HomeMy WebLinkAbout052692 CC AgendaAGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER - 28816 Pujol Street
MAY 26, 1992 - 7:00 PM
At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will
determine which of the remaining agenda items
can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00
PM and may continue all other items on which
additional time is required until a future meeting.
All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 PM
EXECUTIVE SESSION: 5:30 - Closed Session of the'City Council pursuant to
Government .Code Section 54956.9 (b) to discuss potential litigation and Government
Code Section '54957.6 (a) and (b) to discuss labor negotiations, salary and fringe
benefits.
211gendl/062682 I 06122/92
AGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER - 28816 Pujol Street
MAY 26, 1992 - 7:00 PM
At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will
determine which of the remaining agenda items
can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00
PM and may continue all other items on which
additional time is required until a future meeting.
All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER:
Invocation
Flag Salute
ROLL CALL:
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 92-12
Resolution: No. 92-37
Mayor Patricia H. Birdsall presiding
Reverend Joan Rich Egea, Religious Science Church
Councilmember Mu~oz
Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz, Parks, Birdsall
Proclamation-National Association of Women in Construction Day
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council
on items that are not listed on the Agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are
limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council about an item
not listed on the Agenda or on the consent Calendar, a pink "Request To Speak" form
should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address.
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.
21eeende/O62882 1 06121/92
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
I Standard Ordinance Adoption 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 May 12, 1992.
3
4
Resolution ADoroving List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
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
City Treasurer's Reoort as of Aoril 30. 1992
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of April 30, 1992.
5 Consideration of an AQreement for Vector Control Services
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1
Approve a contract agreement for County of Riverside Health Services
Agency, Division of Environmental Health, to provide vector control
services to the City on an as-needed basis.
21/genda/O62eg2 2 06/21/92
6
7
8
9
L-ShaDed Prooertv Adjacent to Sam Hicks Monument Park
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Authorize the City Manager and City Attorney to open escrow on 1.53
acres adjacent to Sam Hicks Monument Park.
6.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DECLARING CERTAIN FINDINGS REGARDING CITY EXPENDITURES IN
CONNECTION WITH THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AS
REQUIRED BY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
REGULATIONS (SECTION 1.103-18}
Uodate on County Fee Collections
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1
Receive and file update of County Fee Collections for the
Redevelopment Agency (RDA), Temecula Communi~ty Services District
(TCSD), Development Impact Fees and case processing fees.
Solicitation of Public Works Bids for Construction of Street Imorovements on Sixth
Street Between Mercedes and Front Street (Project No. PW 92-02)
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1
Authorize the Department of Public Works to solicit public bids for the
construction of ultimate street and sidewalk improvements on Sixth
Street between Mercedes and Front Street.
Selection of Auditors for the Fiscal Years 1992-94
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Appoint Moreland and Associates as auditors for the Fiscal Years ended
June 30, 1992, 1993 and 1994.
2/agenda/062692 3 06121192
10
Resolution Authorizing Security Pacific Bank to Accept Facsimile Signatures for the
City
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
REGARDING THE USE OF FACSIMILE SIGNATURES
CITY OF TEMECULA
11
First Amendment to National Pollutant Discharae Elimination System (NPDES)
Stormwater Discharge Permit Implementation A{3reement, San Dieao Region (Santa
Margarita Drainaae Area)
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1
Approve the First Amendment to the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Discharge Permit
Implementation Agreement adding the City of Murrieta as a co-
permittee;
11.2
Authorize the 'Mayor to execute said Agreement.
12
Resolution Reouestina County Reaistrar to Conduct General Municipal Election
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
REQUESTING THE SERVICES OF THE COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS TO
CONDUCT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY,
NOVEMBER 3, 1992
21agend~/062892 4 06/21
13 Acceotance of Public Improvements in Tract No. 20154
14
15
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1
13.2
13.3
13.4
13.5
Accept the Public Improvements in Tract No. 20154;
Authorize the reduction of street, sewer, and water faithful performance
security amounts;
Accept the warranty bonds in the reduced amounts;
Approve the subdivision agreement rider;
Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
Chanoe Orders on Project No. PW 91-03 - Rancho California Road Benefit District
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
Approve the attached Contract Change Orders consisting of:
14.1.1
A $9,119.00 decrease in contract amount for modifications in
the storm drain design;
14.1.2
A $64,793.00 increase in contract amount due to site soil
conditions necessitating a change in street structural section;
14.1.3
A $954.00 increase in contract amount due to additional removal
of unsuitable base soils;
14.1.4
A $30,218.50 increase in contract amount due to relocation of
a 24" steel water line; and
14.1.5
A $3,000.00 increase in contract amount due to additional
insurance required by Riverside County Flood Control of the
Contractor.
14.2
Appropriate $39,874.82 from the Development Impact Fund to the
Reimbursement District and appropriate $39,874.82 to Account No.
011-165-605-44-5804.
Professional Traffic Enqineerinq Services
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1
Award a contract to J.F. Davidson Associates, Inc. to provide
professional traffic engineering services and authorize the Mayor to
execute the Contract;
21egende/O62692 5 06/21/92
16
17
15.2
Approve a budget transfer of $10,000 from Account No. 164-5100
(Salaries) to 001-164-999-42-5406 (Traffic Engineering).
AooroDriation of Funds for Geotechnical Soils Testing Services (Law/Crandall.
Incoroorated) on the Street and Sidewalk Improvements at Various Schools Project
(Project No. PW92-01 )
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1
Approve a transfer of $4,400.00 from the Measure "A" Fund to the
Capital Projects Funds and appropriate $4,400.00 to Capital Projects
Account No. 021-165-607-44-5804 from Unreserved Fund Balance.
Revised Vestina Final Tract Mao No. 23267
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1
Approve Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267, subject to the
Conditions of Approval.
18
19
Revised Vesting Final Tract MaD No. 23267-3
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1
Approve Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-3, subject to the
Conditions of Approval;
18.2
Approve the Memorandum of Understanding for recordation concurrently
with Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-3.
License Agreement with Temeka Advertisina for Installation of Directional "Kiosk"
Signs Within the City Right of Way
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1
Approve an award of and authorize the City Manager to execute a
License Agreement to Temeka Advertising, for the installation of the
City's "Kiosk" signs.
2/agendd062692 6 01512 1192
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
20 Second Reading of Ordinance 92-11 - Animal Reoulations
RECOMMENDATION:
20.1 Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-11
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AUTHORIZING THE SEIZURE, IMPOUNDMENT AND TERMINATION OF
OWNERSHIP RIGHTS IN ABANDONED, NEGLECTED, OR CRUELLY TREATED
ANIMALS
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.
21
Mitigated NeQative Declaration and Condemnation of Prooertv
(Continued from the meeting of 5/12/92)
RECOMMENDATION:
21.1 Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment
(EA) Number 8;
21.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA FINDING
AND DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST, CONVENIENCE AND
NECESSITY REQUIRE THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC
PARK AND RECREATION PURPOSES AND ALL USES APPURTENANT THERETO
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF MARGARITA ROAD, EAST
OF STONEWOOD ROAD, WITHIN THE CITY OF TEMECULA
2/egenda/062682 7 0612 1
22
Aooroval Authority for Subdivision and Land Use ADolication Ordinance
(Continued from the meeting of 5/12/92)
RECOMMENDATION:
22.1 This report will be forwarded under separate cover.
23
Vesting Tentative Tract MaO 22761
RECOMMENDATION:
23.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A* RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING THE SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
NO. 22761 TO SUBDIVIDE 28 ACRES INTO 80 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
LOTS LOCATED IN THE RANCHO HIGHLANDS SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 180, AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 923-020-038 (PORTION)..
24
Tentative Tract No. 23103 - MaD Extension
RECOMMENDATION:
24.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING THE SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 23103 TO SUBDIVIDE 29.2 ACRES INTO 18 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED IN THE MARGARITA VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN
NO. 199 AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 919-340-014, 016,
018 AND 923-200-009, 010, 016, AND 923-210-001,014 AND 923-721-
021. (PORTIONS)
218genda/062~182 8 06121182
25 Tentative Tract Mao No. 27336. Reversion to Acreage
RECOMMENDATION:
25.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27336 FOR REVERSION TO
ACREAGE OF ELEVEN (11) PARCELS ON APPROXIMATELY 11.5 ACRES
LOCATED NORTHERLY OF WINCHESTER ROAD BETWEEN CALLE EMPLEADO
AND DIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS CALLE EMPLEADO AND DIAZ ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 909-310-24-THROUGH 28 AND 41
THROUGH 46
COUNCIL BUSINESS
26
Prooosed Fiscal Year 1992-93 Annual Ooeratinq BudQet
RECOMMENDATION:
26.1 Consider the proposed annual Operating Budget for the Fiscal Year
1992-93 and provide necessary direction to staff to proceed with the
budget process.
26.2 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
1992-93 FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON
CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENT BUDGETS
27
Conditional Use Permit 2872, Revised No. 1 - Airstrip Community Prooerties
RECOMMENDATION:
27.1 Provide direction to assist staff in providing a recommendation to the
Riverside County Planning Department.
2/Igendd062692 9 06/21/92
28 Temporary PavinQ of Parkino Lot at 6th Street and Front Street
29
30
RECOMMENDATION:
28.1
Direct staff regarding its interest in the temporary paving of the vacant
lot at 6th and Front Streets;
28.2
Appropriate funds as necessary.
Consideration of an Ordinance AmendinQ Riverside County Ordinance No. 546 "Fire
Protection"
RECOMMENDATION:
29.1
Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 546, "FIRE
PROTECTION" ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA, BY
AMENDING DIVISION VII, FIRE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR BUILDINGS,
INSTALLATION, REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF FIRE SYSTEMS AND
APPLIANCES
29.2
Set for public hearing on Tuesday, June 9, 1992, to hear any objections
to the adoption of this ordinance.
Consideration of Adoption of Various Buildina Codes and Certain Amendments Thereto
RECOMMENDATION:
30.1
Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING CODES WITH
CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THERETO: THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM
BUILDING CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE
STANDARDS. THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE,
THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, THE 1991 EDITION
OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE
UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, THE
1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE
UNIFORM FIRE CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE
STANDARDS AND THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM SWIMMING POOLS,
SPAS AND HOT TUB CODE
21~gendW062692 10 0612 1182
31
30.2
Set for Public Hearing on Tuesday, June 9, 1992, to hear any objections
t'o the adoption of this Ordinance.
Temecula/Murrieta Joint Transoortation Committee
RECOMMENDATION:
31.1 Appoint one member of the Council to serve on the Temecula/Murrieta
Joint Transportation Committee.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: June 9, 1992, 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816
Pujol Street, Temecula, California
21a~endNO62692 11 06121/92
TEMECULA COMMUNITY Si~RVICES :DISTRICT MEETING '- (To be held at 8:00)
Ordinance: No. 92-
Resolution: No. 92-
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.
CONSENT CALENDAR
I Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of the meeting of May 12, 1991.
2 Acceotance of Easement Deeds for Slope Maintenance - Vintaqe Hills
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Accept Easement Deeds for the TCSD to provide slope maintenance
services.
Appropriate $4,800 to account #019-193-999-42-5250 to process legal
documents required for dedication purposes.
2.2
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3
21eOenda/052602
Community Recreation Center Project
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Adopt Negative Declaration for the CRC Project.
3.2 Approve conceptual schematic design of the CRC Project.
3.3 Authorize the preparation of construction documents and release a
formal public bid for the CRC Project.
12 0612 1/92
3.4
3.5
Transfer $332,000 from Account No. 019-190-999-42-5910 to No.
029-190-129-44-5802 to cover the cost of the preparation of the
design, construction documents, and project administration.
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT DECLARING CERTAIN FINDINGS
REGARDING CITY EXPENDITURES IN CONNECTION WITH COMMUNITY
RECREATION CENTER AS REQUIRED BY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
THE TREASURY REGULATIONS (SECTION 1.103-18)
DISTRICT BUSINESS
4 Prooosed FY 1992-93 Annual ODeratina Budaet
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ADOPTING THE ANNUAL OPERATING
BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1992-1993 FOR THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN
APPROPRIATIONS AND PERSONNEL POSITIONS
5 Resolution AcceDtinQ Filina of Proposed TCSD Rates and Charaes - FY 1992-93
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-
A RESOLUTION OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT ON T HE FILING OF A REPORT ON THE PROPOSED
RATES AND CHARGES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 AND SETTING A TIME
AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONNECTION HEREWITH
2/agerids/062692 13 0612 1/62
6
Initial Bike Way Proiect
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1
Approve the initial bikeway project which includes painting bike lanes on
appropriate streets, sand blasting and readjusting center lane lines, and
installing bikeway and no parking signs.
6.2
Award contract to Work Striping & Marking Service, Inc. for $25,993
to provide bike land striping, bike legends, and adjustment to center lane
lines, and appropriate $25,993 for this project to account #029-190-
133-44-5804.
6.3
Transfer $17,530from Account No. 001-164-999-42-5402 to No. 029-
190-133-44-5804 to purchase no parking, bike lane, and directional
signs, which will be installed by City staff.
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT - Dixon
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting June 9, 1992, 8:00 PM, Temporary Temecula
Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
21~Oend,e/052692 14 06122/82
TEMECULA :REDEVELOPMENT. A~ENcY MEETING "'
Next in Order:
Resolution: No. 92-
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
Chairperson J. Sai Mufloz presiding
AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks,
Mufloz
PUBLIC COMMENT:
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.
AGENCY BUSINESS
2
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of May 12, 1992.
License Agreement with Temecula Town Association For Use of City Prooertv Located
West of Diaz Road and South of Cherry Street
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the License Agreement between the City and the Temecula
Town Association, for use of City property located at west of Diaz Road
and south of Cherry Street.
2legendre/0528 ~2 115 0612 1
Proposed FY 1992-93 AnnVal Operating Budaet
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADOPTING
THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 FOR THE
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON
CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting June 9, 1992, 8:00 PM, Temecula Community
Center, 28816, Temecula, California
21agenda/062682 18 0512 1/92
PROCLAMATIONS
The City of Temecula
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, the National Association of Women In Construction have organized a
chapter in the Temecula Valley; and
WltEREAS, the Temecula Valley Chapter #338 was chartered in June of 1991 and is
approaching its first year anniversary; and
WItEREAS, the National Association of Women In Construction is an organization that
has been formed to promote the construction industry and to encourage women to enter this
profession; and
WHEREAS, the National Association of Women In Construction is active in the
community and plans to provide scholarships to local students to pursue careers in the
construction industry;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Patricia H. Birdsall, on behalf of the City Council of the City
of Temecula, hereby proclaim June 3, 1992 to be:
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WO1VfF~N
IN CONSTRUCTION DAY
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City
of Temecula to be affuced this 261h day of May, 1992.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
ACE TRA . OR
R C'olifornzo Corporobon
May 11, 1992
June Greek, City Clerk
City of Temecula
P.O. Box 3000
Temecula, CA 92590
Dear Ms. Greek,
I am writing to you on behalf .of the National
Association of Women In Construction Temecula Valley
Chapter #338.
Our chapter chartered in June 1991 and we are fast
approaching our first year anniversary. To help make 'this
special occasion for us, we would like to request a
proclamation from the City of Temecula on our behalf.
The National Association of Women In Construction
(NAWIC) is an organization that has been formed in order
to promote the construction industry and encourage women
to enter the profession. We are active in the community
and will provide scholarships to local students to pursue
the construction industry.
Our first year celebration will be held on June 3, 1992
at the Temecula Creek Inn. We would like to have the
proclamation for the ceremonies that evening.
If you need any further questions, please do not
hesitate to contact me at the address or phone number
listed below.
Thank you very much for your assistance with this
matter.
Very Truly Yours,
Robin F. Meyer
Phone (714) 677-9835
FAX (714) 677-9830
38305 Maisel Avenue
Mumeta, CA 92F~,62
ITEM
1
ITEM
2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
HELD MAY 12, 1992
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:38 PM in the
Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. Mayor Patricia H.
Birdsall presiding.
PRESENT 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz,
Parks, Birdsall
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 Birdsall declared a recess to an executive session pursuant to Government Code
Section 54956.9(b) and (c) to discuss potential litigation.
Mayor Birdsall reconvened the City Council Meeting at 7:02 PM with all members present.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Pastor Gary Ruly, HIS Church Christian Center.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the pledge of allegiance by Councilmember Moore.
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor Birdsall proclaimed May 13, 1992 as Transit Appreciation Day.
Captain David Webb, representing the California Highway Patrol, spoke on behalf of members
of law enforcement and fire services personnel and presented the City. with an $862 check
to be used to benefit the youth of the community.
PUBLIC FORUM
None
Minutes\5\12\92 -1 - 05/15192
City Council Minutes May 12. 1992
Mayor Birdsall reordered the agenda taking Item No. 15 out of order, since staff is
recommending continuance.
15. ChanQe of Zone No. 5361 - Tentative Tract No. ~5320 - Bedford Properties
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
continue Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 to
June 9, 1992.
The motion was unanimously carried.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Moore stated she has reviewed the tapes of the previous meeting from which
she was absent, and would be voting on issues discussed at that meeting.
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans to approve
Consent Calendar Items 1-12. The motion was unanimously carried.
w
Standard Ordinance Adoorion Procedure
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
Minutes
2.1 Approve the minutes of April 28, 1992.
Resolution ADorovinQ List of Demands
3.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-36
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
ADDrOve Subdivision Agreement end Extension of Time for Tract MaD No. 23371-1
4.1 Approve the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and 18-
month extension of time for Tract Map No. 23371-1;
4.2 Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
Minutes%5%12%92 -2- 05/15~92
City Council Minutes May 12. 1992
10.
11.
Aoorove Subdivision Aareement and Extension of Time for Tract Mao No. 23371-2
5.1
Approve the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and 18-
month extension of time;
5.2
Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
ADorove Subdivision Aareement and Extension of Time for Tract MaD No. 23371-3
6.1
Approve the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and 18-
month extension of time;
6.2
Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
APPrOVe Subdivision Agreement and Extension of Time for Tract MaD No. 23371-4
7.1
Approve the replacement Subdivision Improvement Agreement and 18-
month extension of time;
7.2
Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
ADorove Subdivision Agreement and Extension of Time for Tract MaD No. 23371-5
8.1
Approve the replacement subdivision improvement agreement and 18-
month extension of time.
Parcel MaD No. 26766
9.1
Approve Parcel Map No. 26766 subject to the Conditions of Approval.
Public Works Mutual Aid Aareement
10.1
Approve the attached Public Works Mutual Aid Agreement and authorize
the Mayor to execute the agreement.
Settlement of Disoute Between City and County Regarding Development Aoolication
Fees Received by County for Permits from December 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990
11.1
Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the Settlement Agreement
regarding Development Application Fees received by the County for the
period from December 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990 subject to
approval by the City Manager and City Attorney as to the final form of
the Agreement
Minutes\5\12\92 -3- 05/15192
City Council Minutes May 12. 1992
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
12. Second Reading of Ordinance Aoorovino 7one Chanoe No. 13
12.1
Adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-09
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY IN THE
CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 13,
CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R 2 1/2 (RURAL RESIDENTIAL, 2 1/2 ACRE
LOT SIZE MINIMUM') TO R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ON PROPERTY
LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SERAPHINA ROAD AND RITA
WAY, AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 914-260-039 THROUGH
046
PUBLIC HEARINGS
13. Mitioated Negative Declaration end CondemnatiOn of Property - (AP #921-300-006)
Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko stated the property owner has requested
a two week continuance.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Mur~oz to
continue the public hearing to the meeting of May 26, 1992.
The motion .was unanimously carried.
14.
ADoroval Authority for Subdivision and Land Use Aoolication Ordinance
Director of Planning Gary Thornhill presented the staff report.
Mayor Pro Tom Lindemans Questioned the reason for the recommendation on Item No.
3 and stated he would prefer the approval authority remain with the Planning Director.
Mayor Birdsall opened the public hearing at 7:25 PM. Since there were no requests
to speak, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed at 7:25 PM.
Councilmember Parks stated he would like to know the reasons the Planning
Commission requested changes in approval authority.
Minutes%5\12\92 -4- 05115/92
City Council Minutes May 12, 1992
Councilmember Mu~oz suggested that the Chairman of the Planning Commission be
invited to attend the next City Council meeting and give input on the recommendations
of the Commission.
Mayor Birdsall stated the Chairman of the Commission has a conflict on Tuesday
nights, and suggested that the Commission appoint a member to attend.
Councilmember Parks stated he would like to approve original staff recommendations
with the caveat the staff has the ability to move a controversial issue from the
Planning Director approval to the Planning Commission Approval.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
accept the original staff recommendation, before Planning Commission changes, with
staff authority to refer controversial matters to the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Parks requested that this be continued for two weeks to allow staff
to come back with appropriate verbiage and to allow the Planning Commission time to
respond.
Councilmember Mu~oz agreed with Councilmember Parks and requested that a
Planning Commissioner be present to explain the views of the Commission.
Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans withdrew his motion, Councilmember Moore withdrew her
second.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Mu~oz to reopen
the public hearing and continue the public hearing for two weeks with staff directed
to prepare the language discussed, which allows the Planning Director to refer
controversial matters to the Planning Commission. Staff was also directed to request
that a Planning Commission representative attend the next meeting to present the
reasons for the Commission's recommendations.
The motion was unanimously carried.
16.
ADOeal NO. 24 (ADOeal Of Plannina Commission Denial of Plot Plan No. 8839, Revised
No. 1, Amended No. 2
Director of Planning Gary Thornhill presented the staff report.
Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans asked if handicapped access needs to be provided to the
second floor. Director of Planning Thornhill explained the Equivalent Uses Rule which
would provide for an exception.
Minutes\5~ 12\92 -5- 05115192
CiW Council Minutes May 12. 1992
Councilmember Parks asked if the second story of the building was developed by the
previous owner with the appropriate permits. Director of Planning Thornhill answered
that appropriate permits were not obtained, however approval of this project would
allow the City to bring the building up to code, without returning the second floor to
its original "storage only" state.
Mayor Birdsall opened the public hearing at 7:53 PM.
Larry De Crona, 41920 Sixth Street, representing the owners of the building, said this
project was inherited, from the County, by the City, and from the previous owners, by
his company. He stated he is aware that the improvements made on the second floor
were made without the proper permits, and the current owners are willing to bring this
up to code. He explained one of the conditions of approval requires the applicant to
pave the alley, which should address some of the concerns of the Council.
Councilmember Parks asked how the owner would guarantee that the garages would
be used for parking instead of storage. Mr. De Crona stated this could be
accomplished through tenant agreements.
Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans asked if the garages could be removed. Mr. De Crona
stated the doors could be removed, making them into car ports, but the actual garages
are part of the building structure.
Councilmember Parks suggested reducing some of the square footage on the second
story to meet the required parking requirements.
Mayor Birdsall called a brief recess at 8:00 PM to change the tape. The meeting was
reconvened at 8:01 PM.
Mayor Birdsall closed the public hearing at 8:03 PM.
Mayor Birdsall asked, if in the event this project is denied, the property owner will have
to remove all the improvements made by the previous owner. Director of Planning
Thornhill stated that if this project is denied the applicant will be required to limit the
uses to storage only, and improvements will have to be removed.
Mayor Birdsall reopened the public hearing at 8:12 PM.
It was moved by Councilmember Mu~oz, seconded by Councilmember Parks to refer
this matter to staff, to work with the applicant to address the issues raised by the
Planning Commission.
Councilmember Mur'ioz amended his motion, Councilmember Parks amended his
second to continue the public hearing for 60 days.
Minutes~5\l 2%92 -6- O511 5/92
City Council Minutes May 12. 1992
Councilmember Parks asked if the City has the ability to set up a community services
district to fund these services without accepting liability for these roads.
City Attorney Field stated a community service district can be created, however the
City will assume liability.
Councilmember Parks stated he spoke with Councilmember Moore who is not in favor
of the City paying to maintain these roads, however she is in favor of setting up an
assessment district for these improvements and services.
Denise Strom, 43843 Paulita Road, spoke in favor of the City becoming involved in the
maintenance and improvements of these dirt roads.
G. F. B. Brewton, 6809 Indiana Avenue, Suite 201, Riverside, representing Tom Sims,
spoke in favor of improving John Warner and Santiago Roads. He asked that a
community services district be established to fund road improvements and
drainage.
Bev Stone, 43136 John Warner Road, spoke in favor of the City assisting in the
improvements of dirt roads.
Bob Kirkpatrick, 30250 Santiago Road, spoke in favor of creating a .community
services district to fund the paving of dirt roads in his area.
Jim Meyler, 29930 Santiago Road, spoke in opposition to improving dirt roads which
property owners knew existed at the time property was purchased. He stated these
lots were obtained at a reduced cost since roads were not installed. He explained he
feels it is not fair for tax payers to bear the cost of improving property values for those
living on a dirt road.
Elaine Kee, 30984 Lolita Road, spoke in favor of Santiago Road being developed to a
66 foot right-away.
John Martinez, 30260 Santiago, stated assessments for a 32 foot street would
probably be $2,800/year, and asked if this would increase of the road is widened.
Frank Klein, 30180 Santiago Road, addressed the Council in opposition to a
community services district, stating paved roads mean increased traffic and noise and
requested this area remain rural.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans to
extend the meeting for 15 minutes. The motion was unanimously carried, with
Councilmember Moore absent.
Minutes\5\ 12\92 -8- 05115192
City Council Minutes
May 12. 1992
Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans suggested conducting a survey of residents to see what
kind of roads they would like to see in their area and if they are willing to participate
in a community services district to fund these improvements.
Basil Tallent, 30650 Santiago Road, requested that the City provide temporary funding
to grade these dirt roads.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Mu~oz to
refer this matter to staff and direct that methods be explored for developing minimum
standards for rural roads, including cost estimates and advise Council on creation of
a special assessment district or community services district. Staff was further directed
to conduct a needs assessment with the property owners affected.
The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Moore absent.
19. Ordinance Amendine County Ordinance No. 630 - Animal Regulations
City Attorney Scott Field summarized the staff report.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tern Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
Mayor Birdsall called a brief recess at 10:13 PM to change the tape. The meeting was
reconvened at 10:14 PM.
19.1 Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AUTHORIZING THE SEIZURE, IMPOUNDMENT AND TERMINATION OF
OWNERSHIP RIGHTS IN ABANDONED, NEGLECTED, OR CRUELLY TREATED
ANIMALS
The motion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Moore absent.
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
None given.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS
None given.
Minutes~5\l 2%92 -9- 05115/92
Ciw Council Minutes May 12. 1992
CITY COUNCIl. REPORTS
Mayor Birdsall requested that e City Events Calendar be established.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Parks to adjourn
at 10:18 PM to the meeting of May 26, 1992 at 7:00 PM. The motion was unanimously
carried with Councilmember Moore absent.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Minutes%5\ 12~,92 - 1 O- 05115/92
ITEM NO. 3
RESOLUTION NO.
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 RESOLVE,
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 allow~i in the mount of
$334,564.76
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 261h day of May 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
~ 3~R-4os 255 1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
CITY OF TEM]ECULA )
SS
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Resolution No. 92- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the 26th day of May by the following roll call vote.
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
June S. Greek, City Clerk
255 2 ~
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
05~8~2 TOTALCHECKRUN:
$55,495.83
05/15/92 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
05/18/92 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
$97,062.30
05/07/92 TOTAL PAYROLL:
$101,518.86
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 5/26/92 COUNCIL MEETING:
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
CHECKS:
001
011
014
016
019
029
041
PAYROLL:
001
019
GENERAL
RANCHO CA. ROAD REIMB. DISTRICT
COMMUNITY DEV. BLOCK CRANT (CDBG)
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUND (RDA)
TCSD
CAPITAL PROJECTS-TCSD
REFUNDABLE DEVELOPER DEPOSIT TRUST
GENERAL (PAYROL~
TCSD (PAYROL~
$135,819.78
$44,791.29
$1,826.61
$863.67
$32,870.44
$8,811.61
$7,052.50
$81,41 2.25
$20,106.61
$101,51 8.86
TOTAL BY FUND:
PREPARED BY KARMA MCINTYRE
MARY JAI |~E H 1~ R FFICER
'
I, MARK OCHEN DU,~KO, ASSISTANT C~ MANAGER
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
O00!0S!E 04/50/?2
5UNEM.65
;TRAl.65
3UNE~5
5TRAi.6~
3UNEII..~
3TRA~,~
3TRAi,Sg
01!02/-~2- C'IY-O2ZV°Jor--.. P-aVr~!!-IZ2~ __ .o! .7n 0. O0 o,! .Tr._ _
01/02/72 01102R2 Nor. Payroll I/2/~2 5,1ZA.I! 0.00 5.15S.!I
61/I&/72 01/16R2 Normal P/R,
01/IA:~-2 01/16/9~' Normal RAt 1/!~/g2 ~=!80;04 O;OO- l.lBC..04 _
01/30/72 01/30/V2 Narmal P/R.01/30/92 B4.06 0.00 B4.06
01130/72 01150/~.2 Normal PIR,O1/30/92 2:B-~2.77 0.00 2,BE2.77
u,...~::, {%"/1~t~,". Normal PIL. GP/!'H~
02115/92 02/15/72 Normal PIR:O2/15R2 2,428.46 0.00 2,~2BA~
02/13/~2 02/13/92 Void/Manual Check 3.44 0.00 5.44
n'. '~? ,o~ 02.:27.'92 O. 'UO
t /
~ ',; .-' Normal Payroll 50.9?
02/27/?2 02/27/?2 )i~rzal Payrn!i 7A5.% O.O0
...... ;TRA:.i;__
3UNEL?I 03112/?2 03/12/~2 Nor~ai Payroll
3TRAi.72 0~/10/92 03/I0/~2 Void/Manual Che=k
~TRA:.7: 05/26/~2 05/28/?2 N~r~al PIE
3UNE~.75 03/26/92 03/26/~2 Normal P/R 3/2!/72
~TRAl.75-.-44/-i6~2 ........ 04/l~/V2-.VGid~anualCheck--
SUNEL75 04/16/~2 04/16/~2 Void/Nanuai Check
0430?2 04/30/~2 04!50/V2 IST QTR PR TAXES
01,.Z2/~2 l~ormal -PavrQi I ....................43. Z7 .............. :~. 00 42.77
6~° 6~ 0.00 ~e ;~
1,9 O.OO ' ~
............ I~.E2 .......... C.0~ ...... 16.32
....... 0.6~ ..... 0,00 - 0,6$;
-~,~= 0.00 1~.25
~U.,, 30.76
.................... 043072-I__ 04130192 ......... 04/30R2 CP2DIT. EHD ......
8.551.80-
---~OIOOiL~S/Oi!~Z-ISE~TIJCHA..EETIR~ENT
2DFCM.7A 04/0~/~2
2DFCLT6 OU2Y?2
043092 .... ~4/3~Y92
Ch:rP Totale: ~ AT~ .c
04/0~/~2 Normal P/E 4/07/~2 601.~7
04/25/~2 Noreal P/R, 4/23/~2 ~34.~7
04/30/~2-EET!RE~ENI~F'RIL-72 ................ I0~45~48
~.00 ........ 2.551.EF
0.00 ? ~: ,.~
0,00 601.37
0.00 ~6~.~7
., ~. Totals:
05/03l~2-AUIO~TI A~TOX~TiVE -~-r,,' T'-~ . ...............
24050 04/29/92 11510 0315!/92 INSTALL LIBHT BAR:ALAR~
~26.54 0.00 326.34
Check-l~tals~--
0001009~ 05/08R2 B~wRMA
..... R MARY BAYER
042!72 04/2!/92 04/21/~2 REFUN~
Check Tutai~=
000100~5 05/08/~2 SEEFIT BENEFIT AMERICA
..... 05052 05/05/72 05/05/V2 ~ED & DE? ~A~E REI~.
........ ~ ............ 0,00 ..... S2&.54
40.00 O,O0 40.00
40.00 0.00 40.00
1.00~.S2 00A ~ 004 ~
Check Totals:
...... 000100%-05/03/V2 ~RATS~Hi ~R~?~T ~ICHAEL & JEAN~IE
~, ,,vw,,~? ......
0430?2 04/50/92 04/50/92 80"~ CONTRACT CLASS ~L:
l.O0~.E2 6 Or
~AC. m': O. O~
1,004.R2
::::1'::!00c7 05/9E.'72 CLUi' THE CL[Z:
C4T:'Z
2'4;:}72-1 04.'3L':2
;:)3.0L':' 5.00 :CC.OC.
~ i, ::: :.::
224..):1 C.
05~I~2 05/0!/~2 C5/01/~2 CORSLESS PgONE 75.41 0.0~
Check--Totals: ......... 75.~i
04"7~c~ REFUND HESTERN DAN~E
05105/92 ~.*;,.--,-,D~ ROBERT r. RD~E
041792 04117/92
Check Totals: 100.00
¢.C0 1DC.C:
0.00 100.00
00010100 05/08/92 DAVLIN DAVLIN
8q-23:t&!--(.U~1/~2--ii4~ O.I/-ti)IL~-AU)tB-PRDk~;BS:jE~.-JUNE-g2 ........ It-.-:~ O.~ -H.~--- -
B9-25:174 04/27/92 11286 02/0~/~2 AUDIO PROD.PLANNINS CD~. 140.00 0.00 140.00
~>23:154 04/20R2 11544 04/20/92 AUDIO PRODUCTION;PARKS & REC. 152.10 O.OO I~2.I0
99-2!~!~10~/20/92 11544 ~/92 ~UDID PRD~CT[D~P~S4~C. l~JO- O.O0 I~2.10 .....
Bg-25:ITB 05/04/92 11286 02/0UV2 AUDIO PRO).PLANNINS SO~. 140.00 O.O0 140.00
89-23:163 04/01R2 11555 04/01/92 AU~!O;VI)EO TAPE STOCK:S.C. 22~.~5 O.O0
8~3~--041~9241544 04~2-~DI~;i~:PARKSI REC ........ 127~0 ......... ~.00 127.~0 -
B9-2~:17~ 04/14/92 11570 04/01/92 AUD!O/VI~.CDUNC!L)A=RIL-~AY 662.!C O.O~ 662.1Q
Eg-25:177 04/2~/~2 11570 04/01/~2 AUDI0/V!D.CDU);SIL:APRIL-MAY 595.7~ O.OD
Check Totals: ~, SO~ ~' 0.00 2 .........
--j)O0!0101 05/08/~2 FI)XB.-~IAR-~TDX--~IAF: F~K. ................................................
&430?2 0~/30/~2 04/30/~2 80~ CONTRACT GLAZE HDR~EMENSF' T2r:.OO 0.00 720.00
........ Check-Totals; 720.0C
14667 04/08/o? "~4~ 03/27/~2 MIC~n=F; TYPE .w, DUEEqCALENDAR ~o~ ~s
Check Totais: 2E5.54
0001~10~ 0~'09 92 H!RJIRON RON HIRJI
---0&~092 ..... 04/30R2 ......... -04/3G/92REFUND ................... 2,746.00
O.O0- ~".00 '
-- i~g
...... 0.00 ..... 2.746.00
Check Totals:
___~OOJ..~O4-OS/~)BI92-~Y;TTAL-I-HYAT-T-REBENCY-ALICANTE ----
042592 04t25/~2 04t25/92 LODGINGI6/B/92/POLICE
2,746.00 0.00 2.74~.00
14~.24 0,00 '4° ~4
............................................ Check-Totais: - -
00010105 05!0~/~2 JOHNSONS JOHNSON. SHAROn:
042992 04/29/92 04129192 MILEABE REINS 4t!-4/29
Check Totais:
00010106 OUOB/92 KIDSPART KIDS PARTIES:ETC.
O~na~ n~/~4'~ ~/04'~ ARTS & CRAFTS
148.24 C.O0- !4L24
126.B4 O.O0 I%.B4
!26.B4 0.00 !2~.B4
120.00 O.O0 12~.00
Check Total~:
000!0109 G5/08/92 [NAPP CYNTHIA KNAc'~
n'~o'' A/?/~2 .... "'~
t,:~.~ 0;/29/?2 .~ . r
120.00 0.00 120.00
': 0~' 0.00 35.00
................... Check Totals:
05/08/?2 ' n .... ,~ , n~n -n ~:~,=.n.-,nu-
(;~11:/92 ii~.E,C, 03/27 ......... :-..K',~-,'---, ......
35.00 Q.O0 :5,00
4!2,22 O,(:':
"=... =: "' (:, C! C 7 .=,, (: (
Descri~tZo~
123191 ~4/0!/72 O2~E
125!9!-I 0~101192 O299
--12;191-2 ..041~I/~24269
10/15!9i ETE~TIOt4 LESS 2%
10/15f91 RETENTION LESS 2%
5,800.00 O.OC.
1,527,02 O.OO 1.327,~
3,~e~,O0. g,4XI --3,905
Check Totals:
00010111 05108192 HARGARIT HARGARITA OFFICIALS ASOC.
00128 04102192 05~2 02/12R2 U~PIRES;~IO SOFTBALL 6AHES
O~o 0~ 0.00 ~ ~5~ ~
955.00 0.00 955.00
Check Totals~
00010112 05lOGIt2 MARLBORO MARLBOROUGH DEVELOPHENT CORP.
0450?2 04/30/92 04/~0/92 REFUND/PERHZT COSTS
Check Totals:
00010115 05109192 HCCANN NCCAMN PRINTING SERVICES
0757 .--..--041~4I~4-1504 .O~,qAj-,q,I--N~6H~RHiX~ NEWCiE,T-TER;AP~iL
1,0~2.50 0.00 7.0~2.50
7,0&2.50 0.00 7,062.50
Check Totals:
950579n2 04109/92 04109f92 FUEL CHGS
ql,4~ 0,00 4~1,46
%6.77 O.O0 %6.77
00010115 05/08t92 PEREAROS ROSE PEREA
052992
05/06/~2 ~ILEASE REIMB MAR, 29
- -R66,77 ¢ ,00 %6,77 ......
4.48 n nn 4.48
Check Totals:
04JSQ/.92-eG~CDI~I~ACtiASf~-CNTRY-DAN~ --
_ 0~I0!!7
043092
Check Totals:
PR¥O~ESLLRC~e.~NC.
04150/92 04/50192 SEMINAR/JULY
4.4E C.O0
--400,00 LO0
400.00 0.00 40L
!95.00 0,00 !95.00
Ch~ckt-T~ls:
00010118 05i0B/92 RAN-CAL RAN-CAL aANITORIAL SUPPLY
4990 04101/92 IOBOB 04101R2 JANITDRiAL SUPPLIES/MAR
Check Totals:
000!01!~ 05/08/V2 RANCHDBL RANCHO BLUEPRINT
~~ ..... - ....... 04/27J92 11426 O~!2~/.V2~APRING.-~UPBLIES-&BLUPRINTB
1V5,O~ 0,00 1VS,O0
2L15 0,00 26.!5
Check Totals:
.... 0001012~:-05/~8/]2-~1Zi0 ..... RIZZB~-CQNSTRUCTION~.NC.
~2-150 04/17/92 1154B 04/I?/92 REMDVE SLAGS WINdOW;TEEN
57.8! 0,00 57,~!
250,00 0,00 250,00
.................................... ~heck-Totals:
00010121 05/09/92 RONALDSM RONALD SMITH
043092 04/30/92
00210112 .'jG/OE/?2 RG~:LE":' CATHERI){E RB~:LE'f
(;45092
84:..':::-1
04/30/92 CONSULTING SE~V,
Check Totals:
250,00
4~ 0n
425.00
--~,00 .250,00 .......
¢.00 425.00
O,O0 425.00
0,0(' '='
0.00
C-C0i:::12:05/0-2;$2 ELA,~.'-'RSD SLArt PECDUCTin''c'
0'
2B5. C :: ' ' ..... -" "~'
350.:;: C ,.),: Z5O.OC',
Check Totals:
0001012~ ~ S~ CA>2 SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE
OCO~5~ -- 04/01/9241',,,!~ OUOU92 .CAR--PRONE;DODS[ HAX!-VAN ....
000!0125 05109192 SP[TI,LI SPETZ, LISA
040192 04128192
Check Totals:
04/28/92 HILEASE RE1HB
O001012& 05/0BI92 TARSET TARGET STORE
050492 05/04/92
Check Totals:
05/04/92 SUPPLIES FOR ARTS & CRAFTS
00010127 05/0B/~2 TEN TROP TBECULA TROPHY
Check Totals:
Check Totals:
0~10~2 TENVLYT[ TEMECULLUA-LLSY TKD
043092 041~0192 04l~0192 80; CO~RACT CLASS TAEKWON~O
0430~-1 04/$0I~ 0413019'Z SOt CO~RACT CLASS SELF DEFEN
Check Totals:
0001012? 05/09/92 THORSBOR ALICIA THORSSO~E
SC-DA-& 05/01/92
Check Totals:
05/0iI92 RENT MAY 92
rherk Tntalc:
000!0151 05/08/~2 TG~ARKS~ TO~ARK SPORTL INC.
~975 04/17192 11496 04/08192 PITCHERS PLAT~;TCS~
000!01~2 05/08/72 VALLEY
I;54~
Check Totals:
VALLEY OFFICE PRODUCTS
O00101S 0510BI92 WECANDO WE CAN ~O
041092 04/30192
Check Totals:
04/30/92 BOI CONTRACT CLASS [INDER BYH
00010134 05/08/92 WILLIAB KAY WI~IARS
04~M2 04130/92
Check_l'.ob, ls:
04150192 BOX CDNTRACT CLASS HODELINB
000101;5 05/08/92 WRiSHTED WRIGHT, EDNA
04~092 04/-*;0,~2
Check Totals:
· 04~OiSZ~O~..,~CONTRAC.T~LAS. S._CALLiSRABH-- .
Check Totals:
.:-=.oort Totals:
550,00
377.12
~,40
50,00
50,00
500.08
300,08
29.00
364.00
7.%
7,5~
134,5~
44LI?
44B,19
256.00
56.00
BBO.O0
SBO.00
240.00
240,00
0.00
--0,00 ........ 577,12
0.00 377.12
0,00 B.40
0~00 9,40: --
0,00 50.00
0.00 50.00
0 O0 lO00B
0.00 ~O0.OB
0,00 ~S~,O0
0.00 2LO0
O.O0 3&4.00
O.O0 7.% .
O.O0 7,56
0,00 5,374,95
O,O0
0.00 !34,55
0.00 448.19~
0.00 44B.19
0,00 256.00
O,OO
0,00 BBO,O0
0,00 SBO.O0
0.00 240,00.
0.00 2~0.00
001 ODD!COla 04/50!92 EHPLOYENT ]EVELOPENT DEPT. Nor. Payroll 112/~2
OOl 00010016 04/50192 EHPLOY~ENT DEVELOPHENT DEPT, Narma% P/R 5/2a/~2 ~2.41
001 00010016 04/I0/92 EHPLDY~ENT DEVELO~NT DEPT. Nor, PaV~/92
00! 00010016 04/50/92 E~PLOYHE~ DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal Payroll
00! OOOZQG16 04/~0/V2 EHPLOYNENI DEVELOPMEN! DEPT. Vo~d/~anual Check h.E:
Onl nOOl~Ol& n~13nlq~ PMPlnyMrNT ~Furi nPMF~ n~l, Normal PIP ~/?~t~
001 OO01O01& 04/30/V2 E~PL~ DE~L~ )EPT, Nor, Payroll 1/2R2
001 OOOlO01& 04~01V2 ENPLDYENT )~D~NT D~T, CRBIT HEHO 17L57-
001 nOOlOOl& 0~I301q2 ~MPLOY~NT ~E~LO~NT ~l. Normal Payroll
001 0001001& 04/~0/V2 E~LDYENT DEVELOPNE~ DEPT. Normal P/R~ 1/16/V2 12.~B
001 00010016 04/I0/t2 EHPLOY~ DEVELO~ENT DEPT. Normal Payroll &6.OO
ODI ~QOlDDIA O4/XDI~? FM~ID~PNT ~V~] ~P~ ~rPT. Nnr=~l PIPm i/!Alq?
001 OOQl~l& OlllO/~ ENPLOYN~ DEVEL)E~ ~PT. Normal P/R l/2&/~ 7B.02
001 O~100[& Oq/]O/~ ~O~E~ )EVELO~E~ DEPT. Normal PIP, I/l<2 7.70
nnl BDOIDnlA n4/~0I~2 FMPl nYMFNI ~VELO~Nl DE~T, Nor~~2
00! 00010016 04/30/V2 EMPLOYRENT D(VELDPNENT DEPT. Normal P/R~O2/13/t2 116.2~
001 00010016 Ot/$O/t2 EHPLOY~ENT DEVELOPHENI ~EP1, CREDii HEHD
001 00010016 O&/lO/~2 E~ENT DEVELOP~:NT ~EPT. Nar~a! Pavro!) 5.2~
001 00010016 0i/$0/92 EHPLDYHENT DEVELOPHENT DEPI. Nor. Payroll !/2/92 251.16
001 00010016 OU30R2 ENPLOYHENT DEVELOPRENT DEPT. CREDIT HEHD 985.1>
001 00010016 04/30I~2 EHPLOY~ENT DEV~DP~ENT DEPT. Nor. Pavrall I/2/~2
001 00010016 04/30/92 EHPLOYHENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal P/R 3/26R2 1.20
001 00010016 OirlO/?2 EP2LOY~T ~EVELDD~E~T ~EPT. t4orm~l P!R, 1/t~/~2 15L24
00i 00010016 04t~01~2 E~PLOY~E~ ~EVELOP~ENT DEPT. Normal PIR:02115192
001 00010015 04/;0R2 E~PLOYHENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal P/R,OI/30/~2.
nnl nO~Ol&___OU~Ol~ E~NUEvr~nP~! ..... Noraalj~Vr~ l
001 00010016 0(/~0/~2 EMPLOYMENT )~ELOP~ENT DEPT. CREDIT ME~O t64.72-
001 00010016 04/50/V2 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal P/R:02/lS/92
nn, nOOinnt6 O(~xO/q2 F~P~ ny~rNT OFVELOP~FNT DEPT.-- No~ma! PIR,01ISO!92 125.~
001 00010016 04/30/~2 E~PLO~ENT )EVELDPHENT DEPI. Normal PIP, 111~I~2 201.74
001 00010016 04/30/t2 ENPLOYHENT DEVELDPHENT DEPT, Normll P/R,O1/30/t2
001 0001~1~ O~/lO/~2 E~PLOY~EN~EVELDP~ENT DEPT. Nor. P~y~Dll 1/2/~2 7.42
001 00010016 04130/~2 EHPLOYHENT DEVELOPHENT DEPT. Normal PIR:02113192 26i.80
001 00010016 04/30/92 ENPLDYHENT ~EVELOPHENT DEPT. Normal Payroll
OO) n~I0~6 _O~O~L FMPi DY~T 5EV~LDP~T ~EPL.---- Normal P/R:O~2-
001 00010016 ~/30/g2 EMPLOYRENT EVELOPHE~ DEPI. Vojd/~anual Check 1.12
001 00010016 04/~0/V2 E~PLOYHENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal Payroll 146.16
OD1 O00!OOlA 04/~O/q~ EMPLOYE~VE~PY~T~T.- Norul.-P/F;,O1/JOlg2.--
001 00010016 04/30/92 EHPLOYHENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal P/R ~/26/92
001 00010016 04130/~2 EHPLOY~ENT DEVELO~ENT D~l. Normal PIR,01/~OI92
001 OOnlOOl~ 04/30/V2 E~LO~I~~I )EPT- No~a~g=O~/1S/q2 17~.~(
001 00010016 04/30/92 EHPLDYHENT DEVELOPBE~I DEPI. Normal P/R, 1/1&/92 4.22
001 00010016 04110192 E~PLDYENT DEVELOPHENT ~EPT. Normal Payroll
__ 0~1 O00!Q0!&- O~O/~? )LDY~ENUEV~ENT-~EP] ................. NDrmakP/LOll3Ot~2 ...... ~.01
001 00010016 04/30/92 EHPLDYNENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. )~DrmaI P/R:02/13/92 5,;~
001 00010016 04/30/92 EHPLOYNENT ~EVELDPHENI )EPI. Nornal Payro!1
001 O0~OO16 O~/~lg2 E~OYH~T-BEVE~D~NLDERT- ~rmal-P/Rrl/l&lq2--
001 00010016 04/30/~2 EHPLOY~ENI OEVELDPHENT DEPl. Norfil P/R,01/30/92
001 0~010016 0~,'30/~2 E~PLOYHENT DEVELOPHENT DEPT. Norma! P/F', 3/26/92 1.7:
GO! OOO!COlS O~n/9~ EHPLOY~EE)4T DcV~ nDw~NT ..... k~-r. Pawoil i~lq~ !41.2.
OOl 00910C16 04.'50/~2 EMPLOYMENT XVELGP~ENT R:PT )~or~l P/F:.Q!/ZO/~:
w~, , m i* · '
OO! O0:'2iOCl~ 0~/30/92 EHPLOYHENT D:u:; no~PNT D:PT. Nor. Pavro!1: n?~
":~'~ r~n",~nnla 04/50/V2 EMPLOY)lENT n"'~:
00i
~ 001
- GO!
00!
00!
UOO1DU15 04:10/92
00010016 04/30!~2
0001~016
00010016
00010016
001 0001001~ O{/iOR~
001 0001001~ 0(/30/V2
001 00010016
001 OOO~(X)I& 0ql~0t92
001 0001001~ 04130192
001 0001001~ 04130R2
001 OOnlQOt~ 04710I~2
00I OOOlOOl~
001 0001001~ 04/~0192
001 0001n016 n&llOR~
001 00010016 0~/~0/92
001 00010016
00! 000!001~
00t 00010016 04/30/V2
001 00010016
001--000!001~
00! 00010016
001 00010016
001 000!001~ 04/~01-V2
001 00010016 04/30R2
001 00010016
On) 00010~1&
001 00010016 04/50/92
001 00010016 04/30/V2
001 OOOlOOt6 O4/lOig
001 00010016 04/30/92
001 00010016
001 OOOlO01a
001 00010016 04/30/92
00I 00010016
001_00u010~!6
001 00010016
001 00010016 0~/~0/02
EMPLOYMENT EVELOPMENT DEPl.
EHPLOYHENT DEVELOPHENT DEPT.
--.E~P-LDYHE~T:gEVEL~NENI-~EP-J-.
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
EMPLOYMENT DEVELDPENT DEPI.
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPENT DEPT.
EMPLOYMENT DEVELO~ENT DEPI.
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPI,
eMpLOymeNT ~EVc, LOoF, NT 9EPT.
EMPLOYENT DEVELOPMENT DEPI,
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPENT DEPT,
EMPLOY~PNT DEVELDP!(FNT )EPT,
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT,
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPI,
EH,~LDV~ENT _nEVELDPMENT
EMPLOYENT DEVELOPMENT DEPI,
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT,
EMPLO-YI(ENT--~EVELOPMENT-j)EPI.
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPI,
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT,
EHRLOYHENT-DEVEbOPHENT--DEP%
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT,
EHRLDYJF:NIJEVEL~ENT ~PT,
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT,
EMPLOYHENT ~EVELOPENT DEPT.
EP2LOYMFNT DEVELOPJ~ENI-DEPT,
EMPLOYHENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT,
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT,
.E~P, LOY~IiL~EVELDP~EMT DEPT;
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT,
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPENT DEPT,
__E~pLDyENLD-'|,UELD~.ENT_D~.
EHPLOYENT DEVELOPHENT DEPT,
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT,
.... OOJ.--OOOlOO!a
O01 00010016
00! 00010016
00! 0001001~
001 O001OOl&
001 00010016
-04Z]OL92 ................EMPLOY~ENT-DEVELOP*ItENT--.QEPI.
0~/30/02 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
04/30R2 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
04Y-,lOl~? EMPLO~ENLDEVELOPMENT DEET.
04/30192 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPI.
04/30192 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
.... DO1 _00010016__-- O&/50/-g2
001 00010016
001 00010016
001---00010016 ---
001 00010016
.,; .....,-,, ~,:~,
vv~ ~
tel C:OiiiCC, 16
EI~P~.OYI~F. NT_.QEVELDPJ~ENT-DEPI.
0~/30/~2 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPi~ENT DEPT.
04/30/~2 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPHENT n-EP1.
Oi/SO/V2 ........... EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPltENT- DEP-T .-
01/50/~2 "' EMPLOYI!ENT DEVELOPItENT DEPT.
0-I/50/72 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT );,EFT.
~ EHF~.OYMENT DEVELOPME~,:T TJEPT,
'i '~,"',/oC, PM, p;. fiyMP):T n---, n:.~:'-~'
C.z='iO/?2 E~:F;LDYtiE):T g. EVELOPKEtiT ~EF'T.
0~/.~/92 E~;F'L3Y~EKT BEVEL3'F'~IEh'.T .~.EPT.
04/30/92 E.~iPLOYEKT ~EVELOP.~iENT I}EPT,
G',/30/72 E~F'LOYHEXT i:-EVELOPME;~T DEPT.
Nor. Fayroll I/2/~2
Normal P/R,Oi/3OtV2
Noraal--P/R. !/!&/~2
Normal
Normal Payro!1
V~id/Manual [h~ck
Normal PIR,011~OI~2
!ST OTR PR TAXES
Void,uAanual Chock
Normal P/R $/26/t2
Nor. Payroll 1/2/92
Norma!--Payra!!
CREDIl END
Normal Payroll
Normal Payroll
Nor. Payro11 1/2/~2
Nor~1~ayro11---
Normai P/R:02/13/92
Normal P/R $/26/t2
Noria~hyr~ll-
NormaX P/R:02/13/g2
Normal P/R
Normal Payroll
CREDIT ~EHO
Normal P/R'O~/ISt9
Normal
Nor. Bayroll I/2/92
Normal P/R,
CREDIT HE~D
Normal P/R
Normal P/R:02/1;/92
Normal Payroll
Normal P/R:02/!S/92
Noria1-Payroli
Normal P/E, 1/16/92
Normal P/R 3/26/92
Nom1~-/R:02/l~/~2
Normal
Nor. Payroll 1/2/92
Normal P/R. 1/16/~2
CREOII HErO
...... Normal hyroll
Normal P/R, I/!6/92
Ncrmal ?avrolZ
~or. Payroil I/2/92
reid/Manual
V~id/)~anu~!
