373 Amended Nd. 1, 23470 and 23471 and *Tracts
22915, 22916, 23100 Amended No;" 1, 2310Z, 23102° and 23103 Amended
No. 1. ,
, P1 anning or
i ~" · ' :'*'
, Prey. Agn. ref-
Depts. Comments
Dist. AGENDA h
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 1988
(AGENDA ITEMS 5-2, 5-3, 5-4 - REEL 1003, SIDE I - TAPE 6, SIDE 1)
VESTING TRACT MAP 23373 AMENDED NO. I - EA 32548 - Margarita Village
Oevelopment Company - Rancho California Area - First/Third Supervisoria)
DIstricts - south of Rancho California Rd, west of Kaiser Parkway - 348
units - 31~ acres - SP 199 Zone. Schedule A
VESTING TRACT MAP 23371 AMENDED NO. 1 - EA 32546 - Margartta Vtllage
Development Company - Rancho California Area - First/Third SupervtsoNal
Districts - north of Rancho California Rd, east of Margartta Rd - 1183 units -
398, acres - SP 199 Zone. Schedule A
VESTZNG TRACT 23372 AMENDED NO. I - EA 32547 - Margartta Village Development
Company - Rancho California Ares - First/Third Supervisortel Districts - north
of Rancho California Rd, west of Kaiser Parkway - 469 units on 66 lots - 44~
acres - SP 199 Zone. Schedule A
The heartngs were opened at 6:50 p.m. and closed at 7:11 p.m.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adoption of the negative declarations for EA 32548, EA
32546, and EA 32547, approval of Vesting Tract ~ps 23373 Amended No. 1, 23371
Amended No. I and 23372 Amended No. 1, all subject to the proposed conditions.
Ms. Gtfford also recommended approval of a waiver of the length to width ratio
for Vesting Tract 23371 Amended No. 1. The subject tract maps were located
within Village A of the Margarita Village Specific Plan, and would create 1763
residential lots and a golf course on 254 acres. Staff had found the tract
maps to be consistent with the adopted specific plan. Ms. Gtfford recommended
several changes to the conditions of approval. Commissioner Purrlance asked
about a fiscal impact report, and was informed this report had been furnished
recently for Amendment No. I to the specific plan.
aim Resney, representing the applicant, briefly reviewed the development,
advising they were proposing a state-of-the-art adult retirement community
which included a championship golf course with a 37,000 square foot clubhouse
facility in the center of the project. He then referred to Condition 33{f)
for all three tract maps, which required front yards to be provided with
landscaping and automatic lrrlga(ion, and requested that this requirement
deleted for larger lots, as it was his opinion that these homeowners would
prefer to do their own landscaping. The CC&Rs would require them to comply
with specific standards. Mr. Resney requested that this condition be amended
by adding to the end "or shall be installed within 75 days after close of
escrow as provided in the CC&Rs in the 45x100 square foot lot areas'.
Road Department Condition 21 for Tract Map 23371 and Condition 14 for the
other two tract maps required a debris retention wall where block walls were
required at the top of slopes. Mr. Resney requested that thts condition be
amended by adding: "If applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
Road Commissioner that a Master Homeowners Association or other entity will
satisfactorily maintain the slopes, the Road Commissioner may, at his option,
waive this requirement of a debris retention wall." He thought that if they
could convince the Road Commissioner that there would be no silting problems
and that the slopes would be maintained, the debris retention wall would not
53
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 1988
be needed. For aesthetic reasons. he felt it would be better not to have the
small wall.
Road Department Condition 22 for Tract 23372 and Condition 15 for the other
two tract maps related to the minimum 30 foot garage setback from face Of
curb. Hr. Resney felt this condition conflicted with the specific plan
develo merit standards which allowed 16 foot driveways with roll up doors,
setbac~ either from the back of curb or the back of sidewalk. He would prefer
to have the specific plan standards applied, but requested that the hearings
not be continued.
Lee Johnson advised the slump wall delineated in Road Department Condition 21
was a wall they had been requiring for the past three or four years when the
Planntng Department required a block wall at the top of a slope, Depending on
the size of the slope, the Road Department Design Engineer could require a two
block high wall at the property line to keep the debris washing down the slope
from crossing the sidewalk, They would be wt11Ing to consider any other
alternative the developer might suggest, as long as it accomplished the
purpose of this condition, He requested that this condition be retained,
Commissioner Donehoe asked whether adding to the end 'or as approved by the
Road Department" would give the developer the opportunity to provide an
alternative plan, and Hr, Johnson agreed that it would,
Mr. Johnson advised the garage setback required by Road Department Condition
22 for Tract 23371 (Condition 15 for Tracts 23372 and 23373) was the minimum
setback required by Ordinance 460. He had read the language requested by the
applicant, but would prefer to retain the condition as originally proposed in
the Road Department letter. Mr. Resney explained they had been discussing the
possibility of providing a 4 foot sidewalk, and would llke to have a 24 foot
setback rather than the 26 foot setback required by this condition. However,
if the Road Department preferred the existing language, they would accept it.
Mr. Johnson advised the condition would not alter ~he width of the sidewalk in
any way. ,.
Comtsstoner Beadling referred t~Hr, Resney's request ~hat front yard land-
scaping and Irrigation not .be required for the larger lots, and stated she
felt they should be required for all lots, Nr, Goldman requested.that the
condition be retained as originally written,:
There was no further testimony, and the hearing was closed at 7:11 p.m.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Vesting Tentative Tract Maps 23371 Amended No. 1,
23372Amended No. I and 23373AmendedNo. I are located within Village A of
the Margarita Village Specific Plan (No, 199); the three tract maps will
'provide 1763 dwelling units and a golf course on 254 acres; Tract 23372
Amended No. I has been condttloned with the specific plan's condition of
approval to mitigate impacts to the Stephens Kangaroo Rat habitat; the tracts
have been conditioned to comply with Specific Plan 199, Change of Zone Case
5107, and Development Agreement No. 5; and a waiver of the lot length to width
ratio will be needed for Vesting Tentative Tract 23371 Amended No. 1. All
environmental concerns have been addressed in EIRs 107, 202, and the initial
54
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 5, 1988
studies for these tract maps, and no significant impacts have been found; the
Change of Zone Case 5107, and Specific Plan 199 Amendment No. 1;
and confom to the requirements of Ordinances 460 and 348. The proposed
project will not have a significant effect on the environment.
#
MOTION: Upon motion by Conntssioner Donehoe, seconded by Commissioner Bresson
and unanimously carried, the Cormnisston adopted the negative declarations for
EA 32546, EA 32547 and EA 32548, and approved Vesting Tentative Tract Maps
23371 Amended No. I with a waiver of the lot length to width ratio, 23372
Amended No. 1, and 23373 Amended No. 1, all subject to the proposed conditions
amended as follows, based on the above findings and conclusions and the
reconanendations of staff.
Tract No. 23371
9 - Amend to reflect the September 30, 1988 Road Department letter.
23(~) and 23(3) - Amend to require the developer to comply with the parkway
, landscaping requirements as shown in Specific Plan No..199
Amended No. I unless maintenance is provided by a
homeowners association or other public entity.
26 - Delete the last sentence ("The final map for Vesting Tract 23371 shall
show the park as a'numbered lot').
33(c) - Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the
subdivision, except for the clubhouse which may have screened
equipment as approved by the Planning Department; however, solar
equipment or any other energy saving devices shall be permitted with
Planning Department approval.
Condition 34(a) for Tracts 23371, 23372, and 33(a) for Tract 23373
Add 'and may be phased with the project'. (to clarify that walls may be
phased with the development of the tract.
Condition 33(d) for Tracts 23371 and 23372, and 32(d) for Tract 23373
Building separation between all buildings including fireplaces shall not be
less than ten feet unless approved by the Department'of Building and Safety
and'the Fire Department per Specific Plan 199 Amended No. 1.
34(e) for Tracts 23371, 23372 and 33(e) for Tract 23373 - Delete
Road Department Condition 21 for Tract 23371 and 14 for Tracts 23372 and 23373
Add to the end "or as approved by the Road Department"
55
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 28, 1988
(AGENDA ITEM 1-2 - REEL 1002 - SIDE 1 - TAPE 1 SIDE 1)
TRACT MAP 23100 AMENDED I t Corp. Rancho
NO. - EA 32318 - Mar borough Dev. -
California/Skinner Lake Area - First and Third Supervisorial Districts - west
of Butterfield Stage Rd, north of Rancho California Rd - 291 lots - 122.5,
acres - R-1/SP Zones. Schedule A
TRACT MAP 23101 - EA 32533 - Harlborough Dev. Corp. - Rancho
California/Skinner Lake Area - First and Third Supervtsorial Districts - east
of Kaiser Pkwy, west of Butterfield Stage Rd - 263 lots - 87, acres -
SP/R-2-6000 Zones. Schedule A
TRACT I~ 23102 - EA 32534 - Marlborough Dev.' Corp. - Rancho
California/Skinner Lake Area - First and Third Supervtsortal Districts - north
of La Serena Way, west of Butterfield Stage Rd - 37 lots - 16.4, acres -
SP/R-1 Zones. Schedule A
TRACT NAP 23103 AMENDED NO. I - EA 32535 - Marlborough Dev. Corp. - Rancho
California/Skinner Lake Area - First and Third Supervtsorial Districts - west
of Butterfield Stage Rd, north of Rancho California Rd - 18 lots - 29~ acres -
SP/R-A-1 Zones. Schedule A
The hearings were opened at 9:49 a.m. and closed at 10:08 a.m.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adoption of the negative declarations for EA 32318,
32533, 32534 and 32535, and approval of Tentative Tract Maps 23100 Amended
No. 1, 23101, 23102, and 23103 Amended No. 1 with a waiver of the lot length
to width ratio, subject to the proposed conditions. The subject tract maps
were located within Village B of the Margarita Village Specific Plan, and
would divide the 254 acres into 605 residential lots. Staff had found the
tract maps to be consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan, Specific Plan
lg9 Amendment No. 1, and the zoning which had been applied to the specific
d
plan through Change of Zone Case 5107. Ms. Gtffor recommended several
changes to the conditions for these tract maps, relating to requirements for
maintenance of the open space areas, park requirements, useable yard areas.,
and fencing requirements. fir. Klotz suggested modifying the last condition
for each tract map by beginning with the phrase 'Development of the'.
Commissioner Bresson requested that changes be made throughout to refer to
either 'public use trails' or 'recreational trails' instead of :"equestrian
trails'; he felt these terms would more accurately describe their use.
Barry Burnell, representing the applicant, accepted the conditions as
amended. It was his understanding that in the event any portion of the
development agreement was held to be invalid {for any reason), the conditions
requiring compliance with that agreement would be null and'void; this was
confirmed by County Counsel.
There was no further testimony, and the hearings were closed at 10:08 a.m.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Tentative Tract Maps 23100 Amended No. 1, 23101,
23102, and 23103 Amended No. 1 are located wit,in Village B of the Margarita
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING CONMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 28, 1988
Village Specific Plan; the four tract maps would divide the 254 acres into 605
residential lots; the tract maps have been condtttoned in accordance with the
specific plan's conditions of approval to mitigate impacts on the Stephens
Kangaroo Rat; the tract maps have been condttiOned to comply with Specific
Plan 199 Amendment No. 1, Change of Zone Case 5107, and Development Agreement
No. 5; a waiver for the lot length to width ratio will be needed for Tract
23103 Amended No. 1. All environmental concerns have been addressed in EIR
107, EIR 202, and the initial studies for these tract maps, and no significant
impacts have been found; the tract maps are consistent with the Comprehensive
General Plan (as amended by General Plan Amendment No. 150), Specific Plan 199
Amendment No. I and Change of Zone Case 5107; the tract maps conform to the
requirements of Ordinances 348 and 460. The proposed projects will not have a
significant effect on the environment.
HOTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Bresson, seconded by Commissioner
Beadltng and unanimously cartted, the Commission adopted the negative
declarations for EA 32318, EA 32533, EA32534 and EA 32535, and approved'
Tentative Tract Naps 23100 Amended No. 1, 2310t, 23102, and 23103 Amended
No. I with a waiver of the lot length to width ratio, subject to the proposed
conditions, amended as follows, based on the above findings and conclusions
and the recommendations of staff.
Tract Map 23100 Amended No. 1
21
3e
Amend to conform to Condition 24 (to provide for maintenance of the
common open space area by either a County Service Area or a Homeowners
Association).
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for 160 units on Tract
23100, the park area shall be developed per Spectftc Plan No. Amended
No. 1.
4 ·
Replace with the standard alternative condition providing for
maintenance of the con,on open space area by either a County Service
Area or Homeowners Assocta(ion. ·
37(b) Wall and/or fence locations shall substantially conform to attached
Figure III-28 of Specific Plan No.:lggAmendment No. 1.
88
The development of Tentative Tract No. 23100 Amended No. 1 shall
comply with all provisions of Specific Plan No, 199 Amendment No, I and
Development Agreement No, 5
Tract Nap 23101
17(h) Rear yards and useable side yards shall have an average flat area of
2000 square feet.
22.
Amend to conform to Condition 24 (to provide for maintenance of the
cc~..n~n open space area by either a County Service Area or a Homeowners
Association).
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTE]~BER 28, 1988
3o
Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for 160 units on Tract
23101, the park area shall be developed per Specific Plan No. Amended
No. 1.
Replace with the standard alternative condition providing for
maintenance of the common open space area by either a County Service
Area or Homeowners Association.
37(b) Wall and/or fence locations shall substantially confom to attached
Figure III-28 of Specific Plan No. 199Amendment No, 1,
38. The development of Tentative Tract No. 23101 shall comply with all
sN 5
Tract Hap 23102
Amend to confom with Condition 33 (to provide for maintenance of the
common open space area by either a County Service Area or a Homeowners
i
Associat on.
3e
Replace with the standard alternative condition providing for
maintenance of the common open space area by either a County Service
Area or Homeowners Association.
35(b) Wall and/or fence locations shall substantially conform to attached
Figure III-28 of Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1.
36. The development of Tentative Tract No. 23102 shall comply with all
sN 5
Tract Map 23103 Amended No. I
21. Amend to confom to Condition 22 (to provide for maintenance of the
2.
common open. space area by either a County Service Area or a Homeowners
Association.
,,
Replace with the standard alternative condition providing for
maintenance-of the common open space area by either a County Service
Area or Homeowners Association.
34(a) Wall and/or fence locations shall substantially confom to attached
Figure III-28 of Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1.
The development of Tentative Tract No. 23103 Amended No. I shall
comply with all provisions of Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. I and
Development Agreement No. 5
4
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 28, 1988
(AGENDA ITEMS 1-3 ANO 1-4 - REEL 1002, SIDE I - TAPE 1, SIDE 1)
TRACT MA~ 22915 - F.A 32505 - Rancho California Dev. Co. - Rancho California
Area - First ~upervisortal District - north of Pauba Rd, west of Butterfield
Stage Rd - 25g lots - 103.3~ acres - R-R/SP Zones. Schedule A
TRACT HAP 22915 - EA 32504 - Rancho California Dev. Co. - Rancho California
Area - First Supervisortel District - south of Rancho Vista Rd, west of
Butterfield Stage Rd - 287 lots - 91.6~ acres - R-R/SP Zones. Schedule A
VESTING TRACT HAP 23471 - EA 32518 - Kaiser Development Co. - Rancho
California Area - First Supervisortel Dtstrtct- south of Rancho California
Rd, west of Katser Pkwy - 155 lots - 44~ acres - R-1/SP Zones. Schedule A
VESTING TRACT HAP 23470 - EA 32517 - Kaiser Development Co. - Rancho
California Area - First Supervisorial District - north of Rancho Vista Rd,
west of Kaiser Pkwy - 325 lots - 106.3 acres - R-1/SP Schedule A
The hearings were opened at 10:10 a.m. and closed at 11:10 a.m.