Normal
~Dr;al PavrD!1
-4~,,~
5C'7, {
400,.~
J,B,Z
)0~,~
10.~
305 .;
128,
5F.,
104.
Re~ort ~riter CHECK LISTI~.} S! .-'J~C Si=_i::r: :'.
FUND CHEC[ NUMBER CHECK DATE VENaOR NAKE DESCR!PTtON
001 000100!6 0~Z~O!92 EMPLOYENLDEVELOPHE~T DEP-T-.-- Nor-.-B~vr~-!-l~/92
001 O001001a 04/30R2 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal Payroll :.5:
001 00010016 04IS01t2 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPHENT DEPT. Normal P/R ~/26/92
00! 00010016 04,~01t2 EM~L~Y~ENT-DEVELOPMENT-DEP-I,- ................ Normai-Payrot! 63.4:
001 00010016 04/30R2 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPHENT DEPT. Normal P!R. I1t6R2 l(.Oz
001 00010016 04/10/92 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal P/R 3/26/92
001 0001001~ OUIOR2 EMPLOYMENT DEVEI.OP!~.ENT DEPT. NorNI P/R, 1/1&R2
001 0001001~ 04/30/92 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPRENT DEPT. Nor. Payroll 1/2/92 E.~:
001 0001001~ 04/~0R2 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal P/R, 1/1~/92 B;.7:
001 0001001~ 0~/10/~2 EIIP-LOYJ~EN~--D)ENT-i)EPT. Nor-Ni~R',~2Ji$/f2
001 00010016 04/30/92 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal P/R 3/2~/92
001 00010016 04/30/92 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal P/R:O2/!SR2 9.1l
not 00010016 041~0/92 FMPLOVMPNT ~EuELOPMPNT D:PT. Normal P/R ~/26/92
001 O001001B 05101192 It)l~ RETIREMENT Normal P/R, t123192 322.3~
001 0001001B 05101R2 ICMA RETIREHENT RETIREMENT APRIL 92 2,052.21
Oni O001001B 05/01R2 ICMA RETIREmeNT Normal P/R 4~9/92 55i.73
001 0001001B 05/01!92 !CMA RETIREMENT RETIREMENT APRIL 92 6.4a~.SZ
OOl 000100~3 05IOB/92 AUTOMOTIVE SPECIALISTS INSTALL LIGHT OAR;ALARM
00! 00010095 05/~l~2 -BENEEDI-AMERICA ~ED-&-DEP-~ARE~EIHB. - 40S.B:
001 0001009B 05/0~/92 COSTCO WHOLESALE COPJ)LESS PHONE 75.~1
001 00010100 05/OBR2 DAVLIN AUDIO PROD.PLANNING OOMM. 2BO.OC
001 09010100 05/-OBI-92 -J)AVLIN -AUDIO/VI~.COUN:ILIAP~IL-NAY
001 00010100 05/03R2 DAVLIN AUDIO;VIDEO TAPE STOCK!C.C. 221.9~
00i 00010100 05/OR/V2 DAVLIN AUDIO PROD.~TBS) FEB.-OUNE 92 130.00
001 00010100 n,%cOB/~n DAVL~N ............... -AUD~O/~ID.COUNC-IL:ARRIL-MAY- -
001 00010100 05/08/92 DAVLIN AUDIO PRDD.~TBS; FED.-OUNE 92 !1.5A
001 00010102 05/OBR2 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO. MICROSOFT TYPE MOUSE;CALENDAR 2~5.54
001 090!0103 05/~8/92 ROW PjDJl -- REFUND 2.14~00
001 00010104 05/08/92 HYATl REGENCY ALIGANTE LDDOINB/a/BR2/POLICE ""'.48.24
001 00010108 05/08/92 LOGO CDMMUN!GATIONS, INC RULE~S;~ABNETS;POLIOE 4!2.22
· 001 0001010? 05/09/9? H~J~=K LOHMAN ..... EXBENBE--REIP_ 7~00
001 00010113 05/0B/92 ~CCANN PRINTING SERVICES NE!BHDDRHODD NENBLETTER;APR!L 441.4~
001 00010114 05/OR/V2 MOBIL FUEL CHBS
001 00010115 05/0B/-~2 gO,q{-~EREA I~X&E~BE-REj~B-~AP.
001 00010117 05/0B/92 PRYOR RESOURCES, INC. SEMINAR/JULY 9/3H
001 00010121 05/OBR2 · RDNALD SMITH CONSULTING SERV. ~25.00
00! 00010125 05~8/~2 ~DZ~.-,-LISA MILEA6E-~EIMD
001 00010129 05/OBR2 ALICIA iHDRSDORNE MILEAGE REIMD. 7.56
001 00010132 05/0B/92 VALLEY OFFICE PRODUCTS FDLDERS)OVERHEAD WATER MARKER 44B.!~
00I
C19 00~I001~
O1g 00010016 04/30/92
019 00010016 04130192
----~IL00010016 --04/~LY-V2
017 00010016 04/30/~2
01~ 00010016 04/30/92
0!9 00010016 04130192
0!9 00010016 04130/q, 2
'.:>l~ '3!:iCl:)~::l~
~c 00010016 n .....
0~c* OOOiCG1~
01~' 000iOC~IB 35;C:I/72
E~"LO-YMENL~EVELOP~ENT- DERT,
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal PayrolX
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT, Noru! P/R:02/13/92
EMP~OYMENI-DEVELDPMENLj)EP-T ...................... VoSdlManual-Check
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal Payroll
E~PLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT, CREDIT MEMO
E~PLOYMENT-DEVELOP~EN!-DEPT.- ...................... Nor.-*-Payrott-i12192
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT. Normal PIP,01/30/92
...... Nor~alP.IR:O211~R2--.
....... 14,51
12.30
494.79
3~5.21
17.5,
lT.~
l,~
5%.25
'U:(D CN-'."K NU~.::~ C'.-FC.'.: DATE VEN,qOR
,:_:1__"': '_:_,_',' ::'__::_L ...............................................................
019 OilOlOOJ.~- '05/0!/~2 __ ~Cx~s PETIR~;:ENT ....... ~tor-'&~ F/R, ~2.Je· ..........
019 0001001B 05!01192
019 000100~4 0~10S192
__0.,Lt-00010095 05/00/*-%2
019 000100% 0510B/92
019 00010097 0510BI92
019 00010097 O~/OB/q2
019 00010099 05108/92
019 00010100 0S108/92
~19 00010101 05108192
01~ 00010105 0510D/92
019 00010!0~ 05/0S/92
~lq QONI~t~7
019 00010111 051081~
01~ 00010114 05108/92
o~q ~01~I1A ~SLOBIq~
0!? 00010118 05108192
0!9 00010119 05/0S!92
01~ On010]?o
019 00010!~ 05/08192
01~ 00010122 05/ORR2
01q 0001G125 __05Z08Y~2
017 00010124 05/0S!92
019 00010126 05!08R2
017 00010127 05/0812~
019 00010128 05108t92
019 00010128 05IOB/92
nlq o0~0_.__-05108t92
019 00010131 05/0BI92
019 00010153 05/08792
Ol~ OOnl~l~ ~5z~8~2
019 000101~5 05/0B/92
ICHA RET!REHENT
HARY BAYER
BENEFIT AHERICA
BRATSHI, IqlCHAEL & aEANNIE
THE CLUB
THE CLUB
ROBERT CROWS
DAVLIN
FOX IRIAR FARN
aDHNSON, SHARON
KIDS PARTIES~ETC.
~y~Tx~A
RARG~ITA OFFICIALS ~SOC,
NO~IL
RAN-CAL 3ANITORIAL SUPPLY
RANCXO BLUEPRINT
RIZZ~ CON~.UCIION~ INC,
CATHERINE ROWLEY
CATHERINE ROWLEY
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
TARSET STORE
TEEF. IH.A TROPHY
TEMECULA VALLEY
TE~ECULA ~ALLEY
TIRITILt.!,~IEVE
TOHAR[ SPORTS~ INg.
WE CAN DO
~Y WIUI~S
WRISXT, EDNA
029 00010110 05/08192 HAHN CONS~UCTION CO
041 00010112 05t08/92 HARLBOROU~H DEVELOPHENT CORP,
RETiREmENT APRIL 92
REFUND
__NED.&-DEL.DIR, E-REI~.IL 601.0C
B0% CONTRACT CLASS BOLF 500.0,:
SOl CLASS BALROD~ DANCE 224,0~
SOl CLA~S CONTEHPO~RY DANCE
REFUND WESTERN DANCE 106,00
AUO10 PRODUCTIONIPARKS & REC, 392,1C
~OZ CONTRACT CLP;mS HQP,~EIJFJS~
~ILEASE REIHB 411-4/29
ARTS & CRAFTS 120,0C
~cFUN~ ~.OC
UNPIRES;$IO SOFTBALL G~E$ g~,OC
FUEL CHBS
SOl CONTHAt Ci~ ~NTPY D~NCf
~ANITORIAL SUPPLIES/NAN 2~.1~
HAPPINa SUPPLIES &BLUPRINTS. 57.81
E~VE-~,L~SS ~IN~OWSEEN CIR 2~O,OC
BO% CONTRACT CLASS BATON 28,8C
SO; CONTRACT CLASS TAP
ENTEIIAINI~F. NZ~RIS 7 crafts
CAR PHONE;DOUSE ~AXI-VAN
SUPPLIES FOR ARTS & CRAFTS
~E~TE~.-BAKE-Z, DNTFES!;RIBBDNS
SO; CONTRACT CLASS SELF DEFEN 2B.0(
SOt CONTRACT CLASS IAEKWDNDO
J.~N.I.-IJI~Y~2 __
PITCHERS PLATE;TCSD 134.51
80Z CONTRACT CLASS KINDEN SY~ 56,0(
SOl CONI~J~CT CL~SS-_~DDEI.ING
BOZ CONTRACT CLASS CALLtSRAPH 240,0:
15,21L9:
RETENTION LESS 2Z 9,012,0
REFUND/PERH!T COSTS 7,062,5
!nvcice Dat~ ~,n Date Des:ri~tion Sross Discount Net
051392 05113192
051.11192 ANNUAL FEES/BULk NAILING
Check Totals:
000!0!40 05115/92 AEI SECU AEI SECURITY INC.
3bB 04130192 11409 04101192 ~AY SECURITY -
00010141 05115192 ALLIED
122%1-00
ALLIED ~RRICADE
05107192 0359
Check Totals:
02/13R2 BATTERIES FOR BARRICADES
00010142 05115192 APPLEONE APPLE ONE
1432401 0510~192 11541
14~0707 04129192 11525
Check Totals:
04122192 NECk ENDINS 5/2192
04/24192 NECK ENDING 4/25192
00010143 05115/92 AT&T A T & T
6941989~ 05125192
Check Totals:
05/25t92 MAY DiLLINS
0001014~ 05/15/~2 AVP AVP VISION PLAN
051592 05115192
Check Totals:
05/15/92 INSURANCE PRE~IU~ NAY 92
00010145 05115/92 CADHANRU RUTH L. CADMAN
0417~2 04117192
Check Totals:
04117/92 REFUND
Check Totals:
O001014a 05!15R2 CALETHNI CALIFORNIA ETHNIC MINORITY
051292 05112192 05112192 E~BERSHIP DUES
00010147 05/15192 CALtEST
0012524
Check Totals:-
CAL NEST RENTAL CENTER
04/23/92 I1499 03131192 RENTAL OF ABUAR;C.I.P. POSTS
Check Totals:
000!014805115/92 COLONIAL COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT
051392 05/13192 05/13!92 INSURANCE RAY 1992
Check Totals:
000!0149 05/15/92 COUNTYPU COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE/SUPPLIES
144229 04110192 04110192 CLANP, PAPER el
00010150 05!15/92 CPAS
040192
Check Totals:
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
05/01/92 05101192 ANNUAL DUES
150.00 0.00 15~.0~__,
150,00 0.00 15~.00
25.00 0.00 25.00
25.00 0,00 25,00
215.50 0.00 215.50
215.50 0.00 215.50
259.20 0.00 -,o ~
259,20 0.00 "9 ~n
518,40 0.00 513.40
101.80 0.00 I01.B~
101.89 0.00 lOl.Bg
&15.05 0.00 &iS.a5
~15.~5 0.00 ~15,65
55.00 0.00 55.00
55,00 0,00 55.
20.00 0.00 20.00
20,00 0,00 20,00
24.78 0.00 24,78
24.70 0.00 24.79
1,022.25 0.00 1,022.25
1,022.25 0.00 1,022.25
20,0~ 0.00 20.06
20,06 0.00 2O.O&
145,00 O.OO 145,00
Check Totals:
00010151 05/15/~2 DEKT!CAR DENTICARE OF CALIFOF:T~IA
~513~2 05,'IS!~2 05/07/~2 INSU~A~C~ PEM!Ufi FOR ~Y ~2
Check
OCCiCjI52 {5/15/~1 .',EF'T.3FTF: DEPART~iENT OF T.'-.A|4SF'OF.T'iTIC'~:
'~01 ,{~r~ :)~ t,,'~,/r.", O~/-~", ,'O"~ ' ~'~T~':T I~P,'r'q 0~
145.00 0.00 145.00
~ ',' 7~9.0¢
~,~.uL' ~ r,~,
O.O~
Check Totals: '~ ~: ,', r,r, ,: o;
Check Date Venoc,, Name
I.n',,ozce Date ~.C D~ Dszri~tion Gross Discount
00010155 05/!5f92 DIXO~ DAVID F. DIXON
0508~2 04/17/92 04/17t~2 EXPENSE REIM814115-4117 415.50 0.00 415.30
042492 04124R2 04/24R2 EXPENSE REINS14/22-4/24 3~L37 0.0O 39~.37
Check Totals: 814.67 0.00 814.67
00010154 05/15192 EDEN EDEN SYSTENS, INC.
0430928-1 05107t~2 11576 05107192 ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE 17,860.00 0.00 17,860.00
Check Totals:
00010!55 05/15/92 ELECTRIC ELECTRICAL CONCEPTS, INC.
1546 05107192 11532 04/16/92 PONER POLE FOR PLANNING ROOM
17,860.00 0.00 17,860.00
150.00 0.00 150.00
00010156 05/15!~2 ELMO ELMO, ANTHONY
040192 04/01I~2
Check Totals:
04101R2 CAL80 CONF, EXPENSE
150.00 0.00 150,00
44!.42 0.00 441.42
Check Totals:
00010157 05115R2 ERBTIN~ T!NA ERR
0511~2 05/11192 05/11/92 REFUND
441.42 0.00 441.42
5.00 0.00 3,00
Check Totals:
00010158 05/!5/92 FiRSTAM FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO
945050006 05/0!/92 11560 05/01/92 PUBLIC HEARING NDTICE;SPT.PRK
3.00 0.00 5.00
75.00 0.00 75.00
Check Totals:
0001015? 05/15192 FRANKLIN FRANKLIN SEMINARS
7027016 04/22/92 11506 04/14~92 FIFR:REFILLS:DAYTIMERS:PLB
75.00 0.00 ?" *~
25&,14 0,00 254,14
00010160 05!15/92 GETPAGED BET PABE~
09005001N 04/!0/g2 10987
~005001N 04/10/92 0228
90050IN 04110192 0219
090500IN 04/10/~2 0246
Check Totals:
10/0719! MAY PAGER RENTAL
07101/tl MAY PABER RENTAL
07/15/91PABER RENTAL NAY
0~/06/~1 MAY PABER RENTAL
234,14 0.00 234.14
11,50 0.00 11.50
138.00 0.00 138.00
34.50 0.00 34,50
11.50 0,00 11.50
Check Totals:
000!0161 05115f92 GFO~ OOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOC,
0531759 04/29/92 04129192 OUN-MAY 95 NEWSLETTER SUB
195.50 0.00 1~5.50
50.00 0.00 50.00
00010162 05/15/92 BLENN!ES GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
1053~6-0 04/1~/92 1145t 04/01R2
101383-0 03/27R2 11343 03/03192
%44>0 03/06/92 11345 03/03/~2
%U!-! 04/16/92 113~
13567 04/01/V2 04/01/92
i06~35-0 04/21/92 11437 03/24R2
13617 04/01/92 04/01/~2
Check Totals:
OFFICE SUPPLIES; PUBLIC WORKS
FOLDERS;LETTER TRAYS:INK
FOLDERS;LETTER TRAYS:INK
FOLDERS;LETTER TRAYS;INK
CREDIT MEMO
OFFICE SUPPLIES~ TCSD
CREDIT MEMO iTEMS RETURNED
50.00 0.00 50.00
20,94 0,00 20,94
14.70 0.00 14.70
555,54 0,00 555.54
589.25 0.00 389.25
15.52- 0.00 15.52-
,.~o 0,00 ' "'
18.67- 0.00 18.67-
.... =5;nEi: STATE TRADING CO,
VUUiUla5 05/15/92 EOLDENST o ~u,
14~21 ~ .......... = .........
....... G.R.'.A.i TRUST
00010164 ns/15r°~ GREAT = .
051;~2 05/15~: ¢5/!3/92
Totals: 955.47 0.00
FOR HARVARS. SP~F'HiCE ~'~ :" O ~
T~.~-i l~f, ci 'U.FIC~
iNSURAr~,]E PF:E~IU~/~Y ~2 800,00 0.0!2
Check Date Ventor Name
invoice Date ;'/0 Oats [,ss:rID%:n Sross %is:ount Net
Check Totals: BOC.OO 0.00 GOt.CO
OOOlOl&5 05!15/92 GREEK BREEL JUNE
050692 05/06R2 05/06/92 CITY CLERKS ~DNF,4/27-5/1 ~1.70 O.O0 51
Check Totals: SI.70 0.00 51.76
O0010Ia& 05/15/92 BTEBILL BTE -
~953539J 04/2B!V2 0412BR2 APRIL 28 BILLING 26.52 0.00 26.52
6~2309J 04/2B/92 04/2B/92 7146992309 APRIL 2B DILLINS 1V.70 0.00 19.70
- 699Ba32J 05107/92 05/07R2 7146998&52 NAY 7 BILLING 17,57 0,00 17,57
69479890 04/2B/92 04/28/92 714-~94-1989/APRIL BILLING 2,769.B5 O.OO 2,769.B5
000101&7 05/15/92 HANKBHAR BANKS HARDMARE
4)43092 04130/92 11419
G43092-1 04130!92 llSBO
Check Totals:
05/12/92 LINE ~AR~ER CHALK;TCSD
03/02/92 APRIL CHSS
2,B55.62 0.00 2,B55.&2
287.!5 0.00 2Bl,15
172,~1 O.O0 172,91
Check Totals:
0001016B ~= i5
~/ ~,. HARKINSR REBECCA S. HARKINS
C51i92 05/11/92 05/!I/92 REFUND
460.06 0.00 460.06
12.00 0,'00 12.00
Check Totals:
00010169 05/!5/~2 HERNANDE ANNE LISA HERNAN~E1
050192 05/01/92 05/01/92 SEMINAR/~F
12.00 0.00 !2.00
1!5.00 0.00 1~ On
O0010170 0~9~ I!'RPN= RENEE ILL
0511~2 0B/11/92
Check Totals:
05/11/92 REFUND
Check Totals:
00010171 05/15R2 iNLAND E INLAND E~PIRE NANABER'S ABSOC
050?92 05/07/92 05/07/92 DUES FOR
115.00 0.00 115.00
5,00 0,00 5,00
~.00 0.00 5..
15.00 0.00 15.00
00010172 05/15/92 JOHNSONS JOHNSON, SHARON
051192 05/ILI92
Check Totals:
05/!I/92 REFUND
15.00 0,00 i5,00
6.00 0,00 6.00
- Check Totals:
00010175 05/!5192 KNECHTRI RICHARD L. KNECHT
O41792 04/17t92 04t17!72 REFUND
6.00 0.00 6.00
116.00 0.00 116.00
Check Totals:
00010174 05115R2 LOBOCONN LOGO COHNUNICATIONS, INC
8665 04125192 11460 03127/92 RULERS;~ABNETS;PDLICE
Check Totals:
00010175 05/15/92 LUNCH~ST LUNCH & STUFF CATERING
e~liO~ 05/I!/92 O~/ltlO~ DINNER FOR rnUN"~'
!16.00 0.00 11~.00
510.1B O.OC 510.18
510,18 0.00 510.18
90.00 O.OO 90.00
Check Totals:
COA~('t~71 r,: ,,= ,.,,-
',. .......w~=_ ~;ARILYfiS MARILYJ'S COFFEE SERVICE
05/0~/92 11555 0~/17/$2 Zn=F= ¢::-,,--:.r.v ~ALL
~0.00 0.00 90.00
7i.61 C.CC ~6.61
{'j$1CilTT {:5/15.'i2
1744
Check Totals:
F,=../,.',i ic,'~ 11114
..,. v ..........
7~. ~! t. CC: 7:. i~.
44.3(: .... r .....
F:scai Year: !~Z Cnecr~ ~,E;i;te' ,iiLi.i', T7:
Ir:vllce Date F'ZO Dat~
00010178 05!15/$2 ~.G~ASSOC ~G~ ASSOCIATES
P~E~2.004 04!30/92 04/,10R2 APRIL C~6S
00010179 05/!5/72 MICROAGE MICRO AGE CONPUTER CENTER
45579 04/24R2 11516 04109R2
Check Totals: 68g.40 0.00 69~.40.
HARD DRIVE;ADAPTER CABLE 4~262.60 O.OO 4.2~2.&0
00010180 05/15192 NESG.TDR NES G. TDRGA
042992 04/29/92
04129192
Check Totals: 4,262.~0 0.00 4.242.~0
4/1-4/29 ~ILEABE REINS 36.% 0.00 ,16.%
Check Totals: 36.96 0.00 3b.gb
00010182 05/151t2 OCBREPRO OCB REPROGRAPHICS, INC.
374125 04/22f~2 11547 04/07/92 PRIk~INB THOU R35 DESIGN 11.3~ 0.00 !I.,16
,15~420 04/07/V2 11547 04/07/V2 PRINTING THRU ROH DESIGN 19.50 0.00 i?.50
~7652 04/07R2 11547 04107R2 PRINTING THRU R3~ DESIGN 58.2~ 0.0¢ 58.29
?~ 04120192 11547 04107/92 PRINTING THRU R~ DESI8): 17.46 0.00 17.46
(~0392 04/07/92 11547 04t07/92 PRINTING THRU Ra~ DESIGN 55.05 0.00 35.05
567~B~ 04/15R2 11547 04/07R2 PRINTING THRU RJ~ DESIGN 25.30 0.00 23.30
~: .... 04/1,l/92 11547 04/07f12 PRINTING THRU Ra~ DESIGN
~56762 04/07/V2 11547 04/07/V2 PRINTING THRU RJ~ DESIGN 19.50 0.00 I~.50
~55~02 04/07/~2 11547 04/07R2 PRINI!NG lHRU
,14684E 04/07/~2 11547 04/07/V2 PRINTING THRU Ra~ DESIGN 28.23 0.00 28.25
..... n I%50 i~.50
~,.. 04/07I~2 11547 04107R2 PRINT1NB lHRU RJ~ DESIG~ 0.00
556590 04/07R2 11547 04/07R2 PRINTING THRU RJ~ DESIG~ 34.!! 0.00 34.!1
~54645 04/07/92 11547 04/07R2 PRINTING THRU R]~ 9ES!BN 29.20 0.00 2~.20
559357 04/07/~2 11547 04/07R2 PRINTING THRU RJ~ DESIGN 68.10 0.00 &B.lO
558751 04/071V2 11547 04/07R2 PRINlING IHRU R~ DESIBN ,14.78 0.00 34.7B
556770 04/07/92 11547 04/07R2 PRINTING THRU RJ~ DESIGN !5.62 0.00 15.a2
35880i 04/07R2 11547 04/07R2 PRINTING THRU R3~ ~ESiBN 46.16 O.O0 46.16
571415 04/17/~2 "54~ Oq/O7/V2 PRINTING THRU R3~ DESIGN Bi.B9 O.O0 GI.B~
37072~ 04/16/~2 11547 04/07/~2 PRINTING THRU Rj~ ~ES!GN !?.46 0.00 17.46
564152 04/07/V2 11547 04/07R2 PRINTING THRU RaH DESIGN 16.70 0.00 1&.70
00010185 05/15/~2 OCHErDUG DCHENDUSZKD, MARK
04,I072' 04t,lOR2 041,10R2
Check Totals: 777.59 0.00 779.5?
EXPENSE REIY~ 20.00 0.00 20.00
00010184 05/15!~2 OLSDNtDO FINAL TOUCH HARKET
03B413~-~2 041,10R2 0`139 02/0!t92
Check Totals: 20.00 0.00 20
PROMOTIONAL PRDBRAH FOR CIlY 1,GB,I.IB 0.00 1,685.18
Check Totals: 1,&BS.IB 0.00
00010185 05!15!~2 ORANGE ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING SERVIC
r50172 05/07/~2 05/07/~2 DIEDDRY 67.88 0.00 67.BB
Check Totals:
00010186 05/!5/72 DRANBECC ORANGE COUNTY CHAHBER r
rJ507~2 05107/92 05/07/92 ~!RECTORY
67.88 0.00 57
67.88 C.O0 67.88
Check Totals:
PAYLESE DRU5
A~ "," ;~' ~ ir'' i~ :~/Q! ~T~ ~
67 .S~ r,.nr~
~.4~ ,':',0:? :,i~
Chec}: T~taiEi
O0~!)IGE 05/15:.02 PESTSACT PESTHASTER SERVICE'
E. 45 .2:. (: .'j 6. '
i ~C. C.(! O. O0 ::j::, :-:,'::
Cnec~ Date Vendor Naf
!nvo:ce Date P/C Date Desert:Lion Dross Discount Net
Check Totals: 140,00 C,O0 140,00
00010189 05/15/~2 PETTIC PETTY CASH
'10492 05104192 05/04/92 CASH REIMD COTY EMPLOY. 305.!7 0.00 305.1,
050492-1 05104192 05/04192 CASH REIMD 186.78 0.00 186.78
00010190 05/15/92 PRESSENT PRESS ENTERPRISE
:6900 04/10/92 11494
'%eck Totals:
04107/92 AD FOR G,P, NORKBHOP
4B9.95 0,00 4B9,95
196,20 .0,00 196,20
Check Totals: 196,20 0,00 196,20
00010191 05/15/92 PROLOCK PRO LOCK & KEY
2907 05108192 11461 04101192 COHNUNITY SERVICES;ACCOUNT 4,46 0,00 6,46
2901. 04/04/92 11461 04101/92 COM~,UNITY SERVICES;AMOUNT 22,63 0,00 22,43
Check Totals', 29,09 0,00 29,09
00010192 05/15192 RAN-CAL RAN-CAL JANITORIAL SUPP!
51S5 05101192 11563 04129192 TRASH PICt~R 25,B4 0,00 25,84
00010193 05/15f92 RANCHMUF RANCHO MUFFLE
4676 04107/92 11452
Check Iotaks:
0315!/92 ACROSS BED IDOL BOX{S-IO IRK,
25.B4 0,00 25.~
219,29 0,00 219,29
00010194 05i!5/92 RANCNOBL RANCHO BLUEPRO
41426 05107/92 11500
Check Totals:
02I!i/92 BLUEPRINTS: ENGINEERING DEPT.
219.27 0.00 219.2'
21.55 O.OO 21.55
Check Totals:
00010195 05115192 SECURITY SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL B?
077~J 04/20/92 04120/92 479BO20000010775/APRIL CHSS
21.55 O.OO 21.5~
~i.10 0,00 31.10
00010196 05/15/92 SIRSPEED SIR SPEE~
5146 05/11/92 11549
Check Totals:
04120/92 CASH RECEIPTS
51.10 0.00
257.50 0.00 257.50
00010197 05t15/92 SO ~L-2 SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE C
2924020 04/08/92
3~93439G 05/07192
2874840O 05/07/92
34954~6J 05107/92
~493A~B8 05/07192
34574198 0B/07/92
Check Totals:
0410B/92 714-292-4020/MARCH CHBS
05t07/92 7143493459/MAY BILLING
05/07/92 7142B74B40/NAY BILLING
05/07/92 714S495456/MAY BILLING
05/07/92 714549345B/MAY BILLINS
05/07/92 714~4574!9/~AY BILLING
257.50 0.00 257.S
!24,49 0,00 124,49
59.45 0.00
125,~2 0.00 125,42
46.36 0.00
144,27 0,00 144,27
53.25 0.00 55.2v
Check Totals:
O00!O19B 05i!5/92 SPEEDYO! SPEEDY OIL CHANGE
I~75 OB/OB/92 11279 05131/92 REPAIR & ~AINT. VEHICLES;PJi.
535.24 0.00 533.24
22,4? 0,00 22,49
OOO!OIgQ 051!5/72 c--,,.~.. STEAM MASTERS
~'~""' ~ '~q':~ 11565
Chad Totals:
0~/27/92 E)iERG.~TEF: D~AEE)TEE{i
22,49 0,00 22,4+
......... ~r, !05 OC
Cne:),. Tcial=:
:'.t:nir~'~F:r C!5/15/-7Z TE~t,:LV-2 ""' ........ViL'f ...........
"'~" ..... 5105;~'2 05i0N~2 ~, = ......
C.~ec+: Tc:ais: i:Oc~O.O0 C:.nO ' "?'?, C"
C eck Dots YEncot "'a~=
i~.~ice Da~E ?.'0 Data Description Gross Discount
'.001020! 05i15192 TO-~ACD~ TO-~AC ENGINEERIN5
'~ 'N25~ 04/07!~2 04/07/92 YNEZ gDRRI~OR 500.00 O.OO 500.0~
Check Totals: 300.00 0.00 500.00
00010202 05/15/~2 TOWNCTR TOWN CENTE~ STATIONERS
15261-0 02101/92 11144 12/09RI CALENDERS;LABELS;PRI~TWHEELS 17.15- O.OO 17.15-
17574-1 04/15192 11422 05/04192 OFFICE SUPPLIES;PLANNING 55.26 0.00 55.2~
Check Totals:
00010205 05/15/~2 TRAVELIN TRAVELING SOFTMARE
050~2 05106192 0510~/~2 SOFTNARE UPTRADE
18.13 0.00 18.I5
70.55 0.00 70.55
Check Totals:
00010204 05!151q2 UN!TO8 UN!TOG RENTAL SERVICE
8772570501 05!01/~2 11180 12/15/~1 UNIFORM ~NT~S;COM~.SERVI~E
8772570508 05/08/~2 11180 12115/~I UNIFORM RENTALS;COMM.SERV!CE
~F'57"SOG 0~'08~9~ 0565 02127t~2 UNIFORMS RENTAL;PUBLIC WORKS
877157050~ 05/01/~2 0565 02/27R2 UNIFORMS RENTAL;PUBLIC WORKS
70.55 0.00 70.~5
12.50 0.00 12.50
12.50 0.00 12.50
12,50 0.00 12.50
12.50 0.00 12,50
-00010205 05115192 USCM USCM
??TRT.77 05/07/72
5PTRT.77 05/07R2
)5!!~2 05/11/92
Check Totals:
05107192 Normal PIG, 5107!~2
05107R2 Normal P/R~ 5/07/92
05/11f~2 PART-TIE RETiREMEN~ 5111~2
50.00 0.00 50.00
'~ '~ 158.15
~ 0.00
!58.15 O.O0 158.!5
__00010206 05/15172 VALLEYGP THE VALLEY GROUP
043092 04150192
Check Totals:
04/50192 REINS AIRFARE
534.55 0.00 334.55
296.00 0.00 296.00
60010207 05/15/~2 VIARS VIARS, CARRE
051192 05/11/92
Check Totals:
05/ii/92 REFUND
29~.00 0.00 29A.00
,, .v. ~ .0~ 3.00
00010208 05/15!92 WESTHIGH WESTERN HIGHWAY PRODUCTS
215285 05107/92 11464
00010209 05/15R2 WHITECAP WHITE CAP
F120~12 04/01R2
0015054 04/02/~2
Check Totals:
05/51/92 BARRICADES;BATTERIES;STENCIL
Check Totals:
04/01192 STEEL TAPE
04/01R2 RETURNED ITEMS
5.00 0.00 5.00
821.08 0.00 821.08
821.08 0.00 821.08
I05.76 0.00 105.76
54.59- 0.00 54.59-
00010210 05!15/92 WIGGINS SUSAN R. WIGGINS
51192 05f11!92
Check Totals:
05i!1t92 REFUND
69.17 0.00 69.17
5.00 0.00 5.60
Check Totals:
00010211 05!!5/~2 XEROX-2 XEROX CORPORATION-BILLING
j~2559021 04/01/92 034? 02/01/92 LEASE ABREE~ENTiA~RIL
5:269549~ n~,,~ O~o ~,r ......L'ASE AGREEMENT/MAY 92
C .........'3549 02/01.'~= ~R:"'~ ENDZOuER BILLED
5:25!P021:0!i01.~2 .... :)2/Ol'~ CREDIT ~c~: nut;. C~SED
;h~:,'. Totals:
..... ' ....YNE:
5,00 0.00 5.00
2.758.!I 0.00 2.958.!i
2.~5~.11 O.O0 2,95S.!i
566.7E- C.O¢ 59t.78-
55~.7> ~.OC' 5B{.,7F
~ .754,6~
S ~= '.:" 0.00 '.2c5,0fi
Check Date Ve~or Na~e
.n\'olce Date P/C Date !~Ezrlztisn Erc~z Discount NEt
]nets Totals: Z,295.00 ¢.OQ Z ~oc .~
0001021~ 05/26/92 ALL=!TY ALL CITY ~ANASEHENT -..
.ii5 04/01/~2 028 10/08/91TRAFFIg CONTROLiRCHO C~L.ROAD 1,614.21 O.O0 1,614.
00010214 05126R2 BROWN$B BROWN & BI8ELOI
549~56~-06 05106!~2 11470
02101192
Check Totals:
CLOISONNE CITY SEALS;
- Check Totals:
00010215 05/26/92 BURKE,WM BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN
09~14 04/21/V2 04121192 PROF SERVICES ~I~1/92
?3090 041211V2 04/21R2 NARCH BILLING
1,614.25 0.00 1,6!4.23
1,514.55 0.00 1,314.55
1,~14.55 0,00 1,314.55
2,683.17 0.00 2.685.17
5,150.00 0.00 5,150.00
00010216 05/26t92 CALIFLAN CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
30~520q23 04/24/~2 11480 04/06/~2
508520!24 04/24/V2 11474 04106t~2
I03520417 04117i92 11376 05/02/92
~085204i6 04/17/92 11561 O5/OI/g2
I08~20426 04/~0/V2 11472 04/06/~2
~08520427 04/30/92 11477 04/06/t2
!0~520450 04/T0/92 11471 04/06/92
30882008 04/30/92 !14T3 04/06/92
~03~2042~ 04/~0/V2 11476 04/06/?2
308820420 04/30/~2 Ii47B 04/06/92
~03~20~25 04/30/92 11475 04/0~/92
:heck Totals:
LABOR;MATRLSdlDBEVIE~
LABDR;NATRLS:CDHHDN AREAS
PLAY SAND:CALLE ARAGON
SPRINKLER HEADS;LABOR;TCSD
LABDR;NATRLS;NICHOLAS{KERNEY
LABOR;NATRLS;COSTAIN SLOPE
LABOR;MATRLS:VlLL,GROUE WASH
LABDR}HATRLS;RCHG CAL,RD
LASDR;HATRLS:V!LLABES !I
LABDR;HATRLS:WOGDOREST
LABORIMATRLS~iNCHESTER CREEK
S,833.17 0.00 5,835.17
74.85 O.O0 74.85
~47.gO 0.00 34~.90
1,042.00 C.O0 1,042.00
50.10 0.00 50.10
1~9.28 0.00 139.28
6%70 O.OO 6V.70
320.25 0.00 ~20,25
517.40 O.OO 517.40
255.75 0.00 251.75
116.85 0.00 1!4.85
502.15 O.OO $02.15
00010217 05126/72 ESILCOR ESGIL CORPORATION
3/71/92 04/~0/92 04/~0/~2
Check Totals:
PlAN CHECKS 411-4/50
5,036.2~ 0.00 5,036.~'
6,149.20 O.OO 6,14t.20
00010218 05126/~2 KNOX KNOX
920404171 04128/V2 11487
920404!67 04/28/92 11486
Check Totals:
BISC.HARDNARE; PUBL.WORKS
HISC.HARDWARE EOUIPMENT;PJ.
6,!49.20 0.00 6,!49.20
24~.75 0.00 24~.75
901.05 0.00 VO!.05
00010219 05/261V2 L&HFERTI L & M FERTILIZER
!!047 04/15/~2 I!4V2
03/5!I72
:heck lotais:
GENERATOR
!,144.80 0.00 1,144.80
1,1~L78 0.00 1,195.78
Check Totals:
00010220 051261V2 NUNIFINA MUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.
V2380 04123/V2 0347 01/2!R2 CREDIT/REFUND;SERVICE LVL C
i,195.78 0.00 1,195.78
5,000.00 0.00 5,000.00
00010221 05/26/72 RIVERBiD RIVERSIDE OFFICE
SUPPLY
Ir'75°0-~ 04~9i9~ 11519 04/15/92
ln'"9O-~ 04150/92 II"I~ 04/15/~2
~'~' ' 04115/~2
~.-~r~ 04/301~2 1~51B
~0757>2 OU2U?2 Z''= 0U15,92
i:75~-:. 0~/27/?~ 1:52('
iC'75a!-: 04/27/% 11520
Check Totals:
OFFICE SUPPLIES; STOCK
OFFICE SUPPLIES: STOCK
OFFICE SUPFLiES~ STOCK
OFFICE SUPPLIES; STOCK
OFFICE SUPPLIES: STOZL
OFFICE S~PF'LIES:
OFFICE SUPPliES: STOCi:
OFFICE SU~LiEE:
OFFICE SUPPLIES:
5,000.00 0.00 5,00~.00
21!.1~ 0.00 21!.17
301.t2 0.00 301.92
57.76 0.00 57.76
Z21,$i
12.07
227,~:: ..... "'
C~ec~ ht~ Ve~r N~
0~'~°~ ":~" 04/I~I72 n~:T~: ~-~ 24.9E .... '
~- I07~19-0 04/24!92 11475 04t02/92 OFFICE SUPF'L!ES:BENERAL 2&0.91 0.20
105634-0 04/01R2 114.25 05/24/92 APPOINTMENT EGOKS:WIRE T~AYS 41.60 O.O0 41.6('
!06354-1 04101/92 1142~ 05121IV2 APPOINTMENT ~ODKS:WIRE TRAYE 8.25 0.00 B.25
.. -:hack Totals:
00010222 05126/92 VAN~ORP VANDORPE CHOU ASSOCIATION
050192 04/10192 04/30/92 PLAN CECKS APRIL 92
Check TotaXe:
2,BBO.ST 0.00 2.BBO.~?
I,S7&.SE 0.00 1.576.5B
1,576.58 O.O0 1,57~.5B
lapoft lotais:
BO~487.77 O.O0 BO.487.77
..-"U~{D CHEC!. NU~.BER CHECK DATE VENDOF: NAME DESCR!?TIO~'i
~,,, nr,~r=,~' ' ......?' POSTMASTER
00! 00010141 ..... ~ ^L' lED B 'RICAE
OOl 00Ci01~2 05/15/72 APPLE ONE
nn~ 0n~0142 0~"5~ APPLE ONE
00! 00010145 05/!5/92 A T & T
001 00010144 05/15/92 AVP VISION PLAN
001 00010147 05/15R2 CAL WEST RENTAL CENTER
001 00010148 05/15/~2 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT
001 00010149 05115/92 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE/SUPPLIES
001 00010150 05/15/g2 CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
001 00010151 05/15/92 DENTICAE OF CALIFORNIA
001 00010152 05/15R2 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
001 00010154 05/15/92 EDEN SYSTEI~ INC.
001 00010155 05/15R2 ELECTRICAL CONCEPTS~ INC.
00! 00010156 05/!5R2 ELMO, ANTHONY
001 00010159 05115192 FRANKLIN SEMINARS
001 00010160 05/!5R2 SET PAGED
001 00010160 05115/~2 SET PAGED
001 00010161 05/15/~2 SOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOC.
00! 00010142 05/15R2 GLENNIS OFFICE PRODUCTS
001 00010162 05/15/92 GLENNIS OFFICE PRODUCTS
001 000101&2 05/!5/~2 BLEWHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
001 00010!62 05/15/~2 GLENHIES OFFICE PRO~USTS
001 000!01~5 05115t~2 SOLDEN STATE IRADIN8 CO.
001 0001016~ 05/15/92 O.R.E.A.i. TRUST
001 000101~5 05/15!~2 GREEK, ~UNE
001 00010166 05/15/~2 8TE
001 00010166 05/15R2 GTE
001 00010166 05/15R2 GTE
001 00010166 05/15R2 GTE
001 00010166 05/15R2 GTE
OOt 0001016~ 05/15/~2 ANNE LISA HERNANDEZ
001 00010171 05/15/~2 INLAND EMPIRE MANASER'S ASSOC
001 00010174 05!15/~2 LB80 COHMUNICATIONS~ IN~
001 00010175 05!15!~2 L~NCH & STUFF CATERING
001 00010176 05/15/~2 MARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
00! 00010177 05/15/92 MARTIN I HOUR PHOTO
001 00010178 05r15/92 NSM ASSOCIATES
001 00010!7g 05/15R2 MICRO AGE COMPUTER CENTER
001 00010180 05/15/92 NESS. TORSA
001 00010185 05/!5R2 OCHENDUSZKO~ MARK
001 00010184 05/15/92 FINAL TOUCH MARKET
00! 00010185 05/!5R2 ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING SERVIC
001 00010186 05115/g2 ORANGE COUNTY CHANBER OF
00! 00010187 05115/~2 PAYLESS DRUG STORES
001 00010188 05715R2 PESTMASTER SERVICES
001 0001018~ 05/15/~2 PETTY CASH
001 00010190 05115/q2 PRESS ENTERPRISE
001 000101~$ 05115R2 RANCHO ~UFFLER
001 00010194 0~/15/t: RAKCHO ~LUEPRINT
001 00~I0175 05115/~2 SECURITY PACIFIC N~TiONAL
0~; 00~10!% 0571U~2 SI~ SPEEDY
TELEpHOneS
0¢! 00~10!~ C5/15/92 SO,CALiFORt-;iA TELEPHOE CC,
,ACi O00!(!IgT C5/15.=92 SO,CA~i=OR~IA TELEPHONE CO,
~)(!1 30~i('i78 05/15/S2 SPEEDY GiL CHANGE
ANNUAL FEES/BULK MAILING !5G.C.-1
BATTERIES FOR BARRI;ADES ~'~ ='
WEEK ENDING 4/25/92 '~ "'
WEEK ENDING 512/~2
NAY BILLING
INSURANCE PREMIUM MAY ~2
RENTAL OF AGUAR;C.I.P. POSTS 24.7E
INSURANCE RAY 19V2
CLANP, PAPER I1 20.0i
ANNUAL DUES · 145.0C
INSURANCE PREMIUM FOR NAY 92 607.0C:
SIGNAL NA1NT. NARCH 92 78.~5
ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE 17,860.00
POWER PULE FOR PLANNING ROOM 150.00
CAL80 CDNF. EXPENSE 441.~2
FILER;REFILLS;DAYTIHERS;PLE 234.1:
MAY PASER RENTAL 92.0~
PASER RENTAL MAY
3UN-MAY S NEWSLETTER SUB ...... '
CREDIT MEMO 15.52-
OFFICE SUPPLIES! PUBLIC WORKS
CREDIT ~EMD ITEMS RETURNED 1B.&?-
FOLDERS;LETTER TRAYS:INK 959.4~
HOUSE FOR HARVARD GRAPHICS
INSURANCE PREmIUm/MAY 92
CITY CLERKS CONF.4/21-5/I Z1,70
APRIL 28 BILLING 2~.~2
714-G94-!gB9/APRIL BILLING 9~4.52
7i46998&~2 MAY 7 BILLING --47.~7
714-GgA-!gBWAPRIL 8ILLINS ...5.3i
7146~92509 APRIL 28 BILLING
SEMINAR/MF 115.00
DUES FOR !9~2 15,00
RULERS;MABNETS)PDL!CE .510.1B
DINNER FOR COUNCIL 90.~0
COFFEE SERVICE)CITY HALL 76.~I
PHOTO FINISHING & FILM
APRIL CHBS 6B9.1O
HARD DRIVE;ADAPTER CABLE
4/!-4/2~ MILEABE REIHB
EXPENSE REINS 20.~G
PROMOTIONAL PROGRAM FOR CITY 1,683.18
DIRECTORY ~7.BB
DIRECTORY 67.88
FILM PROCESSING;B&S:24EXPOSUR
APR!L !1 SERVICE 140.00
CASH RE!MS COTY EMPLOY.
AD FUR G.P. WORKSHOP !%.20
ACROSS BE~ TOOL DOX:S-!O TRK. 2!9.%?
BLUEPRIN!S: ENGINEERING ~EPT. 21.E
4?gS0200000!GTTS/APR!L CHS~
nlr..:7~',,~V r,: , In=
FUND r,,-~v ~E:^~
~nc,.. ~EF: DATE
GO1 00010200 05/15t92 TEM~CULA VLLY SCHOOL DISTRICT gSF FUNDINS :.OC.C.C":
COi 00010201 05/!5/~2 TD-~AC ENGINEERi!{~ YNEZ CORRIDOR
-401 00010202 05/!5R2 TOWN CENTER STATIONERS OFFICE SUPPL!ES~PLANNING Z~.2~
~ 00010202 05/15/92 TOWN CENTER STATIONERS CALEN~ERS:LABELS:PRINIWHEELS
001 00010203 05/15/~2 TRAVELING SOFTWARE SOFTWARE UPGRADE 7{:.:~
00! 00010204 05/15/92 UNITOB RENTAL SERVICE UNIFORMS RENTAL;PUBLIC WORKS 25.C'
001 00010205 05115192 USC~ Normal P/R~ 5/07R2 112.41
001 00010205 05/15/t2 USC~ PART-TIE RETIREMENT 5/1R2 I~.2
001 00010205 05/15R2 USC~ Normal P/R, 5/07/~2
001 00010206 05/15/92 THE VALLEY GROUP REI~B AIRFARE 29a.0C!
00! 00010208 05/1~/92 NESTERN HIGHWAY PRODUCTS BARRICADES;BATTERIES)STENCIL B21.~E
COl 00010209 05115192 WHITE CAP RETURNE) ITEMS
001 0001020~ 05115192 WHITE CAP STEEL TAPE I05.7~
001 00010211 05/15/92 XEROX C~PORATION-BILLINB LEASE AGREEmENT/APRIL 2,958.1!
001 00010211 05/i5/92 XEROX CORPORATION-BILLING CREDIT HEND/OVER BILLED 580.7~-
001 00010211 05t15/92 XEROX CORPORATION-BILLING CREDIT ~E~O/DVER gHBED 5BG.7E-
001 00010211 05/15!~2 XEROX CORPORATION-BILLING LEASE ABREEMENT/~AY ~2 2.955.I:
001 00010212 05f26/V2 ALHAMBRA SRDUP YNEZ RDA~ CFD 88-12 4/1-4/50
001 00010215 05/26R2 ALL CITY I~ANAGEHENT TRAFFIC CDNTRDL;RCHD CA:.ROA~ 1.61~.23
001 00010214 05/26/92 BROWN & GIBELOW CLDISDNNE CITY SEALS) 1.314.5~
001 00010215 05126!~2 BURKE, W!LLIA~S & SDRENSEN PRDF SERVICES 5131192 2.69~.17
001 0001G2!5 05/26R2 BURKE, NILLIArS & SORENSEN ~ARCH BILLING 5.150.00
001 AOnln~'~ 05/2~/72 ;e~T, CORPORATION PLAN CHcPK~ ~/t-u30 6.!4~.2~
001 00010218 05/26/92 KNOX H1SC.HARDWARE EDUIP~ENi;P.L
001 00010218 05/26/92 KNOX ~IS.HARDWARE~ PUBL.)~DRKS
001 00010219 05/26/92 L & ~ FERTILIZER GENERATOR !,195.75
00! 00010221 05/%/92 RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY OFFI:E SUPPLiES!GENERAL 260.!1
001 00010221 05i26R2 RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES: STOCK 227.40
"nO1 00010221 05/26/92 RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY APPOINTMENT BOOKS;WIRE TRAYS 49.55
~01 00010221 05/26/92 RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY OFFICE SUPPLIES; STOCK 2.342.21
001 00010222 05126I~2 VAN~DRPE CHOU ASSOCIATION PLAN CHECKS APRIL V2 1,57&.58
001 68,535.70
016 00010153 05115192 DAVID F. DIXON EXPENSE REI~BI4115-4117 415.50
016 00010153 05/15/V2 DAVID F. DIXON EXPENSE REIMB/4/22-4/24 3~9.~7
016 - 814.67
017 00010140 05115192 AEI SECURITY INC. I~AY SECURITY 25.00
O!q. 00010144 05/!5/V2 AVP VISION PLAN INSURANCE PREMIUM I~AY g2 128.65
017 00010145 05/15/~2 RUTH L. CADIiAN REFUND 55.00
01~* 00010146 05/15R2 CALIFORNIA ETHNIC HINDPITY ~EMBERSHIP DUES 20.00
0I~ 00010148 05/15I~2 COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT INSURANCE ~AY I~2 51&.O0
01~ 00010151 05/15/92 DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA INSURANCE PRE~IU~ FOR MAY 92 1~2.0G
019 00010157 05/15!V2 TINA ERB REFUN) 5.00
A,Q 00010158 05/!5/92 FIRST A~ERICAN TT~)~ rO DHF' IC HEARING NOTICE:SPT.PRF. 75.00
~I~ 00010160 05/!5/92 BET PAGED MAY PABER RENTAL 6~.00
011 00010162 05/15/g2 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES: TCSO 7.2~
0!~ 00010164 05/15/92 B.LE.A.T. TRUST INSURANCE PREmIUM/MAY ~2 IB0.00
Of'? 00010167 05/15/~2 HANKS HARD~AF:E APRIL CHCS 172.~'i
017 00{'.!0167 05/15/92 HA)~KS HARDWARE LiNE ~iAFiKER CHA~)C:TCS~ 2ST.i~:
,91~ 00010168 ~'~" = '~ ~-~ ....... ~.p,,,,,-- ~::u~,. ,-.
i': ,"t;'H;:~7? r,~i~/~' jOHNEO~, 5~ARON REFUND ""
..
01: OOOlOlg~ 05~15/72 FETT~' CASH CASH RE!.~E 18:.7E
.............................................. u... 2~ ".:
FUND CHECK NUHBER ~HEC[ DATE VENDOR NAME ~ESR!PTIO~ A~GUN:
019 00010192 05115192 RAN-CAL JANITORIAL SUPPLY
C19 00010197 05115R2 SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE
019 000101t9 05115It2 STEAM MASTERS
019 00010204 05115/92 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
019 00010205 051!5R2 USCM
019 00010207 05/15192 VIARS, CARRE
019 00010210 05115R2 SUSAN R. tIGGINS
019 00010215 0512&/92 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
019 0001021~ 05/2&It2 CALIFORNIA LA!iDSCAPE
019 00010215 05/2&/t2 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
019 0001021& 05/2&R2 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
01~ 00010215 05/2&R2 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
019 000102~& 0512S/92 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
019 0001021& 0512~!92 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
019 0001021& 0512&/92 C~IFORNIA LANDSCAPE
019 00010215 05/2&R2 CALIFORNIA L~DSCAPE
019 000~021& 05/2&/92 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
019 0001021& 0512&!92 CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
019 00010220 05/2d~R2 RUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.
019
TRASH BICKER 25,S~
714-292-4U20/~RRCH C~6S
EMERG.WATER DAMASE;TEEt~ CENTR
UNIFORM RENTALS;CDMI~.SERViCE
Normal P/R, 5/07/~2
REFUND
REFUND
SPRINKLER HEADS~LABOR:TCSD
LABOR)NATRLS)RCHO CAL.RD 317,4(
LABOR;~ATRLS;CDSTAIN SLOPE
PLAY SAND;CALLE ARAGON
LABOR;NATRLS)NINCHESTER CREEK
LADOR)NATRLS)RIDBEVIEN 71,~
LABOR)NATRLS)VILLABES II 2S.75
LRBORII~TRLS)VILL.BROVE NASH ~2~.~
LABOR)RATRLS..'NICHDLASIKERNEY
LADOR~HATRLS:IDODCREST
LAItOR)MATRLS!CORMDN AREAS
CREDIT/REFUND;SERVICE LVL C 5~000.0¢
CC) REPROBRAPHICS, INC,
PRINTINS THRU ROH DESIBN
77S,59
0,4S7.77
lnvcice Dots P/C hte ~ES~ri~t:~ Br,~ms u~=~.;. ..
00010224 05/18!~2 CGSTCO COSTCO ~OLESALE
0513~2 0511~/92 OS/I~R2 DAYCA~PITV ~ONITORIRECORDE? 46~.3! 0.00
Check Totals:
00010225 05/18!~2 COUNTYCO COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE-CLERK OF
0515~2 05115/92 05115192 FILE NOTICE FO EXEMPTION
00010226 05/18!~2 NEWPORT
~0824
Check Totals:
NEWPORT WAVE SOFTi~RE
04/01/~2 0183 02/01/~2 310&R2 CHSS
00010227 0511B!~2 PEPS
051B~2
ChEck Totals:
PERS (HEALTH INCUR. PRENIUM)
05118/92 05118/~2 PRE~IUH HAY ~2
00010228 05/18/92 SKILLPAT SKILLPATH, INC.