STAFF REC(IdMENDATION: Adoption of the negative declarations for EA 32517, EA
32518, EA 32504, and EA 32505 and approval of Tentative Tract Naps 22915 and
22916, and Vesting Tentative Tract Naps 23470 and 23471 subject to the
proposed conditions, and a waiver of the lot length to width ratio for all
four tract maps. These four tract maps were located in Village C of Specific
Plan 199 Amendment No. 1, and would divide the 345 acres into 1020 residential
lots, provide a 10 acre school site, a 5 acre park site and 3 tot lots. Staff
had found the proposed maps to be consistent with the Comprehensive General
Plan, the adopted specific plan, and the zoning which had been applied to the
property through Chan e of Zone Case 5107. Hs. Gtfford recommended several
changes to the conditVons of approval; these changes related to the minimum
lot size, lot length to width ratio requirements, park requirements,
landscaping/irrigation requirements, and a requirement for development of the
tract maps in accordance with the adopted specific plan and approved
development agreement.
Commissioner Beadling questioned Hs. Gtfford's recommendation for deletion of
the conditions for Tract Naps 23470, 22915 and 22916 requiring landscaping and
Irrigation. Ms. Gtfford explained these three tentative maps roposed mtntmum
7200 square foot lots and the County did not normally requtre ~andscaptng and
irrigation for lots of this stze. Mr. Streeter felt thts condition could be
retained, as it was County policy to require landscaping and Irrigation for
7200 square foot ]ors in the Rancho California area.
Robert Ktmble, representing the applicant, advised they would prefer not to
provide the frontyard landscaping and irrigation, and requested that the
condition be deleted. Commissioner Beadling asked whether Mr. Ktmble had seen
the letter submitted by ~. and Mrs. Pipher objecting to the density proposed
in the area adjacent to their estate type homes. At her request, Mr. Kimble
located Mr. Pipher's subdivision which was next to Rancho Vista Road. They
h
were proposing the 7200 square foot lots allowed by the specific plan for t is
area. Hs. Gifford advised the tract map was a refiling of a previously
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 28, 1988
approved map, and there was no change in the density; the proposed tract map
was within the density range allowed by the specific plan. Commissioner
Beadling quoted from the letter, which requested that the density be reduced
to the density originally proposed by the specific plan. She wanted to know
what this density was, and was informed there had been no change in the
density.
Mr. Kimble requested that Condition 4 of the Flood Control Distrtct's letter
for Tract 23471 be deleted. This condition required maintenance ramps in the
this channel for their underlying map with 4:1 slopes. Nr. ~o a to the
deletion of this condition. ~r. Kimble then requested that Road Department
Condition 26 for Tract 22915 and Condition 28 for Tract 22916 be amended by
adding to the end 'or as approved by the Road Commissioner"; Hr. Johnson
agreed to this change for both tract maps.
Condition 20 for Tract 22916 required the park to be fully improved and
developed prior to the issuance of building permits for 150 units, and
Kimble requested that this condition be amended to require the ark prior to
the issuance of occupancy for the 259th lot. Providing the fulVy improved
park prior to 150 units would be a burden to the developer. Ms. Gifford
advised Mr. Ktmble's request would delay completion of the park until after
the entire tract had been completed; staff felt 150 units would afford the
applicant an opportunity to build some units, and at that point the improve-
ments could be tied into road improvements. The park would also be useful for
the tract to the north, which was being developed by the same developer.
Mr. Kimble requested clarification of the new condition staff had sug ested
for Tract 22916 regarding mitigation for the Stephens Kangaroo Rat. ~r.
Goldman explained this condition referred back to the specific plan condi-
tions, which required either a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department
of Fish and Game or that the applicant comply with the Countywide program
being established by Riverside County.
Robert Oudonay, also representing the applicant, advised he was actively
involved with the task force appointed by the Board of Supervisors regarding
the Stephens Kangaroo Rot program. There was no set pro ram at the present
time, and he wanted to know whether they would be ch)rg~ the $750 per lot
feet or whether they would be held up until !a specific program was estab-
lished. He did not want to be dela ed, as they would be read to pull build-
ing permits within the next few wa~{s.. Mr. ~otz explained i~e Board had
generally endorsed the concept of having a developer'make a deposit of $750
per lot, accompanied by an agreement to pay the fee as ultimately adopted;
this would allow the project to go forward. He felt this option would be
available to the developer. He explained this was not necessarily the
Mr. Kimble advised it was their understanding that in the event Development
Agreement No. 5 should be held invalid at some time in the future, the
approval of the four tract ~aps wou!~ still stand, but the condition for
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COe4MISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 28, 1988
compliance with the development a reement would be null and void. Mr.
advised this was explicitly provided within the
devel
opmant agreement.
OPPONENTS: ·
K1 otz
Bob Pipher, 41825 Greentree Road, Temecula, advised the development in which
he lived (knom as Green Tree) contained approxin~.tely 96 acres and he and his
wife owned approximately one-third of this property. They had submitted the
letter requesting that the portions of the subject tract maps adjacent to
their area be required to create lots similar in size. Mr. Pipher had a map
of the Margarita Village Specific Plan dated March 30, 1986, which showed the
density in this area to be approximately half of the density currently
Vroposed. Mr. Pipher advised this was an equestrian area, and people residing
n the area needed riding trails. He requested a connecting trail from Pauba
to Rancho Vista along the boundary between their subdivision and the subject
development or along Kaiser Parkway; this would provide an additional
landscaped buffer area.
Mr. Pipher advised they had no problem with the proposed school site, but felt
the circulation system proposed to serve the school was inadequate. In his
opinion, Street "B' should be extended to KaiSer Parkway; this would then
provide access to both the school site and the park from Kaiser Parkway. At
the present time there was a steady flow of traffic, and providing an access
to the park site and school from Kaiser Parkway would help everyone in the
area, in addition to making the park more accessible. Because of the traffic
on Kaiser Parkway, Mr. Pipher thought it would be difficult for people living
on the other side to reach the park. He therefore suggested that one or two
ptarks be required on the other side of Kaiser Parkway, to benefit residents in
hat area.
Fir. Pipher requested a solid wall along the boundar~sbetween their development
and the subject project. The people residing in th area were i a
request ng
buffer, and would appreciate anything the CommissiOners could do to help
them. In answer to a question by Commissioner Bresson, Fir. Pi her advised
there was no street between the area he was representing and ~e sub;iect site;
the lots frem the subject tract map were backing up against the lots in his
subdivision.
When Fir. Pipher again requested equestrian trails, Fis. Gtfford briefly
reviewed the proposed trail system, which tncl:uded a trail along Rancho
California Road, going up the Kaiser Parkway and ll4O easement; no trails were
proposed in the southern area as requested by !Mr. Pipher. Commissioner
Bresson requested that these trails be designated as public access or
recreational trails instead of equestrian trails. Fir. Burnell advised that an
'equestrian trail had been established all along Pauba Road, going east and
west, and there was a north/south trail in the: Metropolitan Water District
1
easement going by the schoo administration site, along Rancho California Road
to Kaiser Parkway. The residents of the Green Tree area could use the trail.
along Pauba, which connected to the trail along Green Tree Lane. This was a
regional trail system, established under the direction of the Parks
Department.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 28, 1988
Commissioner Bresson requested information on the type of buffer to be
provided. Mr. Burnell advised there would be masonry walls in the area north
and south of Rancho Vista Road; he thought this would satisfy Mr. Pipher's
concerns. Mr. Burnell advised the Margartta Village Specific Plan had
originally been approved with a slightly higher density in this area. They
had added land with the amended specific plan but had not changed densities in
the area of the subject tract maps. The exhibit presented by Mr. Pipher was a
conceptual exhibit prepared by the engineer for internal use only and had
never been presented to the County.
Mr. Ktmble responded to ~. Ptpher's request for an additional park on the
other side of Kaiser Parkway, by advising Cosrain Homes was providing a park
planned for Tract 22715 to the north; they were planning to upgrade both parks
over and above the requirements of the specific plan.
Commissioner Donehoe asked whether staff was recommending that a condition be
added to require the wall as a buffer between the subject tract maps and the
area represented by Mr. Pipher, and was informed this was a condition of the
specific plan.
Lee Johnson referred to Mr. Ptpher's sug estton that "B" Street be extended to
Kaiser Parkway, and advised both he and ~ohn Johnson (Transportation Planning
Section of the Road Department) felt this was an excellent recommendation.
Circulation in this area might be improved by making this connection rather
than having the school served by a cul-de-sac street. This would also give
both the school and the park site access from a 66 foot wide street. When
Commissioner Bresson asked whether this could be accomplished without
redesigning the map, Mr. Johnson replied he felt the map would have to be
amended. Mr. Streeter felt this provide a much better access.
Commissioner Beadling felt that a long cul-de-sac street going into a school
was poor planning, as it required the cars and school busses bringing in
children to wrap around and come back out the same way. Extending the street
would allow the vehicles to drop off the children and go out a different way.
Commissioner Bresson was concerned about creating a 4-way intersection, and
Mr. Johnson agreed that a 3-way t~tersectlon created les~ problems. However,
he still felt that providing access to Kaiser Parkway would result in better
circulation service to the school site. ,
Mr. Burnell did not feel it was necessary to extend "B" Street to Kaiser Park-
way in order to provide adequate circulation for the school. He was concerned
that the change in the roadway might cause problems with regard to the sewer
lines. Mr. Burnell was also concerned about a 4-way intersection at Kaiser
Parkway; he felt retaining the existing 3-way intersection would provide an
overall better circulation system for residents of the area. Conmnissioner
Bresson preferred the cul-de-sac street because it would not encourage through
traffic along the school site. Mr. Johnson pointed out that there would be
less opportunity to eventually obtain signalization for a 3-way intersection
than for a 4-way intersection.
PLANrliN D PA:IClTI;rlC
DATE: June 1o 1988
TO: Assessor
Butldtng and S~fety
Surveyor - Dave Dude
.... Road Department
Health, Ralph Luchs
Fire Protection
FTood Control Otstrlct
Ftsh& Game
S Patslay
U.S. Postal Service - Ruth E. IMvtdson
JUN 13 1~8
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPAFiTMENT
Sherlff's Depafi~nent
Parks par nt - orge B.
Agrt cu~uret~ml · s~ner
Airports Depat~cment
UCR, Ltfe $ctence Dept., br.ll. Ha. yhev
GROFIT ' '
Eastern Municipal Vater Dist.
Rancho"CaT tfornia !~ar i~lst.
Elstnore Unton School Dtst.
Te~cula Unton School Oist.
Sierra Club, San Gorgonto Chapter
C/d..T~ 18
VESTING TRACT 23373 - (Sp P1) - E.A.
32548- PAr arita VIllage Development Ca
- Robert BeTh, Vtlltam Frost & Assoc, -
Rancho California Area - First
Supervtsorial District - X, of Rancho
California Roe4, V. of Kaiser Parkway -
R-R Zone - 28 Acres 348 Condomtnium vntt
- (RELATED CASE TR 2337l & 23372) Nod
- A,P, 9Z3-210-023
· Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map, A Land
Division Comtttee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for June 20, 1988. If it
it will then go to publlc hearing,
Tour coanents and recommendations are requested prior to Oune S, 1988 in order that ~e me
include them tn the staff report for this particular case,
Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact
Kathy Gtfford at 787-6356
Planner :'
~JtlXlllke
DATE: SIGXATURE: ,~
PLEASE print name and t~t~e
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS STREFT,
INDIO, CALIFORNIA ~Z201
(619) 342-8277
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 28, 1988
Mr. Kimble advised they had met with the school district and showed them the
tentative map; they were pleased with the confi uration of the school site as
well as the proposed street system. Mr. Burneli advised their original design
showed the school/park site.adjacent Kaiser Parkway, and the school district
had objected to this plan because they did not want the children adjacent to a
major street. Commissioner Bresson supported the tract map as currently'
designed, as it was satisfactory to the school district.
There was no further testimony, and the hearing was closed at 11:10 a.m.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Tentative Tract Maps 22915, and 22916, and Vesting
Tract Maps 23470 and 23471 are located within Village C of Specific Plan 199
Amendment No. I (the Margarita Village Specific Plan); the four tract maps
would divide the 345 acres into 1020 residential lots; design manuals have
been prepared for Vesting Tentative Tract Maps 23470 and 23471; the tract maps
have been condtttoned to comply with Specific Plan 199 Amendment No. 1, Change
of Zone Case 5107, and Development Agreement No. 5; a waiver for the lot
length to width ratio will be needed for all four maps. All environmental
concerns have been addressed in EIR 107, EIR 202, and the initial studies for
these tract maps, and no significant impacts were found; the tract maps are
consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan (as mended by General Plan
Amendment 150), Specific Plan 199 Amendment No. I and Chan e of Zone Case
5107; and conform to the requirements of Ordinances 348 an)
· 460.
MOTION: Upon motion b Commissioner Bresson, seconded by Comissioner
Beadling and unanimously carried, the Commission adopted the negative
declarations for EA 32517, EA 32518, EA 32504 and EA 32505, and approved
Tentative Tract Maps 22915 and 22916, and Vesting Tract Maps 32470 and 23471,
all with a waiver of the lot length to width ratio, subject to the proposed
conditions and based on the above findings and conclusions and the recommenda-
tions of staff.
Tract No. 23470
17(a) - All lots shall have a minimum size of 7200 square feet net.
17{b) - Delete entirely
20 - Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for 150 units, one tot lot
shall be improved and fully developed.
21 - Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for 275 units, the second
tot lot shall be improved and fully developed.
27 - Prior to the issuance of building permits (balance to remain the same)
36 - The development of Vestin Tentative Tract Map 23470 shall comply with
its Design Manual, with aV1 provisions of Specific Plan No. 199
Amendment No. 1 and with Development Agreement No. 5
Tract No. 23471
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 28, 1988
20 - Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for 200 units, one tot lot
shall be improved and fully developed.
25 - Prior to the issuance of building permits (balance to remain the-same)
32(f) - All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and manually
operated, perre ent underground irrigation. n
Flood Control Condition 4 - Delete entirely
35 - The development of Vesting Tentative Tract Hap 23471 shall comply with
its Design Hanual, with all provisions of Specific Plan No. 199
Amendment No.. I and with Development Agreement No. 5
Delete Condition 4 of the Flood Control letter dated June 17, 1988.
Tract No. 22915
24 - Prior to the issuance of building permits (balance to remain the same)
32 - The development of Tentative Tract Hap 22915 shall comply with all
provisions of Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No, I and Development
Agreement No, 5
Road Department Condition 26 - Add to the end "or as approved by the Road
Commissioner".
Tract No. 22916
2 - Add the following: except for the lot length to width ratio.
20 - Prior to the issuance of occupancy pemtts for 150 units in Tentative
Tract 22916, the park shall be fully improved and developed. ~'
25 - Prior to the issuance of bbtldtng permits (balance to remain the same)
32 - The development of Tentative Tract )~p 23916 shall comply with all
~rovtstons of SpeCtftc Plan No, i99 Amendment No, I and Development
greement No, 5
33 - Prior to issuance of grading pemtts, impacts to the Stephens Kangaroo
Rat Habitat shall be mitigated per the spectftc plan conditions of
approval.
Road Department Condition 28 - Add to the end "or as approved by the Road
Commissioner".
10
Zontng Area: Rancho California Vesting Tentative Tract Nos.: 23371 Amd.
Supervtsorlal DIstrict: Flrst and No. 1, 23372 lid. No. 1, 23373 lid. No. 1
Thtrd Planntng Comtsston: 10-5-88
E.A. Nos: 32546, 32547, 32548 Agenda Item No.: 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4
Spectftc Plan Sectton
ILTVEXSXDE aXn~T PUUmlIi DEPART~Xr
.. $rAfir EEPIIT
1. ~pllcant:
2. Engineer:
3.-~ Type of Request:
· MargarttaVtllageOevelolae~t Co.
Rick Engineering Compan~ :
The 3 tracts vd11 subdivide 472 acres
Into 1763 residential units ..
:"" "'~'-";:6~"": Surrounding Zontng:
L -. .'
o~ 7," Site Characteristics:
~, 8.'-Area Characterlsttcs:
L:C'(Chang
rvts on
Lrd Of S~pe ors 9-13-88 proposes
Sl' 19g lid; No. ~ zoning).
Zoning' to. the north and west is R-4,
A-2-20, R-R, R-l; Zontng to the south ts
" Vacant land traversed wtth
Located on eastern edge of Rancho
California comuntty
des1 natt~n of Specific P~an No,
". 10., Land Dfvlston Data:
'::: Vesting Tract .
23373
Acreage: Units , · Denstry (Du/Ac)
394 1183 3
37 '" 232'. 6
31 348
11. Agency Reco~ndattons:
23371 Amd. NO. I
23372 Amd. NO. I 23373 Amd. No. I
Road 9-22-88 3,22-88 9-22-88
Hea 1 th 7-2 5-88 9- 7- 88 7 -25-88
Flood 7-22-88 7-22-88 7-22-88
Ft re 8-17-88 8-17-88 8-17-88
Sheriff 6-10-88 · 6-10-88 6-10-88
Letters:
13. Sphere of Znfluence
Znfluence
None received as of this wrtttng
Not within e City sphere
ANALTSIS:
Vesting Tentative Tract NOs. 23371Amd. No. 1, 23372 Amd. NO. I, and 23373 Amd.
No. I Implement Village as a planned retirement coffinunity In the ~rgartta
Vtllage Spectftc Plan (SP 199 Amd. No, 1) Spectftc Plan NO. 199 Amendment NO.
1, Change of Zone No, 5107, General Plan Amendment No, 150 and Development
Agreement No. 5 were heard by the Board of Supervisors on September 13, 1988.
These tracts have been designed to be consistent with these documents,
The table below summarize the tracts' relationship and consistency ~th the
$pectftc Plan's planntng areas. As shown, none of the tracts exceed the
pemttted number of residential units,
C~e~ARISOR OFTRACTAH) SPECZFZCPLAR IZR.'ELLXNG WilTS
Pro _posed Spec tft c Pl an
Tract NO. No. of Units Area
VIT 23372 Amd. No. 1
VTr 23372 Amd. No. 1
VTT 23373 Amd. NO. I
Permitted
No. of Untts
1183 33-37, 42-45 1197
232 41 234 :'
348 38 348
A destgn mnual has been prepared for all'three vesting raps which provtdes
guidelines for landscaping, floor lens, elevations and zoning. Acoustical
studtes have been proposed and w11~ be implemented as required by the
conditions of approval. Htttgatton for potential impacts to Ht. Palomar are
also tncluded in the conditions of approval. Additional evaluation found no
cultural resources onstte.
Vesting Tentative Tract 23371, Amended No. 1 tncludes an 18 hole golf course.
As also required by the specific plan conditions, the tract has been
condttlon~ to tmprove the park In Plannfng Area 45. In conformance with the
specific plan Vesttng Tentative Tract 23372, ~nended No. I has been condtt~oned
for mitigation of impacts to the Stephens Kangaroo Rat.
It should be noted that the number of units for congregate care are on estimate
and will be reviewed at the developnent plan stage.
Environmental assessments have been prepared on all three tracts.
Environmental impacts were assessed in E%R 107 and EIR 202 prepared for th
Rancho Village Specific Plan and the yargartta Village Specific Plan~
Additional environmental evaluation has been provided by the reports prepare
for the specific plan amendment and the acoustical studies prepared for the
three tracts- ~ stgn$ficant environmental impacts have been found.
1. Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23371 Amended No. 1, 23372 Amended Ho. 1, and
23373 Amended No. I are located tn Village A of the ~rgartta Vtllage
Specific Plan.
2. The three tracts w$11 provide 1763 dwelling units and golf course open
space on ~S4 164 acres- (Amended by Planntng Co~ntsston 10-5-88)
Trac~ 23372 Amended Ho. I has' been oondtttoned r. the Specific Plan's
3. condttlon of approval to mitigate Impacts to the ~tephens Kangaroo Rat.
4. The tracts have been condtttoned to comply w~th Specific Plan No. 199,
Ho.
Change of Zone No. 5107 and Development Agreement 5
5. A waiver for length to w$dth ratio w~11 be needed fo Vesting Tentative
Tract 23371 Amended No. 1.
COI~CLUSTOMS:
1. All environmental concerns have been addressed in ETRs 107. 202 and the
1nittel studies for these tracts and no stgn.~ftcant impacts have been
found.
2. The tracts are consistent' with General Plan Amendment No. 150 Change of
Zone No. 5107, and Specific Plan No. 199, Amendment No. 1.
3. The tracts confore to the requirements of Ordinances 348 and 450.
RECOHI4ENDAllORS
ADOPT/OR of a Negattve Declaration for EA Nos- 32546, 32547, 32548 on a finding
tna: r~e projects wilt not have a significant effect on the environment-
APPROVA~ of Vesting Tentative Tract Nos. 23371 Amended No. 1, 23372 Amended
1, and 23373 Amended Xo. I subject to the attached conditions of approval-
KG :mcb :rap
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTHENT
SUBDIVISION
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
I
$,
0
0
0
>
0
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23373
ANENDEq) NO. I
.STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. The subdivider shall defend, tndemntf , and
Riverside, its agents, officers, and employees hold hamless the County of
from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the County of Riverside or its agents, officers, or
concerning Vestin TentatheTract 23373 Amended No. 1, which action is
.brought about within the time period provided for tn Colifornta Government
Code Section 66499.37. The County of Riverside will promptly notify the
subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the County of
Rtyerstde and ~tll coo erate full tn the defense. Zf the County fails to
p~omptly notify the SuCdhtder o~Yany such claim, action, or proceeding or
fails to cooperate fully tn the defense, the sulxlhtder shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the
County of RIverside.
2. The tentative subdhtston shall comply with the State of California
Subdivision Hap Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule"
A, unless modified by the conditions listed below.
3. This conditionally approved tentative map wtll expire two years after the
RIverside Board of Supervisors approval date, unless extende as
County of d
provided by Ordinance 460.
4. The final map shall be prepared bye ltCense~ land surveyor subject to all
the requirements of the State of California Subdivision Hap Act and
Ordinance 460, '
5. The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the Riverside
County Surveyor's OffiCe and two copies to the Department c: Butldtng and
Safety. The report shall address the so ls stability and geological
conditions of the site.*
6. If any 'grading is proposed, the subdivider shall submit one print of
comprehensive gradtng plan to the Department of Butldtng and Safety- The
plan shall comply rdtth the Untfom Building Code Chapter-70, as amended
by Ordinance 457 and as maybe additionally ~rovtded for in these
conditions of approval.
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23373 Mended No. :1
Page 2
& gradin pemtt shall be obtained from the Department of Butldtng and
Safety pr~ilor to canmencement of any grading outside of county maintained
road r, ght, of Nay, -'
Any delinquent property taxes shall be patd prtor to recordatton of the
final map.
The subdlvlder shall comply with the street Improvement recommendations
outltned In the Rherstde County Road Department's letter dated 9-22-88 a
copy of which ts attached.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract
map boundary to a County maintained road.
1Z. All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the publlc and shall
Conttnue In force unttl the overntng body accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications s a~l be free from all encumbrances as approved
h
b the Road Commlssioner. Street names shall be subject to approval of
~e Road Commissioner.
Easements, when requtred for roadway slopes, dratnage facilities,
utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map tf they are located
f of dedication and
wtthtn the land dtvtston boundary, All of era
conveyances shall be submitted and recorded as dtrected by the County
'Surveyor.
Water and sewerage dtsposal facilities shall be installed in accordance
wtth the provisions set forth tn the Riverside County Health Department's
h
letter dated 7-25-88 a copy of w tch $s attached,
The subdhfaer shall comply wlth the flood control recommendations
outltned by the RIverside County flood Control Nstrlct's letter dated
7-22-88 · copy of which ts ~ttached, Zf the land d~vtston 11es wtthtn an-
n
adopted flood control dratnage area pursue't t · Section Z0,25 of Ordinance
460 appro rtate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shah be co~lected by the Road Comtssfoner,
The sutxlhtder shall comply with. the' ftre Improvement recommendations
outltned In the County Ftre Rarshal's letter dated 8-Z7-88 a copy of whtch
ts attached.
Subdivision phastng, Includfng any proposed ~ommon open space area
Improvement phasing, If applicable, shall be subject to Planning
Department approval. Any proposed phaStng shall provtde for adequate
vehicular access to all lots tn each phase, and shall substantially
conform to the Intent and purpose of the subdivision approval.
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23373 Mended No. 1
Page 3
Lots created by th?s subdivision shall cmply wtth the following:
a. Corner lots and through lots, tf any, shall be provided with
additional area pursuant to SecttOn 3.8B of Ordinance 450 and so as
not to contain less net area than the least amount of net area tn
non-corner and through lots.
b. Lots created by thfs subdhts(on shall be tn conformance~th the
development standards of the Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1
zone,
C,
14hen lots are crossed by ma~or public uttltty easements, each lot
shall have a net usable area of not less than 3,600 square feet,
exclusive of the utility easement.
d. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained tn a weed-free
-- condition and shall be etther planted wtth Interim landscaping or
provided wtth other erosion control measures as approved by the
Otrector of Butldlng and Safety.
e. Trash btns, loadtng areas and Incidental storage areas shall be
located awe and vtsually screened from surrounding areas with the use
of block w~{ls and landscaping.
Prtor to RECORDATION of the ffnal map the following conditions shall be
sattsftea:
PHor to the recordatton of the ftnal map the app14cant shall su~tt
R and Survey
wrftten clearances to the Rherstde County oad Oepartment
that all pertinent requirements outltned tn the attached approval
letters from the following agenctes have'been met.
County Fire Department County Health Department
County flood Control County Plannln Department
County Parks Department RanchoVater DTstrlct
Eastern.~ Fldnlctpal I~ater Dlst.
Prtor to the recordatton of the ftnal map, General Plan Amendment 150,
Spectfic Plan No. 199 Amendment No. l, Development Agreement No. 5,
and Change of Zone o. 5107 shall be approved by the Board o
hN
Supervisors end s all be effecthe. Lots created by this lan~
dtvtston shall be tn conromance wtth the development standards of the
zone ultimately applted to the property.
All extsttng structures on the subject property shall be removed prior to
recordatfon of the ftnal map.
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. :L
Page 4
The Con~non open space area shall be sho~ as a numbered lot on the ftnal
map and shall be managed by 'a master property o~ners association.
Prtor to recordatton of the ftnal subdlvtston map, th~ subdivider shall
submit the following documents to the Planntng Department for revtew,
whtch documents shall be sub3ect to the approval of that department and
the Office of the County Counsel:
2) & declaration of covenants, c0ndtttons and restr4ctfons; and
2) A sample document conveyed~itle to the purchaser of an 4ndhtdual lot
or untt whtch provtdes that the declaration of covenants, conditions
and restrictions ts Incorporated theretn by reference.
The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions submitted for
revtew shall (a) prov(de for a mintmum term of 60 years, (b) provtde
fo~ the establishment of a property. ovmers' assoc4athn comprised of the
ovmers of each Individual lot or unit, (c) provide for ovmershtp of the
common and (d) .contatn to following provisions verbatim:
"Nothwtthstandtng any provision tn this Declaration to the contrary,
the folioring provts4on shall apply:
The property o~ners' association established heroin shall manage and
continuously maintain the 'common area', more particularly described
on Exhtbtt 'IZZ-17' of the spec~flc plan attached hereto, and shall
not sell or transfer the 'common area', or any part thereof, absent
the pr4or ,rltten consent of the Planning DIrector of the County of
R~verstde or the County's successor-In-Interest.
The property ovmer's association shall have the rtght to assess the
ovmers of each Individual lot or untt for the reasonable cost of
maintaining the 'common'area' and shall have the rtght to 1ten the
f
property of any such Owner who de aults fn the payment of a
maintenance assessmeet. An assessment 1ten, once created, shall be
prtor to 811 other 1tens recorded subsequent to the nottce of
assessment or other document creattng the assessment 11on.
This Declaration shall not be t~mtnated, 'substantially' amended or
ropetry deannexed therefrom absent the prtor ~rttten consent of the
~lann4ng Dtrector of the County of RIverside or the County's
successor-tn-lnterest- A proposed amendment shall be considered
f the extent, usage or maintenance of the
'substant4al' tf tt afects
ecommon area',
In the event of any conflict between thfs Declaration and the Articles
of Zncorporatton, the Bylaws or the property o~ners' assocfat4on Rules
and Regulations, tf any, this Declaration shall control."
Condi tions of .~pprova)
Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. 1
Page 5
Once approved, the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions
shall be recorded at the same time that the ftnal map is recorded.
Prtor to recordatton of the ftnal map, c]earence shall be obtained from
lqetropolttan 1later Dtstrict relattve to the protection of applicable
easements affecting the subject property. Lot 11ne adjustments shall also
be completed.
The developer shall comply wtth the following parkway landsca tng
re uirements as shown tn $pectftc Plan No. 19g Amendment No. I unVess
maintained by H0A or other publtc entity: (Amended by Planntng Comtsston
10-5-88)
1) Prior to recordatton of the final map the developer shall file an
application wtth the County for the formation of or annexation to, a
parkway maintenance dtstrtct for Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23373
knended No. 1 in accordance wtth. the Landscaping and Ltghttng Act of
197Z, unless the project is within an existing parkway maintenance.
3)
Prtor to the lssuance of bulldtng permits, the developer shall secure
approval of proposed landscaping and Irrigation plans from the County.
Road and Planning De armant. All landscaping and irrigation plans
and specifications sKall be prepared In a reproducible fomat suitable
for permanent ft]tng with the County Road Department.