051572 05/15/~2
Check Totals:
SEHINAR/TE
ChECk Totals:
0001022? 05/!S!V~ SO CAL-2 SO.~ALIFORNIA TELEPHONE
~45741~2 05107/?2 05m~t~n ~'~-~-?418I~Y 7 Sn'~N
Check Totals:
05/!8/72 TrMrCWtlT TcMPn~LA SHUTTLE S=RVTrc
0~12~2 05/12/~2 05/!21~2 TR~SICDNFSilCHA CDNF/KL
00010231 ~5/!S/72 UN~J~
051592
Check Tote!s:
UNU~ LIFE INS. CO. OF AREPICA
05115192 05/!5/72 INSURANCE FOR HAY ~2
Check Totals:
00010252 051!8/~2 WASTEHB~ WASTE ~ANAGE~ENT INC.
0~31B0 04/01/92 0302 04/01/~2 RENlAL OF PDRT-D-LET;AP~IL 92
076676 04/24/?2 0302 04/01/~2 RENTAL DF PDRT-O-LET;~AY 92
..... n~R 04!01/~? 0302 04/0!/~2 CRDIT A~CT CLOSE~
Cl~OOy~,~
Check Totats:
00010233 "S'n~ BU~ WM BURKE, NILLIA~S & SOREHSEN
OSO? 04/21/92 04/21/~2 PROFESSIONAL SERV. ~AR 92 SE~
00010234 05126/72 ~AURICE
Chec'~ Totals:
~AURICE PRINTERS OU!CK PRINT
04/30/?2 !i~3Q. 04/30/~2 TDURIS~ BROCHURE
00010255 05/26/92 OLIVERBR OLIVER BROTHERS
1363 05/07172 OSBO
Check Totals:
03/!2!~2 STREET,STOR~ ~RA!~,T~FC.SIGNL
5neci ict-zls:
,- ....... - ................ -:.;,,rn-,-UF'.B~;~ rjES;G~ qT!i~Tr
C, 4/22r'-:1 C::.~ '.-.",4."2:::,': L[: TGi~P.: E:ECIFI[:: ......
465.ZI 0,00
25,00 0.00 25.00
25.00 0.00 25.00
150.00 G.OG 150.00
150.O0 0.00 ' !50.00
19,076.11 O.O0 19.076.11
!9,076.!I 0.00 !9,076.!!
9~.00 O.OO ~l n~
99.00 O.O0 9~.00
~5.07 0.00 95,07
~5.07 ~ On ~5 n7
~.00 0.00 4~ 0n
2,!49.3~ Ojm ~ ~4°
4~.78 0.00 49.78
49.7B 0.00 49.78
56.4! 0.00 56.41
10j22.40 0.00 10,322.40
10,322.40 0.00 10.322.&0
4,8q8.75 O.O0 4,84825
44J~1.27 0.00 44,791.23
...... " C.CC %1.00
C.~.!..~..
!nv:ic~ Dat~ F'/O Oa;~ Descr!~tlo~ ~r:~ 3is::un: ~,~t
Che:k To;ats: i,S2&.al 0.00 l.S2a.li*
0001~2~ 05/2~/~2 Wn~DAN WT,~nAN A::nrIAT=
40042~ O&lOll~ 04/01R2 PLANNINS/FE~ ~ERVI~ES lO,~OB.O0 0.00 ~A OAC
Check Totals: I0,908.00 0.00 10,908.00
Report Totals: t7,0&2,;O 0.00
001
~' "01
001
001
00I
00010125 n~'lB~°" COUNTY OF RIVERSTOE-CLERK OF PlL~ Nn~Tr; FD EXEMPTION
00010226 05/!8/92 NEWPORT WAVE SOFTWARE 3/06/92 CHSS 1St.O:
00010227 05/IBI92 PENS (HEALTH INSUR. PREMIUM) PREMIUM HAY 92 !5,!O~.Ei
00010225 05/!S/~2 SKILLPATH, INC. SE~INAR/TE 9~.C'
00010231 05/!B/92 UNUM LIFE INS. CO. DF AMERICA INSURANCE FD~ MAY 92 1,72~.h
000102~2 05/!B/72 WASTE HANABE~ENT INC. RENTAL OF POll-D-LET;MAY 92 4~.7E
001 00010232 05/1B/92 WASTE ~AMABEHENT IMC. " CREDIT ACCT CLOSE~ (5.!5-
001 00010252 05/IB/92 WASTE ~NAGEMENI INC. RENTAL OF PDRi-D-LET;APRIL
001 00010235 05/26/92 BUR[E, MILLIAMS & SORENSEN PRDFESSIDNAL'SERV. ~AR 92 SEN .10,206.54
001 00010234 05/26/92 ~AURICE PRINTERS OUICK PRINT TDURIS~ BROCHURE
001 0001023B 05/26/92 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES PLANN!NB/FEB SERVICES 10,90~.00
001
011 00010255 05/26/92 OLIVER BROTHERS STREET,STORM DRAIN,TRFC.SiBNL 44.791.27
0!~ 00010237 05/26/92 URBAN DESIGN STUDIO
OLD TOWN e~:r~F'C PLAN:
016 00010230 05/18192
TE~ECULA SHUTTLE SERVICE
TRANS/CONFS/IC~A CONF/KL
0!9 00010224 05/!8/92 COSTCO WHOLESALE DAYCA~P/TV MONITOR/RECORDER
01~ 00010227 0511BI~2 PENS (HEALTH INSUR. PRE~!U~) PRE~!U~ MAY 72
0!? 00010229 05/!8/92 SO.gALiFORN!A TELEPHONE gO. 714-~45-741B/~AY 7 BILLING
019 00010231 05/1B/92 UNU~ LiFE INS. CO. OF AMERICA INSURANCE FOR ~AY ~2 428.19
01g 00010231 05/26/92 BURKE~ WILLiAMS & SDRENSEN PROFESSIONAL SERV. MAR 92 SEF: 1!5.86
017 00010236 05/26192 TEMECULA VLLY SCHOOL DISTRICT jAN-MAR CLASSROOMS 90.00
019 00010236 0512&/92 TEMECULA VLLY SCHOOL DISTRICT MARCH-jUNE ~2 1,590.00
.__O!? 00010256 05/26t~2 TE~ECULA VLLY SCHOOL DISTRICT JAN-~A~ OLASSROO~S 222.0?
019
7.275.71
7,062.3C
ITEM
NO.
4
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
May 26, 1992
City Treasurer's Report as of April 30, 1992
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's
report as of April 30, 1992.
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 April 30, 1992.
FISCAL IMPACT:
NOFle
ATTACHMENT:
City Treasurer's Report as of April 30, 1992
City of Temecula
City Treasurer's Report
As of April 30, 1992
Cash Activity for the Month of April:
Cash and Investments as of April 1, 1992
Cash Receipts
Cash Disbursements
Cash and Investments as of April 30, 1992
$
$
15,991,083
1,944,871
(5,060,244)
12,875,710
Cash and Investments Portfolio:
Type of Investment
Institution
~r)emand Deposits
~'reasury Service Shares
Petty Cash
Deferred Comp, Fund
Local Agency Investment Fund
Security Pacific
Pacific Horizons
N/A
ICMA
State Treasurer
Cash and Investments as of April 30, 1992
Yield
N/A
3.810%
N/A
N/A
5.692%
Matudty
Date
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Balance
as of
April 30, 1992
$ (651,251)
818,322
800
73,766
12,634,073
$ 12,875,710
(1)
(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 Carole Serfling, Senior Accountant
°~
ITEM NO. 5
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
ppI~.pAI~Rr) BY:
City Council/City Manager
Mark Ochendu~zko
Assistant City Manager
May 26, 1992
Consideration of an Agreement for Vector Control Services
Anthony Elmo, Chief Building Official
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve a contract agreement with the County of
Riverside Health Services Agency, Division of Environmental Health, to provide vector control
services to the City on an as-needed basis.
DISCUSSION:
The City, on occasion, has experienced infestations of mosquitos, ~es and rodents caused by
certain seasonal and climatic conditions, the keeping of certain alli/nals, as well as natural habitat
elimination caused by development. Staff has negotiated an agreement with the County of
Riverside Health Services Agency, Division of Environmental Health Services, to provide vector
control and housing program services. These services will be provided on an as-needed basis
upon referral by the Code Enforcement Officer.
Fiscal Impact:
An appropriation of $5,000 to Account/K)01-162-999-42-5250, "Other
Outside Services," for Fiscal Year '92-'93 is needed to fund this program.
v:\wp~a~eada.rpt~,e~-m0~26.ve~lor
AGI~I~':MI:~NT B~ TItE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ~
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE FOR VECTOR CONTROL SERVICFS
PROVIDED TItROUGH TIlE tlI~ALTH SERVICES AGKNCY,
DEPARTIVmNT OF ENVIRONMmqTAL HEALTH SERVICPS
Tltlg AGI!I~.k'Mk'NT is entered into between the City of Temecula (hereinafter referred
to as "City"), and the County of Riverside through its Health Services Agency, Department of
Environmental Health Services (hereinafter referred to as "County").
WIlERE&S, City desires the County to provide Vector Control Services that includes
plague surveillance, mosquito surveillance, fly and mosquito control; rodent and cockroach
control, advice and assistance, community awareness and abatement projects, complaint
response, public presentations, consultations, public education with ~yers and booklets, and in
enforcing Riverside County Ordinances Nos. 523, 527, 650 and 657 as said ordinances have
been adopted by City; and
WItlinE&S, County has personnel with sufficient training and expertise to provide such
NOW, TII1ZREFORE, the panics hemto agree as follows:
1. SERVICES TO BE RBNDEl~. Upon receipt of a request for service from the
City Cede Enforcement Officer, the ~County shall furnish personnel, materials and supplies to
perform the following services:
A. Mosquito Control Services:
1)
Respond to all citizen's complaints and requests for assistance
concerning mosquitos and, when appropriate, take action(s) to
abate or control the vector(s).
2)
Conduct mosquito survcillancc and control activities including fact-
fmding, inventory of breeding sources, education and consultation,
i.e., issuing citations, follow-up contact with the offending party
when necessary, and appearing in court as wimess, and direct
control action to include biological and chemical control when
necessary.
] vXwp\oontrgtXvo~torJvs
B. Domestic Rodent Control Services:
1)
Investigate all reported infestations of domestic rodents. Offer
advice on cartea methods as may be necessary to ensure control,
including pest abatement for rams rams and rams norveignus only;
elimination of harborages and attractants; and
educational/consultation.
2)
Maintain a program of public education, consultation, and
assistance in preventing, detecting and eliminating domestic rodent
and ectoparasite infestation.
Fly Control Services:
1)
Investigate citizen comphints concerning flies and animal waste,
take action to eliminate fly breeding sources where practical,
including legal action if required, i.e., issuing citations, follow-up
contact with the offending paxty when necessary, and appearing in
court as witness.
2)
Cooperate with agficultnralists, farm groups, civic groups,
schools, industries and other interested parties in solving area fly
problems, pwviding area chemical control only if the community
approves it.
Other Vector Control Services: Respond to requests for assistance and to
citizen complaints with information and advice and providing legal action
where necessary and practical to eliminate source problems. County will
not provide chemical or biological treatment of house vectors. Other
vectors include, but are not limited to, cockroaches, food-infesting pests
and insects, ticks, mites, lice, fieas, and bed bugs; venomous insects such
as bees, wasps, yellow jackets, hornets and ants; other venomous
arthropods such as scorpions and spiders, and vertebrate pests and vectors
such as native rodents, rattle snakes, pest birds, bats and skunks, among
others.
Overflowing Sewage: Investigate all complaints of overflowing sewage
and abate the situation if justified; including legal action if required, i.e.,
issuing citations, follow-up contact with the offending party when
necessary, and appearing in court as witness.
~ 2 v \wp~c~ntra~five~lor. sv s
2. CHARGES AND PA~.
For and in conSideration of the rendition of such above-enumerated
services by County, City agrees to pay County at the rate .of $50.00 per
hour for the cost of services rendered and at the amounts billed for
pesticicles and supplies. The amount of $50.00 per hour shall be deemed
to be the total hourly cost to County to provide said services and City
sbnll not be billed for travel time. Except in cases requiring emergency
service, City shall be charged portal to portal the travel time from the
County Hemet office.
County shall submit itemized billings for the items as outlined in
Attachment "A" of Agreement to City on a quarterly basis, for all services
rendered. City agrees to pay all such charges within sixty (60) days of
receipt of itemized statement therefor.
PERSONI~-~ -.
The services provided by County shall be performed by County personnel
under the control and direction of County. To the extent that city officers
or employees may also participate in any of the activities herein provided
for, or that peace officers of City (whether working by contract or as City
employee) may be called upon to rendor services, aid or assistance within
the boundaries of City, or otherwise to perform law enforcement
functions, any expenses thereof shall be borne by City.
In the event city wishes to have a County representative available to
provide testimony or otherwise provide expertise at a City sponsored
meeting, City will give a minimum of three (3) days notice to the County.
City shall be responsible for payment to County of an hourly rate of
$50.00 per hour for attendance, including travel time. County will bill for
any of the above-rendered services with its quarterly billing statements as
noted in Paragraph 2, above.
All persons employed in the performance of such services and functions
for City shall be County ernployees, and no City employees as such shall
be taken over by County, and no person employed hereunder shall have
any City pension, civil service, or other status or rights.
For the purpose of performing such services and functions, and for the
purpose of giving official status to the performance thereof, every County
officer and employee engaged in performing any such service or function
shall be deemed to be an officer or employee of City while performing
3 v~wp\e~grm~tW~lor.mvm ~
service for city within the scope of this agreement.
D®
City shah not be called upon to assume any liability for the direct payment
of any salary, wages, or other compensation to any County personnel
performing services hemunder for City, or any liability other than that
provided for in this agreement.
Except as her. in otherwise specified, City shall not be liable for
compensation or indemnity to any County employee for injury or sickness
arising out of his employment.
4. HOLD HARMLF~S.
County agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its officers,
agents and employees from and against any and all liability, damages,
costs, losses, claims and expenses, resulting from County's acts or
omissions arising out of activities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement.
City agrees to ddend, indemnify, and hold harmless County, its officers,
agents, and employees from and against any and all liability, damages,
costs, losses, claims and expenses resulting from City's acts or omissions
arising out of activities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement.
5. EN'IIRE AGI~-~. This Agreement is intended by parties hereto as a final
expression of their understanding with respect to the subject matter hereof and as a complete and
exclusive statement of the provisions hereof and supersedes any and all prior and
contemporaneous agreements and understandings, oral or written, in connection therewith. This
Agreement may be changed or mixed only by an instrument in writing signed by beth parties.
6. RECORDS. County agrees to maintain records and documentation of the services
rendered and supplies used pursuant to this Agreement for a period of five (5) years. Such
records or copies thereof, shall be accessible to City for review upon reasonable notification by
City.
7. SEVERABII-ITY. ff any provision of this Agreement is found to be invalid,
void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shah nevertheless continue in full force and
effect without being impaired or invalidated in any way. One or more waivers by either party
of any provisions, term, condition or covenant shall be construed by the other party as a waiver
of a subsequent breach of the same by the other party.
8. TERM AND RENEWAL. This Agreement shall be for the initial term of one
year from January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992. Thereafter, the Agreement shall continue
from month to month until terminated upon thirty (30) days written notice given by either party
to the other.
~ 4 v%wp\coalract\vector. svs
9. NOTICES. All notices and communications under this Agreement shall be made
via United States First Class Mail to the following:
COUNTY:
Director, Environmental Health Services
Riverside County, Health Services Agency
Depaxtment of EnvironmelIta] Health
P.O. Box 7600
4065 County Circle Drive
Riverside, CA 92503-7600
CITY:
City Manager
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
IN WITNESS WHERF~F, the City of Temecula by action of its City Council,
has caused this Agreement to be sigmed by its Mayor and attested and sealed by its Clerk, and
the County of Riverside by order of its Bom'd of Suporvisors, has caused this Agreement to be
subscribed by the Chairman of said Board and sealed and attested by the Clerk of said Board.
Dated:
By
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATFEST:
By
June S. Greek, City Clerk
(Seal)
Dated:
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
ATTEST:
Gerald A. Maloney
Clerk of the Board
By
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
By
Deputy
(seaD
5 v\wp\conlract\v~ctor.svs ~
ATTACHlVIENT "A"
CITY OF TEMECULA QUARTERLY BugLING STATEMENT COUNTY OF
RIVERSIDE, HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMF~NT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL I-r~-ALTH SERVICES
From , 19 To , 19
As per the Agreement signed between the County of Riverside, Health Services Agency,
Department of Environmental and the City of Temecula, this is the Quarterly Billing Statement
for housing and vector control related activities performed by Environmental Health.
Attached are documentation of activities performed, man-hours expended, and any
pesticides or supplies used.
The total nmount billed for this quarterly period is: $
~ (~ v\wp\coatnct~vcctor. m/s
CITY OF TEMBCULA QUARTERLY BHJ~ING STATEM~NT COUNTY OF
RIVERSIDE, I-~ALTH SERVICF. S AGENCY DBPARTI~:~-~YI' OF
ENVIRO~AL ~TH SERVICES
From , 19 To , 19
Date
Location
Summary of Activity
Total Man-hours
Pesticicle(s) Used
Other Supplies
Inspector
@$50.00/I-Ir. =$
Total =$
--~
'7 v\wp\oontrsct~v~ctor. svm
ITEM NO. 6
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER ~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA A GENDA REPORT
City Council
David F. Dixon
May 26, 1992
L-Shaped Property Adjacent to Sam Hicks Monument Park
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council (1) authorize the City Manager and City
Attorney to open escrow on 1.53 acres adjacent to Sam Hicks Monument Park, (2)
adopt Resolution 92- "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Temecula
Declaring Certain Findings Regarding City Expenditures in Connection with the
Temecula Redevelopment Agency as Required by United States Department of the
Treasury Regulations (Section 1.103-18)," and (3) approve an advance from the
Development Impact Fee Fund balance to the Capital Projects Fund in the amount of
$1,051,000 and appropriate $1,051,000 in the Capital Projects Fund.
STAFF REPORT:
For several months we have been negotiating for the purchase of approximately 1.5
acres adjacent to Sam Hicks Monument Park. The property in question was proposed
for an 83-room motel. Because the property is adjacent to Sam Hicks Monument Park
and adjacent to the proposed Senior Citizen Center, it was felt that it would be
advantageous to purchase the additional property. A diagram is attached showing the
property which fronts on Moreno Road and is adjacent to Sam Hicks Monument Park.
The City had the property appraised. We have also received an appraisal from the
seller. Based upon the appraisals, we have offered the seller $1,050,000 for the
property. Escrow fees in the amount of $1,000 have been included in the
appropriation request.
The staff recommends that the City Council approve the acquisition of the
aforementioned property and authorize staff to proceed with escrow and the purchase
of said property. Resolution 92-__ must be adopted to enable repayment from
Redevelopment Agency Fund proceeds to the Development Impact Fee Fund once the
Redevelopment Agency Bonds are sold.
Agenda Report:
Page 2
L-Shaped Property
FINANCIAL IMPA C T:
The cost of the property and escrow fees are estimated to be $1,051,000. An
amount equaling $401,000 will be refunded to the Development Impact Fee Fund
balance from Redevelopment Agency Bond proceeds. The balance ($ 650,000) is from
Development Impact Fees collected by the County and remitted to the City.
LU
6TH St.
z
0
O0
rr
r~
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLIH~ON OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA DECLARING CERTAIN FINDINGS
REGARDING CITY EXPENDITURES IN CONNECTION
WITH THE TEMECULA I~F-I}EVELO PMF~ AGENCY AS
REQUIRED BY UNfrFX} STATES DEPARTMEaNT OF THE
TREASURY REGULATIONS (SECTION 1.103-18)
WHEREAS, on January 27, 1992, the United States Department of the Treasury (the
"Treasury") issued final regulations (Section 1.103-18) relating to the use of bond proceeds for
the reimbursement of expenditures made prior to the date of issuance of bonds (the
"Reimbursement Regulations"); and
WHEREAS, under the Reimbursement Regulations, in general, if specified requirements
are satisfied, the proceeds used for reimbursement are deemed to be spent on the date of
reimbursement; and
WHEREAS, if such requirements are not satisfied, then proceeds used for
reimbursement will remain subject to the rebate, arbitrage and other rules relating to tax-
exemption until ultimately spent; and
WHEREAS, the Reimbursement Regulations apply to m-exempt obligations issued after
March 2, 1992, except that the Reimbursement Regulations do not apply to expenditures before
such date if such expenditures were made after September 8, 1989, and if there was objective
evidence at the time of the expenditures that the issuer reasonably expected to reimburse the
expenditure with bond proceeds; and
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula ("City") authorized the purchase of the "L-shaped"
property adjacent to Sam Hicks Monument Park east of Moreno Road, north of Mercedes Street,
Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 24038, Temecula, California with the proceeds of tax-exempt Temecula
Redevelopment Agency (RDA) obligations; and
WHEREAS, in order to comply with the Reimbursement Regulations, the public interest
and convenience require that City officially declare its intent that City reasonably expects to
reimburse the Expenditure with proceeds of the RDA Obligations;
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND
DECLARED by the City Council of the City of Temecula as follows:
Section 1.
The foregoing recitals are true and correct.
Section 2. City reasonably expects to reimburse the Expenditure with proceeds
from the Obligations. The reimbursement of the Expenditure is consistent with the City's
established budgetary and financial circumstances. There are no funds or sources of money of
the City, or any related person or commonly controlled entity, that have been, or reasonable
expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis or otherwise set aside to pay costs of
the Project to be paid or reimbursed out of proceeds of the Certificates.
Section 3. This Resolution is a declaration of City's official intent under the
Reimbursement Regulations.
Section 4. The maximum principal amount of the Obligations for which the
Expenditure is made is reasonably expected to be $15,000,000.00
Section 5.
The proceeds from the Obligations are to be used for the Project.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall make this Resolution reasonably available for
public inspection within thirty (30) days of the date this Resolution is adopted.
Section 7. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and
thenceforth and thereafter same shall be in full force and effect.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 261h day of May, 1992.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
CITY OF TEMECULA )
SS
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Resolution No. 92- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the 26th day of May 1992 by the following roll call vote.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
ITEM NO.
7
TO:
APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
FROM: Mary Jane Henry
DATE: May 26, 1992
SUBJECT: Update County Fee Collections
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file this update of County
Fee Collections for the Redevelopment Agency (RDA), Temecula Community Services
District (TCSD), Development Impact Fees and case processing fees.
DISCUSSION: Since incorporation City staff has negotiated with the
County to obtain funds collected by the County on the City's behalf. To date, we
have been successful in obtaining the following fees or related assets:
Fees
Development Impact Fees
RDA Low/Moderate Housing Funds
Planning Case Review Fees
Engineering Case Review Fees
Community Services District Fund Balance
Total
Assets
Fire Mitigation (Station 73)
Traffic Signals
Total
$2,098,393
847,553
229,537
796,042
703,978
$4,675,503
$1,574,653
2.078,622
$3,653,275
ITEM NO.
8
APPROVAL
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO'
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
May 26, 1992
Solicitation of Public Works Bids for the Construction of Street
Improvements on Sixth Street Between Mercedes and Front Street
(Project No. PW92-02)
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 ultimate street and sidewalk improvements on Sixth Street between Mercedes
and Front Street.
BACKGROUND:
During the formulation of the City's Capital Improvement Program, Sixth Street was identified
as needing paved street improvements between Mercedes and Front Street. The proposed
improvements (vicinity map attached) consist of:
a. Paving to a width of 40 feet within a 60 foot right-of-way.
b. Asphalt sidewalks along both sides of Sixth Street.
c. Concrete curb returns, wheelchair ramps and cross-gutters at the intersections.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Engineer's opinion of probable cost of construction is $60,000.00. Funds for
construction exist in the FY 91-92 Community Development Block Grant Fund. An
appropriation to a Capital Improvement Project account will be made at the time of award of
the contract.
Attachment: Vicinity Map
pw01\agdrpt~92\O526\pw92-02.sol 0520
TO CORONA
RANCHO CALIFORNIA
ROAO
PROJECT SITE %
TO SAN DIEGO
PROJECTED TOWNSHIP 8S,. RANGE 2W, SECTION 15,.
SAN BERNARD I NO BASEL I NE AND MER I D I AN
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
ITEM NO. 9
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ]~'
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
May 26, 1992
Selection of Auditors for the Fiscal Years 1992-94
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council appoint Moreland and Associates as
auditors for the Fiscal Years ended June 30, 1992, 1993 and 1994.
DISCUSSION: We issued a request for proposal for audit services to 11
firms for the three years ended June 30, 1992, 1993 and 1994. Four firms
responded to the request, KPMG Peat Marwick, Diehi Evans, Ernst and Young and
Moreland and Associates. These firms were interviewed by Mayor Pro Tem
Lindemans, Councilmember Moore, Genie Roberts, Chief Accountant, and me.
Based on our review of the written proposal and oral interviews, staff is
recommending Moreland and Associates for the following reasons:
1. The audit staff serving Temecula has more experience auditing cities.
2. The Moreland staff has proven to be accessible throughout the year not just
during the audit.
3. Moreland's fees are lower than all other firms.
FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed fees are as follows:
Fiscal Year Ending June 30.
992 1993 1994
4,500 $15,400 $16,300
The FY 1993 proposed budget includes the cost of the Fiscal Year 1992 audit.
ITEM NO. 10
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER~/~'
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No.
entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA REGARDING THE USE OF FACSIMILE
SIGNATURES
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
May 26, 1992
Resolution of Authorization For Security Pacific Bank to Accept
Facsimile Signature for the City
92-
DISCUSSION: The City uses an automatic check signing machine to sign
checks. As a result, the City's bank requires the City to provide the attached
resolution to authorize the use of the check signer.
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCH., OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA REGARDING THE USE OF FACSIMILE
SIGNATURES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE,
DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. It is resolved that Security Pacific National Bank as a designated depositary
of the City of Temecula is hereby requested, authorized and directed to honor all checks, drafts
or other orders for the payment of money dram in the City's name on its checking accounts
(including those drawn to the individual order of any person or persons whose names appear
thereon as signer 'or signers thereof) when bearing or purporting to bear the facsimile
signature(s) of any two of the following:
The Mayor or the Mayor Pro Tern of the City of Temecula;
and
The City Manager, or the Assistant City Manager, or
the City Treasurer of the City of Temecula
Section 2. It is further resolved that said Bank (including its correspondent banks)
shall be entitled to honor and to charge the City for all such checks, drafts or other orders for
the payment of money, regardless of by whom or by what means the actual or purported
facsimile signature or signatures hereon may have been affixed thereto, if such facsimile
signature or signatures resemble the facsimile specimens from time to time fried with said Bank
by the City Clerk or other officer of the City.
Section 3. All previous authorizations for the signing and honoring of checks, drafts or
other orders for the payment of money drawn on said Bank by the City are hereby continued in
full force and effect as amplified hereby.
Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 261h day of May, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
~ R=sos/254 -1-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Resolution No. 92--- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Temecula on the 26th day of May 1992 by the following roll call vote.
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Rcsos/254 -2- """
ITEM
NO.
11
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
May 26, 1992
First Amendment to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Stormwater Discharge Permit Implementation Agreement, San
Diego Region (Santa Margarita Drainage Area)
PREPARED BY: Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve the First Amendment to the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Discharge Permit Implementation Agreement adding
the City of Murrieta as a co-permittee, and authorize the Mayor to execute said Amendment.
BACKGROUND:
In August 1991, the City of Temecula entered into an agreement with the County of RiVerside
and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District to establish the
responsibilities of each party concerning compliance with the NPDES Stormwater Discharge
Permit issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region.
Subsequently, the City of Murrieta filed a written request with the Riverside County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District to be added as a party to the NPDES Agreement.
The City of Murrieta has been added to the current NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit by
the San Diego Regional Water Quality Board, and the proposed amendment to the
Implementation Agreement requires them to comply with all provisions of the permit and the
Agreement. The City of Murrieta will also assume their portion of all shared costs as
discussed in the original Agreement.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachment:
First Amendment to NPDES Stormwater Discharge Permit Implementation Agreement
pw01 ~agdrpt\92\O526\npdes.amd 0501 a
-.- 1
4
5
.;
6
8
9
10
11
12
15
14
15
16
17
18
19
P. 4
- P. 7
'_LIAM C. KATZENSTEIN
COUNTY COUN.SEL
SUITE 300
3535 - 10TH STREET
RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA
FIRST AMMRDI~NTTOTHE
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
StoAm, vater Discharge Permit
Implementation Agreement
San Diego Region
(Santa Nargarita Drainage Area)
....This FIRST AMENDMENT to the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System Stormwater Discharge Permit Implementation
Agreement - San Diego Region (herein called the NPDES AGREEMENT),
made and entered into on August 27, 1991, by and between the
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT,
the COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, and the CITY OF TEMECULA (herein
collectively called the PARTIES), adds an additional party to the
NPDES AGREEMENT as follows:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the CITY OF MURRIETA has filed a written
request with the RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT (herein called the DISTRICT) to be added as
a party to the NPDES AGREEMENT; and,
WHEREAS, the DISTRICT has solicited from all PARTIES the
approval or denial of the request; and,
WHEREAS, all PARTIES have approved the request; and,
WHEREAS, the DISTRICT has asked that the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Stormwater Discharge
Permit (herein called the NPDES PERMIT) issued by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board - San Diego Region be amended such
that the CITY OF MURRIETA is added as an additional co-permittee;
and,
-1-
1
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
.,ILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN
COUNTY COUNSEL
3535 · 10TH STREET
RIVERSIDE. CA~,IFORNIA
WHEREAS, the Regional Water Quality Control Board - San
Diego Region has made the CITY OF MURRIETA an additional
co-permittee; now, therefore,
IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED that the NPDES AGREEMENT be
amended as follows:
1. The CITY OF MURRIETA is hereby added as an
additional party to the NPDES AGREEMENT in accordance with
Section 7. thereof.
2. This FIRST AMENDMENT shall be effective upon
approval by all PARTIES to the NPDES AGREEMENT.
3. Once effective, the CITY OF MURRIETA shall comply
with all provisions of the NPDES PERMIT and the NPDES AGREEMENT
and shall be responsible for its pro rata share of the shared
costs discussed in Section 5. of the agreement for the current
and any subsequent budget year.
4. Except as specifically provided herein, all
provisions of the NPDES AGREEMENT shall remain the same.
5. This FIRST AMENDMENT may be executed and delivered
in any number of counterparts or copies ("counterpart") by the
PARTIES hereto. When each party has signed and delivered at
least one counterpart to the other PARTIES hereto, each
counterpart shall be deemed an original and, taken together,
shall constitute one and the same FIRST AMENDMENT, which shall be
binding and effective as to the PARTIES hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, all PARTIES have caused this FIRST
AMENDMENT to be executed and attested by its proper officers
thereunto duly authorized, their official seals to be hereto
affixed, as of the date written.
-2-
9
10
11
15
1
Dated:
4
5
6
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
7 Chief Engineer
8
Dated:
14
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL this
day of
15
20
21
22
24
25
26
27
28
:LLIAH C. KATZENSTEIN
COUNTY COUNSEi
3535 - IOTH STREET
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA
16 APPROVED AS TO FORM this
day of 199__
17 '
WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN
18 County Counsel
19 By
Deputy
, 199__
RIVERSIDE COUNT~FL(X)D CONTROL
AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
By
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
ATTEST:
Gerald A. Maloney
Clerk of the Board
By
Deputy
(SEAL)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
By
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
ATTEST:
GERALD A. MALONEY
Clerk of the Board
By
Deputy
(SEAL)
-3-
Dated:
1
3 APPROVED AS TO FORM this
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
.,ILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN
COUNTY COUNSEL
3535 - 10TH STREET
RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA
day of
By
City Attorney
, 199
CITY OF TEMECUIA
By
Mayor
ATTEST:
By
City Clerk
(SEAL)
-4-
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
~O~NTY
3535 · IOTH STRF. ET
RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA
Dated:
1
2
3 APPROVED AS TO FORM this
day of , 199
4
By
City Attorney
.:
KAL:re/6771it/042092
CIT~ OF MORRIETA
By
Mayo r
ATTE ST:
By
,Gity Clerk
( SEAL )
-5-
ITEM NO. 12
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICERS,
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDATION:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
City Clerk
May 26, 1992
Request of County Registrar to Conduct General Municipal Election
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REQUESTING THE SERVICES OF THE COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS
TO CONDUCT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1992
BACKGROUND: The County Registrar of Voters has requested that the cities in
Riverside County who have been approved for consolidation of elections by the
County Board of Supervisors, formally adopt a resolution requesting the Registrar to
conduct the November 3, 1992 General Municipal Election. This is a housekeeping
matter and one of the purposes of the resolution is to recognize the cost of the
consolidation and agree to reimbursement of the County for these additional costs.
JSG
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RF~OLU'I~ON OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA, REQUESTING THE SERVICES OF THE
COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS TO CONDUCT THE
GENERAL MUNICIPAL ~LECTION TO BE WFJX) ON
TUF~DAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1992.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula, California, called a General
Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 1992, for the purpose of the election
of three (3) members of the City Council and
WHEREAS, it is desirable that the General Municipal Election be consolidated with the
Statewide General Election to be held on the same date and that within the City the precincts,
polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same, and that the county election
department of the County of Riverside canvass the returns of the General Municipal Election and
that the election be held in all respects as if there were only one election;
NOW, THEREFOE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That pursuant to Sections 22003 and 23302 of the Elections Code of the
State of California, the Registrar of Voters of the County of Riverside is hereby requested to
conduct the General Municipal Election in consolidation with the statewide General Election on
Tuesday, November 3, 1992, for the purpose of the election of three (3) Members of the City
Council of the City of Temecula.
Section 2. That, except for those services routinely conducted by the City Clerk,
delegation is hereby made to the county elections department of the powers and duties of the
elections officer for the City of Temecula to conduct said election in accordance with all
applicable laws and procedures. The election shall he held in all respects as if there were only
one election, and only one form of ballot shall be used for each of the three (3) effected
Councilmanic positions.
Section 3. That, in all particulars not recited in this Resolution, said election shall be
held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections in said City.
Section 4. That the City of Temecula recognizes that additional costs will be incurred
by the County, by reason of this consolidation, and agrees to reimburse the County for such
additional costs.
Section 5. That the Registrar of Voters of the County of Riverside is hereby
authorized, instructed and directed to give such further or additional notice of said election, in
time form and manner as required.
~ 2/R~sos 255 I
Section 6. That said Registrar of Voters is hereby authorized to canvass the returns
of said General Municipal Election.
Section 7. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this
Resolution with the Board of Supervisors, the county elections department of the County of
Riverside and with the County Clerk.
Section 8. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution.
PASSR!), APPROVRr~ AND ADOPTED, this 26th day of May, 1992.
ATTF. ST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
CITY OF TEMECULA )
55
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 92-__ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the 261h day of May, 1992, by the following
vote:
NOES:
ABSENT:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[Seal]
2/Re,os 2S5 2 }
ITEM- NO. 13
#e
APPROVAL f_-~
CITY ATTORNEY ~/
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER .~'~/~,, __
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
/r~De~t of Public Works
May 26, 1992
Acceptance of Public Improvements in Tract No. 20154
PREPARED BY: /~ Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council ACCEPT the Public Improvements in Tract No. 20154, AUTHORIZE the
reduction of street, sewer, and water faithful performance security amounts, ACCEPT the
warranty bonds in the reduced amounts, APPROVE the subdivision agreement rider, and
DIRECT the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
BACKGROUND:
On June 17, 1986 the Riverside County Board of Supervisors entered into subdivision
agreements with:
The Toman Company
18002 Skypark Circle
Irvine, CA 92714
for the improvement of streets and installation of sewer and water systems. Accompanying
the subdivision agreements were securities, issued by First Nationwide Savings as follows:
1. Instrument of Credit No. 724-S in the amount of $377,500 to cover street
improvements.
2. Instrument of Credit No. 724-S in the amount of $75,500 to cover water
improvements.
3. Instrument of Credit No. 724-S in the amount of $102,000 to cover sewer
improvements.
4. Letter of Credit No. 744-S, in the amounts of $188,750, $37,750, and $51,000
respectively, to cover material and labor.
Page 1 pw02\agdrpt%92\O526\TR20154 051592
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 Paseo Sonrisa Del Sol, and a portion of Via Cuesta AI Sol, South
General Kearney Road, Via Puesta Del Sol, and Avenida Cima Del Sol.
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 faithful performance security amounts. Therefore, it is
appropriate to reduce these securities as follows:
Streets: $339,750
Water: $67,950
Sewer: $91,800
The remaining 10% of the original faithful performance security amounts are to be retained
for one (1) year guarantee period as follows:
Streets: $37,750
Water: $7,550
Sewer: $10,200
The developer has submitted Warranty Bond Nos. 572 8573, 572 8574 and 572 8575,
issued by Safeco Insurance Company of America, designating the City of Temecula as obligee.
City Council acceptance of these bonds will permit the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to
release the faithful performance instruments of credit for these items of work. The Material
and Labor Letter of Credit will remain in effect pending City Council exoneration.
Attachments:
Location Map
Warranty Bond
Subdivision Agreement
Page 2 pwO2\agdrpt\92\OS26~TR20154 051592
PORTION OF RANCHO TEMECULA
LDGkTIQN l'tb,?
ITEM NO.
14
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER ,~
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
May 26, 1992
Contract Change Orders on Project No. PW91-03 Rancho California
Road Benefit District
PREPARED BY: Douglas M. Stewart, Deputy City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
a. Approve the attached Contract Change Orders consisting of:
1. A $9,119.00 decrease in contract amount for modifications in the storm drain
design;
2. A $64,793.00 increase in contract amount due to site soil conditions
necessitating a change in street structural section;
3. A $954.00 increase in contract amount due to additional removal of unsuitable
base soils;
4. A $30,218.50 increase in contract amount due to relocation of a 24" steel
water line; and
5. A $3,000.00 increase in contract amount due to additional insurance required
by Riverside County Flood Control of the Contractor.
b. Advance $39,874.82 from the Development Impact Fund to the Reimbursement
District Fund and appropriate $39,874.82 to Account No. 011-165-605-44-5804.
Page 1 of 2 pwOl\agdrpt\92\0526~pw91-03.cco 0521 a
BACKGROUND:
The contract for street improvements under construction on Rancho California Road between
Lyndie Lane and Margarita Road (Project No. PW91-03) was awarded to Oliver Bros. on
March 10, 1992 for the sum of $499,716.85, plus a 10% contingency, for a total of
$549,688.54. These improvements are part of the Margarita Village Specific Plan Agreement
with the City and as such, are all being reimbursed through additional building permit fees up
to a $2,000,000 cap. Also, included in that Agreement are the improvements being
constructed on the I-15/Rancho California Road overpass. Taking into account all funds
encumbered to date for both projects and the reimbursement to the developers for costs
associated with engineering, $343,561.00 remains on balance prior to the $2,000,000 cap
being reached.
The Contract Change Orders consist of:
CCO #001: A decrease in contract amount of $9,119.00 due to storm drain inlets being
redesigned to eliminate the need for right-of-way;
CCO #002: A $64,793.00 increase in contract amount due to site soil conditions varying
from preconstruction testing values;
CCO #003: A $954.00 increase in contract amount due to unanticipated removals of
deleterious materials in the street subsection;
CCO #004: A $30,218.50 increase in contract amount due to the relocation of a 24" steel
water line; and
CCO #005:
A $3,000.00 increase in contract amount due to additional insurance required
by the Riverside County Flood Control District of the Contractor, above that
required by the City.
FISCAL IMPACT:
On March 10, 1992 the City Council approved the appropriation of $499,716.85, plus a 10%
contingency of $49,971.68 for a total of $549,688.54. Therefore, only the additional
appropriation of $39,874.82 above the 10% contingency is required at this time to the Capital
Project Account No. 011-165-605-44-5804.
Attachments:
Contract Change Orders #001 through #005
Page 2 of 2 pwOl\agdrpt\92\O526~pw91-03.cco 0521a
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
PROJECT:
CONTRACT NO:
May 4, 1992
Tim' D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Jack L. Hodson, Sr. Public Works Inspector
RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. BENEFIT DISTRICT
PW91-03
CCO NO: 001
$ 9,119.00 DECREASE
CONTRACT: PW91-03
$0.00 INCREASE
THIS CHANGE PROVIDES FOR:
Decrease in storm drain quantities. Design changes that were necessitated by a property
owner's reluctance to grant slope easements to the City along the frontage of their property.
CCO DISCUSSED WITH:
1. City Engr: ?'D.-<'
2. Other: Douglas M. Stewart, Dep. Cty. Engr.
3. Other:
Prior Apl~r. By: Date:
ESTIMATE OF COST
Line Items:
Force Acct:
Adjustments:
Agreed Price:
~ (9,1-19.00)
TOTAL:
(9, 119.00)
pw01\pw91-03\cco.001 050192
CITY OF TEM! CULA
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 001
CONTRACT NO. PW91-03
PROJECT: RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BENEFIT DISTRICT
SHEET 1__ of I
TO:
NOTE:
OLIVER BROTHERS
This change order is not effective until aDDroved by the EnGineer.
CHANGE REQUESTED BY: Project Inspector
I. DECREASE IN CONTRACT QUANTITIES AT CONTRACT UNIT PRICES:
B.
C.
D.
E.
Delete CSP Riser Inlet 1 ea. @ $230.00 Each
Delete 18" CSP 16 Gauge 9' @ $31/LF = $279.00
Delete Brow ditch 570' @ $14/LF = $7,980.00
Delete Down drain 40' @ $12/LF = $480.00
Delete Concrete collar, 1 ea. @ $150.00 Each
CCO-I-IA, Item No. S1-18, Riser, 1 ea. @ $230/EA = .................. (230.00)
CCO-I-IB, Item No. S1-17, 18" CSP 16 Gauge, 9' @ $31/LF = ............ (279.00)
CCO-I-IC, Item No. SI-21, Brow ditch, 570' @ $14/LF = .............. (7,980.00)
CCO-I-ID, Item No. SI-22, Down Drain, 40'@ $12/LF = ................. (480.00)
CCO-1-IE, Item No. SI-20, Collar, 1 ea. @ $150.00 = .................. (t 50.00)
ESTIMATE OF DECREASE AT CONTRACT UNIT PRICE: .............. ($9,119.00)
By reason of this Order, the time of completion will be adjusted as follows: No Change
Submitted: Project Inspector B ~, ~ ~' Date: v4'--/--/-f~.
We the undersigned contractor have given careful consideration to the change proposed and
hereby agree. If this proposal is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish all
materials, except as may otherwise be noted above, and perform all services necessary for
the work above specified, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above.
2:~'~l-;:g Title:
By: _
If the contractor does not sign acceptance of this order, his attention is directed to the
requirements of the specifications as to proceeding with the ordered work and filing a written
protest within the time therein specified.
pw01\pw91-03\cco.O01 050192
45174 BUSlNE$5 PARK DI~IVE · TE/vtECULA, CALIFOI~NIA 99590 ® PHONE (714) 694-1989 · FAX (714) 694-1999
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
PROJECT:
CONTRACT NO:
May 4, 1992
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Jack L. Hodson, Sr. Public Works Inspector
RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. BENEFIT DISTRICT
PW91-03
CCO NO: 002
$ DECREASE
CONTRACT: PW91-03
$64,793.00 INCREASE
THIS CHANGE PROVIDES FOR:
An increase in asphalt concrete, aggregate base, and unclassified excavation and fill. After
commencing construction, it was found that field conditions were not as reflected by the
original soils report, which prompted new "R" value tests to be taken. The results of the new
tests changed the structural section of the road, causing quantity changes.
CCO DISCUSSED WITH:
1. City Engr:
2. Other: Douglas M. Stewart, Del3. Cry. Engr.
3, Other:
Prior Appr. By: Date:
Line Items:
Force Acct:
Adjustments:
Agreed Price:
TOTAL:
ESTIMATE OF COST
$ 64,793.00
$ 64,793.00
pw01\pw91-03\cco.002 050492
1989
CITY OF TEMECULA
PROJECT:
TO:
NOTE:
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 002
CONTRACT NO. PW91-03
RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BENEFIT DISTRICT SHEET
OLIVER BROTHERS
This chanae order is not effective until aoDroved by the Enqineer.
CHANGE REQUESTED BY: Project Inspector
I. INCREASE IN CONTRACT QUANTITIES AT CONTRACT UNIT PRICES:
A. Increase Asphalt Concrete by 1" - 897.5 tons @ $27/ton
B. Increase Aggregate Base by 4" - 1,905 CY @ ~ 18/CY
C. Increase Unclassified Excavation by 5" - 2,366 CY @ $2.65/CY
I of 1
CCO-2-1A, Asphalt Concrete by 1" - 897.5 tons @ S27/ton = ........... 24,233.00
CCO-2-1B, Aggregate Base by 4" - 1,905 CY @ $18/CY = ............. 34,290.00
CCO-2-1C, Unclassified Excavation by 5" - 2,366 CY @ $2.65/CY = ....... 6,270.00
ESTIMATE OF INCREASE AT CONTRACT UNIT PRICE: ............... $64,793.00
By reason of this Order, the time of completion will be adjusted as follows: No Change
Submitted: Project Inspector By' Date:
Date:
Approved: Deputy City Engr. B _
We the undersigned contractor have given careful consideration to the change proposed and
hereby agree. If this proposal is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish all
materials, except as may otherwise be noted above, and perform all services necessary for
the work above specified, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above.
Date Acce,~;_~d~: -'_ - Contractor: 4'~j//'~'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'_'/~ ,~J~'~7'/J~'=2~ c.
If the contractor does not sign acceptance of this order, his attention is directed to the
requirements of the specifications as to proceeding with the ordered work and filing a written
protest within the time therein specified.
pwO1\pw91-03\cco.O02 050492
43174 BUSINES~ PAI~K DI~$VE * TEMECULA. CAUFORNIA 99590 · PHONE (714) 694-1989 ® FAX (714) 694-199g
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
PROJECT:
CONTRACT NO:
May 4, 1992
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Jack L. Hodson, Sr. Public Works Inspector
RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. BENEFIT DISTRICT
PW91-03
CCO NO: 003
$ DECREASE
CONTRACT: PW91-03
$ 954.00 INCREASE
THIS CHANGE PROVIDES FOR:
The unanticipated removal of unsuitable material (sponge) at three locations on the north side
(westbound lane) of this project.
CCO DISCUSSED WITH:
1. City Engr: ~
2. Other: Douglas M. Stewart, Pep. Cry. Engr.
3. Other:
Prior Appr. By: Date:
ESTIMATE OF COST
Line Items:
Force Acct:
Adjustments:
Agreed Price:
TOTAL:
$ 954.00
954.00
pw01~pw91-03\cco.O03 050492
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 003
CONTRACT NO. PW91-03
PROJECT:
TO:
NOTE:
CHANGE REQUESTED BY:
RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BENEFIT DISTRICT SHEET 1__
OLIVER BROTHERS
This chanae order is not effective until apDroved by the Enaineer.
Project Inspector
of I
I. INCREASE IN CONTRACT QUANTITIES AT CONTRACT UNIT PRICES:
A. Increase Unclassified Excavation - 360 CY @ S2.65/CY
CCO-3-1A, Unclassified Excavation - 360 CY @ $2.65/CY = .............. 954.00
ESTIMATE OF INCREASE AT CONTRACT UNIT PRICE: ................. $954.00
By reason of this Order, the time of completion will be adjusted as follows: No Change
Submitted:
Approved:
Project Inspector
Deputy City Engr.
Date:
Date:
We the undersigned contractor have given careful consideration to the change proposed and
hereby agree. If this proposal is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish all
materials, except as may otherwise be noted above, and perform all services necessary for
the work above specified, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above.
Date Accepted:
Contractor:
Title:
If the contractor does not sign acceptance of this order, his attention is directed to the
requirements of the specifications as to proceeding with the ordered work and filing a written
protest within the time therein specified.
pw01%pw91-03\cco.003 05049 2
45174 BUSlNE55 PARK DI~IVE · TEMECULA. CALIFORNIA 9~25g0 · PHONE (714) 694-1989 ® FAX (714) 694-1999
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
PROJECT:
CONTRACT NO:
May 4, 1992
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Jack L. Hodson, Sr. Public Works Inspector
RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. BENEFIT DISTRICT
PW91-03
CCO NO: 004 CONTRACT: PW91-03
$ DECREASE $ 30,218.50 INCREASE
THIS CHANGE PROVIDES FOR:
The vertical relocation of 24" water main to allow for installation of the storm drain line "A" .
The project plans, as designed by RBF, indicate the main had already been relocated. Field
conditions show that it had not been moved.
CCO DISCUSSED WITH:
1. City Engr:
2. Other: Douglas M. Stewart, Dep. Cty. Engr.
3. Other:
Prior Appr. By: Date:
ESTIMATE OF COST
Line Items:
Force Acct:
Adjustments:
Agreed Price:
TOTAL:
30,218.50
$ 30,218.50
pwO1\pw91-03\cco.004 050492
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 004
CONTRACT NO. PW91-03
PROJECT:
TO:
NOTE:
RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BENEFIT DISTRICT SHEET 1__
OLIVER BROTHERS
This chanQe order is not effective until aDDroved by the EnQineer.
CHANGE REQUESTED BY: Project Inspector
of I
INCREASE IN CONTRACT QUANTITIES AT CONTRACT UNIT PRICES:
Not applicable.
II. INCREASE IN CONTRACT QUANTITIES AT AGREED PRICES:
A. Relocation of conflicting water line, including all fabrication, placement, safety
and traffic control and back-fill compaction.
CCO-4-11A, Relocation, etc. of conflicting water line at agreed price = ..... 30,218.50
ESTIMATE OF INCREASE AT AGREED PRICE: ..................... $30,21 8.50
By reason of this Order, the time of completion will be adjusted as follows: FIVE DAYS
Approved: Deputy City Engr. By .~~ z. ~ Date: ~
We the undersigned contractor have given careful consideration to the change proposed and
hereby agree. If this proposal is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish all
materials, except as may otherwise be noted above, and perform all services necessary for
the work above specified, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above.
By: Title:
If the contractor does not sign acceptance of this order, his attention is directed to the
requirements of the specifications as to proceeding with the ordered work and filing a written
protest within the time therein specified.
45174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE ® TEMECULA. CALIFORNIA 92590 ® PHONE (714) 694-1989 f~6t)i~l~)~J)i~3t~J~-O04 050492
Submitted
To:
A General Engineering Contractor
1074'[ Limonite Ave. · Mira Loma, CA 91752
License #572558A
Phone (714) 360-9140
Fax (714) 360-0247
City of Temecula
43174 Business
Temecula, Ca.
Park Drive
92590
Og N~E / NO. DA~
Rancho California Road 5/4/92
Project 91-03 Benefit District
· 'je hereby submit specifications and estimates for;
IMPROVEMENTS QUANTITY &UNITS
Page No. 1 of 1 Pages
PROPOSAL
In the State of California: Contractors are required
by law to be licensed and regulated by the Contractors'
State License Board. Any questions concerning a
contractor may be referred to the Registrar of the board
whose address is:
Contractors' State License Board
P.O. Box 26000, Sacramento, CA 95826
JCaN~EI~.
Conflicting Waterline
Rancho California Road
between Cosmic and Lindie
UNIT BID
TOTAL BID
Relocation
of conflicting waterline per attached bid
Lump Sum
Oliver Brothers OH & P 10%
$26,135.00
2,613.50
Traffic flagmen and signing on time and material basis -
including mobilization of additional signs. (This item
could exceed $750.00)
Overtime for welders Saturday work
750.00
720.00
Total $30,218.50
We propose hereby to furnish matedai and labor - complete in accordance with above specifications, for the sum of:
Thirty Thousand Two HuD~lred Eighteen and Fifty Cents dollars ($ 30,218.50
: ~ymenl to Ix made as folows:
Terms Of Payment: 95% contract billing with 5% retention withheld. Subject to Terms & Conditions attached, which are
referred to and hereby made a part of this Proposal. All terms of this proposal are to be integrated with any other contract
9ertaining the same work.
-~11 matedal is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a
,vorkmanlike manner according to standard practices. Any alteration or deviation
· 'tom above specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written
,rders, and will become an extra charge over and above ~he estimate. All
greements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control.
,A ;ceptance of Proposal -
The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are
authorized to do the work as specified. Payment will be made as outlined above.
~gn~um
Signmum
Dill
e
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
PROJECT:
May 18, 1992
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
lJack L. Hodson, Sr. Public Works Inspector
RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD. BENEFIT DISTRICT
CONTRACT NO:
PW91-03
CCO NO: 005 CONTRACT: PW91-03
$ DECREASE $ 3.000.00 INCREASE
THIS CHANGE PROVIDES FOR:
Increased cost of insurance. The Riverside County Flood Control District requires $2,000,000
of insurance, which is $1,000,000 higher than the amount set in the City Contract Boilerplate.
Staff was unaware of this requirement until after the project was awarded. $3,000.00 is the
cost to the Contractor, Oliver Bros., for the increase in coverage.
CCO DISCUSSED WITH:
1. City Engr:C/,,,_Z~. ~ .
2. Other: Douglas M. Stewart, Dep. 6~~gr,
3. Other:
Prior Appr. By: Date:
ESTIMATE OF COST
Line Items:
Force Acct:
Adjustments:
Agreed Price:
TOTAL:
$3,000.00
$ 3,000,00
pwO1\pw91-03\cco.O05 051592
1989
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 005
CONTRACT NO. PW91-03
PROJECT:
TO:
NOTE:
RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD BENEFIT DISTRICT SHEET
OLIVER BROTHERS
This chan{~e order is not effective until aooroved by the En{3ineer.