The developer shall post a landscape performance bond which shall be
vtabtlity of all landscaping whtch wtll be
tnstalhd pr(Or tO the assumption of the maintenance responsibility by
the district.
4)
The developer, the developer's successors-in-interest or assignees,
shall be responsible for all parkwa landscaptn maintenance until
such time as maintenance ts taken overly the dlst~ct,
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all
slopes, .landscaped areas and IrrigatiOn systems unttl such time as those
Street lights shall be provtded wtthtn the subdivision tn accordance with
the standards of 0rdtnance 461 and the following:
l)
Concurrently vtth the ftllng of subdivision improvement plans wtth the
Road Department, the developer shall secure approval of the proposed
street 11ght layout first from the Road Department's trafftc engtneer
and then from the appropriate uttltty purveyor.
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. 1
Page 5
2) Following approval of the street 11ghttng layout by the Road
3)
4)
Department's traffic engineer, the developer shall also file an
application with LAFCO for the formation of a street ltghttng
district, or annexation to an existing lighting district, unless the
site ts within an existing lighting district.
Prtor to recordeaton of the ftnal map, the developer shall secure
conditional approval of the street 11ghting application from LAFCO,
unless the site ts wtthtn an exlstlng:11ghting district.
All street 11ghts and other outdoor lighting shall be sho~n on
electrical plans submitted to the De artment of Building and Safety
for plan check approval and sha~l comply with the requirements of
Riverside County Ordinance No. 655 and the RIverside County
: Comprehensive General Plan.
Prtor to the issuance of GRADZNG PEPJqlTS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
l)
2)
Prior to the issuance of gradtng permits, detatled common open space
area parking landscaping and Irrigation plans shall be submitted for
Planntng Department approval for the phase of development tn process.
The plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall
provide for the following,
Permanent automatic Irrigation systems shall be Installed on all
landscaped areas requiring irrigation.,
Landscape screening where requtred shall be designed to be opaque up
to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity,
3) All ut111ty servtce areas and enclosures shall be screened from vtew
4)
with landscaping and decorative barrters or baffle treatments, as
n
approved by the Plan tng Director, Utilities shall be placed
underground.
Parkways and landscaped butldlng setbacks shall be landscaped to
provtde visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of
the stte. Landscape elements shall include earth bermfng, round
cover, shrubs and specimen trees in conjunction wtth meandering
sidewalks, benches and other pedestrian amenltfes where appropriate as
approved by the Planning Department and $pectftc Plan No. Z99
Amendment No. Z.
5) Landscaping plans shall Incorporate the use of specimen accent trees
at key vtsual focal points wtthin the project,
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. :Z
Page 7
8e
6)
7)
a)
Where streets trees cannot be planted wtthtn right-of-way of tritertot
streets and project pmrkways due to Insufficient road right-of-way,
they shE11 be planted outstde of the road right-of-way.
tandscapfng plans shall incorporate nattve and drought tolerant plants
where appropriate,
All existtng spectmen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the
sub act property shall be shown on thie pro~ect's gradtng plans and
she{1 note those to be removed, relocate and/or retained. d
9) All trees shall be minimum double staked, Weaker and/or slow growing
trees shall be steel staked,
10.. Parktng layouts shall comply with Ordinance 348, Sectton 18,12.
All extsttng nattve specimen trees on the sub4ect property shall be
preserved vherever feasible, Where they cannot be preserved they shall be
relocated or replaced with spedmen trees as approved by the Planntng
Director. Replacement trees shall be noted on approved landscaping plans.
Zf the project is to be phased, prtor to the approval of gradtng penn{is,
an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planntng
Director for a prove1, The plan shall be used as a guideline for
subsequent detat~ed grading plans for individual phases of development and
$hali include the following:
x)
2)
3)
4)
Techniques which w111 be utilized toprevent erosion and sedimentatton
during and after the grading process. .
Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which
may be graded during 'the higher probability rain months of 3anuary
through Parch.
Preliminary pad and roadway elevations, :
~reas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
Grading plans shall contom to had ado ted Htllstde Development
Standards: A1 cut and/or f{11 slopes, Or Individual comb{nations therof,
which exceed ten feet in vertical height shall be modified by an
with irrigation. All driveways shall not exceed a fifteen percent grade.
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23373 Mended No. Z
Page 8
All cut slopes located adjacent to un faded natural terratn and exceeding
ten'(lO) feet tn verttcal hetghts shal~ be
contour-graded
Incorporating
the following grading techniques:
The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the angle
of the natural terrain,
2) Angular forms shall be discouraged.' The graded fom shall reflect the
natural rounded terratn.
3)
4)
The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves with red11
destgned in proportion to the total height of the slopes where
drainage and stab'llity pemtt such rounding.
Where cut or ftll slopes exceed 300 feet tn horizontal length, the
- horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous,
undulattng lashton.
Prtor to the tssuance of grading pemtts, a qualified paleontologist shall
be retained by the developer for consultation and con~nent on the proposed
grading wtth respect to potential paieontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist ftnd the potential is high for impact to stgnlflcant
resources, a pre-grade meeting between the paleontologist and the
excavation and grading contractor shall be arranged. When necessary, the
paleontologist or representative shall have the authority to temporarily
divert, redtrect or halt gradtrig acttvtty to a11o~ recover~of fosstls.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDZNG PEPJqZT$ the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
a. In accordance wtth the w~ttten request of the developer to the County
of Rherstde, · cop~ of which is on ftle, and tn furtherance of the
agreement between the 'developer and the County of Rtverslde, no
building permits shall be tssued by the County of Rherstde for any
parcels wtthfn the subject tract until the developer, or the
developer's successors-in-interest provided evtdence of compliance
with the terms of said Development Agreement No. 5 ~or the financing
of public factl'fttes. --
b. ~tth the submittal of butldtng plans to the Department of Building and
Safet~ the developer wtll demonstrate compliance with the acoustical
study prepared for Vesttng Tentative Tract 23371 Amended No, 1 which
established appro fiat, mitigation measures' to reduce amblent interior
nots, levels to 4~ Ldn and exterior noise levels below 65 Ldn.
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving
devices shall be permitted with Planning Department approval.
Condltlons of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. Z
Page g
,
die
Butldtng separation between all buildings Including fireplaces shall
not be less than ten (ZO) feet nless approved by the Department of
e. All street sideyard setbacks shall be a ndntmumof 10 feet.
f. All front yards shall be provMed wtth landscaping and automatic
Irrigation.
Prior to the tssuance of OCCUPANCY PERHITS the following conditions shall
be sattsfted:
.a- prtor to the ftnal butldtng inspection approval, by the Buildtng and
~ Safe.ty Department, walls shall be Constructed alon Kaiser Parkway and
Rancho California Road, La Se end May, Kaiser Par~
r
Way per the Oestgn
Hanual. The requtred wall shall be subject to the approval of the
Otrector of the Department of Butldtng and Safety and the Planntng
Otrector and may be phased wtth the project. .(Amended by Planning
Commission Z0-5-88)
b. Wall and/or fence locations shall confom to attached Figure 1II-17 of
Spedtic Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1.
c. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans prtor to the tssuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal
conditions do not permtt plantin ,: tntertm landscaping and erosion
control measures shall be uttltze~ as approved by the Planntng Dtrector
and the Director of Butldtng and Safety.
All parktng, landscaping and 4rrtgatton shall be Installed
accordance w"lth approved plans and shall be vettried by a Planntng
Department field Inspection,
e---Consrete-sldM1ks-shall-be-eenstrueted-threugheut-the-subdivh4on--4.
aeeorddnee--wfth--the-standards-of-grdfnance-46~-and-S ec4f~c-Ptan~No:
lg~-Amssdment-Ne,-t~ (Deletedby Planntn~ Con~ntsston ~0-5-88)
Street trees shall be
~t!~ the standards
Amendment No. Z
planted throughout the subdivision tn accordance
of Ordinance 460 and Spectftc Plan No. 199
Developnent of VestingTentative Tract No. 23373 Amended No. I shall
cmaply wtth all provisions of Spectftc Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1 and
A
Development gre.ement No. 5.
taRDy D. Smoc4 ·
I
OFFICE OF ROAD COMMISSIONER & COUNTY SURVEYOR
September 22, 1988
RIverside County Planning (omission
4080 Lemon Street .
RIverside, CA 92501
Re: Tract Hap 23373 - Amend #1 - Road Correction
Schedule A - Team SP Hap fl
Ladies and Gentlemen:
VIth respect to the conditions of approval for the referenced tentative land
h
division mapo the Road Department recommends t at the landdhtder provide the
following street Improvement plans and/or road dedications In accordance with
Ordinance 460 and Rlvers lde County Road [reprovemerit Standards (Ordinance 461).
[t is' understood that the tentative map correctly shows acceptable cent·tithe
profiles, all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses with
appropriate O's, and that their mission or unacceptablllty may requtre the map
to be resubmitted for further consideration, These Ordtnancei and the following
conditions are essential parts and a requirement occurring !n ONE ts as binding
as though occurring fn e11, They are Intended to be complementar;y and to
describe the conditions for a complete design of the Improvement. All questions
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referr. e.d to the Road
Cornmiss Ioner's Office.
1. The landdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages
caused by alteration of the drainage patterns, I.e., concentra-
tion of diversion of flow. ProteCtion shall be provided by
constructing adequate drainage facilities Including enlarging
axisflu facilities or by securfn · d~alnage easement or by
both. ~11 drainage easements sha~l be Shokn on the final map
and noted as follows-' "Drainage Easement - no buildings
2. The landdhider shall accept end property dispose of all offsite
drainage flowing onto or through the site. · [n the event the
Road Commissioner poreIts the use of streets for drainage
put oseso the provisions of Article X[ of Ordinance Ho, 460
wtl~ apply, Should the quahtltles exceed the street
capacity or the use of itreets .be prohibited for drainage -
purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate drainage
facilities as approved b~f the Road Department,
s
MaJor drainage Is involved on this landdlvlslon and its resolution
shall be as approved by the Road Department.
All Interior streets shell be Improved In accordance with County
Standard No. ZOS, Section A or greater as approved by the Road
Coaaissloner (modified no r/w).
S. The landdhlder shall provide utility clearance from Rancho Calif.
1Afar DIstrict prior to the recordslion of the final rap.
The maximum centerline gradient shall not exceed ZSZ.
7o The minimum centerline radii shall be as approved by the Road
Department.
Rancho California Road shall be fm roved with concrete curb and
gutter located 43 feet frm cent '~r~lne and retch up asphalt concrete
paving; reconstruction; or resur'actn of existing plvln
dedicated right of way In accordance with County Standard No. ZOO.
Kaiser Parkway shall be Improved.with concrete curb and gutter
located 38 feet from centerline nd match up asphalt concrete
paving; reconstruction; or resur~acin of existing paving as
dotemined by the Road Commissioner ;Tthln a 50 foot half width
dedicated right of kay In accordance wf.th County Standard No. tOT.
Prior tO the' filtng of the final mp with the County Recorder's
Office, the developer shall provide evidence of continuous
maintenance of all proposed rhlte streets within the development
as approved b~ the Road CommissIOner.
il driveways shall contom to the applicable RIverside County
Standards and shall be shown on the street Improvement plans.
1~en bloCkwalls are required to be constructed on top of slope, a
debris retention wall shall be constructed it the street right of
way line to privent silting of sidewalks as approved by the Road
Commissioner. ' ' ·
Concrete sidewalks shall be'constructed on Rancho Callfornla Road
.and Kaiser Parkway in accordance with County Standard No. 400 and
40Z (curb sidewalk).
vlth County Standard No. 106, Section B, ~3Z'/60') ·ta grade and
alignrant as epproved by the Road 'comlssioner-
Prior to the recordatlon of the final rap, the developer shall
deposit with the Riverside County Road Department, · cash sum of td
$140.00 per unit for parcels 1-7 as mitigation for traffic signal
tmpocts. Should the developer choose to defer the tim of payment,
he my enter into a eftten agreement vlth the County deferring sa
pavement to the tim of issuance of a building pemlt. hrcel 8 Is
not sub3ect to signal mitigation it this time. It is postponed
until the time of development.
16. ~nprovement plans shall be based upon I centerline profile extending
a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries it a grade and
alignment as approved by the Riverside County Road ConTnfssloner.
Completion of road improvements does not Imply acceptance for
maintenance by County.
:~7. Electrical and communications trenches shall be provided tn
accordance with Ordinance 461, Standard 817,
18. Asphaltfc emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than
fourteen days following placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall
be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per-square yard... Asphalt
e~ulsion shall confore to Sections 37, 39 and 94 of the State
Stand.ard Speci f i cations. ·
Lndard No. 805 shall
lg. Comer cutbacks in conformance with County Star
be shown on the final map and offered for dedication,
20, Lot access-shall be restricted on Rancho California Road and Kaiser
Parkway and so noted on the final map with the exception of one
opening on RanchoCollfornTa Road approximtely 400' westerly-.of
intersection with Kaiser Parkway.
21. Landdlvlsio~s creating cut or f111 slopes adjacent to ~e streets
shall provide erosion controll sight distance control and slope
easements Is ipproved by the Road Department.
All entrance gate facilities shall be located · minimum distance of
60' from gate to flow'line,--
A~l centerline Intersections shall be it 90%
The street deslg~ and Improvement concept of this pro~ect sha~l be
coordinated with TR 23371 and TR 23372,
25, Street lighting shall be requl~ed in accordance with Ordinance 460
and 461 throughout the subdivlslOn, The County Service Area (CSA)
Mminlstrator determines ~hether! this proposal qualifies under an
' existing issessment district or not. If not, the.land owner shall
file an application wlth LAFCO for annexation Into or creation of
- . · %t htlng Assessment DIstrict" In accordance with Governmental
Code ~ction 56000,
26, Prior to recordation of the. final map, the landdivider shall record
CC & l's provldfn Ingress and e' ress for parcel 1 thru 7 and shall
be sub;lace te revTew and approva~ b7 RIverside Cou ty Counsel
GH:lh
Ve: · truly yours, ..
/
es
ngtneer
RAY H~RARD
s xT-ss
I,I,,,A, II:!IIIiG DE?AAIXDrr
GZ/YORD
23373 - ~ED IX, ROAD CO~GTXOH IX
Vith Tempera to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division,
the Fire Department recommends the foXloving fire protection measures be provided
in accordance vith l~tverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
FIRE PJt. OTECTION
The valet mains shall be capable of providing · potential fire flay of 2500
mud an actual tire flov available from any one hydrant shall be 1500 GPH for
hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure*
Applicant/developer shall furnish one cop7 of the valet system plans to the Fire
Department for review, Plane 0ha11 conform to firm hydrant types,'loeatinn and
spacing, and, the system shall melt the fire flow requirements* Plans shall be
signed/spproved by · reSistsred civil engineer sad the local valor company vith
In accordance with the re~uirement p '
The required vatmr mlstone including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted
by the appropriate valor misery prior to any combustible buildinS material being
~lscsd On an individual
All buildings shall be constructed vith firs retardant roofing material as
described in Section 3203 of the Unirorm Suildinl Code, Any rood shinelee
or shakes shall have · Class wlwrating and lhalX be approved by the Fire
Department prior to installation*
NITIGATION
Friar to the recordalien of the final Rap, the developer shall deposit vith the
Riverside CoUnty Fire Department, · cash stm of 0400.00 per lot/unit as nitilation
for fir· protection Inpacts, Should the developer choose to defer the the of
payment, he/she nay enter into s vrittsn agrsenent vith the County deferring said
payment to the the of issuance of a buildinS paxtit,
Ill ~usstions regardinS the Ramming of conditions shall be referred to the
FlannlnS and ZnSineerinS staff,
RATHONDH, RZGIS
Chief Fir· Department Flanner
By
GearSo S, Tatt~, Planning Officer
.f-.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY ?LANNING DEPARTNENTDA11::
July 25. 1988
Attn: Kathy GTfford
~e~arar~~Sr~.flnim H tlrlan. Environmental Health Services
Tract 14aO 2~)7). Amended No. I
The Envlronmental Health Servlces has reviewed Tract Nap 23373, Amended Ibp
No. I dated July lg, 1988. Our current co,~nents'vlll remain as previously
stated In our letter dated June 13, 1988.
SH:bo
A U G 3 lg88
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PLANNIgeR .n. EPAPTuEtiT
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
III1flllllDl~ CAIJFOIINIA t1801
0Uly 22, 1968
its: Vesting ~act 23373
Amended~. I
This :t.s a x.-.oF>sral to o:x,.strt.~t a ccnd~t.wn coti,:l. ex ~'x a 28 acre :lot. :Ln the
Temecula Valley at'm, 'lhe airs :Ls at the no.rth~st ~ oE the .4.ntersect..tct,.
of Ka.tse. r l~az-~,~y and ~ Cs~.~z'n~ l~osd, 'Zhe FoJect .'Lo a ~ of
~:::L~L~ FJ. an ~99 (l~rga.d. ta V~acJe).
:
c~ revted ~-dtcat. es t?at the area o::ns:Ls~s of wel.1. ~Lned ~ges a,-xl nat=ral
watercopses ~ttch traverse the propez~o local offsite ~lon are trtlxt, xry
to the r~ Lh boundary of the FoS~-L~. Vesting Tract 23372 to the north has
l~oposed a stcrm drxtn system to collect and ~,vsy these fion ~ the r~rth
through this project to Icog CarOm Wash ~hlch ls alcrgj the sou~h side of
l~anc?o Call~rornta l~oad. C~xtte fion would ha drained to the stte's south~st
Follc~ng are t?~ Distr~ct's rccu.-,~aticnss
~s tract ~s located within the limits of the ~rrleta Cree~/Ta~-ula
~alley ~zea Erainage Plan ~o= which dra4na~e ~es have teen adc~ed by
the Boar~o Drainage ~ees shall ha l~d as sat ~th u~er the l~ov1-
aims o~ the '~zles and ~juZaticns ~or Mmini~att~n of Xrea "
Dra.tnage Plans=, amended Februa~ 16, 1988s
a. l:raizage ~ees ~ be taid to the ~oad C~,,,~ss~cr~r as ~ of
the fiJ.tng ~z recc:L'd o~ the st~dl~ ~ map c~ parcel nap,
c~ i~ the r~ off a ~ Itrctt nap ~s ~ved, drainage ~es
shall ts lmid as a conditioa ol the ~ver lzio~ to recording a
certificate c~ cc~pl~ eviS~ the w~Lver off the parce.1 n~px
the option ol the land alvide~, upon ~ling a :~d ~
a ~~ ~t ~ ~ld~ ~t ~ a~ a~d ~,
~~v~ my ~ ~r~ ~~ a~ ~ r~~ o~ ~ ~
de~ ~ ~s m~ ~ ~ ~ci~ ~ ~ ~cel ~e ~g .
~~es ~ve ~ ~a~ ~ h ~ ~ ~ F~ 3
y~ Fi~, ~ ;ts ~r ~h~. ~vity ~ve ~m is~ m
mann/rig Demru~nt
lies Vest_ing ~-act 23373
-2- July 22, 1368
Crmits drai,~ge ~actl/ties located oats~de of rued r~ht of ~By should
be cxmf=4Md w~thin ~Lnage easehints w~th mininun w~dth 'of 20 feet
shc~n~thefh~almap. AnotesluxldbesddedtDtheSnalmpstat-
h~g, 'r~a/nage easedrite ~ be 'kel~ free of buildings and
chstruct/ces".
Offsite dra/nage ~hc~/ittes guild be located w~thin publicly dedicat-
ed dra/nage easeM~ts chta~Bd fr~n the affected prolmr~ owners.
~cu~ents should ~e recorded e~d a cow sulxaitted to the l~strtct
l~Lor to recc~at/cn'of the final map.
Drainage facilities outletting sump ccndtt~ons should be designed to
convey the tr~ 100 year storm flo~. Mdtticna/e~rgency es-
The property's Street and lot grad/rig should be designed ~n a manner
that perl~tuates the existtrig natural dra/nage patterns w~th respect
to tributary drainage a:ea, o~tlet points a~d ou~let ccn~ticns,
otherwise, a dra/nage easement should la obtained fi~n the affected
property c~ners fur the release of ccmcentrated cr diver~__-~_ storm
Zlc~m. A oc~f of the recorded dra/nage ease~t should ~e
t.~ the District fr= review prior t~ the reccr~m of the final
T~,L~ary erostin _-x~_tml ~asures should be hnplenented hn~diataly
following rough grading to Fevmt depoaitim of debris c~to ~-
str_~m.propart/es cr drainage AcJ/ities.
R:L,araide ~
Plann/ng De/mrUmmt.
l%ez Vesting Tract 23373
Amended :No. Z
-3- July 22, 1988
Fo~d ~t~ ~ U~ of ~
Quer,/cra oca,;e.,,,lrgj this mattar nay be refertel t~ ]%cbert Chtang of this
office at 714/787-2333.
Very truly yours,
C, OU 'i'k' .k<_fVERSIDE '
DEPARTMENT "'
of HEALTH
sllll,,ll
tatate
El
1'!sis
C~diOlSi, ~A Ilyal
t&l[I Ikllleel
l~ml~
till
4avlRI&OL
lUlllees
6411 tpTrdom atvD,
dzvfJtfdOff, gdk Jdt4e
mm
' .3~e 13, lg6S -'
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPT.
4060 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92503
Attn** Kathy Oilford
JUN 21 1988
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE; TRACT PAP 13373z That certain land situated in the
tanincorporated territory of the County of Riverside. State
of California, being Parcels l, 1,3.4 and 5 of Parcel
21864 as shorn on a map thereof filed in Book 144, Pages 24
through 33 of Parcel Haps in the O/rice or the County
Recorder of said Riverside County together vith s portion ot
the Rancho Temecula granted by tho Government ot the United
States of America to Luis Vtgnes by patent dated 3anuary
1860 and recorded in the O/face or the County Recorder of
San Diego County, California
(6 Lots)
Gentlemen:
The Department of Public Health hal revieved Tentltive
No. 23373 end recommends that: ·
X valor system shall be installed according to'
plans end s~ecitication as approved by the vater
company and the Health Department, Permanent
prints !of the plans of the valor system shall
be submitted in triplicate, vtth· minimum scale
not less then one inch equals 200 feet, along viLh
the original drsving to the County Surveyor, The
prints shall ahoy the internal pipe diameter,
location of valves end fire hydrants; pipe end
~oint specifications, and the size or Lhe main
iL the ~ction or the nov system to the
existing system, ~e plans shall comply in
all respects vith Day, S, Part 1, ChapLet 7 or
the California Health sad Safety Code, California
Administrative Code, Title 22, ChapLet 16, and
Order No. 103 of the Public U~iliLies Co~ission
SLs~.e or California, vhen spplicible.
Riverside Cotn~ty PlinningDept.
Page Two
Attn: Kathy Gtfford
,~;ne 130 1988
The plans shill be signed by t registered engineer and
valor company with the foXloving certification: =I
certify that the design of the vaLor system in
Tract Map 23373 is accordance with the valor system
expansion plans of the Xancho California Water District
and that the valor service,storage and distribution
system viII be adequate to provide water service to
such tract. This certification does not constitute
guarantee that it viII supply valor to such tract
any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire
protection or Iny other purpose". This certification
shall be signed by · responsible official of the water
company.
the req~faA_Lg£_~bt,£ss~£~s~i~n_gL_~bt_glnS~_asn.
This Department has a stiLemeat from the Rancho California
Water District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and
every lot in the subdivision on demand providing
satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the
subdivider. It viii be necess,ry for the ftnanci,l
,rr,ngements tO be made prior to the recordaLien of the
tin,l m,p.
This Department has s statement from the Eastern Hunicip·l
VaLor District agreeing to slier the subdivision sewage
system to be connected to the severs or the District. The
sever system shill be installed according to plans and
specifications as approvSd by the District, the County
Surveyor sad the Health Department. Permanent prints of the
plans of the sever system shell be submitted in triplicate,
&long with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor. The
prints shill show the internal pips diameter, lociLion of
sinholes, complete profiles, pipe and ~otnt specifications
and the size of the severs st the ~unction of Lhs new system
to the existing system. A single pitt indiesLing location
of sever lines and valet lines shall be s portion of the
sewage pleas and profiles. The plans shill be signed by s
registered engineer and the sever district with the
following certification: 'I certify that the design of the
sever system in Tract Map 23373 is in accord·ace with the
sever system expansion plans of the Eastern Hunicipal Water
District and that the vista disposal system is adequate at
Jeiverstde County Planning Dept.
Fags Three
ATrJ4** Kathy Gifford
June 13, 1908
this time to treat the anticipated vastes from the proposed
tract.'
It viII be necessary for financial arrangements
prior to the recordatton of the final map.
ia
S' t n
ironmental Health Services
SX:tac
to be made
LANNiNd D PA CMErlC
DATE: ,Tune 1, 1988
TO: Assessor
Bulldtng and Safety
Surveyor - Dave Dude
Road Department
Health - Ralph Luchs
Fire Protection
FTood Control DIstrict
Fish & Game
LAFCO, S Paisley
U.S. Postal Servtce- Ruth E. Davtdson
· Jurt 16 1988
RIVERSIDE COUNTy
PLANNfNG DEPA. RTMENT
Sheriff* s Department
AIrports Department
UCR, Ltfe Sctence .Dept,, V. il.' Ma~ew
GROFZT ....
Easter;. Huntctpal Valet Dtst.
Ranthe' California Vater Olst.
Elstnore Unlon School Dtst. -
Te~ecula Unton School Dfst.
$terra Club, San Gor~onto Chapter
CALTRANS f8
VESTiN6 TRACT 23373 - ($p Pl ) - E,A.
32548 - Par arSta VIlla e Development C,
- Robert SeTh, lltlltam lrost & Assoc, -
Rancho California Area -Ftrst
Supervisortel Dtstrtct- N. of Rancho
California Road, V. of Kaiser Parkway -
R-R Zone - 28 Acres 348 Condomtnlum unl
- (RELATED CASE TR 23371 & 23372) ~d - A.P, 923-210-023
PTease rerlew the case described above, along wtth the attached case map, A Land '~
Dtvtston Coattree meeting has been tentatively scheduled for June 20, 1988. If it ,.ear
It will then go to public heartng,
Tour coe~ents and recommendations are requested prior to June S, 1988 in order that we w
include ~hem tn ~he staff report for this particular case.
Should/ou have any questions regarding this Item, Rlease do not hesitate to contact
Kathy Gifford at 787-6356
Planner
The ilstnore Unton High School District facilities are overcrowded and our
educatlonal programs seriously impacted by Increasing student population
caused by newresfdenttal, cowmerctal and Industrial construction.
Therefore, pursuant to California Government Code Section 53080 of A8 2926
and 58 327, this district levtes a-fee against all new development projects
k4thtn Its'boundaries.
DATE: SIlIIIATURE
PLF. AiE prtnt name and tttle
4080 LEMON STREET, 9T" FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
{714) 787-6181
Joseph Enserro, Assistant Superintendent
46-209 OASIS STREET, RO-"7)-dl. 3C
INDIO. CALIFORNIA 922C
(619) 342-627
qs;qTE: 3gne 1, 1968 .
Assessor
luilding and Safety
Surveyor - Dave Duda
~oad Departaent
Health - Ralph Laths
Fi re Protect1 on
Flood Control District
Fish & Game ,
LAFCO, S Patslay
U,S, Postal Servtce- Ruth E. Divtdson
JUra 13 1988
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
.I:I,ANNING DEPARTMENT
Shertff's Department
Parks pa nC - orge B.
Agrtcu~uare~t~nL~s~eoner yVESTINS ~ 23373 - Cap Pl) - E.g.
A!~ kpa~nt - 32548 - ~r artCa Vtlla e Developer' Co.
;~ L~fe Sc~enff kpt · V.V. ~ - Robert Be~n, ~11(m ~rost & Assoc. -
~ ' ' ' ~ ' ' hncho Cal~fornla hi -
r
~ste~ ~tctpsl Vite O - Supewlsortil OtstrSct -N. of hnc ·
hn~o ~11fo~18 ~er O~st. ..CilSforntl Road, H, of htser PsFkvay -
Zone - 28 Acres 348 Cond~ntum untts
~stno~ ~ton S~1 Otst. R-?~T~
T~li Until Sch~l Dtst. - C~E TR 2337~ & 23372) ~d
Sierra Club, Sin ~nto ~ap~r - A.P. 923-21~023
CALT&AHS 18
olease revtev the case describe~ above along with the attached case map. A Land 988
tvTsion Cofntttee meeting has been te~ta~.tvely scheduled for June 20, I . [f it clears,
tt v111 then 9o to public hearing.
Your constants and recommendations are requested prior to June S, 1988 tn order that we
tncTude them in the staff report fort his particular case,
Should you have any questions regarding this flea, please do not hesttste to contact
Kathy Gtfford at 787-6356
Planner
~S:
DATE: C~,'T'u~tT~ SIGt(ATURE
PLEX~ print flare and tttle
080 LEMON STREET. 9v' FLOOR
RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
EASTERN tNFbRMATION CENTER
ArChaeo;ogical Research Unit
Universiity of California
Rivers;de. CA 92521
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
wJNDIO, CALIFORNIA 92:'
(619) 342-82- -
DATE: June 1, i988
TO: Assessor
Buildtrig and Safety
Surveyor - Dave Dude
...Road Department
Heelth - Ralph Luchs
FIre Protection
Flood Control DIstrict
FIsh & Game
LAFCO, S Paisley
U.S. Postal Service - Ruth E. Davtdson
'rlLAliNilld ErtA,IQTIENC
JUN 13 1 U8
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT"
$hertff's Department
Perks par nt - Geoqe I.
A g rt culture t~ml s s t one r
M rports Department
UCR, Life Sctence .Dept., W.W. Payhew
GROFIT ' * '
Eastern Huntcfpel I/ater Disto
Rancho**Cal Iforofe kter DtsL
E:lstnore Unton $chool Dtst°
Terecule Union School Disto
Sierra Club, San Gorgonto Chapter
CALTRAHS f8
VESTING TRACT 23373 - ($p P1) - E.A.