CHANGE REQUESTED BY: Project Inspector
I of 1__
INCREASE IN CONTRACT QUANTITIES AT CONTRACT UNIT PRICES:
Not applicable.
II. INCREASE IN CONTRACT QUANTITIES AT AGREED PRICES:
A. Increase in insurance coverage.
CCO-5-11A, Increase in insurance coverage ..........................
3,000.00
ESTIMATE OF INCREASE AT AGREED PRICE: ...................... $3,000.00
By reason of this Order, the time of completion will be adjusted as follows:
Submitted: Project Inspector By: ' ~ Date:
Approved: Deputy City Engr. By:
NO CHANGE
511~
We the undersigned contractor have given careful consideration to the change proposed and
hereby agree. If this proposal is approved, that we will provide all equipment, furnish all
materials, except as may otherwise be noted above, and perform all services necessary for
the work above specified, and will accept as full payment therefore the prices shown above.
By: i~. 2:. -L Title: ~;~/t~-T..
If the contractor does not sign acceptance of this order, his attention is directed to the
requirements of the specifications as to proceeding with the ordered work and filing a written
protest within the time therein specified.
pwO1\pw91-03\cco.005 050492
4:~ 174 i~LI51NFqq PARK DImly1: ® TP..MI:CULA. C, ALIFOI~NIA 952590 · PHONE (714) 694-1989 · FAX (714) 694-1999
INSURANCE AGENCY, INC.
..;
285 IMPERIAL HWY., SUITE 104 · FULLERTON, CA 92635
(714) 773-4084 · (310) 694-2247 ° FAX (714) 773-5478
April 14, 1992
Oliver Brothers
10741Limonite Avenue
Mira Loma, CA 91752
Attention: Mr. Dave Oliver
Re: Project No. PW 91-03
Rancho California Road
Benefit District
Dear Dave:
This is to inform you that there will be an additional premium of
$3,000.00 to increase your liability limits co $2,000,000 on the
above project.
If there are any questions please callme.
Very truly yours,
TA:pg
SERVING ALL
YOUR
INSURANCE NEEDS
ITEM NO.
15
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER~
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Department Of Public Works
May 26, 1992
Professional Traffic Engineering Services
PREPARED BY:
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
1. Award a contract to J.F. Davidson Associates, Inc. to provide professional traffic
engineering services and authorize the Mayor to execute the Contract;
2. Approve a budget transfer of $10,000 from Account No. 164-5100 (Salaries) to
001-164-999-42-5406 (Traffic Engineering).
BACKGROUND:
The FY91-92 budget approved the funding of the positions .of Traffic Engineer and Engineering
Technician/Traffic. The Engineering Technician has been hired and is performing field studies,
calculations and other traffic engineering work under the direct supervision of the Director of
Public Works. However, after a lengthy recruitment did not attract any applicants for the
position of Traffic Engineer, it was decided to re-evaluate the duties and salary range for that
position. The re-evaluation is currently ongoing. In the interim, there is a need for a
professional Traffic Engineer to direct the City's Traffic Engineering Technician and organize
the Traffic Division in such a manner that the City's future Staff Traffic Engineer could step
into a fully-functioning division. The consulting Traffic Engineer will be responsible for the
operations portion of the traffic engineering functions. The operations section involves
accident studies, census programs, traffic signals and traffic device maintenance. The review
and conditioning of traffic studies associated with new development projects will remain with
the City's current engineering consultant. It is anticipated that this responsibility will
ultimately be transferred to the Traffic Division. Additionally, the traffic engineering and
Page 1 of 2 pw01%agdrpt\92\O526\award.te 0519a
enforcement analysis conducted by the Institute of Transportation Studies from the University
of California at Berkeley indicated that several cities of similar size are currently using a
consulting Traffic Engineer to supervise a Staff Technician with satisfactory results.
The Public Works Department received proposals from nine engineering firms and after
analyzing the proposals, invited the top three candidates for an interview. The three firms
interviewed were J.F. Davidson Associates, Inc., BSI Consultants, Inc., and Willdan
Associates.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funding for the Traffic Engineering Consultant is included in the proposed FY92-93 Operating
Budget. However, funding for this service during the last month of FY91-92 will necessitate
a budget transfer in the amount of $10,000 from Account No. 164-5100 (Salaries) to 001-
164-999-42-5406 (Traffic Engineering).
Attachment:
Professional Services Agreement with J.F. Davidson Associates, Inc.
Page 2 of 2 pw01%agdrpt\92\0526\award.te 0519a
AGREEMENT
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 26th day of May, 1992, between
the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and
J.F. DAVIDSON ASSOCIATES, INC., a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as
"Consultant".
The parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit "A" attached
her·to.
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 hourly rates set
forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto, based upon actual time spent on the above
tasks. This amount will not exceed $100,000.00 for the total term of the
Agreement unless additional payment is approved by the City Council; orovided 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.
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 Consultam 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.
2/forms/ARG-04Rev 1/22/92 -1- pw01\te~profsvc.92 0519a
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 Consultam 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 Consultam 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 June 1, 1992, and shall remain and
continue in effect on a month-to-month basis, but in no event later than
June 30, 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 see. 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 Consultam.
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 Consultam 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 Consultam 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.
RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL. The individual directly responsible for the performance
of the tasks set forth in Exhibit "A" shall be James B. Dobbins, Registered Traffic
Engineer, License Number 0018. Replacement of said individual shall not be made
by Consultant without the prior knowledge and consent of the City. The Consultant
21formslARG-O4 Rev 1122/92 '~-' pw01\te~profsvc.92 0519a
10.
11.
12.
13.
shall remove from service, under this Agreement, any person determined by the
City, or their duly authorized representative, to be unsuitable for the work herein.
Consultant shall perform the services defined in this Agreement in accordance with
the generally accepted standards for performing similar services. City has relied on
Consultant's representations for quality and professional work as an inducement to
enter into this Agreement. Consultant has represented to City that Consultant has
the qualifications, experience and personnel to perform services for City.
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.
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 mail,
postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the City Manager of the
City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula , California
92590, and the Consultant at P. O. Box 493, Riverside, CA 92502, 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.
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.
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:
a. Minimum Scooe of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
(1)
Insurance Services Office form no. 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).
2/formslARG-O4 R®v 1122192 -3- pwOl\te\profsvc.92 0519a
(2) Insurance Services Office form no. CA-0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering
Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA-0025.
(3) 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:
(1) General Liability $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for
bodily injury and property damage.
(2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for
bodily injury and property damage.
(3)
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 $1,000
must be declared to and approved by the City.
Other Insurance Provisions. Insurance policies required by this contract shall
contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions:
(1)
All Policies. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be
endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided,
canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after
thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the City via United States First
Class Mail.
(2)
General Liability and Automobile Liability coverac3es. The City, its
officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as
insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on
behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of the
Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant, or
automobiles owned, lease, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The
coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection
afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
With regard to claims arising from the Consultant'$ performance of the
work described in this contract, the Consultant's insurance coverage
shall be primary insurance as respects the City, 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.
2tforms/ARG-04 Rev 1122/92 -4- pw01 \te~orofeve.92 0519e
14.
15.
16.
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.
(3)
Worker's Compensation and Emolovers Liabilitv Coveraae. The insurer
shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its
officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work
performed by the Consultant for the City.
(4)
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.
LICENSES. The Consultant and subconsultant shall obtain all necessary licenses,
including but not limited to City Business License.
INDEMNIFICATION. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save harmless the
City, 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.
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.
21forms/ARG-O4 Rev 1/22/92 -5- pw01 ~te~profsvc.92 0519a
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.
EFFFCTIVE 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
Print Name and Title
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
2/formslARG-O4 Rev 1/22/92 -6- pwO1~te\profevc.92 0519e
EXHIBIT "A"
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
1. Prepare engineering studies and responses to requests for traffic control device
installations and modifications; such as stop signs, parking regulations, channelization,
crosswalks, pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Provide written reports identifying
procedures, results and recommendations.
2. Identify, review and develop recommendations for corrective measures at locations
experiencing accident rates higher than would normally be anticipated.
3. Provide traffic engineering support for City Staff and represent the Department of Public
Works at all Traffic and Transportation Commission meetings.
4. Provide guidance and procedures in the selection, installation and routine maintenance
of traffic control devices.
5. Provide direction for and support the City's Traffic Engineering Technician.
6. Advise, support and assist City Departments, Committees, Commissions and City
Council regarding traffic engineering matters and concerns. Provide interface with
Regional and State transportation agencies.
7. Assist in the anticipated modification of the City Traffic Ordinance and in the
development/assessment of fees for capital improvements and maintenance.
8. Prepare plans, specifications and cost estimates, and provide inspection for traffic-related
capital projects.
9. Prepare grant applications for funding from Federal, State and Regional agencies for
traffic safety studies and improvements.
10. Conduct traffic engineering studies for traffic signals and speed zoning, preparing
appropriate written reports concerning those studies. Perform other duties as assigned
relating to traffic and transportation engineering.
11. Work with City Staff to develop City traffic engineering procedures and policies.
12. Work closely with Riverside County's Signal Maintenance Crew to ensure that signal
timing and operation of the signal systems provide the maximum efficiency.
13. Perform other duties as assigned.
2/formstARG-04 Rev 1122/92 EXHIBIT "A" pw01%te~profevc.92 05198
EXHIBIT "B"
PAYMENT SCHEDULE
Director of Traffic Engineering
Deputy Director of Traffic Engineering
Senior Transportation Engineer
Designer
Transportation Engineer I
Draftsman
$100.00
95.00
84.00
58.00
55.00
45.00
- :.: :: .: :: ::: : .: :: :::: .:: :: ..;:: ::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .::: ::, :::: ,:: . :.::
Secretarial
$35.00
Travel - charge per mile 0.36
2/forms/ARG-O4 Rev 1122/92 EXHIBIT "B" PwO1\te~profsvc.92 OSlga
ITEM
NO.
16
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
/l~Department of Public Works
May 26, 1992
Appropriation of Funds for Geotechnical Soils Testing Services
(Law/Crandall, Incorporated) on the Street and Sidewalk Improvements
at Various Schools Project (Project No. PW92-01 )
PREPARED BY:
Michael D. Wolff, Senior Public Works Inspector
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
Approve a transfer of $4,400.00 from the Measure "A" Fund to the Capital Projects Fund and
appropriate $4,400.00 to Capital Projects Account No. 021-165-607-44-5804 from
Unreserved Fund Balance.
DISCUSSION:
In January, 1992, the Department of Public Works solicited qualifications from interested
engineering firms to provide the City with geotechnical soils testing services for various
Capital Improvement Projects throughout the year of 1992. Three firms responded to the
Request for Qualifications No. 003, and the responses were evaluated by Public Works Staff.
The three firms were interviewed and ranked one through three (1 - 3). All three firms have
the necessary qualifications to perform the desired geotechnical testing services for the
projects. Thus, the one through three (1 3) ranking was necessary to establish a
rotationbasis for project award· The ranking is as follows:
Leighton and Associates
Law/Crandall, Incorporated
California Geo Tek, Incorporated
-1- pwO1\egdrpt%92\O526~pw92-O1,geo 052092a
Leighton and Associates was awarded the contract for geotechnical testing services for the
Rancho California Road Benefit District Project (Project No. PW91-03, first project).
Therefore, LawlCrandall, Incorporated was selected for the Street and Sidewalk Improvements
at Various Schools Project (Project No. PW92-01, second project). A contract with a defined
scope of work and an hourly budget not to exceed $4,400.00 has been negotiated.
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is necessary to transfer $4,400.00 from the Measure "A" Fund to the Capital Projects Fund
and appropriate $4,400.00 to Capital Projects Account No. 021-165-607-44-5804 from
Unreserved Fund Balance.
-2- pwO1 \egdrPt~92~O526~pw92-01 .geo 052092a
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
~)~Dl~rt~_g:f Public Works
May 26, 1992
Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267
PREPARED BY:
Kris Winchak
RECOMMENDAT I ON:
That City Council APPROVE Revised Vesting Final Tract
Map No. 23267, subject to the Conditions of Approval.
DISCUSSION:
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 was originally approved by the Riverside
County Planning Commission on October 19, 1988, and the Riverside County Board
of Supervisors on October 25, 1988. Change of Zone No. 5150 was also approved by
the County Board of Supervisors on October 25, 1988. However, the zone change
was not given a second reading and, therefore, was not officially adopted at that
time.
Following incorporation of the City, Presley Homes of San Diego submitted a revised
map for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267, along with Change of Zone No. 5,
which is identical to the original Change of Zone No. 5150.
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23267 and Change of Zone No. 5, with an
Addendure to Environmental impact Report No. 281, was approved by the City
Planning Commission on April 1, 1991, and the City Council on May 14, 1991. A
second reading of Zone Change No. 5 was approved on May 28, 1991.
Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267 contains 119 residential lots and one (1)
open space lot with 38.92 gross acres. The tract is located on the south side of
Highway 79 between Pala Road and Margarita Road,
A Memorandum of Understanding between The Presley Companies and The City,
which restricts any building permits from being issued for lots 1-13, 20-29, L~0-59,
95-103, and 106-119 which are located within the "100 Year Flood Plain", will record
concurrently with Tract No. 23267-3. Assessment District 159 proposes to construct
a Rood Control Channel through Tracts 23267-3 and 23267-Final which will physically
remove those properties in question from the "100 Year Flood Plain". The restriction
on building permits will remain until the channel has been completed and a
Conditional Leter of Map Revision (CLOMR) has been received from FEMA for the
Temecula Creek Channel.
The following fees have been paid (or deferred ) for Revised Vesting Final Tract Map
No. 23267:
* Area Drainage Fees (see RCFC Statement)
* Fire Mitigation Fees (Deferred to Building Permits) $ 47,600.00
* Traffic Signal Mitigation (Deferred to Building Permits) $ 17,850.00
* Stephen's K-Rat Fees (at Grading Permits) $ 75,89L~.00
The following bonds have been posted for Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No.
23267:
Faithful Labor and
Performance Materials
Streets and Drainage
Water
Sewer
Survey Monuments
$1,837,500.00
249,500.00
199,000.00
$36,190.00
$919,000.00
125,000.00
99,500.00
SUMMARY:
Staff recommends that City Council APPROVE Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No.
23267. subject to the Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
e
e
Development Fee Checklist
Location Map
Copy of Map
Planning Commission Staff Report
dated April 1, 1991
Conditions of Approval
TCSD Agreement
RCFC Statement dated July 22, 1991
Releasing Tract 23267 from A. D .P. Fees
Memorandum of Understanding preventing building
permits from being issued for lots located in the 100 year
flood plain
Fees and Securities Report
ATTACHMENT 1
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267
The followin9 fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this
project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
( Quimby )
Public Facility
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 24
Condition No. 25 S See TCSD
Agreement dated 9-30-91
Condition No.
Traffic Signal Mitigation
Condition No. 42
Fire Mitigation
See Fire Department Letter
Dated 1-29-91
Flood Control
{ADP)
Condition No. 49 ~; See RCFC
Statement dated 7-22-91
Staff Findings:
Staff finds that the project will be consistant with the City's General Plan once
adopted.
The project is not a part of a specific plan.
ATTACHMENT 2
LOCAT I ON MAP
,/
CITY OF TEMFCULA "~
THE MEADOWS
Sl= 219- ' 1'
,,
·
,~,,'
· ;:;;: "":' ~'; ': "'/"~ ":i
/.
VA
//
!
HAWI.
IP
ATTACHMENT
COPY OF MAP
IN THE CITY OF TEMEC;ULA. COUNTY OF F~IVER&IDE, ~.,,.TE OF CALIFORNIA
TRACT NO. 23267
A OF A pORTTON OF PARCEL 2 AS SHO~IN BY PARCEL HAPNO. IB993,0N FZLE IN BOOK
BEINGpA~0UGH ~.8 0r PARCEL NAPS. RECORDS OF RZVERSTDE COUNTY, CALZFORNi ,~
1A3L.~:) LOCATED IN THE LITTLE TEMECULA' RANCHO-T S APR;L 1989
CROSBY, HEAD, BENTON, & ASSOCTA E .
PARCEL I
P.M. NO.
P.M.
P.M. NO. 6?.56
P.M. 34/34'3,5
TR.4CT ';YD 232S7-4' i ·
~ ~J q |rJ
TRACT NO
ENGINEER"= NOTE'=
lee SHEET NO. 3
TRACT
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
'rT
TI
T&IULATIe0 DATA TAILE
liSASUllieD0ATA 'RECOI~D DATA ~
~ARING DXSTANC~. BEARZNG DISTANCE P.M: ' 15~/
(NZ6*36'43'~I 189.40'~'' .ST ) PM NO
T° <NeO*S3'15'W ¢NIO°S3'S ' ·
TI2 (k'Seea2'a4'E iSd.TT:) (NSEe42'21'E)
(NI3°ti'3S'E T24.13.'I
T15 (N&3'Z43'08'M ,12.4t') IId3e,t'~.l'ld212.48')
Tti (IdTeS6'3°'1~ ,=32.t&'~>(NE'Fe,=I'S4eM,=32.01')
TI/ (NTOe4S'oT'E 45, .94')(NTOe4S'o'=eEaS2 .iS' )
TI8 CI41~le37 'STeil33& .$0')(Nl'te31'3S*i336.25' )
,47 .t") (N48°37'A0*V 247.°0' )
T'O '(NI4e31'SI'M (NI4e37*SS°M)
T,4 (NA0e04'0°eli (1440e03'i0'V 4tI"T')
T'S 6V.17'2'='ST°'= (IOT"27'DD*E 300.09' )
T26 ddie'4'33'E
T27 (1436e14'37"ld
T21 (NI. Ie36'21,v
T.° ¢NZ0*SS'OO'U
T32 (NIEe36'4J'i
T34 (Ntle'i'43,v 4t3'!~")
T3S
..: .%
308.0
121.31
TRACT NO.
:' 306 3 - 2
M.B. 22.0 / 30-3g
TRACT
GRAPHIC SCALE: l""400'
"'VO
-j -
PARC2.L J
P./,L NO, 24332
R/vl. J.5~, I gB-JO3
N~ 232,~7-~
/ --
TRACT NO. 23063-1 M.B. ::'12/4g-58
& TAD °R.C.E. 11842°
TRACT NO. Z3063-6
IVI.B 2.22/64-g6
rOUND e' t,l~, ~.
W/TAO, e.t..E.
te'tR P'M. He,
ATTACHMENT ~
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DATED APRIL 1, 1991
STAFF REPORT - PLANNINC
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 1, 1991
Case No.: Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267
Prepared By: Richard Ayala
Recommendation: Forward the following recommendations to the
City Council:
RECOMMEND adoption of the addendum to
EIR No. 281 for Revised Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 23267; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Revised Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 23267.
APPLI CAT ION I NFORMAT ION
APPLICANT:
R EPR ESENTAT I V E:
PROPOSAL:
LOCAT ION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
Presley of San Diego
Crosby Mead Benton ~ Associates
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 is a
proposal to subdivide 189.0 acres of land jr. to 601
residential lots with approximately 57.8 acres of
open space. This project is being processed
concurrently with Change of Zone No. 5.
South side of Highway 79 between Pala 'Road and
Margarita Road.
R-R ( Rural Residential )
( ResidentialAgrlcultural,
5 Acre Minimum)
( Light Agricultural, 10
Acre Minimum)
(Specific Plan 217, Red
Hawk )
[ Rural Residential )
North: R -A-5
South: A-1-10
East: SP
West: R - R
A: \VTM23267
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
R-3
R-~
R-5
( General Residential)
I Planned Residential)
(Open Area Combining Zone,
Residential Developments )
lq. 68 arre~
57.8 acres
Vacant/Graded Land
North:
South:
East:
West:
Low Density Single Family
Existin?BiSOnd Farm
Vacant, gle Family
Tract Under Construction
Vacant
Single Family
Total Lots: 601
Total Acres: 189
Min. Lot Size: ~,500 sq.ft.
Density: 3.19 DUIAC
On March 18, 1991, the Planning Commission
continued this item in order to allow Staff the
opportunity to provide additional information
regarding open space maintenance.
The subject property was originally a portion of.the
Old Vail Ranch. It is located along the south side of
Highway 79 between Pale and Margarita Roads. The
original application, Change of Zone No. 5150 was ·
request to change the zoning on 221.2 acres of land
from R-R | Rural Residential ), and R-5 ( Open Area
Combining Zone). This zone change was approved
by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors on
October 20, 1988. However, due to an oversight by
the County, the zone change was never given a
send reading and, therefore, was never officially
adopted. The applicant submitted a new
application, Change of Zone No. 5, to the City of
Temecula Planning Department on September 2~,
1990.
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 was
submitted to the City of Temecula on December 21,
1990.
On January 17, 1991, this project was reviewed by
the Preliminary Development Review Committee
(Pre-DRC) in order to informally evaluate the
project and address any concerns, as well as
suggesting possible modifications. The comments
by the Pre-DRC included the following:
"; ' A: \VTM23267 2
1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
A: \VTM23267
Open Space Maintenance
Traffic Impacts
Access/Circulation
Subsequent to the Pre-DRC meeting, Staff met with
the applicant to discuss possible design
modifications in order to address the Pre-DRC's
concerns
On March 7. 1991, Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267 was reviewed at a Formal
Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting;
and, it was determined that Revised Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 23267 met the DRC's concerns.
This tract includes 189 acres of land with proposed
R-~ and R-5 zoning. This subdivision contains 601
single family lots with 57.8 acres of open space.
The minimum lot size is ~,500 square feet. The open
space acreage contains 33.9 acres consisting of the
Temecula Creek Flood Channel, which may have as
joint use as a park in the future, two (2)
neighborhood parks totaling 10.2 acres, and an 11.8
acre preserve for native vegetation and the original
adobe ranch house.
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 i~
situated along Highway 79 and will incorporate a 20
foot buffer between Highway 79 and the subject
tract. The subject site along Highway 79 consists
of approximately lq~ single family lots with a
minimum lot size of ~, 500 square feat. The applicant
is also proposing a one acre neighborhood park ( Lot
605) for this section of the project. This area is
proposed to be zoned R-~ and R-5.
The entire tract is bisected by the Tamecula Creek
( Lot 60q ) which consists of approximately 33. g acres
and is zoned R-5. Subsequently, the possibility
exists for the creek to be used by future residents
as a regional park, but the joint use as a flood
control system and park must be discussed and
developed by and between the City and the
Riverside County Flood Control District.
3
A: \VTM23267
The area south of the Temecula Creek is also zoned
R-q and R-5 and consists of ~53 single family lots
well over L~,500 square feet. This portion of the
project is also incorporating a 10.7 acre regional
park and a 1.1 acre lot for the old historic adobe
house I Lot 603 and 609). In addition, the applicant
is also providing a 9.1 acre neighborhood park ( Lot
602) and may incorporate the existing secondary
treated water reservoir for the adjacent sod farm
into the park design. The secondary treated water
is to be upgraded to tertiary treated in the near
future.
The revised map was submitted in order to change
the grade of the development and to change the cul-
de-sacs designed off of "S" Street in order to create
a more efficient design. The revised map is not
proposing any major circulation or lot changes.
Instead, the revised map will aid to eliminate the
need for a Home Owners Association {HOA).
Currently the applicant is working with the CSD in
order to determine the maintenance of the proposed
open space lots and down slopes at property lines.
Open Space
The Tsnecula Community Service District has been
in direct contact with the applicant in regards to the
proposed open space maintenance issue. and has
determined that the following dedicated lots are
acceptable for City maintenance by means of an
irrevocable easement deed:
Lot No. 606
Lot No. 607
Lot No. 608
Lot No. 610
Lot No. 611
Lot No. 612
As for the well sites I Lots 185 and 57~), the
Community Service District recommends that these
well sites be dedicated to the serving water district
by mesns of s grsnt deed.
A: \VTM23267 '
Traffic Impacts
The Transportation Engineering Staff has reviewe~
and accepted the findings and mitigation measures
as specified in the traffic impact analysis prepared
for revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267
and has determined that the proposed project wild
have an impact to the existing road system.
However, given the proposed mitigation measures.
there will be no adverse unmitigable significant
traffic impacts resulting from the development of
this proposed project.
Access and Circulation
The portion of the project that abuts Highway 79
will have vehicular access via "A" Street (a 100'
street) which in term has access to Highway 79.
Additional access to the northern portion of the
project will be provided by "B" Street ( an 82' street
with a 15' bike lane) which runs parallel to the
Temecula Creek. Internal, 66' and 60' wide streets
will provide access through this portion of the
project.
Access to the portion of the project south of ~he
Temecula Creek will be provided by Loma Lynda
Road (a 66' street) which has access to Pale Road I
11 0~ street). In addition, Via Cordoba [a 66' street.~
will provide access to the southeast portion of the
project which will integrate with the existing Red
Hawk Development. internal 66' and 60' wide
streets will provide access through this portion of
the project.
Both the Engineering and Traffic Engineering Staff,
as well as the Planning Department Staff, have
determined that the applicant~s proposed access and
circulation are acceptable.
Gradinq
The majority of the area south of Tamecute Creek
has been mass graded with some major
infrastructure already being completed within the
proposed street sections, The 10,7 acre open space
is mostly sloping hillside and very little grading will
occur within this area. The area north of Temecula
Creek is rather fiat and will require minimal grading
for the project development.
S
GENERAL PLAN/SWAP
CONSISTENCY AND
COMPAT I B ILI TY:
A: \VTM23267
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 has an
acreage density of 3.2 units per' acre. However,
SWAP designates the entire flood control channel as
recreational open space and therefore. this area is
not included in the 2 to 5 unit per acre area. The
portion of the map north of the flood channel
maintains an average density of 1~.8 units per gross
acre. The area south of the channel maintains an
average density of li.0 dwelling units per gross
acre. These densities conform to SWAP. This
project does conform to the surrounding land uses
in the area. The two approved specific plans to the
east and south contain similar residential densities
and minimum lot sizes as the subject property.
These projects were approvecl under the plan
previous to SWAP which allowed a slightly higher
density. In addition, they contain over 6,000
housing units with similar characteristics to the
proposed subject property. These plans have
average densities between 5 and 6 DUIAC. The
applicant is proposing to have an average density of
only ~ units/acre. The properties to the west ,are
currently designated for commercial in SWAP, along
with the land along the south side of Highway 79
between the subject site and Margarita Road. Staff
feels that by breaking the commercial strip along
the highway with residential, the commercial will be
concentrated at the corner of Margarita and
Highway 79 where it is more desirable. Another
specific plan, Murdy Ranch, is directly west of the
subject site snd it contains similar residential
densities. The properties to the north are
designated commercial in SWAP along Highway 79
and existing low density rural residential beyond
(Santiago Estates). Staff feels that there will be no
significant impact from the higher density
residential along the south side of Highway 79 due
to the physical break of the roadway and the
commercial barrier along the north side of Highway
79. To provide a barrier to noise for the proposed
development along the highway, Staff will require a
significant landscaped buffer of 20 feet minimum.
Therefore, Staff feels that the proposed
development is logical and is consistent with the
type of residential development that is found in the
area,
6
In conclusion, the proposed Revised Vestina
Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will kkk~,> b'-,
consistent with the future adopted General Plan fo~
the City of Temecula. This proposal is a logical
extension of residential development in the area and
with the implementation of traffic mitigation
measures for the development, there will be no
significant impact on the surrounding area.
EN V I R ONMENTA L
DETERMI NATION:
FINDINGS:
A: \VTM23267
Environmental Impact Report No. 281 was completed
on the subject property for Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267. The report indicated a number of
mitigation measures that must be implemented in
order to reduce the impact of the project below a
level of significance. These mitigation measures
included a new q-lane bridge on Pale Road over
Temecula Creek, the channelization of Temecula
Creek, and several other significant measures that
have not currently been implemented. Therefore,
Planning Staff recommends that an addendum to
Environmental Impact Report No. 281 be adopted.
A copy of which is attached.
The proposed density is consistent. with. the
is within the range d the SWAP designation
d 2-5 units per Kre.
The proposed revised vesting tentative tract
map is compatible with surrounding zoning,
existing lend uses in the vicinity, and
approved projects. The proposed R-I~ and R-
3 portions of the project adjacent to Highway
79 consist of higher densities and abuts
future office commercial SWAP designation
land uses. The lots situated south of the
Temecula Creek are substantially larger than
~, 500 square feet and abut specific plan areas
such as Red Hawk, Vail Ranch end Murdy
Ranch, which in term are similar in density
and design.
7
The lot design and internal street I?v.~l,~ p~F
acceptable to the City F J~:,r.l~,~ ....
Engineering Departments. All lots conform to
the standards of their respective zones, and
proposed street alignments are adequate to
accommodate projected traffic volumes.
Adequate public street access will be
provided to every lot. The legal owner of
record has offered to make all required
dedications.
Staff finds that site access will be adequate.
Assessment District 159 will provide for
street improvements on Pale Road and
Highway 79. and four 1~) access points to the
site are shown on the map.
There is a reasonable probability that the
project will be consistent with the City~s
General Plan once adopted, in that the
proposed density is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan land use designation,
and the revised map is compatible with
surrounding zoning, existing land uses in the
vicinity, and approved subdivisions.
It is unlikely that the proposed revised
tentative map will constitute a substantial
detriment to the future General Plan if the
proposed subdivision is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan. Surrounding
zoning, existing land uses, and approved
subdivisions are all residential.
The project will not have a significant
adverse affect on the environment. The
County of Riverside Board of Supervisors
certified EI R No. 281 in conjunction with the
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos.
23267, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23299
and Change of Zone No. 5150. Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will
not result in any new or substantially
increased environmental impacts.
makes adequate
provision for future passive or natural solar
heating opportunities in that all proposed
parcels have adequate southern exposure.
A: \VTM23267 8
9. The proposed project
!0.
11.
12.
13.
The project meets the requirements o{
Ordinance 3/48 and/460 in that all lot5 conform-~
to the minimum size and dimensio
requirements of the zoning code and abut
upon dedicated street.
The proposed project includes adequate
dedication for public parks in that it provide
for 10.2 acres of public parks and 10.7 acre
preserve for native vegetation.
The lawful conditions stated in the project~s
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety, and
welfare.
These findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
RA: ks
Attachments:
Based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the
Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions
of Approval, the Planning Department Staff
recommends that the Planning Commission:
RECOMMEND adoption of the
Map No. 23267; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267.
Resolution ( Revised VTM No. 23267 )
Conditions of Approval
I Revised VTM No. 23267)
Addendure to E I R No. 281
Exhibits
Map No.
A :\VTM23267
9
ATT,a.C'~:~r N1 I
RESOLUTION ~lCJ. 91-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE pLANH!NL; COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOM;vlENDING APPROVAL OF
REVISED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23267
TO SUBDIVIDE A 189 ACRE '.'.,~RCEL INTO 601 51NGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 5 OPEN SPACE LOTS
LOCATED ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79
BETWEEN PALA AND MARGAR ITA ROADS AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 926-016-002, 003, 012, 017.
AND 025.
WHEREAS, Presley of San Diego filed Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning
and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map application was processed in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Revised Vesting
Tentative Tract Map on April 1, 1991, at which time interested persons had an
SECTION 1. Findincls, That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following fin~ngs:
A. 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
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
12) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of buildinn
permits, each of the following:
A: \VTM23267 10
opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Theft i.~ a reasonable probat~ility th~t th,'
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with t. he general plan proposal beint ~
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable' time.
Ib)
' 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.
The proposed use or action.complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the
Southwest Area Community Plan, | hereinafter "SWAP" ) was adopted
prior to the incorporation of Tomecula as the General Plan for the
southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this tim, 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.
C. The proposed Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map and is
consistent with the SWAP and meet the requirements set forth in Section
65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with
preparation of the general plan.
· |2) The Planning Commission finds, in recommending
approval of projects and taking other actions, including
the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title,
each of the following:
|a)
There is reasonable probability that Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will be
consistent with the general plan propos~i
being considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
(b)
There is little or no probability of substent|a:
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
A :\VTM23267
11
(c)
ThP propes~:d use or action compile.. ,~,~|~ all
otl~: ;'i [.';c ntAe requirements of star. I ,,,. ~r~d
local ordinances.
D. ll) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordina~. No.
q60, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findistals are
made:
a) That the proposed land' division is c<.-.l~tent
with applicable general and specific t~l-ns.
b)
That the design or improvement ~,I the
proposed land division is consistettt with
applicable general and specific plan,.
c)'
d)
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
That the site of the proposed land divl.ion is
physically suitable for the proposed density
of the development.
a)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental da~tag~-or
substantially and unavoidably injur= t tsh 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 problemq.
(2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval
of the proposed Tentative Tract Map, makes the following findia~gs, to
wit:
A: \VTM23267
17
r
~. g) That the design of the proposed land division'
or the type of improvements will not c~mfllct
t h
with easements, acquired by t · Pui~lic at
large, for access through, or
property within the proposed land division.
f)
A land division may be approved if it It found
that alternate easements for access or for use
will be provided and that they will b~
substantially equivalent to ones Previously
acquired by the public. This subtection
shall apply only to easements of rec~rd or tn
easements established by judgment ol a cour.
of competent jurisdiction.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
The proposed density is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan land use designatib~.
The proposed density of 3.19 units per acre
is within the range of the SWAP designation
of 2-5 units per acre.
The proposed revised vesting tentative tract
map is compatible with surrounding zoning.
existing land uses in the vicinity, and
approved projects. The proposed R-t4 and R-
3 portions of the project adjacent to Highway
79 consist of higher densities and abuts
future office commercial SWAP designation
land uses. The lots situated south of the
Temecula Creek are substantially larger than
It, 500 square feet and abut specific plan areas
such as Red Hawk, Vail Ranch and Murdy
Ranch, which in term are similar in density
and design.
The lot design and internal street layout are
acceptable to the City Planning and
Engineering Departments. All lots conform to
the standards of their respective zones, and
proposed street alignments are adequate to
accommodate projected traffic volumes.
Adequate public street access will bn
provided to every lot. The legal owner o'.
record has offered to make all required
dedications.
Staff finds that site access will be adequate.
Assessment District 159 will provide for'
street improvements on Pals Road and
Highway 79, and four (q) access points to the
site are shown on the map.
There is a reasonable probability that the
project will be consistent with the City's
General Plan once adopted, in that the
proposed density is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan land use designation,
and the revised map is compatible with
surrounding zoning, existing land uses in the
vicinity, and approved subdivisions.
A: \VTM23267
13
It ;~ cenli~<ply that the proposed revised
tentative map will constitute a substaf~t~bl
detriment to the future General Plan if the
proposed subdivision is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan. Surrounding
zoning, existing land uses, and approved
subdivisions are all residential.
h)
The project will not have a significant
adverse affect on the environment. The
County of Riverside Board of Supervisors
certified EIR No. 281 in conjunction with the
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos.
23267, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23299
and Change of Zone No. 5150. Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will
not result in any new or substantially
increased environmental impacts.
i)
The proposed project makes adequate
provision for future passive or natural solar
heating opportunities in that all proposed
parcels have adequate southern exposure.
j)
The project meets the requirements .of
Ordinance 3~8 and 1180 in that all lots conform
to the minimum size and dimension
requirements of the zoning code and abut
upon dedicated street.
k)
The proposed project includes adequate
dedication for public parks in that it provides
for 10.2 acres of public parks and 10,7 acre
preserve for n~t. ive vegetation.
I)
The lawful conditions stated in the. project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety, and
welfare ·
m)
These findings are supported by minutes.
maps. exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map is compatible with the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
A: \VTM23267
SECTION 2. EnvironmentaL_C.omloliance.
The County of Riverside Board of Supervisors certified EIR No. 281
conjunction with the approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267. Revise
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will not result in any new or substantially
increased environmental impacts. An addendure to EIR No. 281 is hereby
recommended for adoption.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 for the subdivision of a 189 acr-
parcel into 601 single family residential lots and S open space lots located along the
south side of Highway 7g between Pale and Mergerira Roads and known as Assessor's
Parcel No. 926-016-002, 003, 012, 017 and 025 subject to the following conditions:
A. Attachment I I I, attached hereto.
SECT ION ~1_.~.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of April, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHA IRMA N
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted b,/
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at · regular meeting thereof, held
on the 1st day of April, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A: \VTM23267' 15
ATTACHMENT 5
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
ATTACHMFNT II
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267
Project Description: Revision to VTM 23267 to allow
for 2 additional lots and 7 oloen space lots to be
maintained by TCSD
Assessofas Parcel No,: 926-160-2, 3, 12 and 17 and
a portion of 926-160-011
Plannin{3 Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance ~60, SChedule A, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request,
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date,
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map o '-
Legal access as required by Ordinance q60 shall be provided from the tract
map boundary to a City maintained road, ~.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer, Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer·
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities.
etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the lan,'
division boundary, All offers of dedication and conveyances shall b,
submitted and recorded as directed by the City Engineer,
e
Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area-
improvement phasing, if applicable, shall be subject to Planning Department
approval, Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular acce.-.,
to all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent
purpose of the subdivision approval.
A maintenance district shall be established for maintenance of Lots .. Open
Space, the .developer/applicant shall pay for all costs relating to est;,bl ishment
of the district·
A: \VTM23267 16
0. v'
11.
12.
13.
15.
16.
Delete Riverside County Condition No. 181d).
Prior to the recordation of the final map, Change of Zone No. 5 shall be
approved by the City Council and shall be effective. Lots created by this land
division siren be in coniormat~ce with the c~eve}opment standarfJs of tt~e 2one
ultimately applied to the property.
/'-
Prior to recordation of the final map, the project site shall be annexed into the
Temecula Community Service Distact (TCSD).
A copy of the final grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department
for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill slopes shall:
Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1 and a maximum vertical
height of thirty (30) feet. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall
be a minimum of one-half the slope height.
b. Be contour-graded to blend with existing natural contours.
c. Be a part of the downhill lot when within or between individual lots.
All. slopes over three |3) feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated
according to the City Development Code. A detailed landscaping and
irrigation plan, prepared by a qualified professional, shall be submitted to the
City Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading
permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire 'Department~s letter dated January 29, 1991, a copy of
which is attached.
All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the
Southwest Area Plan.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern
Municipal Water District transmittel dated March 8, 1991, a copy of which is
attached.
Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the R-I~ (Planned Residential) zone,
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.
A: \VTM23267
17
17.
18.
19.
20.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes,
landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those ope~ b~ ,. ~.,
are the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director~'
Prior to recordatlon of the final m~lD. an Environmental Constraints Sheet
I ECS) shall be prepared in conlunction with the final map to delineate
identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the
office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the
Planning Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be
forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department
and the Department of Building and Safety.
The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
,'This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palmar
Observatory. All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the
California Institute of Technology. Palomar Observatory outdoor lighting
policy.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
I1)
Prior to the issuance of grading permits detailed common open space
area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning
Department approval for the phase of development in process. The
plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide_for
the following:
a. Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on a~L~
landscaped areas requiring irrigation.
Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be
opaque up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity.
All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from
view with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle
treatments, as approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall
be placed underground.
de
Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or"
transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscap~
elements shall include earth harming, ground cover, shrubs ano
specimen trees. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees
planted.
Wall plans shall be submitted for the project perimeter and along
Highway 79 and Lime Street..Wooden fencing shall not be allowed
on the perimeter of the project. All lots with slopes leading dowr,
from the lot shall be provided with gates in the wall for
maintenance access.
A: \VTM23267 18 ~
t.andscaping plans sl~-~I' ;;~cnrloorate the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal ~>,,;,~ts within the project.
Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of
interior streets and project parkways due to insufficient road
right-of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-
way.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant
plants where appropriate.
All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked·
If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading
permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to
the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a
guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual
phases of development and shall include the following:
1. Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and
sedimentat/on during and after the grading process.
2. Approximate time frames for grading and identification of
areas which may be graded during the higher probab_ility
rain months of January through March.
3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
All cut slopes located adjacent to ungraded natural terrain and
exceeding ten |10| feet in vertical height shall be contour-
graded incorporating the following grading techniques:
1. The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually ..adjuste
to the angle of the natural terrain.
2, Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded fern
shall reflect the natural rounded terrain,
3, The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curv-~
with radii designed in proportion to the total height of tl~.
slopes where drainage and stability permit such rounding.
Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizont.~'
length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall he
curved in a continuous, undulating fashion.
A: \VTM23267
19
22.
Prior to the issuance of gr~rling permits. the developer shall
provide evidence to the Director- of Building and Safer) dja: ail
adjacent off-site manufactured slopes have recorded slop
easements and that slope maintenance responsibilities have bee~e~')!
assigned as approved by the Director of Building and Safety.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources. a
pro-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. red(tact or halt
grading activity to allow recovery of fossils.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
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.
Prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Buildihg
and Safety an acoustical study shall be performed by an acoustical
engineer to establish appropriate mitigation measures that shall be
applied to individual dwelling units within the subdivision to reduce
ambient interior noise levels to q5 Ldn.
All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required
elements from the subdlvision*s approved fire protection plan as
approved by the County Fi~'e Marshal.
de
Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval.
The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front
yard landscaping.
All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed
and constructed with fire retardant ( Class A ) roofs as approved by the
Fire Marshal.
fe
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within thr
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy savin9
devices shall be permitted with Planning Department approval.
A: \VTM23267
20
23.
26.
g. All street side yard setbacks shall br a minimum of ten I101 fr rl
h. All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic
irrigation.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
a. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal
conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and erosion
control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director
and the Director of Building and Safety.
b. All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection.
c. Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical
study is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all
required walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where
applicable.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
provisions of Ordinlnce 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.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall submit to the
Planning Director an agreement with the Community Services District which
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that the land divider has satisfied
Quaruby Act requirements in accordance with Section 10.35 of Ordinance No.
q6O. The agreement shall be epproved by the City Council prior to the
recordation of the final map.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees
to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal beards or legislative body concerning Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267, which action is brought within th~
time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66t~99.37. TI~,
City of Temecula will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action,
or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in th~
defense. if the City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim,
action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider
shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless
the City of Temecula.
A: \VTM23267 21
27.
The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required
property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer st,al!~ '
at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter int~ '
an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code
Section 66~62 at such time as the City acquires the property interests
required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by
the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property
interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion
of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an
appraisal report obtained by the developer, at the developer's cost. The
appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the
appraisal.
28.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required.
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired
in the residence.
29.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greeter, shall be installed
underground.
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements:
30.
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions I CC~;R's) shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Department prior to final approval of the tract
maps. The CCF, R~s shall include liability insurance end methods of maintaining
the open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, all buildings
in common open areas, and all interior slopes.
No lot or dwelling unit in the development shall be sold unless a corporation.
association, property owner's group, or similar entity has been formed with
the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which
have any rights or interest in the use of the cormnon areas and common
facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet
the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty
maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such
entity shall operate under recorded CCSR~s which shall include compulsory
membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of
assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance. repairs. and services.
Recorded CCSR's shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions requireu
by the City as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidenc~
of compliance with this requirement to, end receive approval of, the City prior
to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated tc
the City for public purposes.
32.
Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such
dwelling unit or 1or, either ( 1 ) an undivided interest in the common areas and
facilities, or (2) as share in the corporation, or voting membership in an
association, owning the common areas and facilities.
A: \VTM23267 22
33.
Maintenance for all landscaped and opPn areas. including parkways. shall br
provided for in the (.C~,R's.
Within forty-eight (~48) hours of the approval of this project, the
h
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers c eck
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Eight Hundred,
Seventy-Five Dollars ($875.00) which includes the Eight Hundred, Fifty
Dollar ($850.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Came
($25.00) County
Code Section 711.~(d)(3) plus the Twenty-Five Dollar
administrative fee, to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination
required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 1~ Cal. Code of
Regulations 1509~. If within such forty-eight (118) hour period the
applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check
required above, the approval for the project granted herein shall be void by
reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711 .~(c).
Enqineerinq Department
The followlng are the-Engineering Department 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 Engineering
Department ·
it is understood that the Developer correctly shows eli existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to'-be
resubmitted for further consideration.
35. The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act, · and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
36. The final map shall be prepared by · licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance No. "leO.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
37. As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, 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:
Engineering Department:
RiverSside County Health Department:
A .;\VTM23267
CATV ~ranchise;
"US Army Corps of Engineers; US Fish and Wildlife; and
California State Department of Fish and Game,
23
38.
39.
q0.
q2.
Street 'T" shall be improved with B~I feet of asphalt concretP p~vement. c~,'
bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-
of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 103, Section A I~Ftl'166'). ~
Street "DD" and 'FF" shall be improved with ~1~ feet of asphalt concrete
pavement, or bends for the street improvements may be posted, within the
dedicated right-d-way in accordance with County Standard No. 103, Section
A Iqq'160~) with 3 foot wide utility easements.
In the event road or off-site right-of-way are required to comply with these
conditions, such easements shall be obtained by the developer; or, in the
event the City is required to condemn the easement or right-d-way, as
provided in the Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall enter into an
agreement with the City for the acquisition of such easement at the
developeris cost pursuant to Government Code Section 661~62 .S. which shall
be at no cost to the City.
The subdivider shall construct or post security end an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb
and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights,
signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control
devices as appropriate. ._
Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping.
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
Prior to recordatton of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department 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 tim of issuance of a
building permit.
The subdivider shall submit four prints of a comprehensive grading plan t-
the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Buildin..)
Code, Chapter 70, and ms may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 2q" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civtl
Engineer,
The subdivider shall submit four copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geelogical
conditions of the site.
A: \VTM23267 2q
qS.
A drainage study shall be submltt,- "' ~'~d approved by the City Fnpineer.
All drainage facilities shall be in~ '~I,-'~ as required by the City F-nginet, ·
Portions of the site are in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood
Zone A subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of
any plans, this project shall comply with the rules and regulations of FEMA for
development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining a'~l~ttei'T
map revision from FEMA for the affected areas.
Prior to final map, the subdlvider shell notify the City's CAT~ Franchises of
Dave op. Conduit shall be insta led to CATV'~.~ndards at time
the Intent to I
of street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
50.
way,
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.
A permit shall be required from CelTtans for any work within the following
right -of- way:
State Hiqhway 79
A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within
its right-of-way.
/
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
52.
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF. CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY
53. Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb an
gutter, A.C, pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees
street lights on ell interior public streets.
A: \VTM23267 25
Developer shall pay any r. apital feP f-,, t -,'f !mprovements and public facilities
imposed upon the property o; proj, ~t. ir~ctuding that for traffic at.el i.:,1.!;, (
project. in the amount in effect at tl~t time of payment of the fee. If an ·
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. 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 ) and specifically waives its right to protest
such increase.
Transportation Enqineerincl Department
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
55.
56.
57.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer for Loma Linda Road. "DD" Street. and
'S" Street. and shall be included in the street improvement plans.
I
A signing plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the City Engineer for all internal streets with ~0 feet or less of curb
separation and can. be shown on the street improvement plans.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a r~jistered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer and CalTrans for State Route 79 South,
"A" Street. and "B' Street. and shall be included in the street improvement
I October 7. 1988 shall b~):
plans. Condition 132 of the County Road attar dated
deleted.
58.
Prior to designing any of the above plans. contact Transportation Engineering
and CelTtans for the design requirements.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY. ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
59.
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 detou:
or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the City Engineer.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
60.
All on-site signing end striping shall be installed per the approved signin,u
and striping plans.
A: \VTM23267 ' 26
61.
in the event that the required improy. ':, .nt'. o,-StateFh~rte~9 5Guth~f~d4~a~
R~cl for the Pale Read reali_.q.~_,' ' ~ ,d the bridcle over lemecula L~ eL; are
not completed brAsscss,,,ef~t'B~c~ ;;~ prior to the issuance of certificate
of occupancy, the developer shall be required to enter into a reimbursement
agreement with the City of Temecula for the construction of the necessary
improvements based, err-the. The developer~s percent of contribution toward
the facilities within the reimbursement aclreement shall be as per the approved
Traffic Study. Construction of necessary improvements shall be based upon
the following dwelling unit occupancy levels (Amended per Planning
~ewnission March 18, 1991 ):
A. For unit one hundred and one 1101 ) or more:
1. A 750 foot minimum right turn lane with an adequate transition
. for east bound travel on State Route 79 South for Pale Road shall
be designed end constructed to CalTrans specifications and
requirements and shall be approved by CalTrans and the City
Ce
Engineer.
2. Multi-way stop controls shall be designed and installed. when
warranted and approved by CelTtans. et the north bound and
south bound on and off ramps of Interstate-15 and State Route 79
South.
For unit two hundred and forty |2~0) or more: ._
A minimum q50 foot north bound left turn lane with transition and
a minimum 125 foot north bound right turn lane with transition on
Pale Road at State Route 79 South shall be designed and
constructed to CelTtans end City requirements and
specifications, and shall be approved by CelTtans and the City
Engineer.
;= .... :l'~e~le~eloper-sheH-tmter'if~te-err c:t, cc,,,ent-witf~-the C-it~-tor
retmb~, sc.,,c,~t'~r~hrC'itlr'frew'ethrdevetopment~'withirt'th'
impect,m~r,fm,_costs_t~,/fftd-~th~-eftent-~f--thif-pro~-~f '
cenditrioned--~, cz, 4--~,,~c~L -~or--~q~-+r--speci~ied--~'~im~m
For unit five hundred and eleven '1511 ) or more:
The signal at the intersection of State Route 79 South and Pale
Road shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer. The
signal shall be installed and operational. as warranted. per
special provisions and the epproved traffic signal plan as
approved by CelTtans and the City Engineer.
A: \VTM23267
27
'[he signal at the intersection of State Routt 79 ~u,jtt, and
Interstate 15 north bound and south bound on and off rampr'~
shall be designed by a registered 'Civil Engineer. The signal
shall be installed and operational, as warranted, per the special
provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as approved by
CalTrans and the City Engineer·
The signal at the intersection of Rainbow Canyon Road and Pals
Road shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer· The
signal shall be installed and operational, as warranted, per the
special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as
approved by the City Engineer. Bese~rrthe-addffrd~wri~tter
dated- -F ebrtmf't - tIT - -14J9~ - frowr - ~ R~frke - -Engif~eerin9; - ~hi s
devde~-~aH--~bwte--r~--~eqfwrd--these-- ro~J~va~
imp, o~t.,,~nt costs. | Amended per Planning Commission March
18, 1991. )
Full road improvements, including all required signing and
striping, on State Route 79 South from Interstate 15 to Pals Road
shall be in place in accordance with CalTrans requirements as
approved by CalTrans and the City Engineer·
Full road improvements, including all required signing and
striping, on State Route 79 South from Pals Road to Margarita
Road shall be in place in accordance with CalTrans requirements
as approved by CelTtans and the City Engineer.
Realignment of Pals Road with State Route 79 South i~'~
conjunction with the construction of a multi-lane bridge across
the Temecula Creek.
The Pals Road Bridge over the Temecula Creek shall be
designed, constructed and operational as approved by the City
Engineer. ~4~is-tkvdr~-h,ent-shst~'~m~b'ibTt~r't~ward.~l"'i
Design and construction of dual left turn capabilities at the south
bound Interstate lS off ramp at State Route 79 South in
accordance with CalTrans requirements and specifications and as
approved by CalTrans.
The signal at the intersection of Loma Linda and Pals Road shall
be installed and operational, as warranted, per the special
provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as approved by
the City Engineer.
A: \VTM23267
28
10.
11.
The signal at the irt-:''"rtlt~" ~ State Route 79 South and "A"
5treat shall be desiclned by a registered Civil ~_ngineer. I~,~
signal shall be instalied ~nd operational. as warranted. per the
special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as
approved by CalTrans and the City Engineer..
Design and construction of a dual right turn lane for east bound
travel on State Route 79 South at Pala Road and a dual left turn
lane for north bound travel on Pala Road at State Route 79 South
in accordance with CalTrans and City requirements and
specifications as approved by CalTrans and the City Engineer.
Department of Buildinq and Safety
62. Submit approved Tentative Tract Map to the Department of Building and
Safety for addressing and street name review.
63. School fees shall be paid to Temecula Unified School District Prior to permit
issuance.
Lighting on site pool area and recreation area shall comply with Mount Palmar
Lighting Ordinance #655.
65. Submit pool plans to Riverside County Health Department for review prior to
structural plan review by the Department of Building and Safety.
66. Pool excavation area shall be fenced immediately the same day as excavation
is complete. All plumbing trenches shall be fenced.
67. Obtain clearances from land Use and from Building and Safety Departments.
68. Provide a geological report at time of submittal for plan review.
A: \VTM23267 29
PLA.~,~!%G & E.~GI.~EERING
46-209 OASIS STREET. SL'ITE 40S
I~DIO. CA 92201
RIX'I-~'qI~I ' '" '- ! %
FIRE [~1.1'.'~!~ 1%1t .~. I
CC~.r',~'cmt. ~'~"' '.'. ' - ° -E
c'· :. :~: 'C" '.
AND FII~F
~1 EN I ~i
FIRE CHIEI
i
D
PLANNING & ENGINEEl
376u IJTH STREET
RIVERSIDE CA 9250
(714) 78T-6~6
DATE:
TO:
ATTI4:
RE:
January 29, 1991
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Tract No. 23267
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land
division, the Fire Department recommends the fellerinS fire protection
measures be provided in accordance vith Riverside County Ordinances and/or
recognized fire p~otection standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
Schedule A fire protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6"x~"x2J")-
Zetated one at each street intersection and spaced no more than 330 feet
· apart in any direction, vith no portion of any lot frontage more than 165
feet from s hydrant. Minimum fire flov shall be 1000 GPM for 2 hours
duration at 20 PSI.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the racer system plans
to the Fire Department for reviev. Plans shall be signed by · registered
civil engineer, containing · Fire Department approval signature block,
and shall conform to hydrant type, location, opechi and minimum fire
flov. Once plans are signed by the local vater company, the originals
shall be presented to the/ire Deparment for signature.
The required vater system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed
and accepted by the appropriate vater agency prior to any combustible
buildiuluterial beans placed on an individual lot.
Prior to the recordsties of the final u~p, the applicant/developer shall
provide ·Item·re or secondary access as approved by the City of Temecuala-
Engineering Department.
MITIGATION
Prior to the recordsties of the final map, the developer shall deposit vith
the City of Temecula, · cash som of $&00.O0 per lot/unit ms mitigation for
fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of
payment, he/she may enter into s vritten aircement rich the City deferring
said payment to the time of issuance of the first building permit.
~E: TR 23267 Page 2
All questions regarding the meaning o{ condi~icns shall be retez~c~ ~,
the Planning and Engineer~n~ scaf~.
RAYHOND H. REGIS
Laura Cabral, ~ire Sale~y Specialist
i
,1
Ea,, rn ic ipalDi,trict
%~ III /
Rolm M. Cos
March 8, 1991
Richard Ayala
City of Temecula
Planning Oepartment
43180 Busthess Park Drive
Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92390
SubJect: Tentative Parcel Nap No. 23267
Dear Mr. Ayala:
As requested, we have
coneants:
Sanitary Sewer
reviewed the subject project and offer the following!
The subject project is tributary to the Otstrtct's Rancho California Region,-1~
Hater Reclamation Facility, via a sewer system to be constructed by Assessmt
Dtstrlct No. 159. The developer is expected to submit a proposed conceptual
plan of sanitary sewer servtce to the Dtstrtct's Customer Service and Planntng
Departments for review and approval. Thts plan shall provide for a system~
of gravity-flow sewerlines located wtthtn road right-of-way according to E!~/D~
.standards.
It must be understood that the available capactty of the Dtstrtct's sewer system.
are continually chsngtng due to development wtthtn the 01strict.' As such,
service wtll be provided based on the timtrig of the subject project, the service
agreement with the Otstrict, and the status of the Dlstrtct's permit ~o operate.
Shodld you have any questions regarding these couments, please contact Rut,.
Newsham or me at (714) 766-1850.
Sincerely,
fg~H. A1 Spencer ' '
cc: john Frtcker, E!~rD
Presley of San Diego, 15010 Avenue of Science, Ste. 200, San Diego, CA 92~-~
91-240
7/M
ATTACHMENT II
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT NO. 281
The Riverside County Board of Supervisors certified Environmental impact Report
(EIR) No. 281 in conjunction with the approval of Change of Zone No. 5150 and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23267 and 23299. The EIR included mitigation
measures to reduce environmental impacts to levels of insignificance. Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 which supersedes Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23299 has 87 fewer residential units than Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23299 and
therefore, will generate less traffic and result in reduced impacts to the environment
and to public services and utilities. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 wiil
involve minimal grading and therefore, is unlikely that any additional amount of
earth movement will result in any increased significant impacts. The Conditions of
Approval are adequate to mitigate any pOtential impacts regarding drainage and non-
renewable fossil resources to levels of insignificance.
Pursuant to Section 1516~ of the California Environmental Quality Act, this addendum
has been prepared to demonstrate that the ~hanges resulting from the proposed
Change of Zone and New Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Revised Tentative Tract
Map will not result in new or substantially increased significant impacts, that there
have been no changes in the circumstances surrounding the project that would
require important revisions to the EIR due to new significant impacts, and that no
measures not previously considered would substantially .reduce any significant
rmpacts. By reducing the number of residential units, the new project will reduce
the level of impacts on the environment and on public facilities and services.
A:\S.CZ
:"~, . ~: ~ZNKS , .' ? SUBMITTALTO THE ItC)ARD OF SUP~hvlbUI~S
VE 3
'~../ V~TING TENTATIVE TMCT N0. 23267 - Tfl0T~ ~ERICA CORP, - First~uperv
District - Rancho California Area - 221 Acres ,596 Lots,232 Condominium Units -
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Schedule A - CHANGE OF ZONE from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-5
The Planning Comission and Staff Rec=anend:
CERTIFICATION of Envtrormental Impact Report No. 281 based on the
Finding that the Environmental Impact Report ts an accurate, ob.~ect]ve
and complete document which complies with the California Environmental
Quality Act and the Riverside County Rules to Implement CEQA; and
APPROVAL of CHANGE OF Z~IE N0. 5150 from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-5
in accordance wtth Exhibit 2, based upon the findings and con-
clusions incorporated in the Planning Commission minutes dated
OCTOBER 19, 1988; and
APPROVAL of V~STING TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 23267, N4ENDED N0. 2 subject
to the attached conditions, based on the findings and conclusions
Incorporated tn the Planning Commission minutes dated OCTOBER 19, 1988;
and
APPROVAL of ¥EST/NG TENTAT/VE TRACT N0. 23299 subject to the attached
conditions, based on the findings and conclusions incorporated in tl~e
Planntng Coawnission minutes dated OCTOBER 19, 1988.
f
Rogelr 5treet~er~P~nnl ng*~~0i rector
.
...... .i ..... ~ ..,. J o.
AGENDA .';.:
,I
~.' ~ontng Area: Rancho California (2lARGE OF ZONE RO. 5150
FtrsL SupervtsorSal Dlstrtct VESTING TEXTATIVE TRACT NO. 23267
E.I.IL~' No. 281 VESTING TERTATIVE TRACT NO. Z3Z99
· Ragtonal Team No. I Planntng Commtss!on: 10-19-88
' , Agenda Item No. 1-6
RXVERSIDE IXXJNTY PLAmIXNG DEPARTRENT
STAFF REX)RT
1. App11cant: Thotem Amertcan Corporation
R st
: Engineer/ep.: RanPac Engineering '
Type of Reque : Change of zone from R-R to R-3, R-4 and
R-So 232 untt condomtntum project and a
" i schedule 'A" subdivision.
Location: South of. Htghway 79, Meat of Pargartta
· Road.
u~ M Extsttng Zontng: R-R t R 5
: 5~rroundtn9 Zo tn9: R-R. &-1-10, R-A-2~,, -A-
n
o.Existing Land Use: ' Generally vacant, a couple of residences
' and structures, horse and cart1 ·
m "~.': .' j.:~'~.i~':*: C". graz ng-
~8. ':Surr~u'~'~itng Land Use: Scattered sJngle fam(ly residences, a
horse ranch, a turf farm and vacant
': land.
9. 'Comprehenstve'Geheral Plan ~ '
Designargon: Land Use: Category
t 2-20 d~e111ng untts per acre
Dens
10. Land Dtvtston Data:
11, Agency Recoanendattons:
12. Letters:
13. ~phere of Influence:
Total Acreage: 221.2
VTR 23267 VTR 23299
Total Lots: 601Sgle Fam. 23Z Units
DU Per Acre: 3.01 du/ac 16.02 du/ac
Proposed Htn. Lot Size: 4500 sq,
See Letters dated:
VTR 23267 VTR 23299 CZ 5150
Road 10-07-88 10-11-88 3-zZ-aG
Health: 09-12-88 8-29-88 no comment
Flood: 10-18-88 10-18-88 4-18-88 (~'; '**
Ftre: 09-09-88 0-24-88 no comment p.i.
Opposing/Supporting: None rocetved
Not within a Ctty Sphere
ANALTSIS:
Pro]ect l)escHpt¶on
Change of Zone No. 5150 ts a request to change the zoning on 221.2 acres of
land ~n the Rancho Calffor,In area from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-5. Vest(rig
Tentathe Tract No. 23299 seeks to establish a 232 untt condomtn~um project on
24.3 acres of the overall stto. Vesttng Tentat(ve Tract Z3Z67 seeks to
L T'
~..)f
CHANGE OF ZONE I10. 5150
VEStiNG TEXTATI~: TRACT NO, 23267
YESTINS TEXTATXVE: TRACT NO. 232~9
Staff Report
Page 2
subdivide the remaining acreage into 601 stngle family residentta3 lots with a
mintmum stze of 4500 square feet, two nell stte lots, and 4 open . space lots
totallng S7.g- acres. Two of the open space lots are 'heighborhood arks
totaltrig 10.2 acres. O~e open space lot tncludes Temecula Creek and wilt be
made tnto a regtonal perk totaling 35.9 acres. fThe remaining open space lot of
11.8 acres WIll preserve an extsting adobe house and some :nattve vegetative
areas.
The project stte ts located south of Htghway 79 and vest of Hargarita Road.
This site used to be a part of the Old Vail Ranch. Currently the site is used
for horse and cattle grazing, and conlaths a couple of single family residences
and assorted related structures. Surrounding land uses tnclude vacant land to
the east, but whtch has had two spectftc plans approved on it (S.P. 217-Red
Hawk and S.P. 223-Va11 Ranch). The area to the north of HighwaY 79 shows
single family residential dwellings on relatively large lots. A horse ranch
and turf ram are located to the west along Pala Road. The turf fam Is
currently under Agricultural Preserve contract (Temecula No. 2). HoNevet, this
Agricultural Preserve Contract had a notice of non-renewal ftled on tt on
September 20, 1979, so the Agdculture Preserve Contract is due to expire on
January'l, 1989, ,.
Zoning found tn the surrounding area currently tncludes R-R to the north, east,-~
south and ~est,. A-I-IO to the east and south, and R-A-2~ and R-A-5 to the
north..
General Plan Coasistency/CampattbilttY
The project site ts located wi'thtn the Southwest Territory Land Use Planntng
Area, Just to the south of the Rancho Caltforntarremecula subarea. Poltctes
within the Rancho Callforntarremecula subarea call for Care orY I and II land
Uses within the 1-15 corridor, transittoning to Category ~II land uses on the
eastern end. These pollctes can be extrapolated doNn to apply to the proposed
proJect's location.
Category I and 11 land uses now exist to the south of Highway 79 and vest of
Pala Road Road. Thts trend towards urban development has been established in
the area south of Highway 79 and is continuing to be extended through the
approval of several specific plan; tn the area. Two specific plans adjoin the
project stte to the east. The R~dhaw~ Specific Plan (S.P. 217) was a proved by
the Board of Supervisors on October 6, 1988. This specific plan cal~s for a
mtxed use develoinent with residential densities ranging from 2 to 14 dwe11!ig
untie r acre. This s ciftc 1an alloNe up to 4,188 dwelltrig units- The
was also a proved by the Board of Supervisors on October 6, ·
specific p~an has approved 2,43l d~elltng untie N~th a denstry range of 2 to ~
du/acre. The tuff ram to the southwest also has a specific plan curten Y
being processed on tt iS,P. 228t Murphy Ranch) but is in the tnttial stages- ~
CliUtE OF ZDRE R0. 5150
VESTING TE~TATIVE TRACT R0. 23267
VESTING TERTAT/VE/F/CT 10. 23299
Staff Report ,
Page 3
Category Z and Zl levels of services and facilities are currently at the stte
or wtll be extended to the~ stte through the Rancho vtllage Assessment
of thts project wtl1 participate. Vesting Tentative Tract 23267 has an
which
overall denstty of 3.01 dwelltng untts per acre and so falls wtthtn Category
densities. 1lesttrig Tentative Tract 23299 has · proposed density of 16.02
dwelltng uftts per acre and so ts wtth n Category I densities. The proposed
I h existing ·re· development and wtth
tracts are considered compattbl· vri t .
:ls therefore found to be
projects approved tn the ·re·. The pro sa: are
consistent kith the Comprehensive General **~11an.
'T~e proposed zone change application proposes zoning which ts consistent with
The zone c ange
the land uses proposed under the two Vesting Tentative Tracts. h
request ts therefore considered consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan.
DestQn Considerations
The proposed tentative tracts have been designed in accordance wtth their
respective restdentta] development standards, and el] other pertinent standards
of Ordinances 348 and 460. The appTtcant ts requesting the waiver of lot
length to width ratio requirements on a number of lot~ withtn Vesting Tentative
Trac~ No. Z3Z67. Thts request ts necessary due to destin and or physical
constraints associated wtth the site. Staff feels thts requested waiver is
accept·b1 e.
Due to the tract's vesting status, additional materials were submitted for
review in accordance with Ordinance 460. All submitted mtertals were found to
be adequate. These plans ~11 be Implemented through the conditions of
approval.
Architectural elevations and materials were submitted in conjunction
Vesting Tract 23299. These 1tams were reviewed and approved and will be
implanented through the conditions of approval.
As ~s the ·ppTtc·nt°s option, · design manual addressing architecture.
ng was submitted ~lth Vesting Tract 2
iandscaptng, irrigation, and fend 324678
These development guidelines kill be implemented through an Ordinance No. 3
Section 18.30 plan plan which wilt need to be submitted and approved by the
Planning Department prtor to the issuance of any bu¶ldtng permits.
lee ·
C:!LeGE OF Z0E II0o 5]50
VESTtIE TE)ITATTVE .TIACT I). 2)267
rE.TritE TBITATffE ~tACT 12. Z32~9
Staff lieport
Page 4
Envtromental Wevtev
Zn accordance Kith the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), Envtromnental impact Report No. 281 was prepared tn connection wtt. h the
proposed project. All significant effects of the project on the environment
and measure~ necessary to avoid or substantially lessen such effects have been
evaluated tn accordance Kith the Riverside County Rules to Implement CF. QA. The
followring Ftndtn and Statenents of OverTiding Consideration are based upon
that Envt Fonmenta~ls~mPact Report.
I. Avoided Impacts and Impacts mitigated to 'an Instqntficant level
Se.tsmfc Safety
Potential Impact: The stte could be subjected to seismic event hazards
a. such as groundshaking, ground rupture, and liquefaction- The Htldomar.
fault ts located on-site along the western most edge. This fault
could have a htghest magnitude of 7.0 on the Rtchter scale during a
setsmtc event. A moderate to high liquefaction potential exists neat
Temecula Creek.
I'
Re utred Fl~tt atton: A fifty (50) foot setback area Kill be placed on
~u~ding ;:de and ~unt~ Grading Ordinance and shall be designed an
~thstand earthshaking frm the 'max~mm credible earthquake that c
be expected, L~quefact~on haza~ can ~ mtttgated b~ over-excavatSo~
and replac~nt of ~c~acted f~11,
c, F~nding: M1 ~tent(al se(~c ~;acts can be mStiga~ed to a hvel of
~nsSgnSfiance,
$1opes and E~s~ons
a. Potential )rapact: Erosion hazard and slope instability Kill tncrease
durtng gradtng, Stltatton of the reservoir and drainages my occur.
b. MItigation: All grading acttvtt¶es will be tn conformance vtth al!
County gradtrig standards, All county eroston control practices shall
be adhered to Including slope plantingand sandbegging. A destltatton
bastn ~11 be provided tn the open space area to reduce stltatton of
the creek during ttmes of peak run-off.
Ftndtn: Potential Impacts can be mitigated to a level of
c. ins49~ficance.
CHARGE OF ZI)RE R0. 5150
VEStiNG TENTAtiVE TRACT n0. 23267
VEStiNG TEXTAT/rE TRACT nO. 23299
surf bport
page 5
F'loodlnq
a. Potent]al ~[mpacts: ~[ncreased runoff potential through construction of
Impervious surfaces, potential ~mpacts to dovmstream · properties
HitSgut?on: T~cula (reek v~11 ~ ?;roved through the
b. V~llages Asses~en~ O?str4ct o{- ~?ch this project ~s a paF~.
[~v~tS ~ T~cula Creek ~nclude'a 400 foot v?de, so{t
channel v?th concrete s~des. All areas ~th~n the ~00 ~eaF floodplain
~11 ~ r~ved fr~ sa~d floodplain through ~mprov~nt o~ Temecu]a
~ek. A drainage channel and box culvert w~11 conve~ s~o~ ~lows
under S~ate H?ghva~ 79. Xn add?~on, all ~q~r~en~s ~ound
~unt~ Flood (ontrol D~str~ct shall ~ adhered
c. Finding: All ~tent~al flood?rig ~eacts can ~ m~?ga~ed to a level
~ ns tgn~ ~? canoe.
/
Rot se '
a.~tenttal Im~cts: Notse frm Ht hway 79 ~11 trapact the stte,
noise ro]ected to be 74.8 dB~A) at a dtstance of 100 feet frm the
centerl~ne of Htghwa~ 79. The enttre area of ~stdentlal develo~ent
no~ of T?ula could experience notse levels tn excess of 65 dBCA).
b. Httigatton: Landscaping and block m11s ~11 ~ used tn areas ad]ace,t
~ ~add s. A stx foot htgh or htgher decorative block ~all and
earthen ~m wtll be ~qutred along Highway 79, adjacent to the
project stte. /ntertor notse levels can ~ reduced to under 45 dB(A)
though use of d~ble glazed w?nd~s mchantcal venttlatlon and
m~ato~ atr conditioning untts- [n add~tton Tttle 24 standards wtll
~ ml Ied ~ th.
Ft~tn: ~ ~tenttal notse t~act an ~ mitigated to a level of
c. tnstgn?f4cance ·
Water Qualtty
a. Potential Tmpacts: A potent4al stltatton of natural drainages and
Tenecula Creek my occur durtng ratny pertotis- Pollutants from street
rueoff could enter ateNays. [ntroductton of Impervious surfaces
could slow an~f recharge of groundwater tn the area.
DINeGE OF-/DIIEI0- 5150
VESTZiGTE]~'ATIVETRACTN0- 23267
VE. ST/iIG.TE)WTATIVETRACTB0- 23299
Staff Report
page 6
b. Nttigatton: Compliance vtth County Gradtrig standards, Including the
sand ba In and destltation basins during rainy weather
to act as natural filtering s~stems fo . '.
c. Ftndtng: Potent4al tmpacts can be adttgated to a level of
Insignificance-
Veqetatlon/i/tldltfe *- .
a. Potential Impacts: $enstttve species occurring on stte tnclude
Blackshoulder ktte, Coopers Hawk, Northern Harrier, and Nevln's
Barberry. in addition the San Dtego Horned Ltzard has a high
probability of occurring on stte, Potential Impacts to these
sensitive species my occur wtth deveqoFment of this project. The
rtparlan area within Temecula Creek wtll be disturbed upon improvement
of the Temecula Creek Channel, vith the loss of four (4) acres of
unconsolidated rtpartan scrub,
b. Htt4gatlon: The ~ipar(an area vtll be disturbed through the
Improvement of the Temecula Creek ChanneT by the Rancho Villages
Assessment District. Approximately 24,5 acres of rtpartan habttat
wtll be removed along the length of the Creek. The biological
enhancement program associated vlth the creek Improvement will
establish 70 acres of revttallzed habttat, vhtch wtll off-set any
tnlttal loss of rtpartan habttat. The subject property ts part of the
Rancho Vtllages Assessment Dtstrtct and wtll participate tn the
program,
The rtpertan area near the extsttng reservoir wtll be retained in an
open space lot. The project has designated approxtmtelY 58'acres of
open space, whtch wtll he)p erlttgate Impacts to the extsttng senstthe
btrd specles and whtch wtll preserve most of the tnland sage scrub
plant community found on stte- Of the t~o extsttng specimens of
· Nevtn~s Barberry found on slte, one wtll be preserved wtthtn the open
space area, A professional horticulturist u111 also take cutttngs of
the Hevtn's Barbert/ found adjacent to the extsttng residence and
replant these tn the Open Space area near the other Novtn's liarbert/-
(3lARGE OF ZIXE IlO. 5150
VESTING _TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 2)267
VESTlIE TENTATIVE 11tACT I10, 23299
Staff eL. port
Page 7 ,
c. FIndings: Potential impacts to sensitive biological species can be
mitigated to a level of Insignificance.
Resources
a. Potential Impacts: Short tem energy use ~rFll occur durtng
construction vtth the use of fuels by construction equipment.
Long-tem energy use vdll occur through hoee heating and 11ghttng and
autoeobtle fuel use. Energy consumption after buildout vtll he the
folioring:
1. Gasollne - 522 vehtcle gallons per day.
2. Natural Gas - 30,392 cubtc feet per day.
3. Electricity- 13,811 ktlo~att - hours per day.
b. Htttgatton: A Class I bicycle tratl vtll he provtded adjacent to the
proposed channel. Tttle 24 energy conservation practices wt11 be
Incorporated into the destgn and develolxnent of the houses.
c. FIndings: Potential energy tmpacts ,tll be'mitigated to a level ~f
Insignificance. ,'
,~::enic Ht~h~rays
a. Potential Impacts: Htgh~ay 79 is an eltgtble scentc highway.
Developcent.of the proposed project could tapact the scentc quality of
the area.
b. Htttgation: LandsCaped entry nodes K111 he provided throughout the
79. Landscape plans will be royteed by the Planning
l)epartxent to ensure adequacy.
c. FIndings: The potential tapacts to the eltglble scentc highway are
mitigated to a level of Insignificance.
&rchaeologtcal Resources
a. Potential Impacts: A site of prehistoric Indian Habitation ts found on
the north stde of Tenecula Creek on the first stream terrace- The
extstlng htstortc t~o story adohe "vtnter residence" of Walter Yatl is
also located on slte. Disturbance of these sites could tmpact these
resources.
b. Prior to any disturbance on site, a qualified Archaeologist shall
review the registered Indian site and collect any data as necessarY-
CXARGE OF ZORE liD. S1SO
YESTIM; TENTAtiVE TRACT I10. 23267
IT_%'fiM; TEXTATIVE TRACT I0. 23299
Staff Report
Page 8
Ce
Data collection methods shall tnclude test bortngs and excavations as
found necessary by the archaeologist and as approved by the Planntng
Department. The extsttng adobe house on site wtll be preserved on so
no trapacts vtll occur.
Findings: Al1 archaeological ~mpacts can be avotded or mitigated to an
tnslgnt ftcant level.
Paleontoloqy
a. Potential Impact: ProJect s?te ts located near Pauba formatSon' Tend
whtch ts known to produce significant paleontologtcal resources.
Potential tmpacts my occur durtng gradtng and trenching.
b. Hfttgatton !teasures: A qualffted peleontologtst -shall be consulted
prtor to any gradtng and shall mnttor the grading activity.
'Stgn¶ftcant ftnds shall be tdentff4ed, ttemtzed and conclusions
presented by the qualified paleontologist. ..
c. FIndings: Any Paleontologtcal
level of Insignificance.
tepacts can be avotded or mitigated to a
CIrculation
a. Potential Impacts: the proposed project coebtned wt11 generate 7,392
trtp ends per day.
Htttgatton: All tnternal street systems vI11 be put tn place by the
developer of thts pro:iect. HaJor circulation roads tn the area. wtll
be traproved by the Rancho Vtllages Assessment DIstrict, by whtch thts
pro~iect ~tll participate. Roads to be tmproved tnclude Htghway 79 to
a ]42 foot R. 0.H. stx lane road, Hargartta Road south of Highway 79 to
a 134/100 foot R.O.H. a~ertal, and Pale Road south of Htghway 79 to a
110 foot R.O.H. arterial. A bike land ts also betrig provtded adjacent
to Temecula Creek.
c. Traffic tepacts can be mitigated to a level of Insignificance.
Hater and Seer
a. Potential Impacts: The proposed project vtll have an estimated daily
water consumption of 547,800 gallons per day, vlth the creatton of
t
273,900 gallons of was eater.
b. Hlttgatton: Roncho California Hater Dtstrtct and Eastern Puntctpal
.Hater Dtstrlct have expressed a postttve abtltty to serve the proposed
CHARGE OF ZONE I10. 5150
VEST]leG TE)ITATXVE 1WACT NO. 23267
VF_STZNG TEXTATZVE lWACT NO. 23299
St~ff bport
Page 9
ro ect. fi line facilities wtll be installed through the Rancho
Hater conserving metho s Tttle 24 Xn addition drought to
IIandscaptng and automat g ,
project-
c. Finding: Impacts to water and sewer servtce~ are not considered
s~gn~f~cant- "
a. Potential Impact: Development of thts project vtll incrementally
lncrease demand for fire servtces-
b. Htttgat¶on: The project shall comply vith all applicable fire
prevention and emergencY response provisions contained tn RIverside
County Ordinances- in addition, the developer ~ill pay $400.00 per
untt to go toward fire protection impacts- --
c. F~ndtng: 'Impacts to fire services can be m~.ttgated to a ~evel of
#
tnstgnt(tca.nce-
Sheriff Servtce ·
a. Potential Impacts: DeveloFment of thts project w~11 add an estimated
1743 ~eople to the area, ~htch will have an incremental impact on the
need for police serv?ces.
b. K~ttgatton: Crime prevention methods will be designed tnto the
development of this project. Hanpo~er increases are at the discretion
of the Board of Supervisors, however, this project pay county w~de
mitigation fee of ~htch a portion can go toward adding add~t~onal
police protect?on,
c. Finding: Potential 4mpacts to police services can be mitigated to d
level of ~nstgnlf¶cance-
Sclmol s
a. Potential Impacts: Oevelopment of this project v~11 generate an
estimated total of 450 new students-
b. Htttgatton: The project developer vtll be required to pay schou~-
editgallon fees ¶n accordance vtth State Law.
IllNEE OF :ZDRE g0. 5150
vETrim TEXTATIVE TRACT If0. 23267
VESTING TEXTATIVE lXACT g0. 23299
Staff Report
Page 10
c. 'Finding: Impacts to schools can be mitigated to a level of
Ins I gnt ft ca rice.
Parks and Recreation
a. Potential Impacts: The state Qutmby Act requtres 3 acres of park site
er one thousand people. Development of this project would require
~.2 acres of park site. :.-
Mitigation: The proposed project ~tll provide'two parks totalling 10.2
acres of land. An approximately 1.0 acre park site is located in the
northern portton of the project site and a 9.2 acre park site is
located in the sourkern ttp. In addition, a 35.9 acre ragtonal park
ts being proposed by the Rancho Vtllages Assessment District for the
Temecula Creek area. This regional park wtll tnclude equestrian
trails and bike paths. Another 11,8 acres of Open Space area vhtch
includes the 'old adobe structure' ts proposed..
Finding: Provision of the two park sites totalling 10.2 acres and w~t*h
the proposed regional parks, lapacts to park and recreation servtces
are mitigated to a level of Insignificance.."
Utilities
a, Potential .Impacts: Incremental increase in demand for utility
services. Temporan/creation-of dust and nots, from construction of
uttllty 1tries.
b. ~!ttgatton: The developer will be required to extend all. utilities as
necessary. Bust shall be controlled during construction activity
h of atering trucks. Vegetation losses wtll be
through t · use
replaced with appropriate planttags tn areas damaged by trenching-
Sandbagging shall be used to prevent runoff,
Ftndtn s: Impacts to utilities can be mitigated to a level of
c. Insignificance.
Solld Haste
Potential tapacts: Thts project w111 create 19,626 pounds of solid
waste per day, Mequate capacity ts currently available to handle
this need,
b. MItigation: IIo wlttgatton required.
ClIARGE OF ZDRE WO. 5150
VESTIRG TENTATIVE TRACT II0. 23267
IESTTRG TENTAtiVE TRACT NO. 23299,
Staff
Page 11
c. Ftnd~ng: There w~11 be no significant lmpact to sol~d w~ste
fact1 tt~es · * ·
tecrmental trapact on lSbrarY servSces- ~ *
b. H4ttgat~on: The developer ~11 be required to pay $100.00 per unit
,dt~gat~on fee. '* '
c. FSndSng: Llbrer~: ~mpacts can be mitigated to a level of
~nstgntficance-
Health Services
a. potential Zmpacts: Development of thts project w~11 have an
~ncremental ~ncrease tn demand for health service. Current and
planned fadl~ties in the area appear CaPable of meterig
additional demand. :,'
b. lqtttgatton: NO mitigation required
c. Ftndtng: There IS no s~gn~ftcant Impact to health servlces.
At rports
a. Potential Impacts: Htntmal tmpact to area airports ts anttctpated.
b. Htttgatton: No mtttgatton requtred-
c. Ftnd¶ng: There ts no stgntftcant trapact to area airports-
D¶ saster preparedness
a. ~otenttal ImpaCts: Htntmal trapacts
preparedness ts anttct pared ·
b. HItSgation: No mitigation requtred-
ar~ no significant
c. FSndtng:' There
preparedness-
to the County' s Dtsaster
toward Dt saste r
~ OF ZDRE NO, 5150
VESTING TEXTATIVE 1TACT g0. 23267
YESfig; TENTATIVE IIACT NO, 23299
Staff Report
Page 12
Ftscal Impacts
a. Potential Impacts: The fiscal study found wtthtn the EIR states'that
the enttre project will have a net positive Impact to the County of
approximately $56,008 annually. ,
b. MItigation: NO adtIgatton proposed.
c. Ftndfng: No significant ftscal negative'fiscal tmpact vtll
PROJECT ALTERRAT/VE5
OCCUr.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines requtre
the consideration of alternatives to the proposed project. Three alternatives
were considered ~thtn th~s EIR. These are the 'No Project Alternative', the
'Decreased Scope Alternative', and the 'Increased Scope Alternative.'
no Project Alternative
Analysts: The NO Project Alternative "would a11o~ the land to remain ~n
non-intensive uses such as the extstJ~ horse and,' cattle ranch and the
existing 11mtted residential uses of · property owner and workers. Gtven
this.scenario, none of the tmpacts of the proposed project would occur.
The No Project Alternative ts considered the environmentally superior
a]ternattve due' to the least environmental tmpacts. Impacts associated
with selsmtc safety, gradtng, notse, atr quality, water quality, loss of
Agricultural land, vegetation and wildlife, energy resources, public
services and utilities, and traffic would not occur or would be
substantially less.
Reasons for ReJectlon of No Project Alternative: Thts alternattv. e would
negate the beneftts associated wtth development of the 600 detached
dwelling units and 230 condom¶ntum untts. These untts are proposed to
reflect anticipated market needs and publlc demand by providing detached
dwelltrig units that wtll be marketable wtthtn the regton. Long-tem use of
the stte ts not considered economically feastble and ts not mandated by the
General Plan. In light of the approved urban land uses tn the nea:.
vicinity, continued Intensive agricultural uses could lead to
incompatibility of land uses.
CHNEE OF ZONE RO. SISO
VESTING TENTATXVE TRACT NO. 23267
VESTING TE~TATZYE 1tACT NO. 232~9
Staff Relmrt ,
Page 13
Decreased Scope AlternatiVe
a. Analysts: Thts alternative will assume the roperty ts developed'out in
accordance vtth the extsttng R-R zone (Rura~ Residential)- Htth the
property developed at one dwelltrig unlt per ~ acre, this alternative
addresses development of 550 dwelltrig untts,
Development of thts slte under the Decreased Scope Alternative ~ould have
I ac~s on setsmtc safety, Air Oualtty, Hater Quallty, Energy Resources,
Pu~11c Servtces and Utilities, and Traffic that would be less than the
proposed project. Potential Impacts upon Slopes and Eroston, Flooding,
Notse, Agricultural Resources, Vegetation and Vtldllfe, Archaeological
be 'about the same.
Resourcest and Paieontologtcal Resources vould
Increased Impact to Vater Quality might be expected due to use of septic
systems.
b. Reasons for~e~ect~on of the'Decreased Scope Alternative: Although the
Decreased Scope Alternative contains incrementally reduced impacts
certain above mentioned areas, It ts not considered to be s4gntftcantly
"env(ronmentally superior" to the current development proposal. The
product tnhtbtts the provision of homes
eltnd~atton of the smaller lot
· ~thtn a more affordable range. The costs of roadway tmprovements as well
as costs assodated with water, sewer and flood control facilities are not
proportionately decreased under this alternathe, maktng the' project
economically difficult. For these reasons, the Reduced Scope Alternative
was rejected.
Increased Scope Alternathe
a. AnalYs~js: The Increased Scope Alternative wauld assume butldin9 out the
pro'act stte wtth multi-family dwelltrig untts at a denstry of 12-~4
dwelling untts per acre. ~ftth thts sort of denstt~, more than 3,000
dwelllng untts could be betlt.
The Increased Scope Alternative veuld have greater tmpacts upon Seismtc
Safety, Slopes and Erosion, Floodin ,Notse, A~r Quallty Hater Quallty,
Energy Resources, Land Use, Pub?tc Services and Utlli~tes and Traffic.
Impacts on Agricultural Resources, Vegetation and H(1dllfe, Archaeological
Resources, and paleontologtcal Resources would be about the same.
Reasons for Re'action of the Increased Sco Alternative: Several adverse
significant. Because 811 impacts under thts alternathe are etther equal
to, or greater than, the proposed project, this alternative is
CHANGE OF ZIXIE NO. 51SO
VESTING TEHTAT!:YE ~ RO. 23267
VESTING TEXTAT/VE TRACT IQ. ?JZ99
Surf Report
Page 34
environmentally lnfertor than the proposed project. For these reasons,
thts alternative uas re;lacteal.
Ill. Rejected Condlttons of Approval
The conditions of approval or the proJect's destgn ~nclude' all recommended
mitigation measures set forth tn Environmental Impact Report No. 281, except
that measure vhtch requtres a reg~onal application and ~s beyond the scope of
the Individual developer. Th~s measure ¶s the requirement of park and r~de
fadlilies tn the area to mtttgate energy ~mpacts.
IV. SIgnificant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts and ProJect Benefits
Project Benefits:
Developeent of the project as proposed ~11 provtde the following benefits to
the region:
1) Ieproved Traffic Circulation: Traffic circulation ,411 be tmproved tn the
project area by the project's Inclusion wtth~n the Rancho. V~11ages
Assessment Dtstr~ct. Improvements tnclude wtdentng of Rancho California
Road to a 142 foot R.0.H., mktng ~t a stx lane expressway, Improving
14argar~ta Road to a 134 foot arterial, and teprovement of Pala Road to 110
foot R.O.H.
2)/.;roved Flood Control: Pa.rttctpatton of thts project stte tn the Rancho
Vtllages Assessment Nstrtct will go towards ~mprovement of Temecula Creek
lnto a 400 foot wide, soft bottomed, concrete sided channel. ·
3)
Provision of Acttve Recreatfonal Open Space: The roJect ts proposing two
nelgnoornooo par~ sites total ling lu.2 acres al~ong wtth providing an 11.8
acre Open Space/Regional Park. Participation of thts project In the Rancho
Villages Assessment Dtstrtct also will see the Temecula Creek Channel area
dev*eloped tnto a 35.9 acre open space area and regtonal park, wtth
equestrian tratls and bicycle paths Included. ~lhlle the neighborhood park
sttes are betng developed prtmrtly for the residents of the project, the
amount of park acreage far exceeds that amount whtch would be requtred under
the Qutmb.v Act, and, along with the ragtonal parks, can be uttllzed by
residents already tn the cmmunttJr.
Stqntficant Unavoidable Mverse Impacts:
Environmental ]epact Report Ro. 281 identified the following significant
unavoidable adverse Impacts.
CHANGE OF ZDIIE NO,
.VESTING TEXTATIVE TRACT I10, 23267
VESTING TEXTATZVE: TRACT I10. 23299
Staff Repo~
Page 1.5
Air Qual'tty:
a, potential impacts: Vehtcle exhaust mission and dust dur(ng construct(on
vt11 contribute to atr quality reductions tn the area on a short-te~m
basts- The long-tem tmpacts wtll be Increased motor vehtcle emissions by
end from Increased power plant
mo~e people tbeot~e d~aHn tnto the area
emissions due demand for electricttJr and natural~. gas-
Requtred Ntttqatton: Hater trucks vtll he. used to reduce dust. On-stte
parks will create on-stte trip destinations- A Class I btke ira11 4s
durtng construct1 on,
turnouts ~tll be destgeed tnto development+of the parks to factlState any
· future mass transtt systea-
c, Unavoidable Adverse impact: .A temporary degradation of air quality
1
tt
result in the project vtc~n Y durtng construction acttvttY with an overal
significant Incremental regtonal de9radatton due to project Implementation-
'of
d, Overrtd~nq Ftndtnq: The public benefits of the proposed pro3ect
public ~mprovements to road and flood facilities and by the develo~en~ of
neighborhood and reglonal parks out~etgh the proJect's adverse trapact upon
atr qualtty,
Aqrlculture
Potential Impacts: Development of the proposed project will result tn loss
a. of cumnt agricultural uses and the loss Of 27 acres of prime agricultural
land (Class I and II sotls).
b. Htttqatton: No mitigation measure available to mtttgate these impacts.
c. Unavoidable Adverse Tmpact: Loss of 27 acres of prime ram land
cons(acted cumulative17 stgntftcant-
d. Overrtdtnq Ftndtnq: Agricultural production tn thts area ts hecom(ng,
has become, economically tnfeastble. Continued use of the land for
agricultural practices could had to land use tncompattbtllttes tn 11ght of
approved and extsttng projects tn the area, The pro3ect beneftts
substantially out~etgh the unavoidable adverse tmpact caused by the loss of
these prtme sotls.
· CXANGE OF ZI:XIE: I10, 5150
VESTING TENTATIVE: TRACT I10, 23267
VE:SI'IIIG TEITATIVE: TRACT NO. 23299
Staff Report.
Page 16
~INDINGS:
Change of Zone fin. SZS0 seeks to change the zoning on 221.2 acres from R-R
to R-J, R-4 and R-5.
2. Vesttng Tentative Tract No. 23299 seeks to create 232 condomtntum untts on
14.3 acres of the stte. ~.
3. Vesting Tentative Tract No, 23267 seeks to create 601 stngle famtly lots
and 4 open space lots on the remainder. of the stte,
4. The site ts located south of HIghway 79 and blest of Hargartta Road.
5. The project $tte ts currently used for horse and cattle graztng. A couple
of residences and assorted related structures are found on stte.
Surrounding Land Uses tnclude stngle famtly residence's, a horse ranch, a
turf farm and vacant land.
7. Surrounding zoning Includes R-R, A-I-IO,"R-A-2~ and'R-A-5. ,.
8. The project site 1tea adjacent to two approved specific plans (S.P. 217 -
Redhawk and S.P. 223 - Vat1 Ranch). These spectftc plans are located to
the east and south of the project site.
The turf farm located to the southwest currently has a specific plan betng
processed on it (S.P. 228- Murphy inch).
The agricultural preserve contract on the adjoining turf ram (Temecula
No. 2), wtll expire on January 1, 1989.
The project stte ts located vithtn the Southwest Territory Land Use
Planntng Area. -
Environmental Impact Report No. 281 was prepared for the proposed project.
Findings, .Mitt atton Measures and Statements of Overriding Consideration
are found in ~hts staff report on pages 4 through 15 and are incorporated
here by reference,
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The proposed zone change and vesting tentative tracts are consistent with
the poltdes of the Comprehensive General Plan.
2. The proposals are compatible Ntth area de.velopment and zontng.
(HJUEE OF ZONE NO. 5150
yESriNG TENTATIVE: 11tACT RO. 23267
VESTI~ TEXTAT/VE TRACT no. 2)299
staff Report
page X7
). The project conforms to all applicable count,v ord~nances-
4. Overr~d¶ng findings necessarY to approve this project are found wtthtn the
.staff report. ' "' '
IIECI)RIENDATIOIIS:
CERT/FICATIOII of E:nv~ronmental Xmpact Report Hoo 281 based ~ the find~n9 that
(he F~vtronmental Impact Report ts an accurate. objective and complete docu:ent
which corn lies with the California Environmental Qualmtit Act and the Riverside
Count,v Ru~eS to implement CEQA; ands '
APPItOVAL of CHARGE OF ZOIIE IIO. 5150 from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-5 4n accordance
,- ....,. ,.-.....
conditions of approval; ands
APPBOVAL of VESTING TEXTATZVE ~IIACT NO- 2)299, sub::lect to the conditions of
approva~ and 4n accordance wtth Exhtbtt A, knended No. 2; and based upon t~e
findings and conclusions Incorporated in this staff report.
GH:sc
10122/88
ee
II :.:.
HORSE
RANCH .,%,,,~'.
LOt/A LINDA /~O.'
TURF FARM
AO. PR/:I.
TEal.
MAP d;'H3
VAC,
· LOCATIONAt,. MAP
App. MR. BRIAN HAYWOOO
SIC. T. 8 S.,R. 2W ~llOr'l Bk. 926 Pg- 16 ., .~ ...~~'
m__ ", R~ Bk: ~.56'A Dote 3117188 ~own By SS ~ ,'
RIVERSIDE COUNI'Y pL/U'VNING DEPARTMENT .o'
1200'
O
Ule R-R TO R-4, R-~, AND R-5 ~ -
kea TEMECULA. RANCHO Sup.~st. I '
Sec, T. 8 S.,R. 2W ~sessor's Bk. 926 h. 16 ~, ~' '.
'--~,
, 'N . Ckculation ~ EXPWY VARIABLE
~1;~:3~,56A ~te 3117188 ~own By SS
.I
4
Ii:
t
-T:- e,.e.e.e,.
:111'1.1
i: "-"! "
RiVERSiDE COURCY
PLA~~iflG DEP R i EP
DATE: Yebruar7 29t 1988
Assessor
Building mud Safety
Surveyor - Dave Duds
bad Department
Health -- ltalph Laths
Fire Protection
F/~od Control District
Fish & Cam
LAYCOs S Paisley
D.S, Poeul Service -Ruth w_. Davidann
,:-~ .... ! -:....-.-,;
;':~':"" *' :' ~~' .:- ~'.' '. :':'7~4,;VERS~DE COUNTy ROAD
..... DEPARTMfL~T
Cmuujssioner bressoo
Rancho Caltf, Hater
Eatern Municipal Hater
~outhern Cn14f, Edtson
Southern Cal4f. Gas
General Telephone
Dept. of Transportat4on #8
Temecula Unton Htgh School
TamecuSs Chamber of Comuerce
Pit. Palomar
S~erra Club
¥al leywtde Parks
CHANGE OF ZONE 5150 - (Tm-1) - E,A. 325~4
-T horse American Corp, - Rancho Pacific
- Rancho California Area - First
Supervisoris1 District - South st Highray
79 end Vest .o[ Margarita Road -~-R Zone
- 207,6 acres - REQUESChange st Zone to
R-2e R-& a'nd R-5 - Concurrent Cases VTP
23267, V3/23299 -- Hod 120 - A,P, --~
926-160-010 to 013; 926-160-002-00L
County Parks
County Avtatton
Plume review the case described above, along vith the attached case map, A Land
Division Committee meeting has been tentatively scheduled [or April 280 1988, If it
clurs, it wilt then go to public hearing,
Tour c~ents and recommendations ere requested prior to April I~, 1988 in order that ve
my include them in the stair report for this particular use,
Should y~u have any questions regarding this item° please do not hesitate to contact
Crag Seal'a~ 787-1363
Planner
DARE: ~SIGHATUIE
~.EASE print name and title
dnRn I FMON STREET. 9TM FLOOR
46-209 OASIS STREET. ROOM "" *,
KENNLrTH I_ illWARD!
Illl MAWWrY Itmlrr
P. O. log Ioll
TWJ-IPI4OIir tTldl ~1T.$O11
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Riverside County
Planntng Department
County Administrative Camtar
Riverside, California
Attention: Regional Te No.
Area: ';~//f_/~z>
CALIFORNIA IIIOI
Re: _~/I/~r-/2~ ,~/v'-C
He have revteved this case and have the follgWtng cmments:
Except for nuisance nature local runoff which may traverse portions of the
property the project is r~onstdered free from ordinary storm flood hazard.
However, a storm of unusual magnitude could cause some damage. New construc-
tion should comply utth all applicable ordinances.
The topography of the area consists of well defined ridges and natural water-
courses which traverse the property. There is adequate area outside of the
kept free of buildings and obstructions
drainage patterns of the area and to prevent flood.damage to new buildings. .,
A note should be placed on an environmental constraint sheet stating, 'All new
buildings shall be floodproofed by elevating the finished floors a minimum of
]8 inches above adjacent ground surface. Erosion pro~ection $hall be provided
for mobile home supports-"
Area
This project is t9 the
drainage plan fees shall be paid in accordance with the applicable r~les and
regu~at ions.
The proposed zoning is coaslstent wtth existing flood hazards. Some
control facilities or floodproofing may be required to fully develop to th~
teplted denstry.
The Dtstrtct's report dated ts still current for this project.
The District does not object to the proposed minor change.
The attached cos~nts apply.
Very truly yours,
KENNETH L. ED~IARDS
April S, 1988
R;V--'R.-.';.t.S -':- ,L L:'. ;-,,'
PLA:,INING
Board aX Dimceres:
N~l~anl D. kit7
JmmeeA. Dm%y
iblpb Dally
Deaf KulberZ
Jm ,L bedim
Jeffre7 L. Mimkkr
T.C. Rmre
atticerE
SIn T. MIlls
General Manager
Phillip L Forbes
Dk~cumr of Finance -
Tmmsurer
Norman L. Thomas
Dim~tm' of Engineering
Thomas R. MeAlhater
& Mainteante
DEbate J. Reed
Dicecar al Admlnistraliam -
Rutan and Tucker
Eiverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor
l~verside, California 92501-3657
Subject: Water Availability
Reference: Change of Zone 5150
Vesting Tract 23267
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that the above-re£erenced
property is located within the boundaries of Rancho
California Water District. Water service, therefore,
would be available upon completion of financial
arrangements between RCWD and the property owner.
water availability would.'be contingent upon the
property owner signing an .~gency Agreement which
assigns water management rights, if any, to
Sites for additional water production facilities
be required within the proposed development depending
upon the level of increased demand created by the
proposal.
If RCWD can be of further service to you, please
contact this office.
Very truly yours,
RANCliO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Senga P. Doherty
Engineer~ng services Representative
F011/dpm113
L
RANCHO CALIFORNIA W-ATER DISTR:
28061 DIAZ ROAD - POST OFFICE BOX 174 · TEMECUI,A, CA 92390-01V4 · ff]4l 672-4101 · FAX r714l
III YERSZD[ COUKT'f PLANNING D[PARTI(NT
SUBDIVISION
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VESTING T[NTATIV[ TRACT NO. 23267
NEW)E:3) NO. !
DATE:
EXPIRES:
STANDARD CONDITIONS
proceeding agates, the County Of RIverside or tts agents, officers, or
emplo es to attack, set aside, votd, or annul an approval of the County
of ~3Teverstde, 1as advtsory agencies, appeal boards or legtslat4ve body
concerning Vesting Tentlarva Tract No. 23Z67, vhich Ictton ¶s brought
about vlthtn the time period provtded for te California Government Code
Sac,ton 6649g.37. The :County- of R~vers~de rill promptly nottf~ the
promptly nottfl the subdivider o}YanY such clatm, acttone or proceeding or'
falls to coop. rate fully In the defense, the sulxItvtder shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, 1rid,emily, or hold hamless the
Countyof layerside.
The tontatlve subdivision shall compl vtth the State of California
2. Subdivision Nap Act and to all the re {rments of Ordinance 460, Schedule
At unlexs mdtfied by the conditions fistod bolov.
3. Thts comltttonally 8 prOved ten,alive map rill expire tvo years after the
County of RIverside ~ard of Supervisors approval date, unless extended as
provtded by Ordinance 460.
4. The final mp shall be prepared by e licensed lend surveyor subject to all
the requirements eft he State of California Sulxltvtston NaP Act and
Ordinance 460.
S. The subdivider shall sutmtt one copy of · sot1· report to the RIverside
County Surve~or's Offtce and t~o copies to the Department of Butldtng and
Safety. The re rt shall address the so ls stability end geological
conditions of ~: site. I
6. If any gradtrig ts proposed, the subdivider shall SUbeta One prtnt of
comprehensive gradtog plan to the Departmet of kildtng and Safety. The
lie shall lye tab the Untforaklldtng Code, Chapter 70, Is amended
~y Ordtnancecc:PS7 and Is mybe additionally prevtded for te these
conditions of approval.
v!3fins TEmATI~ ~ no. 23~7 Aad. i!
Cadtrim ~ Approval
Page !
7. A grading permit shall be obtained from the DeNrant of hlldlng and
Safety pFtor to come·no·meet of an)' grading outside of county maintained
road H ght of m Jr.
8. Any delinquent prop·re)' taxes shall be HId prior to record·tree of the
final rap.
9. The subdivider shall con;l)' vith the street taproy·mane rec~nnendatfons
outlined In the RIverside CountJr bad Depart·rites litter dated ZO-07-88,
a cop7 of aifch Is attached.
Legal access as required b)' Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract
nip boundlr~ to I Count}, mintlined road.
A11 road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue ta force until the ,yarnleg body accepts or abandons such '
offers. A11 dedications shall be free from all encmr~rsnces as approved
the bad Comtssloner. Street names shall be subject to approval of
tb~eitoad CamJlsloner. :
Ease·eta, vhen required for road~a)' Slopes, drainage facilities
utilities, etc., shall be shone on the ftnal mp tf they are locataa
vtthtn the lind dtvtsJon boundar3r. A11 off·re of dedication and
conveyances shill be submitted and recorded as directed ~ the County
S. rve~r.
liter and seerage dispuss1 facilities shall be Installed tn accordance
vlth the levisfoes set forth In the liver·Ida County Health Departmnt's
lettar dated 9-Z2-88, · cop), of ahlch tl attached.
Z4. The subdivider shall cmply with the flood control reconnendattons
eutltned b~ the Riverside Count flood Control Dlltrlct'l letter dated
10-)1-88 I copy of vhfch tl attached. If the land division 1tol
viehie an adop~i flood control drltnage area pursuant to Section ~0.25 of
Ordinance
facilities ~s~l°h appro rtlto fee for the construction of 1111 drllnlgl
la collected by the bad Cant·It,her. (Amended at P.C. on
lS. The subdivider shell c ly with the fire Improvement rocamendattons
outlined te the County F°Fe~re Itirsbal*l letter dated 9.-~.88, I cop)' of ubtch
Is ·ttachd.
16. Subdivision phasing, Including an)' propose con·on open space area
laprove·el phulng, tf applicable shall be subject: to Planning
Deiartaet q;roval. AnF proposed pha;tng shall provide for ida ate
vehicular access to all lots te each phase, and shall substant~11jr
centore to the Intent and purpose of the subdivision approval.
Lob cream hjr this subdivision shill coepl)' with the foilrating:
VESTIN TEITATIYE llACT I). 23267 ~ed. i!
Credittern ef Apprwal
Pale 3
a. &11 lots shell have a lintmum size of 4S00 square feet net.
Graded but ufulevel ed land shall be maintained 4n e weed-free
~trector of k¶ldJng and hfetX.
Prior to ItECOROATX0N. of the ftnal mp the following conditions shall be
slit ,fled:
Prior to the retardation of the final mp the applicant shell submit
written clelrances !to the Riverside Count7 Reid and Survey Department
tint 811 pertinent requirements outlined tn the attached approval
letters free the tel'leering agencies have been met:
IlHlth De arrant
County FIre Department County Planning ~:pirtment
County flood Control Counter ._
Count~ Pain DepIrlau~nt
b. Prior to th~ recOrderton of the fin81 an, Change of Zone No. 5~5Q
,hI1 be approved b~r the Board of Supervisors end shall be effective.
Lea created b3r kilts land division shell be tn conference wtth the
developaunt standards of the zone ulttmtel~ applied to the property.
c. Prtor to recordertoe of the ftnll rapt the project stte shall be
leaaxed tnto C.S.A. 243.
d. Prior to recordertee of the final rap, the subdivider shell convey to
the hun fee staple tltle, to ell canon or careen open spice areas,
free an~y clonr of 911 1tens, taxis, assessment, leases (recorded end
the Coun_~y Icc~pttnt title to such ereass the subdivider shall su
the follknd declinenil to the Pllnntng De rimeat for raytar, wh ·
decfronts lh:T1 be subject to the approval o~lthet departant a~d ~e~'
I)lrflfi of b but,7' Counsels
l) A declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions3 and
2) A s.pp. 1 dacemerit conve trig tttlt to the' purchaser of ae
artdirt u:~ lot Or unit whllc~ provides that the declaration of
d
fiveanti, conditions end restrictions Is Incorporated theruth by
reference. .
1be.declaration of covenants, conditions end restrictions submitted
IGI]N6 TE~AIIVE 11.4CT 10. 23267 And.
Cdmmllttm ~ lipl~al
Palel
o...~.., ~ uck lndlv41v.i1
- fr.lvlllenl
shall be it the sole d
1st O. unlL and (c) cv,,tat,, LI,. r-Ilwl.u
ellel .hatsriding any provision tn thts Declaration
conIra the fOlioring provision shill apply:
The ramera' association estmbltshed hireto
dormant, be ~tvated, by lnco_rlmrltlon or otha~dtse
request of County of liverside, led the
association sl encoedltlonall~, accept frm
liverside, ul County'l domed title to Ill
the 'careen area perttcullr{y described
attached hereto. decIsle to reWIre
led the doctlton
accept title
:rafter of the Coun~
the event that the
Irll, Or
o IlSI
'certain
conveyed to tim
tberssfter shill mm sac
continuously mathlath suc|
transfer such comaon atilt or
written consent of the fie
liverside or the County'l succ
emirs* association shill
each tedtvtdual lot or
of any such
maintenance Islesmerit.
be prior to all other 11~
IllliNt or other
tf
It the
turners'
of
of
btt'A*
;n of the
re that the
*connon area'
RIverside,
thereof, tl"
the association.
shall mnage and
shall not sell or
thereof, absent the prior
of the County of
~erest. The propert
right to assess the otters ot~
the reasonable cost of
hive tim right to lien
This I)ecleratton
of ProePe~anntnl
the
Ceet. y's secces:
constricted
mintmum of
t creating
In the payment of I
lien, once created, 'shill
equent to the notice of
lion.
he terminated,
absent
of the
st, A
;tlll* tf tt LI
acremOil Irlla,
ubstenttilly' amended
'tot written consent
of RIverside or the
shall he
eatont, usage or
In the event my conflict between this bcl tton and the
ArUcles the I laws, or the obners'
luoctat' , ~r; lf~y, this tlon shall
control
Once Ippreved, the declaration of covonInts, conditions and
restrictions shall be recorded It the lm tim that the ftnal mp Is
retarded.