32548 - Par artta Village Development Co
- Robert Be?n, Vi111am Frost & Assoc, -
Rancho Californle Area - First
Supervtsorlel Oistrtct - N, of RanchO
CallfornSa Road, V. of Kaiser Parkway -
R-R Zone - 28 Acres 348 Condomtnlum untt
- (REI. ATED CASE TR 23371 & 23372) Nod
- A.P, 923-210-023
Please revlew the case described above, along wtth the attached case map. A Land
Division Comittee meetfng has been tentatively scheduled for June 20, 1988. if it
tt w111 then 9o to public heartngo
Tour c~unents and recommendations are requested prior to June S, 1988 tn order that ~ re
include them tn the staff report for this pertitular case,
Should you have any questions regarding this ttem, please do not hesitate to contact
Kathy Gtfford at 787-6356
Planner
DATE: SIGNATURE
PLEASE prtnt hare and tttle CHIFJ
4080 LEI~ON STREET. 9T" FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS STREET, RO( ~304
INDIO. CALIFORNIA ~2201
(619) 342-8277
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
S%STAFFRPT~3373.VTM
15
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
EXHIBITS
S\STAFFRPT',.23373V'TM. CC
17
CITY OF TEMECULA
VICINITY MAP
EXHIBIT NO.
c ;. s U. 0
~P.C. DATE IF~4-ql
.bb~AC
L
CITY OF TEMECULA
GARITA
,/
EXHIBIT NO.
~P.C. DATE I~q-~l Y I
CITY
OF TEMECULA
tlR
RI,4|
iXHIBIT NO.
'CAS~' NO.,nH;~ -,,
~P.C. DATE 11-14-q/ ~ I
CITY OF TEMECULA ).
A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 6
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
S%STAFFRPl"~3373VTM.CC 18
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23373
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Feq
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Library)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition of AoDroval
Condition No. 1
Condition No. 14
Condition No. 9
Condition No. 3
Condition No. 2
Condition No. 6
Condition No. 5
S\STAFFRPT~3373VTM.CC 19
ITEM NO.
14
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Planning Department
January 14, 1992
Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320
Prepared By: Debbie Ubnoske
Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 were previously before the City
Council on October 8, 1991, November 12, 1991, and December 10, 1991. These items were continued
at the applicants' request.
The applicant is once again requesting a continuance to the January 28, 1992 City Council meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council continue Change of Zone No.
5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 at the request of
the applicant.
vgw
" qbert Beir ,'William cFrost &c ssociates
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & SURVEYORS
J.N. 25800
January9, 1992
Honorable Mayor and Members
of the City Council
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Subject:
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25320/C'nange of
Zone No. 5631 - Bedford Development Company
Dear Mayor Parks and Councilmembers:
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25320 and Change of Zone No. 563 1 are scheduled for hearing
before the City Council on January 14, 1992. The City has just recently completed its
independent appraisal of the property. To allow additional time for the City and Bedford
Development Company to review the appraisal and determine the appropriate course of
action, we respectfully request that this item be continued to the January 28, 1992 meeting.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Robert B. Kemble
Director of Planning
Temecula Regional Office
CO:
June Greek - City Clerk
Gary Thornhill - Planning Director
Csaba Ko - Bedford Development Company
RBK:dd
28765 SINGLE OAK DRIVE · SUITE 250 · TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA 92590 · (714) 676-8042 * FAX (714) 676-7240
O~PlCES IN !RVINE , COP~_'Dr,,.~ , P,t-,LM DESERT , S~CRAMENTO · SAN DIEGO
ITEM NO. 15
APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE:
January 14, 1992
SUBJECT:
Conversion of City Vehicles to Alternative Fuel Sources
Prepared by:
Grant M. Yates, Senior Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file this report regarding
conversion of City vehicles to alternative fuel sources.
DISCUSSION: At the request of the City Council we have prepared a staff
report regarding the conversion of City vehicles to propane fuel.
Recently, the City converted two (2) vehicles to propane fuel. The conversion was
performed by Petrolane, a local company specializing in this service. Petrolane was
the lowest of three (3) bids received for this conversion and City staff has been
satisfied with the performance of these vehicles.
At this time, staff is recommending that the remainder of the City's fleet not be
converted to propane. This recommendation is due to the fact that all City trucks are
mid-sized trucks and, therefore have limited bed space. When a mid-size truck is
converted to propane, the propane tanks are placed in the bed of the truck, thereby
reducing the amount of cargo space. All future City vehicles purchased will be
evaluated for the possibility of purchasing full sized trucks that will allow the propane
tank to be stored in the body of the truck, which will not have a negative impact on
the amount of cargo space available.
FISCAL IMPACT: It is possible for the City to utilize funds collected
from Assembly Bill 2766 revenues, which are funds disbursed from the Department
of Motor Vehicles to agencies that adopt ordinances expressing a commitment to
spend the revenues to reduce air pollution from mobile sources. The City has
collected $4,61 6 to date from the Department of Motor Vehicles for our share of
AB2766 revenues. Total anticipated revenue through the end of fiscal year 1992 is
$18,000.
ITEM NO.
16
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICERL~.~_
CITY MANAGER ·
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
January 14, 1992
Appointment of Councilmembers to serve on Committees
PREPARED BY:
John R. Meyer
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve nominees to General
Plan Technical Subcommittee.
DISCUSSION
At its December 17, 1991, the Council discussed appointments to the five General Plan technical
subcommittees. Each subcommittee will focus one of the following topics:
Land Use
Traffic/Circulation
Community Design
Economic Development
Growth Management
It was agreed that each Councilmember would individually recommend one nominee to each
subcommittee. The Council will then act upon the nominees as a whole. At this time the
nominations are still being received. Once all of the nominations are received, staff will provide the
City Council with a completed appointee matrix. In addition to listing the nominees for each
committee, the matrix will contain staff's recommendations relative to each Councilmember's
assignment on the five subcommittees. Please note that the attached matrix contains only the
names of Councilmembers and Commission assignments. Staff's recommendation are based on
the attached 1992 Committee Assignments as approved by the Council in December of 1991. The
Council assignments are recommendations only, and the Council may change assignments as they
desire.
Staff has also made recommendations relative to the subcommittee assignments of the various City
Commissions (Parks, Planning, Traffic, Parks and Safety). As before, staff attempted to best fit
the interests and responsibilities of each Commission. However, the Council may elect to make
Commission assignments to whatever subcommittee it deems appropriate. Commissions will
appoint representatives to the technical subcommittees during their January meetings.
attachments
MISYERJR~SELECT.M2P
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
1992 Committee Assic~nments
Commission Liaison (One Member)
Parks and Recreation Commission:
Planning Commission:
Public Safety Commission:
Traffic and Transportation Commission:
Patricia H. Birdsall
Ronald J. Parks
Karel Lindemans
Sal Mu~oz
Committee Assignments One or two members)
Administration Committee:
Airport Committee:
City Promotion/Economic Development Committee:
Cultural Preservation Committee:
Design Standards Committee:
Finance Committee:
'General Plan Committee:
Integrated Waste Management Committee:
JPIA Committee:
K-RAT, JPA:
Legislative Committee:
Old Town Specific Plan Committee:
Old Town Advisory Committee:
Public Works/Facilities Committee:
RCTC:
RDA Committee:
Regional Transit Authority Representative:
Sister City Committee:
Sphere of Influence Committee:
WRCOG Representative
Ron Parks
Peg Moore/Sal Mu~oz
Karel Lindemans/Peg Moore
Pat Birdsall
Peg Moore.
Karel Lindemans/Peg Moore
Ron Parks/Sal Mu~oz (Peg
Moore, Alternate)
Karel Lindemans, Peg Moore
Peg Moore
Ron Parks, Sal Mu~oz
Peg Moore
Ron Parks, Karel Lindemans
Peg Moore
Peg Moore, Ron Parks
Sal Mu~oz
Sai Mu~oz, Ron Parks
Sal Mu~oz
Pat Birdsall, Karel I.indemans
Sal Mu~oz, Ron Parks
Ron Parks, Pat Birdsall
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:: :i :',1-,~ :~::;:
:::.:..:'.:.' .:.
N
C:
0
0
0
~.--
0
C,)
ITEM NO.
17
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVA
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER '
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
January 14, 1992
Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the ConStruction of Overland
Drive between Ynez Road and Jefferson Avenue; EA-6.
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
BACKGROUND:
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
It is requested that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for Environmental Assessment Number 6, the
proposed construction of Overland Drive between Ynez Road and
Jefferson Avenue.
Attached is a copy of the project description for the extension of
Overland Drive. The project includes the acquisition of right-of-
way, the construction of a four-lane overpass and roadway
between Ynez Road and Jefferson Road, and the anticipated
future use of the facility.
Based upon the analysis of the potential environmental impacts,
as described in the Initial Study, it has been determined that the
proposed project could have a significant adverse impact on the
environment, but the impacts will be mitigated to a level of
insignificance by the mitigation measures contained in the Initial
Study. As a result, it is recommended that the City Council
adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project.
HOGAND\CCAR_EA6.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
INTRODUCTION
The City of Temecula is proposing to construct a four lane overpas~ at the
proposed alignment of Overland Drive at Interstate 15 in western Riverside
County. The proposed alignment of Overland Drive extends from Ynez Road
south to Jefferson Avenue. The new overpass is being proposed by the City
to provide improved traffic circulation. The overpass will improve east-
west intercity circulation and decrease through traffic from the Winchester
and Rancho California Road/I-15 interchanges. The Riverside County
assessment district CFD 88-12 will finance 100% of the $11.8 million for
the proposed improvements. The City will acquire the necessary right-of-
way at no cost to the County or the State.
BACKGROUND
The County of Riverside established the Community Facilities District
No. 88-12 to provide for construction of several improvements to existing
facilities. The improvements include widening of several major arterials,
signalization of intersections, construction of the Overland Drive
overpass, and the construction of north bound on and off ramps at the
Winchester and Rancho California/I-15 interchanges. The purpose of these
improvements is to provide improved traffic circulation and allow for
further development of industrial and commercial land uses. The City of
Temecula has passed Resolution 90-30 to assist in the financing of these
projects.
PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT
The purpose of the project is allow for the intercity movement of vehicles
to be independent from that of the Winchester and Rancho California Road
overpasses. Winchester and Rancho California/I-15 interchanges both have a
projected Level of Service (LOS) of "F" for the year 2015. The extension
of Overland Drive as an overpass is the only practical solution to
facilitate the anticipated traffic congestion on Winchester and Rancho
California overpasses.
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
II
Backqround
1. Name of Proponent:
City of Temecula
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
~317~ Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
(71~) 69~-1989
e
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
June 2~, 1991
Agency Requiring
Assessment:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
EA 6 (Overland Drive/I-15 Interchanqe)
6. Location of Proposal:
Alol3roximately 1/2 mile south of
Winchester Road/I -15 I nterchanqe,
between Ynez Road and Jefferson
Avenue.
Environmental Imloacts
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets. )
Yes Maybe
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
No
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
X
X
X
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
X
X
A: EA6 1
Air.
a.
Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the
ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Exposure of 'people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Will the proposal result in:
Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air
quality? '
The creation of objectionable
odors?
Alteration of air movement,
moisture, or temperature, or any
change in climate, whether locally
or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or
fresh waters?
Substantial changes in absorption
rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff?
Ca
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
ee
Discharge into surface. waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or Fate
of flow or ground waters?
Yes
Maybe
X
X
X
No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A:EA6 2
Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct addi-
tions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts
or excavations?
Substantial reduction in the amount
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?'
Exposure of people or property to
water related hazards such as flood-
ing or tidal waves?
Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
ae
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants {including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops. and aquatic plants)?
Yes
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare. or endangered species
of plants?
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing
species?
Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects ) ?
ao
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
Maybe
X
X
No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A:EA6 3
Yes Maybe No
10o
11·
12.
13.
Noise· Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
Exposure of people to severe noise
levels?
Light and Glare. Will the proposal
produce substantial new light or glare?
Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land usa of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
b. Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal
involve:
A risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (including,
but not limited to, oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation ) in the event
of an accident or upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Population. Will the proposal alter
the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population of
an area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A: EA6 ~
15.
16..
Yes
Maybe
b. Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking? __ __
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems? X
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? X
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? __ __
Public ServiceS. Will the proposal have
substantial effect upon, or result in a
need for new or altered governmental
services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection? __ X
b. Police protection? __ X
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads? X
f. Other governmental services:
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy? t __
b. Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy? m m
Utilities. Will the proposal result in'
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A:EA6 5
17.
18.
19.
20.
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health ) ?
Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
Aesthetics· Will the proposal result
in the obstruction of any scenic vista
or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal resulit in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
bo
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
Co
Does the proposal have the potential
to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area?
Yes
Maybe
No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
A:EA6 6
Yes Maybe No
21.
Mandatory Findings of Significance.
Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short-term
impact on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively brief,
definitive period of time while long-
term impacts will endure well into
the future. )
Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but cumu-
latively considerable? ( A projectBs
impact on two or more separate
resources may be relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment
is significant. )
Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
X
X
X
A: EA6 7
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
Earth
1o8o
1.b.
1,C,
1.d.
1o6.
1.f.
l.g.
No. Proposed improvements are limited to surface construction and
attendant necessary foundation works. Sensitive/significant geologic
substrata have not been identified ~t the project site. The proposed
overpass site does not lie within any designated fault zones. No
impacts on, or from unstable earth conditions of significance are
anticipated.
Yes. The project entails construction aspects necessitating disruption,
displacement and overcovering of on-site project soils. Proposed plans
entail accepted grading techniques as approved by GaiTtans and the
City Engineer. Soils on the subject site exhibit no unique
characteristics warranting their preservation. Proposed construction
will not significantly impact area soils resources.
No. The project site is essentially level. Proposed bridge height does
not exceed LtO'+/- relative to adjacent existing ground surfaces.
Grading/fill of significant volumes is not proposed. No significant
change in regional topography will result from implementation of this
project.
No. Unique geologic or physical features are not evident on the project
site. No impacts of significance.
No. Localized erosion may occur as soils are exposed during the course
of construction. Subsequent to construction and prior to re-
establishment of on-site vegetation/landscaping soils are also
vulnerable to erosion by wind and water. Mitigation is realized by on-
site watering during grading aCtivities to control dust, and'-
installation/maintenance of landscaping, and hydro-seeding and
mulching per City and GaiTtans specifications. Physical limitations of
project scope preclude impacts of significance on a regional basis.
No. The project does not include elements logically affecting beaches,
rivers or streambeds.
Maybe. No identified earthquake, ground failure or similar hazards of
significance affect the subject property. However, the project lies
within "Seismic Zone II-B" . As defined by Riverside County, this zone
is classified as generally unsuitable for construction of major highways,
tunnels or bridges. This is an advisory classification only, intended
to promote community safety and disaster recovery during and following
an earthquake. Detailed site investigations and engineering studies
may be necessary for structures in this zone. As required by existing
regulations {Section 51, GaiTtans Standards and Specifications),
geologic and engineering studies will be required by GaiTtans for the
overpass prior to approval of the construction design.
A:EA6 8
Air
2.a,b.
2.co
Water
3.a.
3.b.
The project improvements are not located within a known landslide
hazard area. The proposed overpass is located within an area of
potential liquefaction or subsidence. Drill hole data in the immediate
vicinity of the proposed overpass indicates groundwater levels between
17 to 3~ feet in depth from the ground surface. There may be the
potential for liquefaction during a strong ground shaking episode in the
vicinity of the proposed overpass. Such impacts are largely
unmitigable. however, the proposal will be designed and constructed
incorporating applicable earthquake resistant standards, designs and
construction methodologies, as specified by CalTrans and the City of
Temecula Engineering Department.