VESTING TEITATIVE ~ I0. Z32S7 J~l. #!
Contilt¶an· of l~pr~al
Page S
e. The developer shallii be responsible for mlntenince and upkeep of all
slopes, landscaped a as and Irrt allan s/stem vet11 such ttm as
*.hose operations ar:r~e responsJltl¶tJes of other par~Jes as approved
bjr the Planning Directar-
t. Prior to recordstie of the final rapt so Environments1 Constraints
Shee~ (ECS) shell be prepared tn conjunction vIth the ftnal map to
environmental concerns and shill be permeant1
delineate 1denttiled A copJr of the ECS shll~
The ap roved ECS shall be forvsrded vtth coptes of *-be recorded ftna~l
mp to 1~ Planntng Del~rtment. and the Department of Butldtng an
Safer/.
1co a artn tn Sectton 6.a. of Ord¶nance Ha. 62S, the
Env~ronmentll Constra~ntssa~S~Sd Se~tton 6 a as betrig located partly
tnthe mMer provided In '" r~l
h. The tailoring note shall be placed on the Environmental Con·Ira¶has
Sheet: "Coen~ Envtronnan,.al Impact Report llo. 281 yes prepared for
this proport3r and ts on file at. the Riverside CountJr Planning
Departmont."
4. The E.C.S. notes found In the letter from the Count Geologist dated
October 11, X985, e copJr of vhlch Is atticbed, shell ~ placed on the
Env~romnental Constraints Sheet.
Prtor to the.haulaGe of SP~M)ZN6 PEltHITS the following conditions shill be
Prtor te the tsseam:e of grading pamtts detetled canon open space
s. am landscaping nd Irrigation plans shall be sueedited for Planning
0...,.,.,, ..,..,,.
Tar the loll
~. PerrunLet
landscaped ·mS requiring irrigation.
.., '
tt3TING TEMTATIVE 11met I10. Z32J7 And.
Credittree d Apprwal.
3. Landscaping plans shell Incorporate the use of spactmon accent
trees at key vtsual focal points wtthJn the project.
4. Were street trees cannot be planted vtthln rt ha-of-May of
to nsuf~tclent road
triteriot streets and project parkaa~s due t
right-of-May, theJr sis11 be planted outstde of the road
S. tJndscaptng plans sis11 Incorporate nattve and drought tolerant
plants flare appropriate.
6. A11 existing spoctmen trees and significant rock outcroppings on
sub act pro ray shall be shoe on the proJect*s gradtag plans
the ahi~l note ~ose to be removed, rolecared and/or retained.
ad
n
7. A11 trees shall be mtnhm double staked. Meaker and/or slov
grmdng trees shall be steel staked. ~
Any oak trees rmoved vtth four 4) tach larger trunk dtamters
sial1 be replacnd on · ten (Z&) to one ~) bmsts is ·pproved by the
Planetrig Director. Itsplacement trees shill be noted on approved
landscaping plans.
c. Prior to the tssuance of gradtag pareIts, · btol 1ca1 resource
''
taelmentattoe of biological adttgstto~ measures is found tn County
Envtromental Lapact lieport No. 28X. Zmportant resources tnclude the
Nevtns krberry found on stte. This plan shall be sutmttted to the
PluMlag Department for revtou and approval.
d. Ouri.mJ redIn activities, a mellfted biologist shall be rot·tried bF
the diM·liar ~l~ monitor the grading activities end to lee that the
a od bloi tc·1 roseeros protection plan t8 tmplmonted. Proof of
~P~v~p s°~11 be Idmlttid to the Department of klldlng end
Safe prior to the 1sawmace of botldtog permits. The biologist shall
havettT~ fight to t or dryera gradtag procedures, If Ncess·Fy, tn
1 hal
order to imp meat the biological resource protection plan,
ArcMeo~oltst. Tht· survey shell tnclude data collection, test
bortegs sod eacavatton as deemed necessar~ the Arch·solo 1st sod is
apfreved by the PluMfag Deportment. ~ the conclusion of the
Investigation, · report prepared by the Archaeologist she, be
suimtttml te the Planntn Department and the Arclmeologtcal Research
Unit st tie getvet·tilt ef Zallforoi· of Ittverelde, for. raytaM sod a
VESTinG TDfT&TTVE 11LqCT I. 2367 lad.
deterednatton of completeness. Fellertrig approval of the report, the
Planning Departmet vt11 issue clearance for the release of grading
peaits.
f. if any ercbeeologlcal resources' are uncovered dvrtng grading
act4vtttes or trenching, 911 acttvtt¶es shall cease aSd an
archaeologist shell be consulted. MJf recomnendattons of the
archaeologl.st shall be adhered to.
g. The eld adobe structure found writhie Open Space lot 603 shall be
preserved ·
h. All existing native specimen trees on the subject prolxrtJf shall be
rved .herever feastbll. adhere etahaY cannot be preserved theJr
Planning Director. Iteplacment are
landscaping plans.
I. 6radin lane shall conform to Board adopted Hillside Development '-
fifteen perc~t grade.
All cut slopes located adjacent to ungreded nature1 terrain and
exceeding ten (~.0) feet tn vertical height shall be contour-graded
incorporating the felledrig grading techniques:
The an le of the reded slope shell be gredua11Jf adjusted to the
Z) angle ~ the nmturJ terrain,
2) Mgular forms shall be discouraged. The graded fern shell reflect
the natare1 receded terrain.
3) 11m toes and taws of dopes abel1 be rounded vtth curve vith
r all¶ destgned ¶e ~rt¶en to the toad bel ht of the slopes
4) hre cat or ftll ale s exceed 300 feet tn horizontal length, the
horizontal centearn ~Tethe slope shall be curved In a continuous,
endelating fashion-
k. Prtor to the tssuance of gradtrig peatie, the developer shall prevtde
evtdence to the DIrector of Bolldteg and hietat that all adjacent
the Director of klldlng and Safety.
1T3TTE TENTAtiVE 11LMT IO. 23267 bd. I!
Conditions of Appranl .
I. Prior to the 1sagarice of gradtrig permits, · qualified paleontologist
shall be ratalead by the developer for consultation and cement on the
proposed gradtug ktth respect to potential laleontologtc·l trapacts.
Sheeld the paleontologist find the potential ts htgh for trapact to
sISattic·at resources, · Ire-grade meettrig betden thi pe eontologtst
aM the excavation Idld grad1 contractor shill be arranged. idhen
eecess·rT, the paleontolo~st or representative shall have the
authority to temporat11 divert, redtract or halt grad ng 1activity to
· 1lee recover7 of fosSIls.
Prtor to the tssuance of BUILDTN6 PEnNITS the felledrig conditions shall
be satisfied:
a. Ib lalldtng parades shall be Issued by the County of Klverstda for
· at resident1·1 lq)t/untt viehie the project bound·r/unit1 the
developer's successor's-In-Interest protides evtdence of cam 11ante
vie public fact1'ty ftnanct measures. A cash sum of one-~:ndred
doll·re ($100) per 'o untt s~an~l be deposited wrlth the RIverside
t/,l~ertmnt :o~/ ktldtng and hfet/·s mitigation for pvbllc
I~1~·r7 dave1 olaent~
Ce
Prior to the substat-1 of butldtng plans to the Department of 8utldtn
and hfety ·~ ecovsttc·l study shill be perfamed bY en ·coustlca~
eegtneer to estoblts4 aro rt·to mitigation re·auras that shell he
ap 1ted to Individual ~1~ untie idthte the subdtfiston to reduce
:~le~t interior noise lev·lsn~ 45 Lde and exterior notse levels to
ES Ldn.
street 11this and other outdoor 11ghttn shall be shove on
, .:
RIverside Carnal/~tnance No. gSS and the RIverside Count~
Cmprehtnsle general Plan.
Prior te issuance of' butldlng peruIts, detailed park alto end rIpartan
area devel.el~nt lane shall be subedited to the Pl·nntng Departmet
for approval. TR:se plans vith gutdel¶nes ~ou~d tnthe
shall conform s active
· pareyed des! manual (Exhibit n). l~e parks ;h·11 tnclude
recreational ~Pe·turol such as ptcntc tables, barbecue areas, tot lo
etc. Racemeeditions found In the letter from George Belief1· of ~e
County Parks Department, · of vhlch tl attached, shall be
Included in the destgn of the
end Open Sp ca Areis.
VESnnGTSXlXn~llACTR0. Z3ZS7M./Z
Credittees ef AeFrewel ,
Page t
For the securtt), and safer), of future residents, the folioring crtme
p. revetton measures shall be considered durtng site and butldtng lajmut
~leslge.
Proper lighting In open ereas;
b. Tt slbt 1 t ty of doors and vt ndoe from the street end between
kdldtngs; ·
c. FeKtng berghas and roterills;
d. MeWate off-street perking; and
e. A clear13r understood method of street mmbertng to facilitate
mrgen~ response.
The ~.lees shell address oll areis and as~.ects of the tract requ
lambca~.lng sod Irrigation to be 1natalled lncludtn, but not
to, larkviJr planting, street trees, slola 1lethe, and Individual
front 3rlrd landscaping, end shell confern to t~ sta~3erds set forth
tn the tract's epproved I)estgn Itsnull (Exhlbtt g).
h. Reef-taunted mchantcel equipment. shell not be permitted vtthtn the
t. All front Jards shell be preytried vtth landscaping and autmittc
Irrigation.
J. A plea plan shall be Subatttod to the Planntng De artrant rsuant to
· Sectlea :~8.30 of 0rdtnance No. 348ecco anTedby e1~eppllcable
fllhe fees, u e plot plan that ts not subject to the b11fornte
EMlroemntel QuI11V Act-ts not treesedited to any govermentel
egeaq other than the RIverside CountJr Planning Delartmnt, The plot
4m shall ensure centermace of the fine1 site developmat Vith
Idledrig elmeels:
:Z. A .ftnal stte plea sheKin the lots tatldtn! fools.tints, all
setbacks, fences end/or vaFls, end ~[oor ~.lan end elevation
eatgamuts to Individual lots.
ON (l) color end infertile staple beard (rexline stze of 8 X H
IKIm b), 3/8 Inch thick) containing reclse color, texture and
intertel MtcheS or phot rephs ~htcb Klr be frm sup_pliers'
brnchures). lndJute m thec~ard the name, address afd phone
Page ZO
nmlers of beth the saele board preperor end. the pro3ect
a ltcant, era nUnbar, and the menlecturer and product numbers
~:re Pesstbllc~trude ares also acceptable).
the architectoral elevations colored to represent
Six (6) co tea of each of gless3~ photographic color prints (size 8
4. X lO Inc~s) of both color end mtertals board end colored
architectural elevations for permanent filing, hearing body
and qenC~ dtstrtbetton- MI wiling must be legible.
Said plot plan shall require the approval of the Planning Director
prior to the issuance of an~ building pemtts for Isis included
the let plan. The SUbmittal Of plot plans prtor to the tssuanca of
bu.dTng permits my be phased provided:
Z. A separate plot plan Shill be submitted to the Planntng
far each phase, vhtch shall he accompanied by appropriate filing
2. Each individual plot plan shell be approved by the Planning
Director r?or to the issuance of build¶rig persits for lots
included .~thfnplot plan.
that
k. A fe~ctng plan shall be submitted for Planning hpertmnt approval.
This plan shall be tn substantial conromance vIth the Design anus
([xhlbtt IQ end tab Into account aT recoagendattons of the requlre~
hesse st. ud~.
PrtoT te the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERHITS the fallWing conditions shall
be satisfied:
s. All landscaping led IrrtgattH shall'be 1natalled te accordance vith
b, Prior to occupancy, nulls end fence abel1 'be Installed in accordance
vl th apptoved pl
aRdtcible.
I:axdtttons ~ lllq~el
Prior to occupe_ncy, the net hborhood rk site allocleted with .that
phase of develoinent she{1 be developed tn accordance w th approved
t
Prtor to occulancy, the wll site ol~n space lots associated with that
~anu~I of dayale nt shall be Improved tn accordance vtth the Design
(Exhibit H~xnei~d Ipproved Landsclptng Plans.
611:SC;IH:
10/1~'/88
ol
liverside Ceeti, FIlching Cormlisten
4090 Lean Rret
Riverside, CA 9ZfO1
lie: Tract Nap 23267 - bend
kbedule A - Tee I
Ladles and Genthash:
IIIth resFect te the condlUons of approval for the referenced tantatlve land
division saps the Road hlartalint recommends that the landdivider prOvide t;he
felllying street tsFrovement plans aM/or road dedications in accordance vltn
Ordinance 460 and Riverside CoUnty Road herovent Standerda (OFdlnancl 461). -.
It tS understand tilt the tentative sap correct13~ shell acceptable centerline
profiles, all existing assonsets, treyelM wyS, and drainage courses vtth tiI
ai;roprlite Q'I, and that their illstee or artaCceptability al~ require the mp ~ --
te be resubaltted for further Considerstie. These Ordinances and the foliovia9 '
conditions are essential parts aM I requirement occurring In ONE Is as binding
· us though occurring in a11. 11W Ire Intended ta be ceepleaentar~ and ta
t
describe the coallions for e cleFlate design of the improvement. All quest; as
regarding the tree seeing of the conditions shall be referred t~ the Road
Coal s s IOMr ' S Offl Cl.
The leadivider shall proact deestress properties from danages
caused b), alterellen of the drainage patternis I.e,s cooclaire-
tim d diversion of time, hat!on shall be tided
constrsctJq edequata drainage facilities inclndTfn~eg enlarging
exlltl facilities Or I~ lacerio I drainage easement or
bib, a~ll drainage ellensots shell be shorn ee the find mp
and naiad Is fellwas "Drainage b esent - ns lietidings
2. The laeddhider shall acce t and preparl~ distal of all offsite
drainage fiering onto or ~reegh the lit;I, Lq the event the
bid Cosedssionsr ;smite the vie of streets far drainage
pu as, the rovfsloM of lrtlcle ! If Ordinance No, 460
wtlr~applJ~. Sr~uld the quantities e~nad the street
capacft7 or the ,el of Itreets be prohibited for drainage
Furposes. the subdivider shill provide adequate drainage
facilities as Ipproved bJf the Road Department.
Wed fZ
3. IbJer dralnage is involved on this landdivision end its resolution
shall be as approved by tJa Road Department.
4. cA" Stret shall be laproved viihie the dedicated right of W In
accordlea utah Ceun~ Standard Ro. ).OX, (76*1Z00).
· · Jim Aveflue) shell be Japro, d v~hln the dedicated
Section A. ~40'160'),
The Tenddivider shall camp17 vlth the Celtruns recoenendatlons as
8. eatlined in their later daked 14etCh 30o X988 (a coPF of vhich Is
attached), prior to the recordalton of ~he fins1 onP.
h landdJv'Jder shell~ provide utllIQ' clearance froe Roncho Csl lf-
9. orals list~r District prior to the rotordillon of the final rap.
A cW7 of the final mp shall be sulaltted to C~ltrens, DIstrict 08,
tO. FaSt Office Dex Z3i, be Dernardlnoo California 9Z403;
ProJect Develolmnt for raylee end approval prior to recorditloe-
~l- ~e nextmum ceeterline gradient shall eat exceed ~SS,
Z2.' The sinbee cantorlisa radii shs~l be 300' or as approved W the
Rod Department- '---
vith cencro~e curb and gutter
Tract IMp Z3ZS7 ' Mend
I)ctober 7, ]HI
paving| reconstructions or resurfacJn! of existtag paving as
dateraJned b7 Caltrenl within e 71 foot half ~ldth dedJcatad right
of elf to accordance vJth State Standard No, A2-8,
All driveways she11 conrim to the applicable IlversJde Count7
Stlwdards and shall be shown. on the street ! overeat plies. A
lialmm of four felt of full height curt shll~be constr-~cted
between driveeaTs.
Vhon blockwalls ire required to be constructed on top of ale e, e
debris retention walt shall he constructed it the street right of
weF 1the to prevent silting of sidewalks as approved b7 the bid
Cassiasloner,
~6. The Itnlmm garage setback shall be 30 feat mainred from the face
of curt. ·
~7o eta Street shall be improved with 34 felt of asphalt concrete
plyanent within e 4B foOt part width dedicated r! ht of vat in
accordance u~th Count7 Standard No. ~030 Secttel
Xa. Concrete sidewalks shill be constructed throughout the landdivision
Jn accordapse with Couet~ Standard No. 400 and 40~ (curb sidewalk).
0°
An access rod (located north of Tamecult Creek aloeg the extension
of 01" Struete James Avenue to the tilt) to thl Marest plVed FOld
maintained by the Count~ shall he constructed within the pub1 c
Comlssioner. This is noceisarJf for circulation purposes.
Prlmr7 and locirider7 access roads (it the locations of LoBe Llnda
Strut and the exileslot of Plrk Avenue, aS" Street) to the nearest
Iss e~ (~)&'/8 ' . fie I~ as approved b7 the
Road Comdlllone~"llso niceslur7 for circelitton purposes.
True:- I~p 23267 - Mnd fl
b~r 7, 1988
Prier to the record·alan of ths final rap, the developer sbe11
2Z. d stt utah the RIverside County Road Departmeat I cat sue o
h s to de h f
the developer coo e defarrTn9 sat; pa~ment to the
· witten agreement with the County
time of Issuance of · tatldlng permit,
merit lies shall be laid upon I cantorline profile extending
m|nte~anca by County.
23- Electrical and canto·Italians trenches sial1 be provided in
accerdanca vlth Ordinance 46~, Sgndard F.7.
24. kidslilt emlston (fog seal) shall be applted not lass than
fatten· dears fellaKin placement of the asphilt surfacing and shall
be ·p 1led at a rata ~ O. OS gallon per square lard, hphalt -.
ralston shall cent re to Sections 37, 39 end 94 of the State
Standard SpeclfJca'~ons,
2S. Standard eel-de-sacS and Imvckles and off-sat cul-da-sacs shall be
cemtructed throughout the 1Bridal|vision-
26. Corner cutlacks tn ~oeformnca vith County Standard Re. 80S sial1
in sham ee the It·el mp end offered for dedication.
27. Lot access shall be restricted on State Highray 7~, ,am Street end
I° SIreS (~aaes Avenue) and so noah no the fine1 rap,
baddivisions creating cut or f111 slopes adjacent te the streets
shall provide erosion canttel, sight.distance control end slope
taints as ipproved bl the bad Depermnt.
All cent·rile· intersections shall be st 90° with · minimum SO*
t, mgeut masurld frmi flml line.
ric~, lla~
cUdmr. ,
age S
Strut lighting shall be required In accordance with Ordinance 460
end 4Sl tlrwghout the subdivision. The County Service Area (CSA)
f
Ads nlstrator it,miNe whether this propose1 qualifies under an
existing assessment district or not. If not, the lend meet shill
file on application with LAFCO for annexation into or creation of
f
a eL tlel Assessaint District' in accordance with Gay, truants1
CaMe ~lee SSOO0.
A ltrlplnl plea Is _r~qutred for State . 71, sac Street, and
Street (~laes Avenue). The remove1 ofH~ exlstf striping shall
be the re nslblll~ of the applicant. Traffic ~gntng and
striping sC~l be done b; Countdr forces with all incurred costs
berne bJr the applicant. ·
left trwi; ~ourl,
Iloml DTvlston Engineer
County of Riverside
DATr~
hptesber 12, lgll
!irrLrouseutsl Bealcb Services
IBviz~. ;Arid Soslib Services bib rnieved TrsctPLtp 2326?.
mnded b. 2 ~ted Sepcmber 6, 1988- ~r ~rent
cmnu viii rmin as s~ated h~r letter bid ~r/l 12, 1988-
| ooo
k ~. · '. '
o¸ , ·
FORM 4, Ib. 8/~i
· COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
DEPARTMENT
', -*_ o f .H'EA LT H
{
='~~s~e'~meam BZV!IISII:I: COUNTY PLA)O~ZN6 13E:PT. FI|VERSmDECOUNTy
~,~"-J~,,_ coos Lemon Street
,,,~,~, PLANNING DEPARTI~ENT
· ---~ Riverside. CA
mmml,'elmmml$,
'mum. earn
w.mmma,(.e.4. mewwe
attnt 6rag Nail
tqZf Tract Map 23267; That portion of Parcel 1, I. 3 and 4 or
Parcel Hap 38993 recorded in look 134, Pales 33 through 38
of Parcel Maps 3n Riverside County. California. ..
(iS1 LOTS)
Gentlemen:
The Department of Public Health hal revieved Tentative Hap
No. 33267 and recomaendl theft
a water system shall be shetailed according to
plane and specification ae approved by the water
camp.any and the Health Department. Permanent
prindte of the plane of the vator system shall
be submitted tn triplicate. vath a mznSmum scale
not ]eel there one inch equals 100 feet. along with
the original dravlng to the County Surveyor. The
prints ,hall they the Internal pipe diameter.
/eatSon of valves and fire hydrants; pmpe and
3oSnt ,pacifications. and the ,tze of the main
at the 3unction or the new ey, tem te the
eelsting eyetam. The plane ,hall comply tn
am] re,pacts vtth Day. S. Part S. Chapter 7 of
the California Realth and Safety Code. California
Admtni,trative Code. Title II. Chapter IS. and General
Order No. 10S of the Public Utilities Commission of the
State or california. vhen applicable.
,: -' fee7
-e Dada
-IM_Dfat~tct
Count~ Avtltion
Camel ss toner Iresson
.... --, Nator
'-""' .....-.-'--- .....~,,llal Mater
-- =! I f. Edt son
,' ~lf. ias
~ .~ll~rtit. t~n 18
...... ~
-~n High School
~ :tier of Coonarc,
pI,jM',lNIl, lO DE~,~.-~. :.,.-~HT
VISaZIG ~ 13261 - (re-Z) - I.A. 326&&
- tootaB Nmricau CoL'p. - hncho haLfie
- hucbo bitfouL8 Area -/irst
l~tso~aZ Dbtzic~ - South of lil~ay
tt ad goat of btlar~ta load - 14 be
- l~edub i- 113.7 acton ~to 516 lots
- Couurrnt boos: 5~, ~ 232,
12o -A,r, 12~16~0 so 0131
92~t~02~3
caee described above, sisal v~tb the attached ease up. A Laud
va matinS beebeen testarivet7 achedaXed ferlprtt 21, 1981. If it
~a- Io to public bearfJl, ·
· rnaoemndetLou ire requested prior to Iprli Z&, t911 in order thee v,
t- the staff report for this perticuhr case.
6# question relardtnl ebb ires, please bait hesitate to contact
.... 1363
"'.'TestSniT race 23267.sbouidberequiredtoatmexto an appropriate
--slencyehids provides park and recrestio8 services. Annexation will
.'- nitlimit lapacts of increased poJmistioe to be served and fees (park
dovelopaent)e shsZZ be used to acquire snddmZop · park site.
Valley-Vide Recreation and T"
Di. ltz J
- :, :. 9"' FLOOR 48-209 OASIS STREET. ROOM
Riverside County Planning Dept.
Page Two
Atkn z grog Noel
April 12, 1988 ·
The pleas shall be signed by a registered engineer and
rarer company v,th the folioring certification: '!
certify that the design or the valet system in Tract
Nap ;3267 is in accordance with the viter system
expansion plane of the R&ncho California eater District
and thit the water service.storage and distribution
system viii be adequate to preYsde valet service to
such tract. This certification does not constitute a
guarantee that it vail Supply water to such tract &t
BAy specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire
protection or any other purpose'. This certification
shall be signed by a responsible official of the water
Ag-~bt-£eggtaA-Le£-Abt-£tig£jl~Agu,gL,Abt, L~DiI,gss .
This Department has a statement from the Ranthe California
Water District agreeing to serve domestic valet to each and
every Jot in the subdivision on demand providing
satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the
subd~Yxder. It viII be necessary for the financial
arranOements to be made prior to the recordarSon st the
f~&l mlp.
This Department has a statement from the Eastern Municipal
Water District agreeing to alloy the subdtvilion sewage
system to be connected to the severs of the District. The
sever system shall be talk&lied according to plans and
speclfxcmtions as approved by the D~strict. the County
Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the'
plans or the sever system shell be submitted in trxplscate.
m:ong vitb the original driving. to the County Surveyor. The
prxnts shall show the internal pipe diameter, location
manholes. cmpleto profiles. pipe and 3sink speciftcatXcna
mad the else or the severs at the Junction or the new
to the extsting Byetam. A single plat indicating location
or sever lines mad valet limes shall be · portion or the
mewage plus and profiles. The plane shall be signed by ·
registered engineer and the sever district with the
SolJovial certifiesfish: "I certify th&k the design or the
sever system in Tract Hap 23Zg7 is in accordance with the
sever system eupBAston plane or the Astern Municipal eater
District sad that the vista disposal system is adequate
this time to treat the anticipated vietom from the proposed
track. ' The pl n_ls_!u_lsL~!.ls~_m_l~!g_~o__~h!__C_o_u9_~X
Riverside County Plshning Dept.
Page Three
;urytZe£:a_9gLiSf_Le_£t At _SLlt!tL_ e- ttba-n e - e- bt
tmgtiL e£_Lbt_ctse di& en-iL- bt- ui -ala'
It viii be necessary for tinancsal-krrangement's t.o be made
prior to the recordsLion of the final map.
It viii be necessary ter the annexation proceedzngs t.o be
campieteiy tanallied prior t.o record&Lion of the final map.
~nv3ror~mental He&l%h Services
SM:%ac
MId P.O. B~I tell
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
IIIWIIIIIDL CALIPVNNI&
October 18, lgee
UNONI e~141
Riverside County
Planning Deportment
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attentions Regional Team No. 1
Grog Meal
Ladies and Gentleness
Rot Vesting Tract 23267
Amended No. 2
This is · proposal to divide approximately 194 acres for single
family housing in the Tamecola are·. The site is located ·long
bo~h sides of Temecula Creek about 1200 feet west of MarVaries
Road.
This project is located on the floor of Temecula Valley and is
subject to both riveting flows from Tomsoul· Creek and.sheeting
offsite storm floes from two other sources. The main course of
Tomscala Creek flo~s through the center of the ~ract. Storm
water from a 800 acre watershed to the north traverses the north-
ern half of this project. Due to poorly defined drainage pot-
terns, it is probable that large amounts of storm water emanating
from tribu~aries north of Tomsoul· Creek and from fir to the east
may sheet west, generally porallel to Tamscala Creek, and ·cross
the site. Unless these Itorm ~owl are dealt with by upstream
development in the watershed, the developer will have to con-
struct drainage facilities to protect thl· project.
Oneits storm runoff l· proposed to be conveyed via both streets
and storm drains to Tomscala Creek Channel, Several acres of
oneits area atthe soughs·stern t:act bounda:y Is proposed to be
diverted to the neighboring developnest, The applicant (Theism
America Corp.) hag submitted documentation that the developer to
e·it (Great American Development Co.) plus to accept this run-
off. A dc~tment showing evidence or this agreement should be
submitted to the District for review prior to record·ties of the
final map.
The improvemenU to Tamscala Creek ate propseed as · pert of
Assessment D/strict 159. The Distriet*e interest in the con-
rigaration oft be main channel is 14mired to its adequacy as ·
flood protectice facility, It should be noted that the present
design does not allow for habitat mitigation within the channel,
nor does it specifically provide for Joint use of the facility
(e,g,, sqgeetrtss or bicycle trails), A change in channel con-
figureties or right of way width my require redssign of this
proposal,
Riverside County
Planning Department
Rat Vesting Tract 23267
bonded No, 2
October ~8, 1988
The developer*s Exhibit isB® proposes to collect storm flows from
t~e 800 acre cuyon st De Portals Road tad convey them so
Tomecult Creek in a trapezoidel channel., Two collec~ion dikes
ere proposed on the casts side elMerSerifs Road to capture storm
flows traveling psrallel~ to Tamscala Creek. ~hese flows would
cosbins with the northern streim ~uet north of Highway 79.
rollowing ere ths District'e rsc~anendationst
1. Temecula Creek Channel should be constructed through~
this tract sa shown on the tentative map,
Both Teme~ula Cr,sk Channel and the drainage facilities
proposed to conv~y storm flows from the north end east
should be built to District standards. S~ao of these
facilities ere proposed to be constructed by Assessment
District 159, If these have not been installed by the
ties grading permits are requested, it will be necessary
for this tract to construct drainage structures necessary'-
to protect it from tributary 100-year storm flo~s,
Evidence of · viable maintenance macbanJos should be sub-
soLtied to the District and County for review sad approval
prior to recorda~ion of the final map,
3, Apartion of the proposed pro~ect is in s flood plain and
may affect "waters of the United Statesee "vetLands" or
"~uriadictional !streambeds", therefore, in accordance
with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance
PrograB and Related Regulations (44 CFR, Parts 59 through
73) and County Ordinance He, 4581
a. & flood s~udy consisting of HEC-2 calculations, cross
sectinns, maps and other data should be prepared to
the eatisfa~tion of the Feder&l Emergency Management
and the District for the purpose of
the pro~ect ,site* The submittal of the study shoal
be concerto 't with the initial submittal of the
related pro~ect improvement plans sad final Distric~
approval will not be given until a Conditional Letter
of nap Revision (CI~MA) hie been received from FEMA,
b, A ~ of appropriate correspondence and necessarY
Swrmits from those government agencies from which
approvtt ie required by Federal or State law (such as
District prior to the final District approval of ths
R~verSide County
Planning DeperUent
Rat Vesting Tract ]3267
Amended No. ]
October 18~ 1988
Be
Oneits drainage facilitie· located outside of reed righ~
of way should be contained within drainage Basements
OhM O~th· final map. A note should be added to the
final map stating, "Drainage easements shall be kept free
of buildings and obstructions",
Offsite drainage facilities should be lo~st·d within
publicly dedicated drainage easements obtained from the
affected property owners. The documents should be
recorded and a ~oP7 submitted to the District prior to
recorderion of the ~insl map.
The 10 year storm flow should be contained within the
curb and the 100 year storm flow should be contained
within the street right of way. When either of these
criteria is exceeded. additional drainage facilities
should be lusUllod.
Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be
designed t O convey the tributary 100 year storm flus.
Additional emergent7 escape should also be provided.
The property*s street and lot grading should be designed
in · mnnar that perpetuates the existing natural
drainage patterns with respect to tributary drainage
area. outlet points and outlet ~onditions, otherwise° a
drainage easement should be obtained from the affected
property Mere for the role. Be of ~oncontrated or
diverted storm flOwBe A Oopy Of the recorded dr·in·Be
easement should be submitted to the Dietriot for review.
prior to the re~ordation of the final map.
Develops"at of this property should be ~oordinated with
the development of adjacent properties to ensure that
wrote,urges remin unobstructed Red stormwaters are not
diver~ed from ~me watershed to Re,that. This my require
the ~oustru~tion of temporary drainage facilities or
offsite ~onst~u~tion end grading.
A ~oPr of the inUrevassar plus, grading pleas and final
map &tong with supporting hydrologi~ Red hydraull~
colonist, ions should be submitted to the District via the
ltoed Departs"at for review and approval prior to
record,lion of the final map. Grading plans should be
approved prior to issuance of grading permits.
Riverside County
net vesting ~rset 23267
Amended So* 2
October 18, 1988
Questions ~oncerning this matter may be
title off~ce st 714/787-2333,
ccs RA)WAC
referred to Bob Cullen of
Very truly yours,
eHIJH, .2kSHUBA
nior Civil Engineer
BCsbab
P. AT H!31tARD
' rWZQgD'
Iqmdqiea~ k4Olm
4010LeanSsaLads IlL
IUemk CA ~2501
C/14) 11144~6
pLLIDIG DEPAtTHDCt
1'ncr 23267
tilth respect te the tend/rinse of approval for the above referenced land d/vision,
the F/re Department recommends the feZlevieS fire protection measures be provided
La accordace with RIverside Count7 Ordinances and/or receSs/sod f/re protection
sUndaEdot
TIRE pgOTECZZQII -
Schedule san fire protection approved standard fire hydra·is, (6el&extJ") located
one at each street Lutereact/o· and spaced no mare than 330 feet apart in any
d/recline, with us portion of any lot frontage sore than 165 feet from a hydrant.
Hintmum fire floe shall be 1000 Glq( for I hours duration at JO PIZ,
Applicaut~dewloper shall furnish one copy of the eater system plume to the Fire
Department fe review. llano shall confers to fire hydrant types, location and
opectug, ands the system skull mast the fire floe requirements. Plans shell he
s/lsed/appreved by · registered civil engineer and the local valet coupany with
the felineinS certifications el certify that the design of the valor eyetea Is
Su accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire
Department,$
11o required valet system, imeludiul fire hydrants, ohttX be installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any cembusttble building material betaS
tinted on am fdSvidutt lot.
Prior to the fmaordatiou of the final map, the applicant/developer shall provide
alienate or Mcoedaz7 access as atproved by the County Road Department.
NITIGATIOe
Prior to the recordallen of the flail map, the developer shall deposit with the
Po~uent, belie may enter into a written miresmast with the County deferring amid
paysent to tla time of be__co of a buildtun peruit.
lale i
questLoss relsrdiul the ueeu~nl of.condft/one ehiZi be referred to the
piesinS and Enl~neerinl gruff,
li_v!lOIID l, RZ, GXS
Chief rLre Depertseut piBnner
boric I, Tstus, FXsuu/nl Officer
:tiVE:DiDE coun
-.-PLAnninG DEP :t InEnt
October 3:, 1988
Htghlend ~otls [ngtneerln '
1832 S. Comercenter Ctrcfe, Sufte A
Sin lermrdtao, CA 92408
Ateduties: lit. leobert C. Ibnntng
Nr. ~rren L. Shefling ·
· Rr. ifilltaa T. Altm7er
SUBJECT: AIqutst-Prtolo/Ltquef
Job Re.: 07-SSSS-OIO-O0-O0
APN:g26-OI6-OO2,O03,010oOII ,012,0:13
Rlncho California Area
Gentlere:
Ve ave rafteyed ~our report entitled *Fault Hazard and Preliminary
GeotecMtcal ]nvesttgattoet ;242s Acres, Southese of the |ritereaction of
Kargarita Road led State Htghwa)' 79, Ranthe Callforeta, RIverside CountT, CAde
""""" '0 ""'"""'0'°"" """"
Your report detandned that:
Exploretort fault trenches 1,3 end 4 exposed fault offsets associated
with the ecttve II¶ldoeer fault. The lotoften of thts fault ts shmm on
Plate IA, batechutes1 Map of 7our report.
TM setsate data for the Elslnore (Wlldomr fault) Fault Zone located
'de stta Is as fallgas:
IllStEa Probable Earthquake °7.0
Peek keead kceleretton - O.13g
brattin of Strong Matron - 30 seconds
3. 11e settlemet atenets1 under setssic loadted for the on-site and
kdrock roteflails ts roderate to vtr7 love respective1)'.
4. TM latheta1 for ltquefectloe tt considered htgh tn the larger
drainage courses within hubs and ltolf Valleys on the site.
LI electlee at), occur tn the fern of differential settlerant, sand
"~s, ud lateral spreading.
4UlO LEMON BillET. F" FLOOR
IIVER~D!. CALJFOIUIA 92501
C/lq 7874181
4&lOI OASIS 8TTdEET. ROOM
INDIO. CALIFORNIA 12?c
t
(819) 342-e~
' Highland Sotls [nilearia
October 1:, 1988
S. A miner landslide erel say be located it the central pertion of the
A Ibp.
site, shsm on Plate ) , kotachntcel
d. TIm alluvial sells ge eraSly ere considered to have e 1or expansion
· potential. The stlta'~nes :dthtn the huh forsstton on stta can be
sodsrata1; to kfghl~ ~xpsnstve,
7. The fine Ireland ellarts1 soils tn the sa3or drainage courses are
general17 cospresstbll In the upper five feet.
l. The arrest urea desl hated as the 100-Tear floodplain for ~esecUla
Creek exceeds the seiSmic-Induced flood Inundation Ires .that would
result during Instantaneous fatlure of Skinner or Vat1 Itsservotra.
0nl~ the lowst area Of Piebe Valley would be effectual.
Ground fissure development ts considered a significant hazard within
the southsleet poleton of the site, due to the presence of acttve
faulting Io this area.
Your report recomendad that:
i. A SO feet setlack zone free beth stdes of the tfildoesr Fault Zone ts
requtred for huron ocCupanCy structures. This letback ts designated on'-
· Plate IA, Gm)tlfJifocal Piap.
2. The fellsslag s~11 sitigito the liquefaction petentis1 on this site:
e. A csspscted ftll mt along vtth e gravel blanket end additions1
feeling rutafore nt should be used for structures.
b. Structure1 eetbe k~s free tops of f111 slopes teetng lath
ed
1tessfiction prone ereel should be us
:'
ef )SsTnet :~ cospacted fill over the 8-~0 feet of rucoenended
illsvial remvels, In order to neerlJ~ eliliners the potential o
llqeehct¶es induced less of beirt or send bells,
la erder te redeft e el! t pesslb~isheu~ letera1 spreadin elon
",..,. ,o.
sad 1~4; ettMr the d
Iratiding letbeck be Increased to laden
tie .lien bet®t Dr pest-tenstoned I be and additional foundation
reinforcerant for Iota
f The gee40_chnlcal en tneer should royten the plans
to dramlop IV fu~er destgn Informtton. preJoct grading
e
Alledal sells sbeuld be overexcavate tn the la r exfstt dratnige
and r, arWoa areas to I SinINs depth of S font. ~re feastb~e total
remvd ef loose alleytel setls to bedreck t8 recomsnded. As an
sitenative, sattlanmnt mnumntl and monitoring my be used In the
area SitS tStck alluvlue.
· HIghland Sells [fingearing
October 12, 2988
4. kldltlonal Investigation of the passthin landslide located et the
central portion of the site ts racemended prior to site grading.
5. The SO font human occupancy setback to the northeast and the property
bounds to the sonthese of the located active fault t11 mitigate the
w
portenttel hazard of ground fissure developaunt on the stte.
It ls ear Winfoe that the report vas prepared tne competent manner consistent
vlth the present estate-of. the.art, end SatiSfieS the requirements of the
AI ~st-Prlolo Special Studies Zones Act the associated liverside County
O~lq~inlance lie. S47, and addttlonll infection required under the California
Environmental Quality Act raytar. Find appruval of this report is hereby
liven.
Me raceamend that the folioring conditions be satisfied before record, elan of
the ftnal pared map or County poreits associated vlth thtl project:
The *Fault Hazard Zone* shmm on Plate ]A, (Seatechnical flap) tn your
report shall be delineated on the Environmental Constraints Sheet
([.C.S.), end the' area tn betreef the setback 1tees shell be lab*Ted
*Fault Hazard Are,.*
note sial1 be placed o~ the E.C.S. stating:
· This proper~y ts affected by earth eke faulting. Structures for
hhumae occupancy sin11 not be illoverate the Fault Hazlrd Area. This
constraint affects parcels 4nO through S04, H2 end
Notes arm11 be placed on the final land division nap stating:
fillareS, landsliding, seismic induced flooding, and vetoelected
trench beckft 11. *
(b) 'This property Is affected by earthquake fanlate . Structures
for lees eccupenCy shall not be alleyed In the ~lult Hazard
Aria, 11m constretfit affects parcels 490 through i04s 60~ and
_el, U sleet on tie ar, c_8!la tee Envfrenm'ntel Constraints
IlkBet, the origins1 of uhlcbe('l on fill It the office of the
Ilssrolde Countdr Surveyor.
A copy of the final imp and Envfrumentel Constraints Sheet shall be
submitted to the Planning Department Engineering kalegist for revtev
and approve1,
Highlind. Soils EnlngeertmJ - 4 - October
S. The explor~tor7 trenches wre backfilled, but not completed, end shell
be completed under the direction of the project geotechntcel engtneer
If e~ Structures ore contempli~d for construction over any pore, tons
ff these trenches.
SAK:al
c.c. Ranpie - Dave 011100
Vor3r trvljr yours,
lIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANRZN6 DEPARTHENT
Roger S. S~treeter - PIntng Dt ector
' tit
C 120S
CIMG - Earl Dart
eutldtng & Safety - Norm Lostboa
Grog Noel - Tim :1
REC I' EDNOV
8 1989
Noventer 2,198!
ego Sotls, Znc,
5751 Palmar tay, Su/te D
Carlabed, California 92008
Attention: Fir. Robert e. Crlsmn
fir. Paul L. I~Cley
fir. TImothy E. Netcalla
Gen 11 men:
SUBJECT:
Alqutst-Prtolo Spectal Studtes Zone
V. O. gg4-SD
Tentithe Tract 23267
APN: 926'016'002,003,0Z0,0XZ,012,013
County Geologic lieport lio. 488 (update)
Rancho California Ares
Your report detemtned that:
Z. The Wtldomr fault, as Previously Identified by HIghland Soils
Engineering, ts not present on the project site.
2. The fault contacts Indicated by Htghland Sotll Enginegrin ire actually
erostonaT/stratlgrephtc contacts produced by deposition o~ recent
3. There Is a lack of gemorphic expression characteristics of faulting on
the stte.
Based on aertal photographs, the active trice of the Wlldomr fault,
northwest of Pauba Valley, appears to bend asslard tn Pauba Valley and
die out east of the project stte.
Your report recoenended that there ts no need te place any fault related
setback or restriction tn the study area.
4080 LEMON STREET. 9'" FLOOR
46'209 OASIS STREET, ROOu '~f:,..s
Geo Soils, Inc.
November 2, 1989
Zt Js Our optnton that the report was prepared tn a competent manner consistent
wtth the present "state-of, the-art' and satisfies the requirements of the
Alqutst-Prtolo Spectal Studtes Zones Act and the associated RIverside County
Ordinance No. 547. Ftnal approval of this report ts hereby gtven.
~ recommend that the following condition be satisfied before Issuance of any
County pemtts associated wtth thts project:
Uncompacted exploretory trench backftll shall be addressed by the ProJect
GeotechnIcal Engtneer prtor to issuance of project grading permtts.
it should be noted that County Geologtc Report No. 488 anttried "Fault Hazard
and Preliminary Geotechntcal Znvesttgatton, 24h acres, Southwest of the
fntersectton of Nor artta Road and State Ht way 79, Rancho California,
Rfverstde County, ~." dated Februl~ 3, tga:; was previously prepared for thts
property. Your report now supercedes only the fault setback aspects of that
report.
Very truly yours,
ng Dtrec. Xor
,
/-"'~ /
,i'~ *'. ·
Engineering bologtst 7 / ~"
CEG-Z20S
SAK:rd
c.c. Crosby, Plead, Benton & Assoc. - Engineer
CDRE.- Earl Hart
Butldtng& $1foty - Norm LostbeE (2)
PlanRtng Team 1, Kt8 Johnson
·
INTIPI'DIIEAIITMINI'AI, LIl'rgPl
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
I',1
OctoNr 7,
FII: It inner
SLIklECT: TT Z3267,Z3ZII 01d VIII Ranch, EZR 281
lle County Parks Department has reviewed the above referenced document and
offers the following reconmendattons.
Parks and Recreation
uur departneat supports the extension of a ragtonal open space/natural green
belt along the Teencull Creek. This Is consistent with other spectftc plans
and development along thll creek. Our department wtli reWIre an offer of
dedication of this ares be made to the Parks Department on the ftnai tract
maps. (leglena1 Park mABo)
Ragtonal Park '1' fs actualIjr a local park and fs located fn a strategic
position to sere as I comaunity park. It does not qualify Is I regional pa_rk~
am due to Its limited IfZeJ however, the historic adobe contained withIs
this area can be successfulljr preserved wttha cornunity park setting and
interpreted.
OverniT, the parks contained within-this developaent show a lack of
sports ftelds capable of accmmodattng organized sports activities and l~hr~:
may need to be examined.
Cemuntty and neighborhood perks should be developed to the satisfaction of
tin )ocal count Jr service area (CSA).
kreattoa Trails
leltonel hit 'A' ate the Teeneels Creek corractljr 1dentif ted the Ned for 0
4tory equestrian tr~1 as shoe. The trail localtoe and develolmnt sbeuld
As Indicated, on the attache exhtbft No. 1., I Class I btc~cl0 lane needs to
be provided for along the Treecuts Creek. This should be developed to county
standards and have connecting access to 1ocII street Class IX bicycle lanes.
fir. Grog NHI, Planning Depirtment
Page
On the attache exhibit So. 1, 'provision for access to the Tentale Creek by a
secondary riding-and hiking trail muIt be Incorporated Into the project. This
vtll utilize the proposed reinforced concrete box culvert under State
Highvary 79 and provide access to the trails in the creek for residents to the
nort~ of this project. This access/secondary era11 should be developed to a
Etatam vtdth 12 feet and to countJr standards.
Coordination of the roposed undercrossing Improvement is requested by our
departBent, t.l., rrp rap, lacemeat and accesl, Ind lfntmm overhead
clearance. (See attached detatr.)
blturol/lffstaric Resources
'me proposed stta of the Old Vail Ranch project is tn an extremelJr sensitive
area for cultural resources. In the thorough cultural resources assessment he
prepared, archaeologist Christopher Drover discusses the htstortc tvo-storJr
adobe hit Ranch House and a 1RITe Let·eRa |ndlan archaeological site.'
The Parks Department ' s Hfstor~ Dtvfston camends Ranpac Engineer1 ng
CorporatieR for Its sensitive consideration of these collar I resources tn the
[ZR. He concur vtth the roposed litigation measures of recovering arttracts
frm the archaeological arden and making these available to the publtc fn an
Interpretlye center, and preserving the Vail Ranch House through
rehabilitation and adaptive reuse. A librerJr, comunftJr center, smelt museum
or mtaurant voeld all Im app rfate uses for the house, as Mould'be
continued residential use tf proplrrrrr~ melntatMd.
In adriftton to the mitigation measures mentioned tn the EIa, the Parks
Department requests full-time monitoring bJr I qualified archaeologist durtn
1
the grading process. lhrtl IS assent al due to the extrem likelihood o~
unknmm archaeological resources existing on the site.
If an/historic resources surface, DIana raider, HIstory Division DIrector,
should be notified It (714)717-Z551. Should Jme have question· regarding
parks, recreation, or trail matterS, please contact me or Hare Brewer of this
dlplrtmtltt.
68/10186
c: hal bea~, DIrector, Parks Department
Sam Ford, Deputy DIrec , Parks Department
Dlaa klder, Niltory ~slen DIrector, Parkl Department
Ibrc Iremr, Alllltant~ Planner, Parks Department
AnRiVER)iDE COUnC
'PLninG DEPARClTIEn
Jaillear
hL~diul and Safety
ServeTar = Da~e Dude
Road Departmet
lealib - gal~h lAehe
F/re ~roteettu
Y~od ~utrol DietfLat
U,I, Fo8td Se~ge
Rancho hllf, Mater
Eastern nunlc$1~l Mater
Southern Cel$f, Edison
Southern ColIf. Su
General TilepJoQe
Dept. of Treespartition 18
Temecula Eles~
Els~nore Union Hip School
Teescull Chamber of Cooneros
Mr. PalMmr
S¶erra Club
VillaTrade Parks
County Avtatton
Camtee Janet Iresson
RIVE.qSID'-- C.'*'. '.;~'Y
pI.~NNING DE~'~.**r':':DNT
VeTtaG TRACT 2326?- (in-l)- t.A.
- Feetee Aretitan Corp, - tenths lac4ftc
- l--eh.o bltfouta Area -/fret
I~niso~aZ District - loath of
?l ~ hot of ~rpr/ta load -
- leehXe i- 103,7 acres Lute--St6
- (annTrout hoes ~ 51~, ~ 23299
~ 120 -A,F, 92~16~10 to
t2HI~02~03
County Parks
tleaee revise the case described above, aZonSvith the attached case map. A t4nd
DtvieZon Cmmtttee matins has bean tentatively scheduled for April 28, 1988, If it
clears, it vt]~ than Be to pubXlc keartna, ·
Tour cements and recoemndattm are requested prior to April 14, 1911 is order that
my include than in the staff report for this perticuXsr nee,
houZd you have any questtom feintdial this llano please do sot hesitate to cutact
Grit fieIX It 787-1363
Planer
VestlaST reel 23267.ebouXd be re~lrd to mmu to an appropriate
alen~ubichprovidas park sad recreation ssryices, Annmilan ViII
~tilate ~aets of ~easd p;lstim tab send areas (park
dffelo~nt). shsZZ be usd to acebe ~ dmle a park sits,
DATEs &/&lee
tl21Sg print sam
TelToy-Vide hereallan an~. r
4080 LEMON STREET, F" FLOOR 48.209 OASIS STREET. ROOM 304
· 9 RlVf:a~u= UUUNTy
fANNING DEPARTMENT
October 13t 1118
Nr. Richard IMcl4ot,t, lupervtetng Planner
Rivefettle Count,y Plenntng I)eDerTaent,
4080 Lemon I~reet,, ItJ1 Floor
Iltveretde, CA liB01
SUBJECT: Vest. trig Tent,at. lye Trect Hap Number 23257
Dear Hr. NlcHot,l~:
TIm following 8memrtze8 our ftndtngs regerdtng the ftscel
impact, 8nelyet8 for l~e project 1denelf ted shove. The
8ppendtx 8t,t4ched 8ummrtzes the baste assumptions used tn
Um analysts. Irissee not4 ~hat l~ese results reflect t,he
current levels of. 8errtee provtded by l~e County based on
FIscal Year I$11 - 1917 ect,uet cost.8 (per ceptt4 rectors)
and Oepertamnl~l and Audtt4r-Controller revte, of operat,tons
end feGtll~y COWLS for 8errtee8 revteved u81ng case stady
inely81e. Itaff to the Orow~h Ftecel Xaeecl; Task Fore end
Departaenta 8re currently revteNtng 8errtee levels proytdld
'end the need to theresee the level8 of 8ervtce. Current,'
ftndtnge ere that extet,tng levels of servtce ere not,
8dequeto tn most Geese. Should the deitred level of servtce
be u~tllzed tn ~he ft8c81 en81yete performed, tt Nould
8tentftcen~ly 1norease the cost4 UeoCtetod Ntth ~ht8
develoixaent,.
~F'tm
(l:ll~erat, lorm ~
Ilalntor~)
FIICAL ZHPACl'
AFTER IUZLDOUT
CUI4ULATXVE FZICAL
ZNPACT AT IIJZLDOUT
county general
FIr~
Free Ltbrery
IUITOTAL COlaflY
(1e1,811)
(llO,leO)
(laBS)
(I10,~00)
(lll,4Ze)
(1B0,720)
(13t,104)
Road Fund 1t,230 llf,4gO
(171,710)
The following epect81 ctrcumtancee ·DDlY Zo Zhte DroJeet:
1. The develoDer 8seuma~tone ~n¢luded · fe¢~or of 2.1
pareone bar dwelltag untZ. CAD e~·ff u~tltzed · fe¢~or of
Z.gg Dareone Ixr houeehold, ~htch te ¢loeer to the
countywide ·vetage for thte ~ylx of untt.
Z. CAO cuff he8 revtewed 11brEry coet8 wtth Ltbrery
Dereonnel .and tncorDoreted act~u81 olafaStoria and maintenance
c08t~ into the ansiyale. Uetng Library etaff eettsmte8 of
the coat8 of Drovtdtng t~he current level of 8errice,
considering t~he tncrsaee tn DoDulat~ton, t~hte project 8hould
reeult~ tn one-Stag caDtie1 f·¢t 1 try ¢oet~ of 171,263
(library 8pace, volusee) and ongotng annual olxrattone and
Bstnl~nencS costs of 114,SI4. LtbrarY 8taff h88 tndtG8%ed
t~at ~.he current level of service ta not' adequate.
3. Flood Control etaff he8 IndIcated ~hat flood control
facilities ¢onetructsd within Zone 7 ·re unllkely ~0 be
cuff t c 1 ant1 y funded for sat atonenee coete · Current
ee~.teetee tndtcets that funding short~age8 should occur for
the next l~n years. Suggested iltt, tgatton seaeuree tnclude a
cssh daDoatS by the DroJoct developer or use of sn
asses smear sechM t ss. The amount, of alepoe t t~ ~ou I d be
determined by · present value analyst8 and project' ttBtng.
The ms, of maintaining flood control f·ctlltte8
not, be knmm unit1 ftnal design Dhaeea, when factllty
haYe been fully 1denttried. Flood Cant,to1 eteff
~herefore, coalition project' 8pprov·18 ~o 1dent,try ·
of · tnenGtng f8~t 1 tt,y saintchance and 'oDerattan
necessary) prior to retardation of aubdtvtetona.
neede
wt11,
IIIIInl
Based on tJm analysts and sssumtne ~hSt, ~he average sales
prtce of the unite wtll be $142,68l, over811 Vesting
Tenter. lye Tract, 23287 wtll have · negative ftacsl impact, 8t
~t1~~ $24,~. After ~tld~, ~hts ~roJe¢~ ~tll have
~~ ~ga~tve ftscel tmsc~ ~ ~ ~n~y of $73,t70 st
~rsnZ level8 of N,t~.
lnttlal Revte. By:
Review ADlaroved By: _.ar/~ //~'
· ®eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ? I ~: l' i ~IIZ~Z~
o
h " · - .
ATTACHMENT Ill
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT NO. 281
The Riverside County Board of Supervisors certified Environmental Impact Report
!299 h er
· -. ,-
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 will
involve minimal grading and therefore, is unlikely that any additional amount of
earth movement will result in any increased significant impacts.
renewable fossil resources to levels of insignificance.
Pursuant to Section 1516~ of the California Environmental Quality Act, this addendum
has been prepared to demonstrate that the changes resulting from the proposed
Change of Zone and New Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Revised Tentative Tract
Map will not result in new or substantially increased significant impacts, that there
have been no changes in the circumstances surrounding the project that would
require important revisions to the EIR due to new significant impacts, and that no
new information has arisen which would indicate that the project will have significant
effects not previously discussed or underestimated, or that alternatives or mitigation
measures not previously considered would substantially reduce any significant
impacts. By reducing the number of residential units, the new project will reduce
the level of impacts on the environment and on public facilities and services.
A: \VTM23267 '
CITY OF TEMECULA
\
·
/
//
,*IT ~ .
I
VICINITY MAP
CITY OF TEMECULA J
ZONE MAP
L. CITY OF TEMECULA
I)
THE MEADOWS
·
.//
VA
HAW),
t17'
SWAP MAP
_ P,O, DATI .,q,_/~..--~,' I
.,/
"'IM!-<
>r'-"
(J
I
!
<1:
I-
Z
I.--
ATTACHMENT 6
TCSD AGREEMENT
City of Temecula
43174 Bus~ss Park Dnve · Ternecula, California 92590
Ronald J. Parks
Mayor
Patrlcla H. lardsaft
Mayor Pro Tern
Karel R Uncleman/
Councilmeml~er
Peg Moore
Councllmeml:e'
J. Sal Mu6oz
CouncjlmemOer
David R DIxon
City Manager
(714) 694-1989
FAX (714) 694-1999
Septembe/30, 1991
Ray Casey
Presley of San Diego
15090 Avenue of Science, Suite 201
San Diego, CA 92128
RE:
TRACT MAP NO. 23267 AND 26861 CLEARANCE AS TO PARK
LAND DEDICATION AND/OR IN LIEU FEES·
Dear Mr. Casey:
TCSD Staff has reviewed the conditions as set forth in the County of
Riverside/City of Temecula Conditions of Approval and recommend that
the City Council APPROVE Tract No, 23267 and 26861 subject to the
developer or his assignee entering into an agreement with the Temecu'~
Community Services District to conform to the following:
Neighborhood Park "A" which consists of a One acre park located
within Sub Tract No, 23267-4 shall be'developed to TCSD
standards and the attached conceptual design prior to the
issuance of the 50th building permit,
e
Neighborhood Park "B" located within Sub Tract No. 23267-2
consists of an approximate 2.9 acre reservoir which the developer
has agreed to drain and level to be contiguous with the remaining
6.3 acres of proposed park land to meet his current Quimby
Requirement and to allow for a total land dedication within this
tract of approximately 9.2 acres. The total 9.2 acres shall be
developed to TCSD standards and the attached conceptual design
prior to issuance of the 50th building permit for Tracts No.
23267-1,2, and 3.
To date, all known interior slope areas are hereby conditioned to
be maintained by an established Home Owners Association (HOA).
Exterior slopes bordering an arterial street may be dedicated to the
TCSD for maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards an
completion of the application process.
Should you have. further questions my telephone number is (714) 694-
6480.
Applicant or his assignee agrees to the aforementioned conditions as
signified below. _
Yours truly,
CITY F TE
· cl,. o.e
s Administrator
II
II
Z'
e-
ATTACHMENT 7
RCFC Statement dated July 22, 1991
Releasing Tract 2321~7 from A.D.P. Fees
· July 22, 1991
· Riverside County Fleas Con~ro!
and Water Conservation District
1995 Market Street
Riverside,-California. 92502
Attention: Mr., Howard Dickerson
Su]3Jec~:
Hurtlets Creek Drainage Area 7ees".
vesting Tentative Tract No. 23267
Job'.No. 225.64
Dear'Mr~ Dickerson:
The City of Temecula 'has re=/ues=ed that Crosby Mead Benton &
Associates -provide confirmation from..the Riverside ·County 'Flood'
.Control and Water Conservation Dis=rict'-that Vesting Tentative
Tract No. 23267 lies outside of the boBradary Of the-Murrieta Creek
Drainage Area and is therefore not subgect .to the fees .associated
with.that.Drainage Area. More generally, we wish to confirm that
the Tract .does not lie in any currently orgap4zed-Dra~nage Area.
Vesting Tentazive TractNo. 23267 lies adjacent to and southerly-of
S~ate Highway 79 between Pale Road and Ma;.garita. Road., in the City,
of Temecu!a,. as depicted on the attached .map. The northeasterly
corner ..of the site .lies approximately 1,950. feet from the
intersection-of Highway 79 with Margarita Road.
In'ane~fort to simpl'ifyt-he process of obtaining~his oonfirmation
we have..prepared. the following statement, which we .believe to be
correct- Please re-4ew the following statement and, if the
statement 'is correct, so indicate by signing below in the place
provided: ..'
Vesti~.a Tentative Tract'Map No. 23267 does not lie within tlle
-boUndaries of the Murrieta CreekArea Drainage Planand is not
~ubject to the rec/uifement to pay the'Area Drainage Fees
23267 does not lie within the boualdarle= of any 'p · y
organized }~ea'.Drainage Plan and is not subject to a
requirement to pay the ~ea Drainage Fees associated with any
such Plan.
Howard DickerSon
Oat.:
:Rjiverside County Floo~ Con?, .... :.~
~.." "" Wa~er Conservation Dist::c-,
-' .., ~ MT'~. Novard Dickerson
..' :july 22, 1991
~-:"-'~' If the statements' ~ade An the ' ' ' · ' ' ' - . ',
":'. "". p'l~tse indicate. your agree Para.g~aph printe,. above are
' - .~PPrecia~ it if Fou woul at o~ offfc~ We won t. Please
..' ..' · .. ".. r · '-"," · yo~ es~sta~e, · · lieSt Possible ~ment. '
. ~ .......'...,.,' · .: . · '.- ... - .. . . . ·
· ' . .ReSPectfully,
· ' ~r ,ander.W, Urquhart
I..
awv/:~ ac
::' mxlrckd~l;fee
"AttaCllment:
Co~ oe Murrieta Creek-Drainage Area,
· No. 23267 marke~ there0~ '
'.C.~:" Z~r. victor Decastro
Map with Tract'.-.
ATTACHMENT 8
Memorandum of Understanding preventing building permits
from being issued for lots located in the 100 year flood plain
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
Attn: Nancy M. Harlan
The Presley Companies
19 Corporate Plaza
Newport Beach, CA. 92660
this
companies,
Temecula.
Memorandum of Understanding
This Memorandum of Understanding is enterea into on
day of , 1992 by and between The Presley
a California CorPoration ("Presley") and The City of
RECITALS
A. Presley is the owner of certain real Property in
the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California,
commonly described as "Old Vail Ranch" or "Bridlevale,,, and more
Particularly described on Exhibit "A" (the "Presley Property',)
B. ·
Presley is dev '
residential community pursueloPing the Presley Propert
vesting Tentative Map No. 2326?.23267-3 and 23267-Pinal
within the Temecula Creek F1 ?rtions o~ these trac~
ose Properties in question fr~=t~°n ~11 Physically removeer
nd of the d ess e2 ear Flood Plain".
AGREEMENT
The Parties agree as follows:
all of the obligations of this Y until
This Agreement shall be recorde n fulfilled.
d and shall run with the land.
2. Presley hereby agrees not to obtain any Building
Permits for lots (see attached list)
(see attached list) of Tra of Tract 23267-3 and lots
mecula Creek Channel. s been received from
3. Presley hereby agrees to fully disclose the flood
insurance requirements to potential buyers of lots within the
flood plain. Presley understands flood insurance shall be
required of the buyersuntil such time as the Letter of Map
Revision (LOMR) has been received from FEMA. Presley further
understands that The City of Temecula will not release any
improvement bonds within Tracts 23267-3 and 23267-Final until
such time as the LOMR has been received.
4. Presley shall require any development successor or
assign to Tracts 23267-3 or 23267-5 become a party to this
Memorandum of Understanding as a condition of lot transfer.
5. All exhibits attached and referred to in this
Agreement are incorporated as though fully set forth in this
Agreement.
6. In any action seeking enforcement of any of the
terms and provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in
those actions shall be awarded, in addition to taxable costs,
damages, injunctive or other relief, its actual costs and
expenses incurred in that action including, but not limited to,
its actual attorneys' fees.
7. All notices, request, consents, and other
communications required or permitted under this Agreement shall
be in writing (including telex, telegraphic, and telecopier
communication) and shall be (as elected by the person giving such
notice) hand delivered by messenger or court service,
telecommunicated, sent by a professional overnight courier
service (such as Federal Express, DHL or Emery) with invoice
prepaid, or mailed (airmail, if international) by certified mail
(postage prepaid), ret=urn receipt requested, addressed to:
If to P.resley:
with a copy to:
The Presley Companies
c/o Presley of San Diego
15090 Avenue of Science #201
San Diego, CA. 92128
Attention: Gerald P. Nordeman
Telephone: (619) 451-6300
Telecopier: (619) 487-7307
The Presley Companies
19 Corporate Plaza
Newport Beach, CA. 92660
Attention: Nancy M. Harlan,Esq
Telephone: (714) 640-6400
Telecopier: (714) 640-1710
If to City
Temecula
City of Temecula
43180 Business Park Drive
Suite 200
Temecula, CA. 92390
Attention: Mr. Scott Field
City Attorney
Attention: Mr. Tim Setlet
City Engineer
Telephone: (714) 694-6400
Telecopier: (714) 694-6488
Each notice shall be deemed delivered (a) on the date delivered,
if by personal delivery, (b) on the date telecommunicated, if by
telegraph, (c) on the date of transmission with confirmed answer
bach, if by telex or telecopier, (d) twenty four (24) hours after
deposit with a professional overnight courier service, if sent by
such service, and (e) seventy two (72) hours after deposit in the
U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, if by certified mail. By giving to
the other parties at least fifteen (15) days written notice, the
parties to this Agreement and their respective successors and
assigns shall have the right from time to time and at any time
during the term of this Agreement to change their respective
addresses, and each shall have the right to specify as its
address any other address within the United States of America.
8. This Agreement contains all of the agreements of
the parties with respect to the matters contained in this
Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements or
understanding, oral or written, are merged in this Agreement and
shall not be effective for any purpose. No provision of this
Agreement may be amended or modified except by an agreement, in
writing, signed by the parties or their respective successors-in-
interest, and expressly stating that it is an amendment of this
Agreement.
9. If, for any reason, any paragraph, section,
sentence, clause or phrase contained in this Agreement becomes or
is held by any Court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal,
null or void, or against public policy, the remaining paragraphs,
sections, sentences, clauses or phrases contained in this
Agreement shall not be affected and shall remain in full force
and effect.
10. This Agreement is executed in and shall be
governed by the laws of the State of California.
11. The City of Temecula hereby agrees to record the
attached quitclaim deed nullifying this agreement upon receipt of
the (LOMR) for Temecula Creek Channel.
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been
executed by the Parties as of the date first written above.
Presley: THE PRESLEY COMPANIES, a
California CorPoration
City:
By: ~t~ ~e Nor
d~ald P. No~reman
Senior Vic esi ent
William B.' PrZbert
Vice President
CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
Patricia H. Birdsall
Mayor
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
By:
N a.~e .(_,/---- S~r~.e ~Z~
Tim D.
City Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field
City Attorney
By:
June S. Greek
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss:
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that
by his signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon
behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
Signature
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss:
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
me, :~~ personally appeared
personally known to me to be the person whose
me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that
by'his signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon
behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Sfgnature
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ~ ss:
me On this day of , 19 ~, before
whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized
capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
)
) ss:
)
me, On this day of , 19 , before
Personally"'appeared
DAVID F. DIXON Personally known to me t~ be the person whose name
is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me
that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by
his signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon
behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
PRESLEY PROPERTY
PARCEL A
THOSE PORTIONS 0F PA~tC!Z I AND PAaCSL 3 OF PARCZL NAP NO. 18993 AS
lt~COltDr~ IN BOOK 1:4 AT PAGE 13 TKROU~H It INCLUSIVe, OF PARCEL
NaPS IN THE OFFIC OF T~E COUNTY lXC0RDER OF THE COUNTY OF
ETVZR~IDE, 2~TE 0F CALIFORNIA NDRI PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
C~I-.~-.a~CING AT THE MOST NO~--ffa~'TERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL
THXNCE NORTH 18' 38e 43w WX~, A DISTANCE OF 102.00 FEET, ALSO
BBING A POINT ONTE~ C~NTXEU. NX OFSTATE HIGHWAY
TKEXCIALONGEA~DC~rTEIG=NE NORT~ 73' a3e 17" EAST, A DISTANCXOF
3015.88 FF. ZTJ
~ZNCI 8OUTH Ii' 3Et 43® EAST, 102.00 I~ET TO TH~ SOUTXERLY RIGHT
O~ WAY LINX OF HIGHWAY 791
TBINCE LFJtVINC lAID RIGHT OF WAY SOUTH IS' 36* 43- EAST, 108.29
FEET TO T~E ~,/J22 OF A ~ ~X~ XOR~STZRLY ~D ~NG
X ~S OF IS00.00 ~s
TKENCE SOtTrI~AST~y ALONe 8AID CURV~ SOUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
09' 51' 27s AN ARc DISTANCE OF 27S.27 FEXT;
THENCE SOUTH 28' 21' 10w EAST, 99.17 FF/T TO THE BEGINNING OF A
CURVE CONCAVETOTSISCUTHWIBTANDHAVING A RADIU2 OF 1600.00 FEXTX
THENCE SOVTKEASTI3~YALONG SAID ctravZ TEROUG~ A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
17' 21t 41"ANARC D~BTANCE OF 414.83 FZFZX
THINCEIOUTH 09' 06' 29w Fa~T, 139.77 FEET TOAPOINTON A NONTANG-
ENTCURV~CONCAVZNORTHZRLyANDKAViNG A P-RDIUS OF 2268.88 FEETAND
A RADIAL BEARING TO SAID CURV~ HIINC SOUTH 09' 0E' 29w EAST;
· HZNCZ KORTHEASTEltLY ALON~ SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
11' 34' 40e AN ARC DI~TANC2 0F 4S1,87 FEXT TO A POINT ON TI~
EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2 AND OF PAR~. 3 I~R SAID PARCZL~AP
18993~
EXHIBIT "A"
PAGE 1 of 4
EXHIBIT "A"
PAGE 2 of 4
,LZ~u. ~.s~cm {oo~4,,n~')
yAGZ3
TIIENCZ PARALLXL T~ THE IABTXXLY LLNE OF SAID PARCEL i NORTH
16' 38' 43s liT. ST, 676.74 lrZZTI
TKENC= XORTH: 41' 38~ 43w lrLST, 30.00 FELT TO THE ~ ~ oF
PARCEL 3 AND PARCIL 4 OF IJLXD PARCXL MAP NO. 11993.
EXCSPTING Tw~rRXFROM ~ wNOT A PART~ PORTIG21B m PARCXL FW5m AND
wpARCEL lrdTw, WBT.r. SITXS, 23t FAVOR OF RAWCII0 CALIFORNIA WAT!2
DISTRZCT ~ ~ PaCOItDID AML]~ 21, 1967 as INBTR'UMENT F, JIGEA
ON fKEFTS 4 AND 8 OF SAID PARGL XA~ MO. 18993.
TOTAL AREA fOR PARCXL A AND B TS 203 .la AC3tFJ MORE OR LESS.
EXHIBIT "A"
PAGE 3 of 4
EXHIBIT "B"
LOTS LYING ENTIRELY OR PARTIALLY WITHINTHE LIMITS OFT HE 100-YEAR-
FLOOD, AS MAPPED BY FEMA'
TRACT 23267-3 (the current 23267-3, not the proposed "new" 23267-3
LOTS I THROUGH 79, and
LOTS 165 THROUGH 214
TRACT 23267-FINAL (the current 23267-Final, not the proposed "new"
23267-Final
LOTS I THROUGH 13, and
LOTS 20 THROUGH 29, and
LOTS 40 THROUGH 59, and
LOTS 95 THROUGH 103, and
LOTS 106 THROUGH 119
"EXHIBIT "B"
PAGE I of 3
· I
=
EXHIRIT "B" - PAGE 2 of 3
I,,,-
1,1,1
I, IJ
;1::
EXHIBIT "B"
PAGE 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT 9
FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT
CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT
TRACT MAP NO. 23267
DATE: April 29, 1992
IMPROVEMENTS
Streets and Drainage
Water
Sewer
TOTAL
FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE
SECURITY
$ 1,837,500.00
$ 2~9,500.00
$ 199,000.00
$ 2,286,000.00
MATERIAL 8 LABOR
SECURITY
$ 919,000.00
$ 325,000.00
$ 99,500.00
$ 1,143,500.00
*naintenance Retention (lOS& for one Jeer)
*(or ~ ff work is cmpleted)
$ 228,600.00
Monument Security
City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs
Fire Mitigation Fee
RCFC Drainage Fee Due
5ignalization Mitigation Fee - SMD #9
Road and Bridge Benefit Fee
Other Developer Fees { Quimby )
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
36, 190. O0
-0-
~7,600.00
N/A
17,850.00
-O-
N/A
Planning Department Fee
Comprehensive Transportation Plan Fee
Plan Check Fee
I nspection Fee
Monument Inspection Fee
$
$
$
$
$
221.00
8.00
79,596.08
75,3q5.00
1,810.00
Total inspection/Plan Check Fees
Less Fees Paid To Date i Credit)
Total Inspection/Plan Check Fees Due
AGENDAS/ARO09
156,980.08
156,980.08
-0-
ITEM NO. 18
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council / City Manager
f Public Works
Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-3
PREPARED BY:
Kris Winchak
R ECOMMEN DAT IONS:
That City Council APPROVE Revised Vesting Final Tract
Map No. 23267-3, subject to the Conditions of Approval.
That City Council APPROVE the Memorandum of
Understanding for recordslion concurrently with Revised
Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-3.
DISCUSSION:
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 was originally approved by the Riverside
County Planning Commission on October 19, 1988, and the Riverside County Board
of Supervisors on October 25, 1988. Change of Zone No. 5150 was also approved by
the County Board of Supervisors on October 25, 1988. However, the zone change
was not given a second reading and., therefore, was not officially adopted at that
time.
Following incorporation of the City, Presley Homes of San Diego submitted a revised
map for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267, along with Change of Zone No. 5,
which is identical to the original Change of Zone No. 5150.
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23267 and Change of Zone No. 5, with an
Addendum to Environmental Impact Report No. 281, was approved by the City
Planning Commission on April 1, 1991, and the City Council on May 14, 1991. A
second reading of Zone Change No. 5 was approved on May 28, 1991.
Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-3 contains 208 residential lots and seven
i7 ) open space lots with 57.74 gross acres. The tract is located on the south side
of Highway 79 between Pala Road and Margarita Road.
1
A Memorandum of Understanding between The Presley Companies and The City,
which restricts any building permits from being issued for lots 1-79 and 165-214
which are located within the "100 Year Flood Plain", will record concurrently with
Tract No. 23267-3. Assessment District 159 proposes to construct a Flood Control
Channel through Tracts 23267-3 and 23267-Final which will physically remove those
properties in question from the "100 Year Flood Plain". The restriction on building
permits will remain until a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) has been
received from FEMA for the Temecula Creek Channel. The Presley Companies is also
conditioned in the agreement to process a Letter of Map Revision (which alleviates
the homebuyers need for flood insurance) prior to obtaining bond releases.
The following fees have been paid (or deferred) for Revised Vesting Final Tract Map
No. 23267-3:
* Area Drainage Fees [see RCFC Statement)
* Fire Mitigation Fees I Deferred to Building Permits) $ 83,200.00
* Traffic Signal Mitigation IDeferred to Building Permits) $ 31,200.00
* 5tephen~s K-Rat Fees {at Grading Permits) $112,593.00
The following bonds have been posted for Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No.
23267-3:
Faithful Labor and
Performance Materials
Streets and Drainage
Water
Sewer
Survey Monuments
$1,930,000.00
370.500.00
343,500.00
$58.740.00
$965,000.00
185,500.00
172,000.00
SUMMARY:
Staff recommends that City Council APPROVE Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No.
23267-3, subject to the Conditions of Approval and that City Council APPROVE the
Memorandum of Understanding for recordation concurrently with Revised Vesting
Final Tract Map No. 23267-3
Attachments:
2.
3.
Development Fee Checklist
Location Map
Copy of Map
Planning Commission Staff Report
dated April 1, 1991
Conditions of Approval
TCSD Agreement
RCFC Statement dated July 22, 1991
Releasing Tract 23267 from A.D.P. Fees
Memorandum of Understanding preventing building
permits from being issued for lots located in the 100 year
flood plain
Fees and Securities Report
ATTACHMENT 1
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-3
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this
project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
( Quimby )
Public Facility
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 2~
Condition No. 25 & See TCSD
Agreement dated 9-30-91
Condition No. 5~
Traffic Signal Mitigation
Fire Mitigation
Condition No. ~2
See Fire Department Letter
Dated 1-29-91
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition No. ~9 6 See RCFC
Statement dated 7-22-91
Staff Findings:
Staff finds that the project will be consistant with the City~s General Plan once
adopted.
The project is not a part of a specific plan.
ATTACHMENT 2
LOCATION MAP
CITY OF TEMFCULA
//o'
THE MEADOWS -'
$P 219-,
/
,/,-
'::'::'~"~' ~ ' : ""'~' : " i
,:,
VA
&~ eI
,//
t
HAW~
SP 117
ATTACHMENT 3
COPY OF MAP
IN THE CITY OF TEMECULA., COUNTY OF RIVERSZDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
TRACT NO. 2:5267 - :,'5
SHEET 2 OF 9 SHEETS
BEING A SIJiDIVISION OF A PORTION OF PARCELS 2 3 AND 4, AND LETTERED LOT B OF PARCEL NAP NO. 18993
4P
AS RECORDED IN BOOK 13 AGES 13 THROUGH 18 ~1~ PARCEL NAPS AS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
,RECORDER, R]VERSZDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; ALSO LOCATED ZN THE LITTLE TEHECULA RANCH0
CROSBY. HEAD, BENTON & ASSOCZATES APR:ZL, 1989
r,t,;,. :" '\,
TRACT :v'n
: "" t S~"T~c
_,, /-Zl-Z
P M 34/34 35
P.M. 134/J3-18
/,,,'~
c,,r',t' / //" ~, .//
DE[AIL"A"
"~'32.':/r:,' 7- -?
,,\ ..~..8
TABULATED DATA TAILE J PARCEL 4
MEASURED DATA RECORD DATA~'''''''''--~ ~.M NO). 2433Z
~ B~ARING D/STANCE BEARIN~G .01STANC~E P.M 156/g8--103
Tt <NIIe3&'43'~IIGe.40'> r~q/ C4;~TE
73
<N21'IS'SS'U 7tl.22'>(U2'°15'5 'N)
74
T6 ·NeGeSG'4g'M 14146'i (N&GeSI'S0'M)
77
<N88*Z2'03"E le2.et'>(NIG*Zl'44'E 1'12.'11' ) ,,
710
<N74 ST 41 i 571 ?l IN/4 Sl lg hi578 70 )
T12 <NS&'4244'E &54,77'>(N56'42'Z1'E)
724,13'> (NI3*IS'3S'E 72411')
212 41'1,(Ni3'Zt'll'ld21248'
5321i'· (NI/eH'I4'W 5320t'
452 t4'~ {NT0e4S'0S*E 452 iS'
33610'} (~t'3I'3S'M 33i.25'
247 IZ' >{N41* 37' 40 'i~41.
"' """""'"" '*""'l
300,07'> (NII*II'00"E 300,0S'
lZZ, 3g' >
124 SS '~
lS.4Q')
l0 51'~
&~ 14'~
413.t1')
2ll. 64' )
TRACT NO.
2308 3 - 2
M.B 22.2/30'39
ltS <N63*Z~r0S'u
711,<N&TeSi '3~J't~
711 <N/0*45'07'E
TIe <NGt'3/'5?'W
T19 <N4l*3~ '3S'ld
72'0<NI4*31'51°N
721
TSZ I
724 (N40*04'09'N
725 <N37'ZS'ST'E
TiI '~'~41&*Z4'33"E
727 (N3Jeld'37"N
TEl oN20* SS' 00 · i
730
TIE (Nll°t& '4B'V
735
TII 'OI20*23'31'E
137 <N21'I.I'Zt'E
N0~ p[LTk RADZUS ~rEN~TH TANGENT
C1 · 4®14'00' 5321.J. 2'393.67' 1~313')
CZ <11ee4'40° 2'261.11'452.17' ZZS.GS'>
C3 <51e20'50* 120O,0O' $101.0?' ISI.II')
C4 <ltslro,r 1400.00' 479.10' 242
C5 · 3·40' 5?" 48'!15.00'101.76' 1SO. 14' ·
C6 · 4·11'11° IGS0.00' L23. 7'
TRACT NO
23267 -3
PARCEL
PM NO 24332
P.M. .L56/9~ -lO3
TRACT 23063 - I
M. B 2J2 / 49-58
.' FENCE P~ST WITH
;~'~,,,-,,
7:,'rV3C T
/
TRACT NO. '23063-5
M.B. 222
PAl. 15ra/M-10B4 PER.
lrll'lr, TUO.
N(L DELTA RADTUG LENGTH TANGENT
CI 1043'37' 4695.00' 633.17' 311.07'
C9 2*23'52' 5305.00' 222.01' lit.0r
Cl0 1Z'27'34' t47,00' ~05.93' 103.37'
ClZ S*21'59' 1053.00' 100.17' 50.42'
ClZ 5*5~'24' 5231.12' 534.12' 267.59'
CL3 11'29'28" 2268.88' 451.04' 228.21'
C14 !1*36'11" 2731.12' 553.08' 277,45'
C15 7e02'55' 4768.11' 586.67' 2g3.11'
C16 5'38'48' 4692.00' 462.41' 231,31'
CZ? 7043'31* 5301.00' 715.14' 358.46'
CI6 O'o4'
HO._,; BEARING LENGTH
T,O ' '~' m:--:
74~
ATTACHMENT 4
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DATED APRIL 1, 1991
STAFF REPORT -PLANNINC;
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 1, 1991
Case No.: Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267
Prepared By: Richard Ayala
Recommendation: Forward the following recommendations to the
City Council:
RECOMMEND adoption of the addendum to
EIR No. 281 for Revised Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 23267; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Revised Vestin9 Tentative
Tract Map No. 23267.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLI CANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
~ROPOSAL:
LOCAT ION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
Presley of San Diego
Crosby Mead Benton i; Associates
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 is a
proposal to subdivide 189.0 acres of land it. to 601
residential lots with approximately 57.8 acres of
open space. This project is being processed
concurrently with Change of Zone No. 5.
South side of Highway 79 between Pala -Road and
Margarita Road.
R-R | Rural Residential )
North: R-A-5
South: A - 1 - 10
East: SP
West: R - R
( ResidentialAgricultural,
5 Acre Minimum)
( Light Agricultural, 10
Acre Minimum)
ISpecific Plan 217, Red
Hawk )
I Rural Residential)
A: \VTM23267
PROPOSED ZONINC:
R-3
R-~
R-5
{ General Residential)
{Planned Residential)
{Open Area Combining Zone.
Residential Developments )
1 ~4.68 arre~
57.8 acres
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant/Graded Land
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Low Density Single Family
Tract Under Construction
Vacant
Single Family
Total Lots: 601
Total Acres: 189
Min. Lot Size: 4.500 sq.ft.
Density: 3.19 DU/AC
On March 18, 1991, the Plannin9 Commission
continued this item in order to allow Staff the
opportunity to provide additional information
regarding open space maintenance.
The subject property was originally a portion ofthe
Old Vail Ranch. It is located along the south side of
Highway 79 between Pale and Margarita Roads. The
original application, Change of Zone No. 5150 was a
request to change the zoning on 221.2 acres of land
from R-R (Rural Residential), and R-5 (Open Area
Combining Zone). This zone change was approvad
by the County of Riverside Board of Supervisors on
October 20, 1988. However, due to an oversight by
the County, the zone change was never given a
second reading and. therefore, was never officially
adopted. The applicant submitted a new
application, Change of Zone No. 5, to the City of
Tomecula Planning Department on September 2q,
1990.
A: \VTM23267
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 was
submitted to the City of Temecula on December 21,
1990.
On January 17, 1991, this project was reviewed by
the Preliminary Development Review Committee
(Pre-DRC) in order to informally evaluate the
project and address any concerns, as well as
suggesting possible modifications, The comments
by the Pre-DRC included the following:
2
1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
A: \VTM23267
Open Space Maintenance
Traffic Impacts
Access/Circulation
Subsequent to the Pre-DR C meeting. Staff met with
the applicant to discuss possible design
modifications in order to address the Pre-DRC's
concerns.
On March 7, 1991. Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267 was reviewed at a Formal
Development Review Committee {DRC) meeting;
and, it was determined that Revised Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 23267 met the DRC~s concerns.
This tract includes 189 acres of land with proposed
R-~ and R-5 zoning. This subdivision contains 601
single family lots with 57.8 acres of open space.
The minimum lot size is li,500 square feet. The open
space acreage contains 33.9 acres consisting of the
Temecula Creek Flood Channel, which may have as
joint use as a park in the future. two (2)
neighborhood parks totaling 10.2 acres, and an 11.8
acre preserve for native vegetation and the original
adobe ranch house.
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 is
situated along Highway 79 and will incorporate a 20
foot buffer between Highway 79 and the subject
tract. The subject site along Highway 79 consists
of approximately lq~ single family lots with a
minimum lot size of q, 500 square feet. The applicant
is also proposing a one acre neighborhood park | Lot
605) for this section of the project. This area is
proposed to be zoned R-~ and
The entire tract is bisected by the Tamecula Creek
[ Lot 60~) which consists of approximately 33.9 acres
and is zoned R-5. Subsequently, the possibility
exists for the creek to be used by future residents
as a regional park, but the joint use as a flood
control system and park must be discussed and
developed by and between the City and the
Riverside County Flood Control District.
3
The area south of the Temecula Creek is also zoned
R-q and R-5 and consists of LIE:3 single family lots
well over ~,500 square feet. This portion of the
project is also incorporating a 10.7 acre regional
park and a 1.1 acre lot for the old historic adobe
house I Lot 603 and 609). In addition, the applicant
is also providing a 9.1 acre neighborhood park I Lot
602) and may incorporate the existing secondary
treated water reservoir for the adjacent sod farm
into the park design. The secondary treated water
is to be upgraded to tertiary treated in the near
future.
The revised map was submitted in order to change
the grade of the development and to change the cul-
de-sacs designed off of "S" Street in order to create
a more efficient design. The revised map is not
proposing any major circulation or lot changes.
Instead, the revised map will aid to eliminate the
need for a Home Owners Association I HOA).
Currently the applicant is working with the CSD in
order to determine the maintenance of the proposed
open space lots and down slopes at property lines.
Open Space
The Temecula Community Service District has been
in direct contact with the applicant in regards to the
proposed open space maintenance issue, and has
determined that the following dedicated lots are
acceptable for City maintenance by means of an
irrevocable easement deed:
A: \VTM23267
Lot No. 606
Lot No. 607
Lot No. 608
Lot No. 610
Lot No. 611
Lot No. 612
As for the well sites I Lots 185 and 57~), the
Community Service District recommends that these
well sites be dedicated to the serving water district
by means of a grant deed.
A: \VTM23267 '
Traffic impacts
The Transportation Engineering Staff has reviewed
and accepted the findings and mitigation measures
as specified in the traffic impact analysis prepared'
for revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267
and has determined that the proposed project will
have an impact to the existing road system.
However, given the proposed mitigation measures,
there will be no adverse unmitigable significant
traffic impacts resulting from the development of
this proposed project.
Access and Circulation
The portion of the project that abuts Highway 79
will have vehicular access via "A" Street [a 100'
street) which in term has access to Highway 79.
Additional access to the northern portion of the
project will be provided by "B" Street Jan 82' street
with a 15' bike lane) which runs parallel to the
Temecula Creek. Internal, 66~ and 60' wide streets
will provide access through this portion of the
project.
Access to the portion of the project south of the
Temecula Creek' will be provided by Loma Lynda
Road la 66' street) which has access to Pala Road [a
110~ street). In addition, Via Cordoba [a 66' street)
will provide access to the southeast portion of the
project which will integrate with the existing Red
Hawk Development. internal 66' and 60* wide
streets will provide access through this portion of
the project.
Both the Engineering and Traffic Engineering Staff,
as well as the Planning Department Staff, have
determined that the applicant~s proposed access and
circulation are acceptable.
Gradinq
The majority of the area south of Temecula Creek
has been mass graded with some major
infrastructure already being completed within the
proposed street sections. The 10.7 acre open space
is mostly sloping hillside and very little grading will
occur within this area. The area north of Temecula
Creek is rather flat and will require minimal grading
for the project development.
5
GENERAL PLAN/SWAP
CONSISTENCY AND
COMPATIBILITY:
A: \VTM23267 '
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 has an
acreage density of 3.2 units per acre. However,
SWAP designates the entire flood control channel as
recreational open space and therefore. this area is
not included in the 2 to 5 unit per acre area. The
portion of the map north of the flood channel
maintains an average density of ~.8 units per gross
acre. The area south of the channel maintains an
average density of I~.0 dwelling units per gross
acre. These densities conform to SWAP. This
project does conform to the surrounding land uses
in the area. The two approvecl specific plans to the
east and south contain similar residential densities
and minimum lot sizes as the subject property.
These projects were approved under the plan
previous to SWAP which allowed a slightly higher
density. In addition, they contain over 6,000
housin9 units with similar characteristics to the
proposed subject property. These plans have
average densities between 5 and 6 DUIAC. The
applicant is proposing to have an average density of
only I~ units/acre. The'properties to the west _are
currently designated for commercial in SWAP, along
with the land along the south side of Highway 79
between the subject site and Margarita Road. Staff
feels that by breaking the commercial strip along
the highway with residential, the commercial will be
concentrated at the corner of Margarita and
Highway 79 where it is more desirable. Another
specific plan, Murdy Ranch, is directly west of the
subject site and it contains similar residential
densities. The properties to the north are
designated commercial in SWAP along Highway 79
and existing low density rural residential beyond
|Santiago Estates). Staff feels that there will be no
significant impact from the higher density
residential along the south side of Highway 79 due
to the physical break of the roadway and the
commercial barrier along the north side of Highway
79. To provide a barrier to noise for the proposed
development along the highway, Staff will require a
significant landscaped buffer of 20 feet minimum.
Therefore, Staff feels that the proposed
development is logical and is consistent with the
type of residential development that is found in the
area.
In conclusion, the proposed Revised Vestinc~
Tentative Tract Map No. 232~ will like,) b,
consistent with the future adopted General Plan for
the City of Temecula. This proposal is a logical
extension of residential development in the area and
with 'the implementation of traffic mitigation
measures for the development, there will be no
significant impact on the surrounding area.
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMI NAT ION:
FINDINGS:
Environmental Impact Report No. 281 was completed
on the subject property for Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267. The report indicated a number of
mitigation measures that must be implemented in
order to reduce the impact of the project below a
level of significance. These mitigation measures
included a new ~-Iane bridge on Pala Road over
Temecula Creek, the channelization of Temecula
Creek, and several other significant measures that
have not currently been implemented. Therefore,
Planning Staff recommends that an addendure to
Environmental Impact Report No. 281 be adopted.
A copy of which is attached.
The proposed density is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan land use designation.
The proposed density of 3.19 units per acre
is within the range of the SWAP designation
of 2-5 units per acre.
The proposed revised vesting tentative tract
map is compatible with surrounding zoning,
existing land uses in the vicinity, and
approved projects. The proposed R-~ and R-
3 portions of the project adjacent to Highway
79 consist of higher densities and abuts
future office commercial SWAP designation
land uses. The lots situated south of the
Temacula Creek are substantially larger than
~, 500 square feet and abut specific plan ar-_-c
such as Red Hawk, Vail Ranch and Murdy
Ranch, which in term are similar in density
and design.
A: \VTM23267 7
A: \VTM23267
e
The lot design and internal stree*. I~,,,,,r,t,: ~-r
acceptabt~ to the City F m;.-:,r.l~ ,~ ....
Engineering Departments. All lots conform to
the standards of their respective zones, and
proposed street alignments are adequate to
accommodate projected traffic volumes.
Adequate public street access will be
provided to every lot. The legal owner of
record has offered to make all required
dedications.
Staff finds that site access will be adequate.
Assessment District 159 will provide for
street improvements on Pala Road and
Highway.79, and four (~) access points to the
site are shown on the map.
There is a reasonable probability that the
project will be consistent with the City's
General Plan once adopted, in that the
proposed density is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan land use designatlon,
and the revised map is compatible with
surrounding zoning, existing land uses in the
vicinity, and approved subdivisions.
It is unlikely that the proposed revised
tentative map will constitute a substantial
detriment to the future General Plan if the
proposed subdivision is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan. Surrounding
zoning, existing land uses, and approved
subdivisions are all residential.
The project will not have a significant
adverse affect on the environment. The
County of Riverside Board of Supervisors
certified EI R No. 281 in conjunction with the
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos.
23267, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23299
and Change of Zone No. 5150. Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will
not result in any new or substantially
increased environmental impacts.
The proposed project makes adequate
provision for future passive or natural solar
heating opportunities in that all proposed
parcels have adequate southern exposure.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
RA: ks
Attachments:
10.
11.
12.
13.
The project meets the requirement.~ of
Ordinance 3L18 and LI60 in that all lots conforrn~
to the minimum size and dimension
requirements of the zoning. code and abut
upon dedicated street.
The proposed project includes adequate
dedication for public parks in that it provides
for 10.2 acres of public parks and 10.7 acre
preserve for native vegetation.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety, and
welfare.
These findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
Based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the
Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions
of Approval, the Planning Department St~ff
recommends that the Planning Commission:
RECOMMEND adoption of the addendum to El R
No. 281 for Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267.
Resolution I Revised VTM No. 23267)
Conditions of Approval
( Revised VTM No. 23267)
Addendure to EIR No. 281
Exhibits
Map No.
A: \VTM23267
9
ATTAFH:~T N1 I
RESOLUTION :.~b. 91- .
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANF~!NL; COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECO~:;~ENDING APPROVAL OF
REVISED VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23267
TO SUBDIVIDE A 189 ACRE ~'.,~RCEL INTO 601 SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 5 OPEN SPACE LOTS
LOCATED ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 79
BETWEEN PALA AND MARGARITA ROADS AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 926-016-002, 003, 012, 017,
AND 025.
WHEREAS, Presley of San Diego filed Revised Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23267 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning
and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Tentative Tract Map application was processed in the
time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Revised Vesting
Tentative Tract Map on April 1, 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 Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECT ION 1. F|ndincls. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following fi~a~ngs:
A. Pursuant to Government Cede 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 th-
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the
general plan, if all of the following requirements are met:
I1 ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
| 2 ) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of buildinn
permits, each of the following:
A: \VTM23267 10
(a)
There i., a reasonable probability that thP
land use or action proposed will be consistent
with t. he general plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
Ib)
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.
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. 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.
C. The proposed Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map and is
consistent with the SWAP and meet the requirements set forth in Section
65360 of the Coyeminent Code, to wit:
I1 ) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
.12) The Planning Commission finds, in recommending
approval of projects end taking other actions, including
the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title,
each of the following:
There is reasonable probability that Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will be
consistent with the general plan proposRi
being considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
Ib)
There is little or no probability of substantia:
detriment to or interference with the future
adopted general plan if the proposed use or
action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan,
A :\VTM23267 11 ~-~
· (c)
ThP propns~d use or action compile.. ,,,~t~ all
otl~: ;~i i*';< ntjIF. requirem~.nts of star, i ,,,, arid
local ordinances.
D. { 1 ) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County' Ordinal.. No.
q60, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findl~qls are
made:
a)
b)
c)'
d)
That the proposed land division is c~,,~,,l~tent
with applicable general and specific Id-ns.
That the design or improvement ~1 the
proposed land division is consiste,tt with
applicable general and specific plan..
That the site of the proposed land divlklon is
physically suitable for the ty!}~ of
development.
That the site of the proposed land dtvl.ion is
physically suitable for the proposed d-nsity
of the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental da~,,9~'-or
substantially and unavoidably injur= fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
f)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not Ilkely to
cause serious public health problemq.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements will not c~mflict
with easements, acquired by the Pul~lic at
large, for access through, or ~ 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 b~
substantially equivalent to ones Previously
acquired by the public. This subnection
shall apply only to easements of rect~rd or tn
easements established by judgment ol ~ cour',
of competent jurisdiction.
12 ) The Planning Commission in recommendin9 approval
of the proposed Tentative Tract Map, makes the following findi~gs, to
wit:
A: \VTM23267
17
A: \VTM23267
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
The proposed density is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan land use designatibr~.
The proposed density of 3.19 units per acre
is within the range of the SWAP designation
of 2-5 units per acre.
The proposed revised vesting tentative tract
map is compatible with surrounding zoning.
existing land uses in the vicinity, and
approved projects. The proposed R-~4 and R-
3 portions of the project adjacent to Highway
79 consist of higher densities and abuts
future office commercial SWAP designation
land uses. The lots situated south of the
Temecula Creek are substantially larger than
q, 500 square feet and abut specific plan areas
such as Red Hawk, Vail Ranch and Murdy
Ranch, which in term are similar in density
and design.
The lot design and internal street layout are
acceptable to the City Planning and
Engineering Departments. All lots conform to
the standards of their respective zones, and
proposed street alignments are adequate to
accommodate projected traffic volumes.
Adequate public street access will
provided to every lot. The legal owner of
record has offered to make all required
dedications.
Staff finds that site access will be adequate.
Assessment District 159 will provide for
street improvements on Pala Road and
Highway 79, and four (4) access points to the
site are shown on the map.
There is a reasonable probability that the
project will be consistent with the CityJs
General Plan once adopted, in that the
proposed density is consistent with the
Southwest Area Plan land use designation,
and the revised map is compatible with
surrounding zoning, existing land uses in the
vicinity, and approved subdivisions.
13
A i \ VTM23267
It :_ u,liRply that the proposed revised
tentative map will constitute a substantIal
detriment to the future General Plan if the
proposed subdivision is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan'. Surrounding
.zoning, existing land uses, and approved
subdivisions are all residential.
h)
The project will not have a significant
adverse affect on the environment. The
County of Riverside Board of Supervisors
certified EIR No. 281 in conjunction with the
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos.
23267, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23299
and Change of Zone No. 5150. Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will
not result in any new or substantially
increased environmental impacts.
i)
The proposed project makes adequate
provision for future passive or natural solar
heating opportunities in that all proposed
parcels have adequate southern exposure.
j)
The project meets the requirements .of
Ordinance 3~8 and ~t60 in that all lots conform
to the minimum size and dimension
requirements of the zoning code and abut
upon dedicated street.
k)
The proposed project includes adequate
dedication for public parks in that it provides
for 10.2 acres of public parks and 10.7 acre
preserve for native vegetation.
I)
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety, and
welfare,
m)
These findings are supported by minutes.
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map is compatible with the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
SECTION 2. Environmental__C_omloliance.
The County of Riverside Board of Supervisors certified EIR No. 281 in
conjunction with the approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267. Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 will not result in any new'or substantially
increased environmental impacts. An addendure to EIR No. 281 is hereby
recommended for adoption.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 for the subdivision of a 189 act-
parcel into 601 single family residential lots and S open space lots located along the
south side of Highway 79 between Pala and Margarita Roads and known as Assessor's
Parcel No. 926-016-002, 003, 012, 017 and 025 subject to the following conditions:
A. Attachment I I I, attached hereto.
SECT ION q._~.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of April, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted b,/
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, he~J
on the 1st day of April, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
A :\VTM23267' 15
ATTACHMENT 5
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
ATTACHMENT I I
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ..
Revised Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267
Project Description: Revision to VTM 23267 to allow
for 2 additional lots and 7 open space lots to be
maintained by TCSD
Assessor~s Parcel No.: 926'160-2, 3, 12 and 17 and
a portion of 926-160-011
Plannincl Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance q60. Schedule A, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in
accordance with the State Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request.
if made 30 days prior to the expiration date.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordat,on of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance q60 shall be provided from the tract
map boundary to a City maintained road· '~
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities.
etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the
division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall b:
submitted and recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
Subdivision phasing, including any proposed common open space area
improvement phasing, if applicable. shall be subject to Planning Department
approval. Any proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular acce.-.,
to all lots in each phase. and shall substantially conform to the intent
purpose of the subdivision approval.
A maintenance district shall be established for maintenance of Lots Open
Space, the ,developer/applicant shall pay for all costs relating to establishment
of the district.
A: \VTM23267 16
11.
12.
13.
15.
16.
Delete Riverside County Condition No. 181d).
Prior to the recordat(on of the final map, Change of Zone No. 5 shall be
approved by the City Council and shall be effective. Lots created by this land
divls~on sl~a~l be in conjormance w~th the development standards o! the zone
ultimately applied to the property.
Prior to recorder(on of the final map, the project site shall be annexed into the
Temecula Community Service Distict (TCSD).
A copy of the final grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department
for review and approval. All on-site cut and fill slopes shall:
Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1 and a maximum vertical
height of thirty (30) feet. Setbacks from top and bottom of slopes shall
be a minimum of one-half the slope height.
b. Be contour-graded to blend with existing natural contours.
c. Be a part of the downhill lot when within or between individual lots.
All slopes over three |3) feet in height shall be landscaped and irrigated
according to the City Development Cede. A detailed landscaping and
irrigation plan, prepared by a qualified professional, shall be submitted to the
City Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading
permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department~s letter dated January 29, 1991, a copy of
which is attached.
All proposed construction shall comply with the California Institute of
Technology, Palomar Observatory Outdoor Lighting Policy, as outlined in the
Southwest Area Plan.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern
Municipal Water District transmittal dated March 8, 1991, a copy of which is
attached,
Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the R-II (Planned Residential) zone.
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.
A: \VTM23267
17
17.
18.
19.
20.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes.
landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those ope~ b~ ,.
are the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director
Prior to recordation of the final maD. an Environmental Cbnstraints Sheet
(ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate
identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the
office of the City Engineer. A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the
Planning Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be
forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department
and the Department of Building and Safety.
The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
"This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory, All proposed outdoor lighting systems shall comply with the
California Institute of Technology, Palomar Observatory outdoor lighting
policy,
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
I1)
Prior to the issuance of grading permits detailed common open space
area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning
Department approval for the phase of development in 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.
be
Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be
opaque up to a minimum height of six 16) feet at maturity.
All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from
view with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle
treatments, as approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall
be placed underground.
Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or"
transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscap~
elements shall include earth betruing, ground cover, shrubs ano
specimen trees. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees
planted.
Wall plans shall be submitted for the project perimeter and along
Highway 79 and Lime Street. Wooden fencing shall not be allowed
on the perimeter of the project. All lots with slopes leading dowr,
from the lot shall be provided with gates in the wall for
maintenance access.
A :\VTM23267
18
Landscaping plans sh-~I' ;;~rnrloorate the use of specimen accenl
trees at key visual focal ;~,,;,,ts within the project.
Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of
interior streets and project parkways due to insufficient road
right-of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-
way.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant
plants where appropriate.
All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked.
If the project is to be phased. prior to the approval of grading
permits. an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to
the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a
guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual
phases of development and shall include the following:
Techniques which will be utilized to prevent erosion and
sedimentation during and after the grading process.
Approximate time frames for grading and identification of
areas which may be graded during the higher probab._ility
rain months of January through March. .
3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations·
Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
All cut slopes located adjacent to ungraded natural terrain and
exceeding ten |10) feet in vertical height shall be contour-
graded incorporating the following grading techniques:
The angle of the graded slope shall be gradual!y adjust·
to the angle of the natural terrain· '
Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded for,
shall reflect the natural rounded terrain.
The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curv-~
with radii designed in proportion to the total height of
slopes where drainage and stability permit such rounding.
Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizont.~'
length. the horizontal contours of the slope shall he
curved in a continuous. undulating fashion.
A: \VTM23267
19
21.
22.
Prior to the issuance of g~-~Hing permits. the developer shRII
provide evidence to the Director of Building ahd Safer)
adjacent off-site manufactured slopes have recorded slope
easements and that slope maintenance responsibilities have been
assigned as approved by the Director of Building and Safety.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits. a qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the developer for consultation and comment on the proposed
grading with respect to potential paleontological impacts. Should the
paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant 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, red,tact or halt
grading activity to allow recovery of fossils.
Prior tothe issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
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.
Prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Buildihg
and Safety an acoustical study shall be performed by an acoustical
engineer to establish appropriate mitigation measures that shall be
applied to individual dwelling units within the subdivision to reduce/~
ambient interior noise levels to q5 Ldn.
All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required
elements from the subdivision~s approved fire protection plan as
approved by the County Fire Marshal.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and
irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval·
The plans shall address all areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front
yard landscaping.
All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed
and constructed with fire retardant { Class A ) roofs as approved by the
Fire Marshal.
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within thr'
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy savin9
devices shall be permitted with Planning Department approval.
A: \VTM23267 20 ~
23.
26.
All street side yard setbad:s sh~ll be e minimum of ten [10) fcr~
All fro. nt yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic
irrigation.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If seasonal
conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and erosion
control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director
and the Director of Building and Safety.
be
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection.
Not withstanding the preceding conditions, wherever an acoustical
study is required for noise attenuation purposes, the heights of all
required walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where
applicable.
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.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall submit to the
Planning Director an agreement with the Community Services District which
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that the land divider has satisfied
Quimby Act requirements in accordance with Section 10.35 of Ordinance No.
q60. The agreement shall be approved by the City Council prior to the
recordation of the final map.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the City of Temecula or its agents, officer, or employees
to attach, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Temecula, its
advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Revised
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267, which action is brought within th~
time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66~99.37. TI~,
City of Temecula will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action.
or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in th~
defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim,
action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider
shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless
the City of Temecula.
A: \VTM23267 21
The developer shall make a good f~ith effort to acquire the required o~(--ii,
property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so. the developer s),aml
at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into
an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code
Section 66~62 at such time as the City acquires the property interests
required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by
the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property
interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security of a portion
of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an
appraisal report obtained by the developer, at the developer's cost. The
appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the
appraisal.
28.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable
TV shall be provided for underground, with easements provided as required.
and designed and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility
provider. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pro-wired
in the residence.
29,
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements:
30.
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions I CCSR's) shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Department prior to final approval of the tract
maps. The CCSR~s shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining
the open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, all buildings
in common open areas, and all interior slopes.
No lot or dwelling unit in the development shell be sold unless a corporation,
association, property owner~s group, or similar entity has been formed with
the right to assess all properties individually owned or jointly owned which
have any rights or interest in the use of the common areas and common
facilities in the development, such assessment power to be sufficient to meet
the expenses of such entity, and with authority to control, and the duty tn
maintain, all of said mutually available features of the development. Such
entity shall operate under recorded CC~,R~s which shall include compulsory
membership of all owners of lots and/or dwelling units and flexibility of
assessments to meet changing costs of maintenance, repairs, and services.
Recorded CC~;R~s shall permit enforcement by the City of Provisions requireu
by the City as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit evidenc~
of compliance with this requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior
to making any such sale. This condition shall not apply to land dedicated tc
the City for public purposes.
32.
Every owner of a dwelling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such
dwelling unit or lot, either ( 1 ) an undivided interest in the common areas anci
facilities, or (2) as share in the corporation, or voting membership in an
association, owning the common areas and facilities.
A: \VTM23267 22 /--'.
33.
Maintenance for aH landscaped and opPn areas, including parkways. sh~ll t~r
provided for in the CCF, R's.
Within forty-eight 1~8) hours of the approval of this' project. the
applicant/developer shall deliver to the Planning Department a cashiers check
or money order payable to the County Clerk in the amount of Eight Hundred.
Seventy-Five Dollars ~$875.00) which includes the Eight Hundred, Fifty
Dollar 15850.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158. required by Fish and Game
Code Section 711.tlld){3) plus the Twenty-Five Dollar 1$25.00) County
administrative fee. to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination
required under Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 1~ Cal. Code of
Regulations 1509~. If within such forty-eight 1~8) hour period the
applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning Department the check
required above, the approval for the project granted hereln shall be void by
reason of failure of condition. Fish and Game Code Section 711 .~l c).
Enclineerinq Department
The following are the Engineering Department 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 referrod to the Engineering
Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements. traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to'-be
resubmitted for further consideration.
35.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
· and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance No, ~60.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
37.
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative,
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:
Engineering Department;
Riveriide County Health Department;
CATV t, ranchise;
US Army Corps of Engineers; ~"~
US Fish and Wildlife; and
California State Department of Fish and Game.
the
A: \VTM23267
23
38.
39.
Street "T" shall be improved with L~LI feet of asphalt concretP pavement.
bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-~
of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 103. Section A 1al41'166').
Street "DD" and "FF" shall be improved with !&!& feet of asphalt concrete
pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the
dedicated right-of-way in accordance with County Standard No. 103, Section
A (~q~/60~) with 3 foot wide utility easements.
In the event road or off-site right-of-way are required to comply with these
conditions, such easements shall be obtained by the developer; or, in the
event the City is required to condemn the easement or right-of-way, as
provided in the Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall enter into an
agreement with the City for the acquisition of such easement at the
developer's cost pursuant to Government Code Section 66t~62.5, which shall
be at no cost to the City.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
ao
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement. curb
and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights,
signing, striping, traffic signal systems, and other traffic control
devices as appropriate. -_
Storm drain facilities.
Landscaping.
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
\
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department 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.
The subdivider shall submit four prints of a comprehensive grading plan t-
the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply with the Uniform Buildin~j
Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 21~" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
The subdivider shall submit four copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A: \VTM23267
A drainage study shall be subm. lt~-- "' -'~d approved by the City Fnaineer.
All drainage facilities shall be in.-.*. '~J,.'j as required by tht City En9inet~.
Portions of the site are in an area identified on the Flood Hazard Maps as Flood
Zone A subject to flooding of undetermined depths. Prior to the approval of
any plans, this project shall comply with the rules and regulations of FEMA for
development within a Flood Zone "A" which may include obtaining'a I~tterT
map revision from FEMA for the affected areas.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City~s CATy Franchises of
the Intent to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CATV'~ndards at time
of street improvements.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-d-
way.