Maybe Long term increases in localized auto emissions will likely result
upon project completion due to increased traffic volumes at the project
site. Temporary deterioration of localized air quality is also likely
during construction activities due to operation of diesel-powered
machinery/vehicles and dust generated during grading activities.
Mitigation of long range impacts may eventually be realized by reduced
auto volumes as ride-sharing and mass transit programs are
implemented. Otherwise, such impacts are unmitigable and considered
acceptable in order to alleviate area-wide traffic congestion. Short
term impacts are mitigated through site-specific remedies such as
limited hours of construction activities. on-site watering during
grading activities, properly tuning and maintaining all construction
equipment and use of low-sulphur fuels for equipment used on the
project site.
No. The proposal does not entail structures sufficient in scope to
significantly alter regional air currents. Climate alteration may be
noticeable on an extremely localized basis as traffic volumes increase in
the project vicinity with little or no discernable impact. "
NO. Project elements do not include water course creation(s) or
diversion ( s ) of significance.
No. Localized drainage patterns will be altered as natural drainage
patterns are modified by construction activities. Drainage plans and
improvements shall comply with applicable City and CalTrans
specifications.
No. The site does not lie within a designated flood hazard area. Off-
site project elements of this proposal do not entail construction within
areas subject to flooding.
A: EA6 9
3.d,e.
3 .f,g.
3.h.
3.i.
Plant Life
L~.a,C.
Animal Life
5.a,b,c.
Noise
No. Localized alterations in drainage patterns and on-site
erosion/absorption qualities my nominally affect surface levels of
distant water bodies, with no significant impact. Similarly, turbidity
of off-site drainage may eventually affect these waters without
detectable impacts.
No. Interceptions, diversions, extractions or contributions to
groundwaters are not proposed.
No. The project's water 'consumption will consist primarily of water
utilized to mitigate potential dust generated during grading activities,
and that necessary to ensure on-site landscaping viability. Based on
the limited scope of this proposal, no reduction of significance in public
water supply is anticipated.
No. Reference Item No. 3.c.
Maybe. New species may be introduced as a result of landscaping
introduced to mitigate potential on-site erosion. Nominal off-site escape
of varietal landscaping can be expected with no regional impact on
vegetative species.
No. Unique, rare or endangered species of vegetation are not evident
on the project site. Similarly, the proposaPs location is not of
agricultural significance.
No. Locally, limited members of common small rodents, reptiles, and
insects and their respective habitats may be destroyed or displaced as
a result of project implementation, with no significant impact on species ''-
populations. Specific site investigation to determine evidence of
Stephen~s Kangaroo Rat (SKR) in 1990 did not indicate existence of
active SKR burrows. The project contributes incrementally to
reduction of regional SKR habitat and is subject to Habitat Conservation
Plan mitigation fees adopted by the City of Temecula.
Yes. Temporary, localized increases in noise levels are anticipated
during construction activities, impacts of which are short term and
largely confined to the project site. Noise generated by such activities
is considered a nuisance impact and is mitigated primarily by limiting
construction activities to daylight hours. Sensitive noise receptors
have not been identified in the project vicinity. Permanent increases
in localized noise levels can be expected as an inevitable impact of
overpass construction as auto traffic in the vicinity increases. Such
impacts, while noticeable, do not pose a health hazard, and are
considered an acceptable environmental trade-off for increased traffic
A:EA6 10
6.b.
No. Severe noise levels are not an anticipated impact of project
implementation.
Liqht and Glare
Maybe. The Overland Drive overpass project lies within the Mt.
Palomar Observatory Special Lighting Area (MOPSLA). The project
will require that some of the site~s existing light standards be relocated
and additional light standards be installed· MOPSLA policy statements
indicate that street lighting will be low pressure sodium vapor. Lights
are to be oriented and shielded to minimize glare. The project will
comply with the requirements of the MOPSLA, therefore, reducing the
project's impacts on light and glare to a level of insignificance.
Traffic utilizing the overpass during nighttime hours will contribute
incrementally to localized and area-wide light and glare. Impacts of
which will likely be insignificant but may require site-specific
evaluation subsequent to project implementation·
Land Use
Yes. The project, as currently sited, lies within land areas designated
for commercial and light industrial uses. Construction of the overpass
is compatible with uses allowed under those categories. As designed
however, the project will encroach upon drive approach/parking
facilities owned and utilized by an adjacent light industrial land use
{Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.) Property acquisition/easements as
required will be acquired from the affected land owner prior to project
approval and implementation. No significant impact on other vicinity
land uses is anticipated.
Natural Resources
9. a,b' No. Project scope precludes substantially increased usage or depletion
of renewable or non-renewable resources.
Risk of Upset-
10.a,b.
Maybe. Temporary storage of toxins, including fuel and oil, on the
project site during construction activities increases localized potentials
for risk of explosion and/or release of hazardous materials. Significant
volumes of on-site storage is not proposed nor will be permitted.
Storage and dispensing of fuels shall comply with applicable State
ordinances. On-site disposal of waste oil and fuel shall not be allowed.
Project scope and location indicate no significant impact.
Temporary diversion and disruption of traffic flows during construction
activities may nominally delay response times of emergency vehicles.
Mitigation is realized through proper traffic flow management plans
implemented during construction activities, including but not limited to,
advance notification of construction periods, adequate detours, and
sufficient on-site traffic monitoring personnel. Long range impacts of
A:EA6 11
· the proposal on emergency vehicle response times should be positive as
regional traffic flow efficiencies increase subsequent to completion of
the proposed overpass.
Population .
11.
No. The project does not propose population relocation elements.
Housinq
12.
No. Housing will not be constructed nor demolished as a result of this
proposal.
Transportation/Circulation
13.a.
No. The project in and of itself will not generate additional vehicular
movement.
13.b.
No. Nominal deletion of parking assets available to the adjacent
Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., facility is necessary to construct the
project as currently designed. Additional parking will be made
available to the referenced facility if required. No significant impacts
on regional parking assets.
13.c,d.
13.e.
Yes.-- The project proposes significant improvement to the Cityis
current circulation plan, alleviating existing congestion at the
Winchester Road/!-15 and Rancho California Roadll-15 interchange.
Project circulation system impacts are specifically addressed in the
Environmental Assessment prepared for the Overlying Community
Facilities District 88-12 {CFD 88-12), reference CFD 88-12, E.A. No.
3~121. The negative declaration for this environmental assessment was
filed with the Riverside County Clerk of the Board on October 3, 1989.
No. The project does not include elements that will logically entail
alterations to waterborne, rail, or air traffic patterns.
13.f.
No. Project implementation should decrease risks of traffic hazards
regionally as traffic flow efficiencies are increased. Reference also
E.A. No. 3~121.
Public Services
Maybe. New road/overpass construction may result in additional
localized requirements for police and fire protection, incrementally
insignificant on a regional scale.
l~.c,d,f.
No. Impacts on schools. parks, recreational facilities or other
governmental services have not been identified as logical consequences
of project implementation.
A:EA6 12
14.e.
Yes. Construction of new bridge and roads increases area-wide public
facilities maintenance requirements and costs. Financial impacts and
mitigation are addressed in the E.A. for CFD 88-12.
Enerqy
15.a,b. No. Reference Items 9.a. and 9.b.
Utilities
16.a-f.
No. Nominal relocation and improvements affecting the utilities
referenced will be required on a site-specific basis. Regional alteration
to utility services is not proposed. No significant impacts.
Human Health
17.a,b.
No. The project site is not subject to known health hazards.
Hazardous waste investigation of the property in question revealed no
toxic substances or contaminants of significance. Reference
"Hazardous Materials Assessment, Proposed Apricot Avenue Extension,
and Crossing of 1-15, Temecula, California" prepared by SEACOR,
dated March 15, 1991.
Aesthetics
18.
No. The project, as designed, does not encroach on existing scenic
vistas. Project elements include site landscaping enhancing
constructed, graded areas. No significant aesthetic impacts are
anticipated.
Recreation
19.
No. Recreational assets are not proposed to be constructed or
demolished attendant to this project.
Cultural Resources
20.a-d.
No. The State Historic Resources Inventory conducted for the project
site and vicinity evidenced no prehistoric or historic archaeological
finds of significance. Similarly, no paleontolocjical assets warranting
preservation have been detected to date. {Reference the attached
correspondence from the California Archaeological Inventory, Eastern
Information Center, dated December 5, 1990. )
Mandatory Findinqs of Siqnificance
21 .a-d.
Reference Items 1 through 20.
A:EA6 13
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
I find 'that although the proposed project could have a si.gni-
ticant effect on the environment, there will not be a signl-
ticant effect on this case because the mitigation measures
described on attached sheets and in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on
the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
June 2~, 1991
Date
For
CiTY OF TEMECULA
X
A:EA6 1~
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA
ITEM
1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
HELD DECEMBER 10, 1991
A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 8:16
PRESENT: 5
ABSENT: 0
PM.
DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks, Mur~oz
DIRECTORS: None
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, City 'Attorney Scott F. Field and June S.
Greek, City Clerk.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None given.
CSD BUSINESS
1. Minutes
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Lindemans to approve the
minutes of the meeting of November 26, 1991 as mailed.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Parks, Mu~oz
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None
2. Cancellation of Reoular Meetino Scheduled December 24. 1991
It was moved by Director Moore, seconded by Director Parks to cancel the regularly
scheduled meeting of December 24, 1991 and reschedule the meeting to take place
on December 17, 1991.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5 DIRECTORS:
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS:
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks,
None
None
Mufioz
41Mtnutesl 121091 - 1 - 1 211 8/91
CSD Minutes December 10. 1991
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Moore to continue Items 3 and 4 until
after the election of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem. The motion was unanimously carried.
RECESS
President Mufioz called a recess at 8:21 PM until after the election of Mayor and Mayor Pro
Tem. The meeting was reconvened following the election of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem at
9:23 PM.
e
Election of President of the Temecula Community Services Board of Directors
It was moved by Director Lindemans. seconded by Director Moore to elect Ronald J.
Parks as President of the Community Services District.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks, Mufioz
DIRECTORS: None
DIRECTORS: None
Election of Vice President of the Temecula Community Services Board of Directors
It was moved by Director Lind.mane to elect Peg Moore as Vice President of the
Temecula Community Services Board of Directors. Director Moore declined.
It was moved by Director Parks. seconded by Director Moore to elect J. Sal Mufioz as
Vice President of the Community Services DistriCt.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 5
NOES:
ABSENT:
DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindernans, Moore, Parks,
Mufioz
0 DIRECTORS: None
0 DIRECTORS: None
COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT
None given.
4/Minuteell 21091 -2- 12/16/91
CSD Minutes December 10, 1991
CITY ATTORNFY RFPORT
None given.
DIRECTORS REPORTS
Director Moore requested that the Parks and Recreation Master Plan include a Skate Board
Park.
Director Parks requested that a semi-annual budget update be given.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Lindemans to adjourn at 9:28 PM. The
motion was unanimously carried.
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, TCSD Secretary
J. Sal Mufioz, President
4/Minutes/121091 -3,- 1 211 6/91
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
HELD DECEMBER 17, 1991
A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 8:31
PM in the Temporary Temecula Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive,
Temecula, California. President J. Sal Mu~oz presiding.
PRESENT 5 DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz,
Parks
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None
Also present were City Manager/General Manager David F. Dixon, City Attorney Scott F. Field,
and City Clerk/District Secretary June S. Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No Public Comments were offered.
DISTRICT BUSINESS
1. Interim Community Recreation Center
Community Services Director Shawn Nelson presented the staff report, and advised
that the recommendation regarding a location has not been finalized. He stated that
two locations, both having excellent potential, are under negotiation.
Director Parks questioned the amount of square footage the facility will require. Mr.
Nelson responded that approximately 4,000 square feet is the desired size for the
facility.
Director Lindemans questioned how the interest being earned on the property tax
assessment is being utilized.
General Manager David Dixon advised that all the funds are invested in the LAIF (Local
Agency Investment Fund) to secure the best rate on investment and that expenditures
of this nature are taken out of the fund as needed.
Tom Langley, 27505(b) Ynez Road, speaking on behalf of the Community Recreation
Center Foundation Board, thanked the City staff and the Parks and Recreation
Commission for their support of the CRC. He stated that the Foundation Board is
concerned that the time-table for construction of the Center is not moving along
promptly as they hoped. Mr. Langley also advised that the Foundation Board has
approved expenditures of up to $20,000 for purchases of equipment to be used at the
interim center.
Minutes~ 12/17/91 - 1 - 12~23/91
Community Services District Minutes December 17. 1991
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by 'Director Moore to approve the staff
recommendations as follows with a modification to the budget allocation for lease of
the space not to exceed $3,600 per month.
1.1
Authorize the City Manager/General Manager to determine a location for the
interim community recreation center and negotiate a lease agreement at a cost
not to exceed $3,600 per month, including tenant improvements.
The motion was unanimously carried.
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
No report given.
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
Community Services Director Shawn Nelson reported on the success of the Winter Fest held
on December 14, 1991.
BOARD OF DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
Director Birdsall announced that she has been reappointed to the League of California Cities
Community Services Committee for 1992.
President Mu~oz stated he has been approached by a representative of the Temecula Golden
Bears regarding the community sponsoring a parade in Jsnuary to recognize the team. He has
asked the Temecula Town Association to assist in this effort.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Moore to adjourn at 8:52 PM to the
next regular meeting to be held at 8:00 PM on January 14, 1992 in the Temporary Temecula
Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive, Temecula, California. The motion was
unanimously carried.
ATTEST:
J. Sal Mur~oz, President
June S. Greek, City Clerk/Community
Services District Secretary
Minutes\l 2/17/91 -2- 12/23/91
ITEM
2
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY~~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/Board of Directors
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE:
January 14, 1992
SUBJECT: Selection of Financial Advisor to Evaluate Bond Capacity
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors approve staff recommendation
to select Fieldman Rolapp and Associates as Financial Advisor to perform a bond
capacity study.
DISCUSSION: In order to facilitate the issuance of bonds to fund the
Temecula Community Services District Capital Improvement Program, it is necessary
to have a bond capacity study prepared by a financial advisor.
The Council Finance Committee, Mark J. Ochenduszko and I interviewed four (4)
Financial Advisors and determined that Fieldman Rolapp and Associates was the most
qualified to serve as finance advisors.
FISCAL IMPACT:
bond proceeds.
The cost of the study is $4,500 and will be reimbursed from
ITEM
3
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER 't
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER
JANUARY 14, 1992
DESIGN SERVICES - COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER
PROJECT
PREPARED BY:
SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors:
Award contract to RJM Design Group, Inc. to provide conceptual schematic
design drawings, construction documents, and project administration for the
Community Recreation Center Project which includes a recreation center,
community pool, amphitheater, and parking improvements in the Rancho
California Sports Park.
Appoint two (2) members from the Board of Directors to serve on the Project
Committee for the Community Recreation Center·
DISCUSSION: A Request For Qualifications (RFQ) was released by the City
to landscape architectural and architectural firms to provide schematic design
drawings, construction documents, and project administration services for the
Community Recreation Center Project.
A Selection Committee consisting of Sal Munoz, Pat Birdsall, Evelyn Harker, and Gary
Thornhill was formed to review and evaluate each firm's qualifications and invite the
final top firms for a formal interview process. After interviewing the final top firms,
the Selection Committee ranked the firms based on their qualifications· It was
recommended by the Selection Committee that cost proposals be obtained from the
top two (2) firms based on the scope of services to be provided.
After reviewing the cost proposals of the top two (2) firms, the Selection Committee
recommended that the City enter into negotiations with the top ranked firm, RJM
Design Group, Inc., to determine a final scope of work and cost.
City staff then negotiated a final scope of work at a time and material cost with a not
to exceed amount for each phase. As a result of this process, the Selection
Committee recommends RJM Design Group, Inc. to provide the design services for
the Community Recreation Center Project based on their qualifications and cost
effective proposal.
Enclosed is the agreement with RJM Design Group, Inc. for your review.
FISCAL IMPACT: Cost to provide these services will not exceed $320,080.
The budget for the Community Recreation Center Project in the amount of
$4,650,000 was approved by the Board of Directors on July 2, 1991. The source
of funds will be the TCSD bond issue. Prior to issuance of the bonds, the TCSD
operating fund will advance the cost of design up to $102, 100.
AGREEMENT
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 14th day of January, 1992, between
the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and P, JM
Design Group. Inc., hereinafter referred to as "Consultant".
The parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A attached
hereto.
PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to
the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described
herein.
PAYMENT. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, at the hou~y rates
set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto, based upon actual time spent on the
above tasks. This amount will not exceed $320,080.00 for the total term of
the Agreement unless additional payment is approved by the City Council;
provided that the City Manager may approve additional payments not to
exceed ten percent (10%) of the Agreement, but in no event more than
$10,000.00.
Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed.
Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month,
for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within
thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice.
SUSPENSION, TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT OF AGREEMENT.
The City may, at any time, suspend, terminate or abandon this Agreement, or
any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant at least ten (10) days prior
written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately
cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise.
Within thirty-five (35) days after receiving an invoice from the Consultant, the
City shall pay Consultant for work done through the date that work is to be
ceased pursuant to this section.
If the City suspends, terminates or abandons a portion of this Agreement such
suspension, termination or abandonment shall not make void or invalidate the
remainder of this Agreement.
5. BREACH OF CONTRACT.
In the event that Consultant is in default for
l/s/contnct/rjmdesil.sdn I
BREACH OF CONTRACT. In the event that Consultant is in default for
cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or
duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the
date of default. Default shall include not performing the tasks described
herein to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager of the City. Failure
by the Consultant to make progress in the performance of work hereunder, if
such failure arises out of causes beyond his control, and without fault or
negligence of the Consultant, shall not be considered a default.
If the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant defaults in
the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall
serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall
have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the
default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the
Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall
have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to
terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any
other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this
Agreement.
TERM. This Agreement shall commence on January 14, 1992, and shall
remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in
no event later than December 31, 1993.
Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute
between the City and the Consultant arising out of this Agreement or breech
thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitrator's decision shall be
final.
Consultant shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three
retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The
arbitration hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil
Procedure Section 1280, et seq. City and Consultant shall share the cost of
the arbitration equally.
OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS. Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the
event of termination, suspension or abandonment of this Agreement, all
original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the course of
providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall
become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise
disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant.
1/a/contractldmdeaig.adn 2 i
10.
11.
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. The Consultant is and shall at all times
remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. Neither the City nor
any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of
the Consultant or any of the Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except
as herein set forth. The Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner
represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner
officers, employees or agents of the City.
No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the
performance of this Agreement. Except as provided in the Agreement, City
shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for
performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for
compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising
out of performing services hereunder.
LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of
State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those
employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to
this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all
such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not
be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply
with this section.
SUBCONSULTANTS. The Consultant shall not enter into any subcontracts
for services to be rendered toward the completion of the Consultant's pertion
of this Agreement without the consent of the City. At all times, Bob Mueting,
RIM Design Group, Inc., shall be primarily responsible for the performance
of the tasks described herein. Consultant shall provide City with fourteen (14)
days' notice prior to the departure of any ~ubconsultants from Consultant's
employ. Llpen such notice, the City shall have the option to immediately
terminate this Agreement. Hpon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's
sole compensation shall be for the value of service rendered to the City.
NOTICE. Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice on
the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by certified
mall, pestage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the City Manager
of the City of Temecula, located at 43172 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
California 92390 and the Consultant at RIM Design Group. Inc.. 27285
Las Ramblas. Suite 250. Mission Viejo. CA 92691 unless and until different
addresses may be furnished in writing by either party to the other. Notice
shall be deemed to have been served seventy-two (72) hours after the same has
been deposited in the United States Postal Services. This shall be valid and
sufficient service of notice for all purposes.
12.
ASSIGNMENT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this
Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without the
prior written consent of the City.
Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be
the value to the City of the services rendered.
13.
B,
LIABILITY INSURANCE. The Consultant shall maintain insurance
acceptable to the City in full force an effect throughout the term of this
contract, against claims for injuries to persons or damages' to property which
may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder
by the Consultant, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors.
Insurance is to be placed with insurer with a Bests' rating of no less than
A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be included in the Contractor's bid.
The Consultant shall provide the following scope and limits of insurance:
Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
Insurance Services Office form Number GL 0002 (Ed. 1/73) covering
Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form
number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General
Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability
coverage ("occurrence" form CG 0001).
,
Insurance Services Office form no. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering
Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025.
Workers' Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of the
State of California an Employers' Liability insurance.
4. Errors and Omissions insurance.
Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits of insurance
no less than:
General Liability $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for
bodily injury and property damage.
Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for
bodily injury and property damage.
1/a/contractJrjmdesig .sdn 4
Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers'
compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California
and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident.
4. Errors and Omissions Insurance. $1,000,000. per occurrence.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of $1,000
must be declared to and approved by the City.
Other Insurance Provisions. Insurance policies required by this contract shall
contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions:
All Policies. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be
endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled
by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30)
days' prior written notice to the City via United States First Class Mail.
b,
General Liability and Automobile Liability coverages. The City of
Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be
covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities
performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed
operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the
Consultant, or automobiles owned, lease, hired or borrowed by the
Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the
scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials,
employees or volunteers.
With regard to claims arising from the Consultant's performance of the
work described in this contract, the Consultant's insurance coverage
shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Temecula, its
officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-
insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or
volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not contribute with, the
Consultant's insurance.
Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall
not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers officials,
employees or volunteers.
The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to
the limits of the insurer's liability.
I/a/contractYrj~ndesig .sdn 5
Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage. The
insurer shall agree to waive all fights of subrogation against the City of
Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses
arising from work performed by the Consultant for the City.
14.
Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with
certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this clause. The
certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person
authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The
certificates are to be on forms provided by the City and are to be
received and approved by the City before work commences. The City
reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required
insurance policies, at any time.
Consultant shall include all subconsultants as insureds under its policies
or shall furnish separate certificates for each subcontractor. All
coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements
stated herein.
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and
approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer
shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self insured retentions as
respects the City, its officers, officials and employees; or the Consultant
shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related
investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save harmless
the City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from
and against any and all claims, demands, losses, defense cost, or liability of
any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may
sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of
persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent
performance under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising
out of the sole negligence of the City.
15.
ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement and any documents or instrument
attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions
mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior
writing in respect to the subject matter hereof.
l/a/contract/rjmdesig.sdn 6
In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this
Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement
shall prevail.
EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from
and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may be
executed in counterparts.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CONSULTANT
CITY OF TEMECULA
By: By
Title
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
1/a/contract/rjmd~aig.adn 7
December 23, 1991
R~M ~-~taX~i'l' A
DESIGN GROUP, INC.
PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
Mr. Mark Ochenduszko
Assistant City Manager
City Clerk's Office
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Re: REVISED PROPOSAL
Dear Mr. Ochenduszko:
Per our meeting on December 18, 1991, we are extremely pleased to submit our revised proposal for
the preparation of schematic design drawing, and construction documents for Rancho California Sports
Park. We believe that upon review of our revised proposal, you will find our approach custom tailored
to the needs and desires required for the success of this exciting project. The design of
community/recreation facilities, community pools, amphitheaters, sports facilities, and parks is a
specialty of our team.
Our association with LPA Architects and Ranpac Engineering Corporation provides a design team of
experienced sports/recreation and park planners, architects, landscape architects, and engineers that meet
your qualifications for a state-of-the-m-facility.
The consultants selected will be directly involved in the schematic design and construction document
preparation. Ranpac Engineering Corporation provides local civil engineering experts well acquainted
with the City and specific development issues related to the Rancho California Sports Park site.
We have organized our revised proposal to follow the ou~ined Scope of Services provided by the City.
We have also suggested specific products and meetings to address each of the specific tasks. We
suggest a formal city review approval of the schematic design phase prior to proceeding with
construction documents. This will allow the City the opportunity to refine construction budget priorities
and evaluate alternative implementation strategies.
Our fees for the schematic design phase are based upon an estimate of the man-hours and disciplines
required to provide the City with timely and cost effective design services. As we discussed, our
revised scope of work assumes that a hydrology study, geotechnical analysis and topographic and
boundary survey will be provided by the City of Temecula. As our Fee Summary indicates we are
prepared to provide the services as outlined in the enclosed Scope of Work for the indicated mount of
$320,080.00.
27285 LAS RAMBIAS, SUITE 250 · MISSION VIE/O, CA 92691 · (714) 582-7516 · FAX (714) 582-0429
We have submitted five (5) copies of our revised proposal. In response to Section II of the city's
request for proposal, we have submitted our statement of qualifications for city review which includet-..
information on the personnel, qualifications and previous similar experience on behalf of tL_
subcontractors. If you require additional copies of this statement of qualifications, we will be happy
to provide you with them at your request. In response to Section llI, the city is currently a review
agency to plans that Ranpac, our civil engineer, has prepared. Beyond that, our consultant team has
not had nor is currently involved in any dealings with the City of Temecula. In conclusion, we are very
excited and extremely enthused about potentially being selected as your design team. We view this
opportunity as both an honor and a privilege, and look forward to our team's future consideration during
the remainder of your consultant selection process. We would like to thank you for your time and
consideration, and look forward to discussing this project with you in greater detail.
Sincerely,
RIM Design Group
.~~ -
presi~"tt~uetin , . .., A.S.L.A
cc: ~h~a;t~ .D/Nn~gon
REVISED HOURLY RATE/ALLOTTED HOURS SCHFJ}ULE
(NOTE: HOURS REFLECT MINIMUM FEES FROM FEE SCHEDULE)
RJM Design Group, Inc. - Landscape Architecture/Planning
Title
Principal Landscape
Architect
Landscape Architect
Project Manager
Senior Draftsperson
Word Processor
Hou~y Rate Hours
$88.00 246
82.00 172
70.00 513
55.00 305
31.00 106
1342
Total
LPA - Architecture
Title
Principal
Senior Project
Manager
Professional
Professional Staff
Intermediate Staff
Hou~y Rate Hours
$120.00 164
105.00
300
75.00 401
68.00 361
58.00 50
1276
Ranpac Engineering Corporation - Civil Engineering
Title Hourly Rate
Senior Engineer $80.00
Associate Engineer 70.00
Senior Designer 65.00
Senior Delineator 50.00
Secretary 30.00
Total
Hours
104
98
137
46
658
Rowley International, Inc. - Aquatics Consultant
Title Hourly Rate
Principal $110.00
Project 68.00
Engineer/Architect
Designer 54.00
Total
Hours
37
176
114
327
John Von Szeleski & Associates - Performing Arts Consultant
Title Hourly Rate
Principal Consultant $110.00
Project 65.00
Designer/Manager
Design &Production 50.00
Drafting
Technical/Clerical 35.00
Support
Hours
23
10
10
2
45
R.W.R. Pascoo - Electrical Engineering
Title Hourly Rate
Principal $110.00
Project Manager 75.00
CADD 40.00
Clerical 30.00
Hours
11
120
110
8
249
Tsuchiyama/Kaino - Mechanical Engineering ,-,,
Title
Principals
Associates
Designers
Draftspersons
Technical Typist
Total
Hourly Rate
$130.00
95.00
60.00
35.00
35.00
Hours
6
58
65
200
Culp & Tanner - Structural Engineering
Title
Principals
Project Engineers
Engineers
Draftsmen
Total
Hourly Rate
$100.00
75.00
65.00
55.00
Hours
20
117
117
98
352
R.W. Smith - Kitchen Consultant
Title
Facility Design
Consultant
Draftsman
Clerical
Total
Hourly Rate
$95.00
45.00
35.00
Hours
10
60
10
80
Meetinl w/
C:i~y Staff
i Projec~ Committee
MeetinIII
P~ Committee
Jvleetinl/2
Project Committee
Mm~jnI/3
Pm*k & Recrea~on Commiuion M~alnt
Plmnl.l Commisska Meetinl
Cily Council Meetinl
Pn:)Ject Committee
M~etinl 14
Pm~ject Commiltae
Ivleminl/~
o
TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
AGENDA
ITEM
NO.
1
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HELD DECEMBER 17, 1991
An adjourned regular meeting of the Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at
8:53 PM in the Temporary Temecula Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive,
Temecula, California. Chairperson Peg Moore presiding.
PRESENT 5
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Muftoz,
Parks, Moore
ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
Also present were Executive Director David F. Dixon, General Counsel Scott F. Field, and City
Clerk/Agency Secretary June S. Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments offered.
AGENCY BUSINESS
Minutes
It was moved by Member Parks, seconded by Member Lindemans to approve the
minutes of the meeting of December 10, 1991. The motion was unanimously carried.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
No report given.
GENERAL COUNSEL'S REPORT
No report given·
AGENCY MEMBER REPORTS
No reports given.
Minutes\ 12/17/91 - 1 - 12/23/91
Redevelo~}men~ A~encv Minu~es December 17o 1991
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Member Lindemans, seconded by Member Parks to adjourn at 8:54 PM to
the next regular meeting scheduled at 8:00 PM on January 14, 1992, Temporary Temecula
Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive, Temecula, California. The motion was
unanimously carried.
ATTEST:
Peg Moore, Chairperson
June S. Greek, City Clerk/
Agency Secretary
Minutes\l 2/17/91 -2- 12/23/91
ITEM NO.
2
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICE~~i
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
January 14, 1992
Selection of Financial Advisor to Evaluate Bond Capacity
RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency Members:
Approve staff recommendation to select Fieldman Rolapp and Associates as
Financial Advisor to perform a bond capacity study.
2. Approve a $4,500 draw from the City advance.
DISCUSSION: In order to facilitate the issuance of bonds to fund the
Redevelopment Agency Capital Improvement Program, it is necessary to have a bond
capacity study prepared by a financial advisor.
The Council Finance Committee, Mark J. Ochenduszko and I interviewed four (4)
Financial Advisors and determined that Fieldman Rolapp and Associates was the most
qualified to serve as finance advisors.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of the study is $4,500 and will be reimbursed from
bond proceeds. The funds will be drawn from the City advance to the Redevelopment
Agency.