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,
5O.
A permit shall be required from CelTtans for any work within the following
right-of-way:
State Hiclhway 79
51. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within
its right-d-way.
/
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
52°
A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Ci,;"
Engineer for location and elevation, end the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
53.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb an,~
gutter, A.C, pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees anrt
street lights on all interior public streets.
A: \VTM23267 25
Developer shall pay any r. apital fPP f-,. ~ "'! !mprovements and public facilities
imposed upon the property o: prc, j, ~'~, i,,cluding that for traffic at,el !,..~l,!i~
facility mitigation as required under the FIR/Negative Declaration for thr"~
project, in the amount in effect at tilt time of payment of the 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. 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} and specifically waives its right to protest
such increase.
Transportation Enclineerincl Department
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
55.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer for Loma Linda Road, "DD" Street, and
"S" Street, and shall be included in the street improvement plans.
A signing plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the City Engineer for all internal streets with ~0 feet or less of curb
separation and can, be shown on the street improvement plans.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer
and approved by the City Engineer and CalTrans for State Route 79 South,
"A" Street, and "B" Street, and shall be included in the street improvement
plans. Condition 132 of the County Road letter dated October 7, 1988 shall br''~
deleted.
58.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering
and CalTrans for the design requirements.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY. ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
59.
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 detou:
or other disruption to traffic circulation as required by the City Engineer.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
All on-site signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signin.u
and striping plans.
A: \VTM23267 · 26
61.
In the event that the required improy. ':, 'nt-. on-Stwte~~9-S~uth-errd~c~a+e
R~scl for the Pala Road reatignn,,' · -~ ,d ~he bridcle over Temeculu L~ e~'. are
not completed brAsscss,,,ent'Bistriet' 159 prior to the issuance of certificate
of occupancy, the developer shall be required to enter into a reimbursement
agreement with the City of Temecula for the construction of the necessary
improvements hosed-err-the. The devetoper's percent of contribution toward
the facilities within the reimbursement aclreement shall be as per the approved
Traffic Study. Construction of necessary improvements shall be based upon
the following dwelling unit occupancy levels {Amended per Planning
Commission March 18, 1991 ):
A. For unit one hundred and one 1101 ) or more:
A 750 foot minimum right turn lane with an adequate transition
for east bound travel on State Route 79 South for Pala Road shall
be designed and constructed to CalTrans specifications and
requirements and shall be approved by CalTrans and the City
Engineer.
Multi-way stop controls shall be designed and installed. when
warranted and approved by CalTrans, at the north bound and
south bound on and off ramps of Interstate-15 and State Route 79
South.
For unit two hundred and forty 1240) or more:
1.
A minimum qS0 foot north bound left turn lane with transition and
a minimum 125 foot north bound right turn lane with transition on
Pala Road at State Route. 79 South shall be designed and
constructed to CalTrans and City requirements and
specifications, and shall be approved by CalTrans and the City
Engineer.
impa~t-trer-fef--eestm-be/emek-the-e~terrt-~f--th~--projt~f -
eorteH~--I~cl ce~t--i,..~t--~r--~ac+r--specFfied--~-~i~nm
}m~, 6vt,,,tntfmt'with~-AD'4tJg~-
For unit five hundred and eleven 1511 ) or more:
The signal at the intersection of State Route 79 South and Pala
Road shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer. The
signal shall be installed and operational, as warranted, per the
special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as
approved by CalTrans and the City Engineer.
A: \VTM23267
27
A: \VTM23267
'lh~ sigr~al at the intersection of State Routt 79 5u.jttl and
Interstate 15 north bound and south bound on and off rarnp~'~
shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer. The signal
shall be installed and operational, as warranted. per the special
provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as approved by
CelTtans and the City Engineer·
The signal at the intersection of Rainbow Canyon Road and Pale
Road shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer. The
signal shall be installed and operational. as warranted. per the
special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as
approved by the City Engineer. Bsse~rrth~-adck-rrdum-lfcter
d~ted- -F ebrtrm-t - M~ - -14J9~ - ~rowr - Oa Rotthe - -Engineering = - ~:hi s
dfYd opmerr~ - -shaH- - corrtHbute- - ~ -'trer-ar~ - -these- - r~dway
ifn~nt costs. I Amended per Planning Commission March
18, 1993. )
Full road improvements, including all required signin9 and
striping, on State Route 79 South from Interstate 15 to Pale Road
shall be in place in accordance with CelTtans requirements as
approved by CelTtans and the City Engineer.
Full road improvements, including all required signing and
striping, on State Route 79 South from Pale Road to Margarita
Road shall be in place in accordance with CelTtans requiremehts
as approved by CelTtans and the City Engineer.
Realignment of Pale Road with State Route 79 South irA
conjunction with the construction of a multi-lane bridge across
the Temecula Creek.
The Pale Road Bridge over the Temecula Creek shall be
designed, constructed and operational as approved by the City
Engineer. T4~s'dtvclop, nerrt-sh~tl"~ontrlbute"6ar'toward-~I-'
constructloft -cast~ -of- ~4~s- brt dgr,- 4:rased -u parr ~ ~chi endtrn
let. el fP~,,-e~R~Jrke{-ngi,,~crii-~;date~Oecember-6;-1994h,
Design and construction of dual left turn capabilities at the south
bound Interstate 15 off ramp at State Route 79 South in
accordance with CelTtans requirements and specifications and as
approved by CelTtans,
The signal at the intersection of Loma Linda and Pale Road shall
be installed and operational, as warranted, per the special
provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as approved by
the City Engineer·
28
10.
The signal at the irtp~'e~rtinr~ nf State Route 79 South and "A"
Street shall be desir4ned by a registered Civil Engineer. I~,lb
signal shall be installed and operational, as warranted, per the
special provisions and the approved traffic signal plan as
approved by CalTrans and the City Engineer. -
11.
Design and construction of a dual right turn lane for east bound
travel on State Route 79 South at Pala Road and a dual left turn
lane for north bound travel on Pala Road at State Route 79 South
in accordance with CalTrans and City requirements and
specifications as approved by CalTrans and the City Engineer.
Department of Buildincl and Safety
62.
63.
6q.
Submit approved Tentative Tract Map to the Department of Building and
Safety for addressing and street name review.
School fees shall be paid to Temecula Unified School District Prior to permit
issuance.
Lighting on site pool area and recreation area shall comply with Mount Palomar
Lighting Ordinance t655.
65.
Submit pool plans to Riverside County Health Department for review prior to
structural plan review by the Department of Building and Safety.
66.
Pool excavation area shall be fenced immediately the same day as excavation
is complete. All plumbing trenches shall be fenced.
Obtain clearances from land Use and from Building and Safety Departments.
68. Provide a geological report at time of submittal for plan review.
A: \VTM23267 29
FIRE
AND FIRF r~ rEC'IC'.
F.N 1%I
FIRE CHIEI
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
46-209 OASIS STREET, SUITE 405
I,~DIO. CA {)2201
(61{}) 342-8886
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
376~ 12TH STREET
RIVERSIDE, CA g2S0!
(714) 787-6606
t
DATE:
TO:
ATTN:
RE:
January 29, 199!
City of Temecula
Planning Department
Tract No. 23267
With respect to the conditions of approvaZ for the above referenced land
division, the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection
measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or
recognized fire p~otection standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
Schedule A fire protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6"x~"x2~")
located one at each street intersection and spaced no more than 330 feet
· apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165
feet from a hydrant. Mint~num fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for 2 hours
duration at 20 PSI.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans
to the Flre Department for review. Plans shall be siped by a registered
civil engineer, containin2 a Fire Department approval signature block,
and shall conform to hydrant type, location, spacing and minimum fire
flow. Once plans are signed by the local water company, the originals
shall be presented to the Fire Department for signature.
The required water system, tncludtn2 fire hydrants, shall be installed
and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior ~o any combustible
bulldin2 material being placed on an individual 1o~.
Prior to the recordatton of the final map, the applicant/developer shall
provide alternate or secondary access as approved by the City of Temecuala-
Engineering Department,
MITIGATION
Prior to the recordargon of the final map, the developer shall deposit with
the City of Temecula, a cash sum of $~00.00 per lot/unit as mitigation for
fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of
payment, he/she may enter into s written agreement with the City deferring
said paymen~ to the time of issuance of the first building permit.
RE: TR 23267 Page 2
All questions regarding the meaning of cor, diticns shall be re£e~L. L,
the Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
By
Laura Cabtel, Fire Safety Specialis:
] ast rn unicipai
er District
Harch 8, 1991
Richard Ayala
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43180 Business Park Drive
Suite 200
Temecul a, CA 92390
Subject: Tentative Parcel Flap No. 23267
Dear Rr. Ayala:
As requested, we have reviewed the subject project
conmnents:
and
Sanitary Sewer
The subject project ts tributary to the Dtstrtct's Rancho
Wattr Reclamation Facility, via a sewer' system to be constructed by Assessmen
District No. 159. The developer is expected to submit a proposed conceptual
plan of sanitary sewer service to the Dtstrtct's Customer Service and Planning
Departments for review and approval. This plan shall provide for a system
of gravity-flow sewerlines located within road right-of-way accordtn9 to EHWD
.standards.
offer the following
California Regiona
It must be understood that the available capacity of the Dtstrtct's sewer syste.,.
are continually changing due to development within the District.' As such,
service will be provided based on the timing of the subject project, the service
agreement with the District, and the status of the Dtstrtct's permit to operatp.
ShoUld you have any questions regarding these conmnents, please contact Rut,
Newsham or me at (714) 766-1850.
Sincerely,
H. A1 Spencer '
o,
cc: John Frtcker, EHWD
Presley of San Diego, 15010 Avenue of Science, Ste. 200, San Diego, CA 921L,.
91-240
7/M
ATTACHMENT II
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT NO. 281
The Riverside County Board of Supervisors certified Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) No. 281 in conjunction with the approval of Change of Zone No. 5150 and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23267 and 23299. The EIR included mitigation
measures to reduce environmental impacts to levels of insignificance. Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 which supersedes Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23299 has 87 fewer residential units than Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23299 and
therefore, will generate less traffic and result in reduced impacts to the environment
and to public services and utilities. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 will
involve minimal grading and therefore, is unlikely that any additional amount of
earth movement will result in any increased significant impacts. The Conditions of
Approval are adequate to mitigate any potential impacts regarding drainage and non-
renewable fossil resources to levels of insignificance.
Pursuant to Section 151 6~ of the California Environmental Quality Act, this addendum
has ben prepared to demonstrate that the changes resulting from the proposed
Change of Zone and New Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Revised Tentative Tract
Map will not result in new or substantially increased significant impacts, that there
have been no changes in the circumstances surrounding the project that would
require important revisions to the EIR due to new significant impacts, and that no
new information has arisen which would indicate that the project will have significant
effects not previously discussad or underestimated, or that alternatives or mitigation
measures not previously considered would substantially reduce any significant
rmpacts. By reducing the number of residential units, the new project will reduce
the level of impacts on the environment and on public facilities and services.
A:\5.CZ
:"~ '~: 2ZNKS ' SUBMrTTALTO THE HfJARD OF SUPF:..tvlbUI~S
' ,::~' -~ "~J~, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STAI'E OF CALIFORNIA
~... .;,.
" 'FROM: THE PLANNZNG DEPARTHENT SUBMITtALDATE: October 2.0, ~[988
t I
-.'_.../
SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE 5150, VESTZNG TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23299, '~'
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23267 - THOTEM AMERICA CORP. - FirstsSupervisor
District - Rancho California Area - 221 Acres,596 Lots,232 Condominium Units -
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Schedule A - CHANGE OF ZONE from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-5.
err
The Planning Con~ission and Staff Reckmend:
CERTIFICATION of Environmental Impact Report No. 281 based on the
finding that the Environmental ]mpact Report is an accurate, objective
and complete document which complies with the California Environmental
Quality Act and the Riverside County Rules to Implement CEQA; and
APPROVAL of CHANGE OF ZONE N0. 5150 from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-5
in accordance with Exhibit 2, based upon the findings and con-
clusions incorporated in the Planning Commission minutes dated
OCTOBER 19, 1988; and
APPROVAL of V[STING TENTATIVE TRACT. N0. 23267, AHENDED N0. 2 subject
to the attached conditions, based on the findings and conclusions
incorporated in the Planning Commission minutes dated OCTOBER 19, 1988;
and
APPROVAL of VESTI'NG TEITTAT/VE TRACT NO. 23299 subject to the attached
conditions, based on the findings and conclusions incorporated in t~e
Planning Con~nission minutes dated OCTOBER 19, 1988.
P~:rs
10-16-98
Roge~r Street~e~nn~ ng"'~~D~ rector
'. vd. , ;'~;.'..', :.: ~:. Depts. Comments Dist.
AGENDA; ;' ·
ok
.: ZOAtng Area: Rancho California alXRGE OF ZONE I10. S150
Ftrsr- Supervtsortal DIstrict VESTING TENTATIVE TRACt N0, 23167
E.Z.R:' No. 282 VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT R0, 23299
Regional Team No. I Planning Commission: 10-19-88
, Agenda item No. 1-6
RZVERSIDE COUNTY PtJU~IING DEPAR~
STAFF REPORT
1. Rppltcant:
?, Engt neer/Rep.:
~l. T. rpe of Request:
ge
Location:
Existing Zontng:
Surrounding Zoning:
Existing Land Use:
· ~... :,..~ ~.,.r' . '..
Surrounding Land Use:
Cmprehenstve.~eheral Plan
Destgnatfon:
10. Land Dtvtston Data:
Agency Recemendattons:
12. Letters:
13. Sphere of Influence:
Thotem Amertcan Corporation
RanPac Engineering '
Change of zone from R-R to R-3, R-4 and
R-5, 232 unit condomlntum project and a
schedule "A" subdivision-
South of. HIghway 79, blest of Hargartta
Road.
R-R
R-R, A-1-10, R-A-2~, R-A-5
General]y vacant, a coup]e of residences
and structures, horse and cattle
grazing,
Scattered single family residences, a
horse ranch, a turf farm and vacant
land,
Land Use: Category I - II
Density: 2-20 d~elltng units per acre
Total Acreage: 221.2
VTR 23267 VTR 23299
Tota] Lots: 601 Sgle Faro. 232 Unlts
DU Per Acre: 3.01 du/ac 16.02 du/ac
Proposed Htn. Lot Size: 4500 sq. ft.
See Letters dated:
VTR 23267 VTR 23299 CZ 5150
Road 10-07-88 10-11-88 3-Z2-81~
Health: 09-12-88 8-29-88 no comeent
Flood: 10-18-88 10-18-88 4-18-88 (Addr,; ***
FIre: 09-09-88 8-24-88 no comment P. ~
Opposing/Supporting: None recetved 1:~ ~-.
Not wtthtn a City Sphere
NIN. TSIS:
ProJect Description
Change of Zone No. 5150 ts a request to change the zoning on 221.2 acres of
3and ¶n the Rancho Cal¶fornta area from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-5. Vesttng
Tentative Tract IIo. 23299 seeks to establish a 232 unit condomtntum project on
14.3 acres of the overall site. ¥esttng Tentative Tract 23267 seeks to
(XI~E OF ZONE RO. 5150
VESTXNG TENTAtiVE TRACT RO. 23267
YESTZRG TEXTATXVE TRACT IO. 23299
Staff Report ·
Page 2
subdivide the remaining acreage Into 601 slngle family residential lots with a
mtntmum stze of 4S00 square feet, two well stte lots, and 4 open · space lots
totallng 57.9- acres- Two of the open space lots are 'i~etghborhood arks
totaltn 10.2 acres. One open space lot includes Temecula Creek and wil~ be
:::s:roJect site ts located south of Highway 79 and west of Hargartta Road.
This site used to be a part of the Old Vat1Ranc · Currently the stte ~s used
for horse and cattle grazing, and contains a couple of single family residences
and assorted related structures- Surrounding land uses tnclude vacant land to
the east, but whtch has had two spectftc plans approved on tt (S.P. 217-Red
Hawk and 5.P- 223-Va~1 Ranch). The area to the north of Highway 79 shows
single family restdentSal dwellings on relatively large lots. A horse ranch
and turf ram are located to the ~est along Pala Road. The turf farm ts
currently under Agricultural preserve contract (Temecula Ho. 2). However, this
Agricultural preserve Contract had a nottce of non-reneval filed on tt on
September 20, 1979, so the Agriculture preserve Contract ~s due to exptre on
Oanuary'l, 1989. ,'
Zoning found tn the surrounding area currently ~ncludes R-R to the north, east,
south and west.. A-l-%0 to the east and south. and R-A-2~ and R-A-5 to the
north..
General Plan Consistency/ComPatibilitY
Planning
The pro~ect site ts located wt'thtn the Southwest Territory Land Use
Area. Just to the south of the Rancho Callfornta/Temecula subarea- Poltdes
wtthtn the Rancho Caltforn~a/Temecula subarea call for Care ory I and II land
Uses within the [-15 corridor transittoning to CategorY ~ll land uses on the
eastern e~d. These poltctes ca~ be extrapointed do~ to apply to the proposed
project' s location-
Category Z and ~! land uses now exist to the south of Highway 79 and west of
Pala Road Road. This trend towards urban development has been established in
the area south of Highway 79 and ts continuing to be extended through the
ectfic lan; tn the area. Two specific plans ad~ot:edt;~
CZlANGE OF ZOIE R0. 5150
VESTIIIG TENTATIVE 11tACT II0. 23267
VESTIRe TEliTAT/VE TEACT 10, 23299
Staff Report
Page 3
Category I and Zl levels of services and facilities are currently at the stte
or will be extended to the site through the Rancho village Assessment District,
of which this project will participate. Vesting Tentative Tract 23267 has an
everall density of 3.01 dwelling untts per acre and so falls within Category ]1
densities. Vesting Tentative Tract 23299 has · proposed density of 16.02
dwe111ng units per acre and so ts wlthtn Category Z densities. The proposed
tracts are const dered compattble ~ th ext sttng area development and wtth
projects approved tn the area. The pro osals are therefore found to be
consistent ~th the Comprehensive General*'~lan.
T~e proposed zone change application proposes zontng which ts consistent with
the land uses proposed under the two Vesting Tentative Tracts. The zone change
request ts therefore considered consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan.
Des~qn Considerations
The proposed tentative tracts have been destgned tn accordance wtth their
respective residential development standards, and all other pertinent standards
of Ordinances 348 and 460. The applicant ts requesting the waiver of lot
length to tridth ratio requirements on a number of lot~ withtn Vesting Tentative
Trac~ No. 23267. This request ts necessary due to design and or physical
constraints associated with the stte. Staff feels this requested waiver ts
acceptable.
Due to the tract's vesting status, additional mtertals were submitted for
review tn accordance with Ordinance 460. All submitted mtertals were found to
be adequate. These plans will be Implemented through the conditions of
approval.
Architectural elevations and materials were submitted in conjunction w~t,
vesting Tract 23299. These Its were reviewed and ·pproved and will be
Implemented through the conditions of approval.
As ts the appllcant's option, · destgn manual addressing architecture.
landscaping, Irrigation, and fencing ms submitted wtth Vesting Tract 23267.
These development guidelines will be Implemented through an Ordinance No. 348,
Sectton 18,30 plan plan which will need to be submitted and approved by the
Planning Deparbnent prior to the tssuance of anY building pemtts.
ot
C!IA,qGE OF X R0, 5150
VESTING TE!iTATTVE .1lAG!' ll0. 23267
VESTtRG TENTAtiVE 'itACT BOo Z)299
St~ff I~l~rt
Page 4
Envt romental Rev'!ew
In accordance vith the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), Environmental Impact Report No. 28Z was prepared tn connection wtth the
proposed project- All significant effects of the project on the environment
and measures necessary to avoid or substantially lessen such ~ffects have been
evaluated tn accordance ~th the Riverside County Rules to Implement CEQA. The
follovring Findin and Statements of Overriding Consideration are based upon
that Envt ronmenta~s ZmPact Report.
Z. Avotded Impacts and Impacts mitigated to 'an Instqntftcant level
Seismic Safety
a. Potential Impact: The site could be subjected to seismic event hazards
such as groundshaking, ground rupture, and liquefaction- The Wtldomar.
fault is located on-s~te along the western most edge, This fault
could have a highest magnitude of 7,0 on the Richter scale during a
seismic event, A moderate to high liquefaction potential exists nea~
Temecula Creek.
-~b. Required Htttgatton: ~ fifty (SO) foot setback area will be placed on
either side of the Wtldomar Fault, wtth no structure for human
occupancy allowed wtthtn the setback. Destgn of the structures on the
roject stte shall be in accordance with the latest (Z985) Uniform
~ullding Code and County Gradtng Ordinance and shall be designed to
withstand earthshaking from the maxtmum credtble earthquake that can
be expected- Liquefaction hazard can be mitigated by over-excavation
and replacement of recompacted fill.
c. Ftnding: All potential seismic tmpacts can be mitigated to a 1eve1 of
insignificance-
5lopes and Erostons
a. Potential Impact: Erosion hazard and slope ~nstabtlttyvtll increase
during gradtng, Stltatton of the reservoir and drainages my occur.
b. Hittgatton: All grading activities vtll be tn conformance with
County grading standards- All count~ eroston control practices shall
be adhered to Including slope planttng and sandbagging. A destltatton
bastn wtll be provided tn the open space area to reduce stltatton of
the creek during ttmes of peak run-o f,
Ftndtn: Potential tmpacts can be mitigated to a level of
c. Insignificance-
CHARGE OF 2/IE RO. 5150
VEST1~ TERTATIVE TRACT I0. 23267
¥EST*XRG TEIITATXVE TRACT RO, 23299
Staff Report
Page S
F'lood]nq
a. Potential Impacts: Increased runoff potential through construction of
impervious surfaces, potential impacts to downstream · properties
through the concentration and diversion o
impacts to areas of development withtn the 10~ storm flows. Potential
year floodplain.
b. Mitigation: Temecula Creek will be improved through the Rancho
Villages Assessment District o~ which this project is a part.
Improvements to Temecula Creek tnclude'a 400 foot wide, soft bottomed
channel with concrete sides. All areas within the 100 year floodplain
will be removed from said floodplain through improvement of Temecula
and box culvert will convey storm flows
Creek. A drainage channel
under State Highway 79. In addition, all requirements found in the
County Flood Control District shall be adhered to.
c. Finding: All potential flooding impacts can be mitigated to a level of
insignificance.
Raise
Hi hwey 79 will impact the site, with
a. Potential Impacts: Noise from dBtA) at a
100 feet from the
distance of
to be 74.8
noise roJected
centerlgne of Highway 79. The entire area of residential development
north of Temecula could experience noise levels in excess of 65 dB(A).
b. Mitigation: Landscaping and block wells will be used in areas adjacent
to roadwe s. A six foot high or higher decorative block wall and
earthen ~erm will be required along Highway 79, adjacent to the
project site. Interior noise levels can be reduced to under 45 dB(A)
through use of double glazed windows, mechanical ventilation and
mandatory air conditioning units. In addition Title 24 standards will
be camp1 led wtth.
Findin: The potential noise impact can be mitigated to a level of
c. tnstgnVficance ·
Water Quality
a. Potential Impacts: A potential stltatton of natural drainages and
rainy per ads. Pollurania from street
Te~ecula Creek may occur during
runoff could enter waterways. Introduction of impervious surfaces
could slow any recharge of groundwater in the area.
4,
OUUIGE OF-ZONE I10. 5150
VESTING TEIfIATIYE TRACT NO, 23267
VESTING-TEMTATIVE TRACT NO. 23299
Staff Report
.Page 6
b. Httigatton: ~ltance with County Gradtng standards, Including the
use of sand bagging and destltation basins during rainy weather will
be utilized- The project is retaining many dratna e areas and slopes
to act as natural filtering systema for $treet.runoVf.,
c. Finding: Potential impacts can be mitigated to a level of
Insignificance- '
Veqetatton/Wtldltfe ""'.' '
a. Potential Impacts: Sensitive spectes occurring on stte Include
Blackshoulder ktte, Coopers Hawk, Northern Harrier, and Nevtn's
Barberry. In addition, the San Diego Horned Lizard has a high
probability of occurring on site. potential impacts to these
senstthe species may occur with development of this project. The
rtpartan area within Temecula Creek wtll be disturbed upon improvement
of the Temecula Creek Channel ,rith the loss of four (4) acres of
unconsoltdated rtpartan scrub. '
b. Htttgatton: The r~partan area will be disturbed through the
Improvement of the Temecula Creek ChanneY by the Rancho Villages
Approximately 24.5 acres of rtpartan habitat
Assessment District-
wtll be removed al.ong the leng of the Creek. The biological
enhancement program associated v~h the creek improvement will
establish 70 acres of revttaltzed habitat, whtch wtll off-set any
tntttal loss of rtpartan hab¶tat. The subject property ~s part of the
RancHo Vtllages Assessment D1strtct and w]11 participate in the
program.
The rtpar(an area near the ex(st~ng reservoir wtll be retatned in an
open space lot. The project has designated approximately 58 acres of
open space, ~hich ~tll he]p mitigate impacts to the extsttng sensitive
btrd spectes and whtch wtll preserve most of the inland sage scrub
plant community found on site. Of the t~o ex~sttng specimens of
Nevtn's Barberry found on site one will be preserved w¶thin the open
space area. A professional horticulturist will also take cutttngs of
the Revtn's Barberry found adjacent to the extsttng residence and
replant these tn the Open Space area near the other Nevtn's Barberr~a;d
in areas of designated open space wtll be planted with native
°PP°rtunittesrfe°rwi~lPbe r~tatned as Open Space with suttable h
OlAfICE OF ZORE RO. 5150
VESTING ..TEXTATIVE TRACT RO. 23267
VESTING TERTATIVE TRACT NO. 2.3299
Staff Report
Page7 ·
c. Findings: Potential tepacts to sensitive biological spectes can be
mitigated to a level of Insignificance.
Eaeray Resources
Potential Impacts: Short tern energy use wt'l 1 occur during
construction with the use of fuels by construction equipment.
Long-tern energy use ktll occur through home heating and lighting and
automobile fuel use. Energy consumption after butldout w111 be the
fol 1 o~t ng: ,.
1. Gasoline - 522 vehicle gallons per day.
2. Natural Gas - 30,392 cubtc feet per day.
3. ElectMctty - 13,811 ktlwatt - hours per day.
Ntttgatton: A Class I bicycle trail will be provided adjacent to the
proposed channel. Title 24 energy conservation practices will be
incorporated into the design and developeent of the houses.
Findings: Potential energy Impacts wtll be'mitigated to a level ~f
insignificance. ,'
Scentc Hfqhways
Potential Impacts: Highway 79 is an eligible scenic highway.
Development.of the proposed project could impact the scenic quality of
the area.
b. Nitigatlon: LandsCaped entry nodes will he provided throughout the
ro ect and a landscaped buffer strip will be built adjacent to
~ig~way 79. Landscape plans will be reviewed by the Planning
Department to ensure adequacy.
c. Findings: The potential impacts to the eligible scenic highway are
mitigated to a level of Insignificance.
Archaeoloq?cal Resources
Potential Impacts: A site of prehistoric Indian Habitation is found on
the north side of Temecula Creek on the first stream terrace. The
existing historic twe story adobe "winter residence" of Walter Vail is
also located on site. Disturbance of these sttes could tmpact these
resources.
b. Prior to any disturbance on site, a qualified Archaeologist shall
review the registered Indian site and collect any data as necessary-
(3lARGE OF ZI)RE RO, 5150
VESTING TE)ffAT]¥E TRACT IK)o Z3267
WESTleG TE]~ATIYE IRACT I0. Z37.99
StJff
Page 8
Co
Data collection methods shall tnclude test bortngs and excavations as
found necessary by the archaeologist and as approved by the Planntng
Department. The extsttng adobe house on site wtll be preserved on so
no trapacts wtll occur.
Findings: All archaeological tmpacts can be avotded or mitigated to an
tnstgnt ticant level.
Paleontoloqy
a. Potential Impact: ProJect site ts located near Pauba formation land
whtch ts known to produce significant paleontologtcal resources.
Potential impacts may occur durtng grading and trenching.
Htttgatlon Keasures: A cluelifted paleontologist shall be consulted
prtor to any gradtng and shall monttor the grading activity.
*SIgnificant finds shall be identified, ttemtzed and conclusions
presented by the qualified paleontologist. **
c. FIndings: Any Paleontologtcal tmpacts can be avoided or mitigated to a
level of Insignificance. .'
CIrculation
a. Potential Impacts: the proposed project coebtned wtll generate 7,392.
trtp ends per day.
tqtttgatton: All tnternal street systems wtll be put in place by the
developer of thts project, tqaJor circulation roads tn the area wtll
be tmproved by the Rancho Vtllages Assessment Dtstrtcto by whtch thts
project wt11 participate. Roads to be teproved tnclude Htghway 79 to
a 142 foot R.O.W. six lane road, Hargartta Road south of Highway 79 to
a 134/100foot R.O.W. arterial, and Pale Road south of Highway 79 to a
110 foot R.O.W. arterial. A bike land is also being provided adjacent
to Temecula Creek.
c. Traffic tmpacts can 'be mitigated toe level of Insignificance.
Water and Sewer
Potential Impacts: The proposed project wt11 have an estimated daily
water consumption of 547,800 gallons per day, wtth the creatton of
273,900 gallons of wastewater.
b. MItigation: Rancho California Water Dtstrfct and Eastern Yunicipal
Water Dtstrict have expressed a posttlve abtltty to serve the proposed
(3lARGE OF ZOIIE RO, 5150
¥ESTIRG TENTATIVE 11tACt lO, 23267
VEStiNG TENTATXYE TRACT NO, ?.3299
Page 9 ·
c, Findtrig: Impacts
significant,
Fire.
project. Ptpellne facilities wtll be Installed through the Rancho
Vtllages Assessment DIstrict, by whtch thts project w(11 participate.
Mater conserving methods ~11 be tncluded tn the development of the
roJect tn accordance wtth Tttle 24. In addition, drought tolerant
~andscaptng automatic Irrigation systems wtll be provtded in the
and
project, '
to water and sewer, serv(ce~ are not considered
a, PotentSal/rapact: Development of thts project will Incrementally
Increase demand for flre services.
b, Iqtttgatton: The project shall comply wtth all applicable fire
prevention and emergency response provisions contained tn RIverside
County Ordinances, In addition, the developer w~11 pay $400,00 per
untt to go toward fire protection trapacts, ..
c. Findtrig: Impacts to ftre servtces can be m~,t~gated to a level of
tns t gnt f~ cance - '
Sheriff Service
a. Potential Impacts: 0evelopment of this project w~11 add an estimated
1743 people to the area, which w~11 have an Incremental (mpact on the
need for pollce services.
b. Ntttgatfon: Crtme prevention methods wtll be destgned into the
development of th(s project. Manpower Increases are at the discretion
of the Board of Supervisors, however, this project pay county w~de
mitigation fee of whtch a portion can go toward addtng additional
pol 1ce protection.
c. F(ndtng: Potential 4mpacts to pol$ce services can be mitigated to d
level of tnstgntftcance-
School s
Potential Impacts: Development of thts pro;~ect wtll generate an
estimated total of 450 new students.
lttttgatton: The project developer wtll be requtred to pay schou!
E!ttgatton fees tn accordance with State Law.
(2lARGE OF ZORE I10, 5150
YESTIE TENTATIVE TRACT RO, 23267
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT I10. 23299
Staff Report
Page 10
c. 'Finding: impacts to schools can be mitigated to a level of
lnstgntftcance.
Parks and Recreation
a. Potential Impacts: The state Qutmby Act requires 3 acres of park site
er one thousand people. Development of thts project would require
~.2 acres of park stte. :--
b. Mitigation: The proposed project ~111 provide'two parks totalling 10.2
acres of land. An approximately 1.0 acre park stte is located in the
northern port¶on of the project site and a 9.2 acre park site ts
located in the southern tip. In addition, a 35.9 acre regional park
ts betng proposed by the Rancho Villages Assessment District for the
Temecula Creek area. This regional park wtll tnclude equestrian
trails and bike paths. Mother 11.8 acres of Open Space area which
tncludes the 'old adobe structure" Is proposed-.
c. Finding: Provision of the two park sites totalling 10.2 acres and with
the proposed regional parks, impacts to park and recroatlon servtces
are mitigated to a level of insignificance..'
Utt1 tttes
FIndtn s: Impacts to utilities can be mitigated to a level
c. tnstgnlftcance.
Potential .Impacts: Incremental increase in demand for utility
services. Temporary creation of dust and noise from construction of
utility lines.
~!ttgatton: The developer wt]l be required to extend all utilities as
necessary. Dust shall be controlled during construction activity
through the use of watering trucks. Vegetation losses will be
replaced with appropriate planrings in areas damaged by trenching-
Sandbagging shall be used to prevent runoff.
of
Soltd Maste
Potential tmpacts: Thts project will create 19,626 pounds of solid
waste per day. Mequate capacity ts currently available to handle
this need.
b. Mitigation: No Elttgatton required.
QUUIGE OF ZIIE R0. 5150
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT II0, 23267
VESTING TERTATlVE ~ NO. 23299
Staff Report
Page 11
c. Finding: There
facilities-
wtll be no significant tmpact to soltd waste
LIbraries
a. potential Impacts: Oevelopment of thts projec;t
tncrenental tmpact on library services,
b, Mitigation: The
mitigation fee,
c. Finding: Library tmpacts can be
Insignificance-
have an
developer will,. be required to pay $1oo.oo per untt
mtttgated to a
level of
Health Services
a. Potential [mpacts: Oevelopment of thts project will have an
Incremental increase tn demand for health service- Current and
planned facilities tn the area. appear capable of meeting 'bny
additional demand, /
b. llittgatton: No mitigation required
c, Ftnd]ng: There is no significant tmpact to health services,
At rports
a. Potential Impacts: Hinthal
impact to area airports ts anticipated-
Mitigation: No Mttgatton required,
Findtag: There ts no significant impact to area airports-
Dtsaster preparedness
a. Potential Impacts: Htntmal tmpacts
Preparedness ts anttctpated-
b. Mitigation: No ndttgatton required.
are no significant
c. Finding:' There
preparedness-
to the County' s
Disaster
tmpacts toward Otsaster
~ OF 2DRE RO, 5150
¥EST]m~ TENI*ATIVE 'IIACT RO. 23267
lESTIra: TE!ITATXVE 'IllACT NO. ?,3299
Staff RE~rl;
Page 12
~tsca~ ~mpacts
a. Potential Impacts: The fiscal study found wtthtn the EIR states that
the entire project will have a net posttire tapact to the County of
approximately $56,008 annual ly.
b. 94tt¶gatton: No mJtlgatton proposed-
c. Finding: No significant fiscal negative'fiscal impact will occur.
[I. PROJECT ALTERRATIYE5
The California Environmental Quallty Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines require
the consideration of alternatives to the proposed project. Three alternatives
were considered ~thin this EIR. These are the 'No Project Alternative'· the
'Decreased Scope Alternattve', and the 'Increased Scope Alternative..
No Pr~ect Alternative
a. Analysis: The No Project Alternative "would a11o~ the land to remain
non-intensive uses such as the extsttn horse and,' cattle ranch and the
e~isting limited residential uses of ~e property owner and workers. Given
this. scenado, none of the tmpacts of the proposed project would occur.
The No Project Alternative is considered the environmentally superior
alternative due' to the least environmental impacts. Impacts associated
with seismic safety, grading, noise, air quality, water quality, loss of
Agricultural land, vegetation and wildlife, energy resources, public
services and utilities, and traffic NoUld not occur or would be
substantial ly less.
b. Reasons for Rejection of No Project Alternative: This alternative would
negate the benefits associated with development of the 600 detached
dwelling units and 230 condomtntum units. These units are proposed to
reflect anticipated market needs and public demand by providing detached
dwelling units that will be arkarable within the region. Long-term use of
the site is not considered economically feasible and ts not mandated by the
General Plan. In light of the approved urban land uses in the near
vicinity, continued intensive agricultural uses could lead to
incompatibility of land uses.
GIAIEE OF ZONE RO. 5150
YESTIE TENTATIVE TRACT I10. 23267
VEStiNG TERTATXYE 1]tACT I10. 23299
Staff Report
Page 13
Decreased Scope Alternative
a. Analysts: Thts alternative rill assume the
toparty ts developed out in
accordance vtth the extsttng R-R zone (Rura~ Rastdenttal). With the
property developed at one dwe111ng untt per ~ acre, this alternative
addresses development of SSO dwelling units.
Development of this stte under the Decreased Scope Alternative Nould have
t actS on seismic safety, Air Quality, Mater Qualtty, Energy Resources,
Pu~lic Services and Utilities, and Traffic that would be less than the
proposed project. Potential Impacts upon Slopes and Erosion, Flooding,
Noise, Agricultural Resources, Vegetation and Mildlife, Archaeological
Resources, and Paleontological Resources would be about the same.
Increased ]mpact to Mater Quality might be expected due to use of septic
systems.
Reasons for Rejection of the'Oecreased Scope Alternative: Although the
Decreased Scope Alternative contains Incrementally reduced Impacts in
certain above mentioned areas, ttts not considered to be significantly
'environmentally superior' to the current development proposal. The
elind~atton of the smaller lot product Inhibits the provision of homes
withtn a more affordable range. The costs of roadway Improvements as well
as costs associated ~th water, sewer and flood control facilities are not
proportionately decreased under this alternative, making the' project
economically difficult. For these reasons, the Reduced Scope Alternative
was rejected.
Increased Scope Alternative
Ana13fs~s: The Increased Scope Alternative would assume butlding out the
project site with multi-family dwelltrig units at a density of %2-%4
dwelling units per acre. MIth this sort of density, more than 3,000
dwelltrig units could be built.
The Increased Scope Alternative Nould have greater Impacts upon Seismic
Safety, Slopes and Erosion, Flooding, Notse, A(r quallty, ~ater 0ualtty,
Energy Resources, Land Use, Public Services and Uttlttles, and Traff c.
~mpacts on Agricultural Resources, Vegetation and'N~ldltfe, ArchaeologiCal
Resources, and Paleontologtcal Resources would be about the same.
b. Reasons for Re'action of the Tncreased Sco · Alternative: Several adverse
impacts are anticipated ~tth the tncreasec~p traffic, noise, air qualit ,
setsmlc safety, and public services and facilities. Land use confltc[~
between such an Intense project and surrounding approve~ land uses could be
significant. Because all Impacts under this alternathe are either equal
to, or greater' than, the proposed project, this alternative ts
OIARGE OF ZORE NO. 5150
YESTXNG TENTAtiVE 11tACT RO. 23267
VESTING TEXTATXVE 11UiCT liO. 23299
Staff Report;
Page 14
environmentallY tnfertor than the proposed project. For these reasons,
thts alternative was rejected.
IIX. ReJected Conditions of Approval
The*conditions of approval or the proJect's design include 'al1 recommended
mitigation measures set forth tn Environmental Zmpact Report No. 281, except
that measure which requires a regional application and ts beyond the scope of
the individual deve]oper. This weasure ts the requirement of park and rtde
facilities tn the area to mittgate energy impacts.
1V. St;ntftcant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts and Project Beneftts
ProJect Benefits:
Development of the project as proposed wtll provide the following beneftts to
the region:
1) Improved Traffic Circulation: Traffic drculatton will be improved tn the
project area by the project's inclusion within the Rancho V~llages
Assessment District. Improvements include widening of Rancho California
Road to a 142 foot R.O.H., making tt a stx lane expressway, ~mprov~ng
Hargartta Read to a 134 foot arterial, and Improvement of Pala Road to 110
foot R.O.H.
2) ;mproved Flood Control: Participation of thts project site tn the Rancho
Vtllages Assessment D~strtct will go tovards ~mprovement of Temecula Creek
tnto a 400 foot wide, soft bottoeed, concrete sided channel. '
acre Open Space/Regional Park. Participation of this project tn the Rancho
VtlTages Assessment District also will see the Temecula Creek Channel area
developed Into a 35.9 acre open space area and regtonal park wtth
equestrian trails and bicycle paths Included. ~htle the neighborhood park
sites are being developed primarily for the residents of the project, the
the Quteb~ Act, and, along with the regional parks,
residents already tn the cmmuntt~.
SIgnificant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts:
Environmental Impact Report No. 281
unavoidable adverse Impacts.
identified
the following significant
CHARGE OF ZOilE RO, 5150
VESTING TERTATIVE TRACT NO. 23267
VEST/NG TENTATIVE TRACT IlO, 23299
SUff IlL-port
Page 15
&tr Qualtty:
a. Potential Tmpacts: Vehicle exhaust en~sston and dust during cOnStrucl:ton
rill contribute to air qualtty reductions tn the area on a short-term
busts. The long-term tmpacts wtll be Increased motor vehtcle emissions by
more people betn9 dra~n tnto the area and from Increased power plant
emissions due to the demand for electricity and Mtural~. gas,
b. Required Htttqatlon: Hater trucks will be. used to reduce dust. On-site
parks will create o,-stte trip destinations.. A Class T btke tratlts
tnc]uded tn the Regional Park. TItle 24 'standards w711 be adhered to
durtng construction. Transtt facilities such as benches. shelters, and
turnouts will be destgned tnto develo;ment.of the parks to facilitate any
future mass transtt systen.
Unavoidable Adverse Tmpact: A temporary degradation of atr quality vtll
result in the project vicinity durtng construction acttvtty with an overall
significant incremental regional degradation due to project Implementation.
Overriding Findtnq: The publtc benefits of the proposed project In teres'of
public improvements to road and flood facilities and by the develoFment
neighborhood and regtonal parks out,etgh the proJ'ect's adverse tmpact upon
it
air qua1
a. Potential Tmpacts: Development of the proposed project vtll result tn loss
of current agricultural uses and the loss Of 27 acres of prime agricultural
land (Class ! and Z! soils).
b. Htttqatton: No mitigation measure available to mtttgate these impacts.
c. Unavoidable Adverse Impact: Loss of 27 acres of prtme farm land
considered cumulattvely significant.
d. Overrtdtnq Ftndtng: Agricultural production tn thts area ts becoming, or
has beceme, economically tnfeastble. Continued use of the land for
agricultural practices could lead to land use tncompattbtllttes tn 11ght of
approved and extsttng projects tn the area. The project benefits
substantially out~etgh the unavoidable adverse tmpact caused by the loss of
these prtee solls,
CHANGE OF ZOnE NO. 5150
VESTING TENTAtiVE TRACT RO, 23267
VE.%'TING TENTATIVE ~ NO. 232~9
Staff Report
Page* 16
TIHDIHGS:
1. Change of Zone rio. S1SO seeks to change the zoning on 221,2 acres from R-R
to R-3, R-4 and 8-5.
2. Vesting Tentative Tract Ho. 23299 seeks to create 232 condomtnJum untts on
14.3 acres of the site. ~'
Vesting Tentative Tract No, 23267 seeks to create 601 sJngle family lots
and 4 open space lots on the remainder. of the site,
4. The stte ts located south of Htghway 79 and Wrest of Ibrgartta Road.
5. The project site ts currently used for horse and cattle graztng. A couple
of residences and assorted related structures are found on stte.
6. Surrounding Land Uses tnclude' s¶ngle Tamtly residences, a horse ranch, a
tuff farm and vacant land.
7. Surrounding zontng tncludes R-R, A-Z-XO,"R-A-2~ a~d'R-A-5. ' '
8. The project stte lies adjacent to t~o approved spedfit plans (S.P. 217 -
Redhawk and S.P. 223 - Vat1 Ranch). These spectftc plans are located to
the east and south of the project stte.
9. The turf ram located to the southwest currently has a spectftc plan betng
processed on tt (S.P. 228 - Hurphy Ranch).
1O. The agricultural preserve contract on the adjoining ~urf ram (Temecula
Ho. 2), will expire on January X, 1989.
X.1. The project stte ts located ~ithtn the Southwest Territory Land Use
Planntng Area. ~
12. [nvtronmental Impact Report Ho. 281 vas prepared for the proposed pro3ect-
FIndings, HIt1 atton IMasures and Statements of Overriding Consideration
are found tn ~hts staff report on pages 4 through 15 and are Incorporated
here by reference.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The proposed zone change and vesting tentative tracts are consistent wtth
the poltctes of the Coeprehenstve General Plan.
2, The proposals are compattble vtth area development and zoning.
CHAIIGE OF ZINIE RO. 5150
VESTING TENTATZVE TRACT RO. 23267
VES11~ TEIITATIVE TRACT leO. 23299
Page 17
3. The project conforms t.o al1 applicable count3f ordinances.
4. Overriding flnd.~ngs necessary to approve this pro:iect are found wtthtn the
staff report. ***
RE~ATIORS:
CERTIFICATION of Environmental Impact Report No. 281 based ~n the finding that
~Fie ;Fnvtronmental Impact Report ts an accurate, objective and complete document
which corn l~es with the California Environmental Qualtt3r Act and the Riverside
CountJr Ru~es to implement CEQA; and, '
APPIIOVAL of CHARGE OF ZONE I10. 5150 from R-R to R-3, R-4 and R-S tn accordance
with Exhibit 2; and
APP~DVAL of VEStiNG 1ENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23267, N4ENDED RO. 2, subject to the
conditions of approval; and,
APPROVAL of VESTING TENTATIVE 11tACT NO- 23299, sub~Ject to the conditions of
approval and ~n accordance w~th Exhibit A, Amended No. 2~ and based upon t~e
ftndincJs and conclusions incorporated tn this staff report-
GN:sc
'lO!J2/8B
· ~ ,CZ.5150/VTR 23299/VTR 2326/
o.
HORSE
RANCH
LAND USE
· k
tOM & LINO&
,MAP e349
'%...-':/
',,,,,
TURF FARM
VAC.
RES-:,
MAP dl'l'4l
· · · 1,4X, ATIONAL, MAP
A. pp. MR. BRIAN HAYWOO0
UN R-R TO R-4, R-2, AND R-5
· Aree TEMECULA RANCHO Sup. Dist. 1
Sec. T. 8 S.,R. 2W Asseetor's Bk. 926 Pg- 16 .....~.
'-::.-,.- ,. -"
Circulotion ~ EXPWY VARIABLE
; '1" ."~'l"U": pO. 56ADote 3117188 Drown By SS .L-',-- --"-- r
N0' }C..*LE
I 0
I"" ' 20 ' tWVE~IDE COUNTY" PI.. AtVNING DE'PAR TMEN T
-2
2: I \ R-R ..~~o..
\,\ .
A-1-10
~
>.'- ' · r ~~"~'~'. ~ L~ . . ' "'
'. '/~':"' A-1-10 ,~,~R
;' .' --_ ~ x~x ,
' '*' '7' -...-'."' ....
Use R-R TO R-4, R-I, AND R-5'u's
. . . · ..
.|
II
m
m
i
el
-":liVF..:t iD conrio-u
pLArlrlirlG DF-.PA::IciTIF-FI
DATE: 7ebruary 29,. 1988
Assessor
BuildinS and Safety
Surveyor - Dave Duda
god Department
Health - Ralph Luchs
Fire Protection
Flood Control District
Fish & Game
LAYCO, S Paisley
U,S, Postal Service - truth I;, Davidsou
' :' ~ -'. .. C '.". '."., ~' 'VERSsD
;-L~:',.. '.;- ~, .:. :~'-. ;':.~* ' E COUN~ ROAD
..... DEPARTMENT
Con~iss~oner Ureason
Rancho Caltf. Hater
Eatern Municipal Water
Southern Ca14f. Edtson
Southern Cal~f. Gas
General Telephone
Dept. of Transportation #8
Temecula Union Htgh School
Temecula Chamber of Conrnerce
at. Palsmar
Sterra Club
¥alleywtde Parks
County Parks
CHANGE OF ZONE 5150 - (Tm-1) - g.A, 325~
.ThotemAmericau Corp, - gancho Pacific
- Rancho California Area - First
Supervisorial District - South of Highway
79 and yest.ofNargarita Itoad -~-it Zone
- 207.6 acres - KEQUES Change of Zone to
g-2, It-& and It-5 - Concurrent Cases VTP
23267, VTR 23299 -~od 120 - A.P-
926-160-010 to 013; 926-160-002-003
County Avtatton k Land
Plnsme revise the case described above, along vith the attached case map.
Division Committee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for April 28, 1988. If it
clear's, it will then go to public hearing-
Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to April l&, 1988 in order that
my include the in the staff report for this particular use,
Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact
Greg Neal'a.t 787-1363
Planner /
DITI: :SIGNATURE
I.EASE print name and title
4nlqn ! FMON STREET. 9~" FLOOR
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM
I
KENNLrTH I_ LrDWARD!
1111
Riverside County
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND.
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
111111311111, {:AI-III~IINIA IIIOle
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside. California
Attention: Regional T~. /
Area:~A~D
have revtewed this case and Ik~ve the foil.owing comments:
Except for nuisance nature local runoff which may traverse portions of the
property the project is cansidered free from ordinary storm flood hazard.
However, a storm of unusual magnitude could cause some damage. New construc-
tion should comply with all applicable ordinances.
The topography of the area consists of well defined ridges and natural water-
courses which traverse the property. There ts adequate area outside of the
natural watercourses for building sites. The natural watercourses should be
kept free of buildings and obstructions tn order. to maintain the n~tural
drainage patterns of the area and to prevent flood.damage to new buildings. ,,
A note should be placed on an environmental constraint sheet stating, "All new
buildings shall be floodprnofed by elevating the finished floors a minimum of
38 inches above adjacent ground surface. Erosion pro~ection shall be provided
for mobtle home supports.'
This project is in the Area
drainage plan fees shall be paid in accordance with the applicable r~les an,~
regu]-ations.
The proposed zoning Is consistent with existing flood hazards. Some
control facilities or floodproofing may be required to fully develop to th~
tepl~ed density.
The,Oistrtct's report dated is still current for this project.
The District does not object to the proposed minor change.
The attached coaments apply.
Very truly yours,
KENNETH L. EDHAROS
C~tef Engineer2 /
HN H. KASHU3A
April
5,
2988
R;V-".~.~;-r.'-= .'2, ,:: :j ' . TY
PLA:;r~N.G
Offietn:
Stun T. ?,lilts
Phillip L. Forbes
Di~r of Finee -
~asu~
N~mn L ~om~
D~ d En~
~omas R. M~i~
i M~n~m
B~b~t J, ~
Di~ d ~~ '
Ruton and ~er
Riverside County Planning Department
4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor
Riverside, California 92501-3657
Subject: Water Avallablli~Y
Reference: Change of Zone 5150
Vesting Tract 23267
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that the above-referenced
property is located within the boundaries of Rancho
California Water District- Water service, therefore,
would be available upon completion of financial
arrangements between RCWD and~he property owner.
Water availability would .be contingent upon the
property owner signinq an .~ency Aqreement which
assigns water management rights, if any, to RCW~
Sites for additional water production facilities n,
be required within the proposed development dependin9
upon the level of increased demand created by the
proposal.
If
contact
RCWD can be of further service to you, please
this office-
Very truly yours,
RXNCHO CkLIFORNIAWXTER DISTRICT
Senga P- Deherty
Engineering Services Representative
F011/dpmll3
RANCHO CALIFORNIA W.-ATER DISTR
28061 DIAZ ROAD * POST OFFICE DOX 174 * TEMECULA. CA 92390-0174 * a14| 876-4101 o FAX a14t
RZVTRSiDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTHENT
SUBDIVISION
CONDiTiONS OF APPROVAL
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23267
DATE:
N4L'lm~ NO. Z
EXPIRES:
STANDARD CONDITIONS
The sukifvfder shall defied, tndenmtf , and hold hamlesT the County of
RIverside, tts agents, officers, led employees from seX eli m, actton, or
proceeding agatha, the County of Riverside or tts agents, officers, or
emplo es to attacks set aside, votd, or annul an approval · the County
~t t r ht
of &~vverstde, 1is advtsof7 agencies, appeal boards or leg slattve body
concerning Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23267, ~hlch ectto s b aug
about wtthtn the ,tee period provided for tn California 6overnment Code
Section 66499.37. The County of RIverside vtll promptly notif~ the
subdivider of any such claim, actions or proceeding agatha, the County of
RIverside end wtll coo rate full tn the defense. If the County fails to.
promptly nottry the su~ivtder o~Yany such cletm, action, or proceeding or
fells to coope_.rete fully tetM defense, the subdivider shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, Indemnify, or hold himless the
County of RIverside.
2. The tentative su~tvtston shall camp1 vtth the State of California
Sulxltvtston FlIp Act and to all the re Tramants of Ordinance 460, Schedule
As unless mdtfled by the conditions T~sted below.
3. Thts condltlonally 8pprovod tentative mp vtll exptre tvo years after the
County of RIverside Board of Supervisors approval date, unless extended is
provided by Ordinance 460.
4. The find mp shall be prepared by I licensed lend surveyor subject to ell
the requiresanta of the State of California Subdivision Kip Act and
Ordinance 460.
S. The subdivider shall subat, see copy of ·sotls report to the RSverstde
County Surve)1)r's Office and ha coptea to the Department of lutldtng and
Safety, The re rt shall address the so 1l steb1111~ end geological
conditions efT jOel to. I
t
6. If any gradtng ts proposed, the subdivider shall subat, one print of
c_omprehenstve grading plan to the Departmnt of hlldtng led Safety. The
plan shall comply idth thlUnlfom klldtng Code Chapter 70 u amended
by Ordinance 4S7 and as mybe additionally ;rovlded f~ tn these
conditions of approval.
VEStiNg TENTATnE 11Kf no. 23267 And. I!
Condltlem ef Mwwal
Page ! ~
e
A gradtng permtt shall be obtatned from the OepartNent of Butldtng and
Safety prtor to coneencement of any gradtng outstde of coun~ maintained
road rtght of ua),.
8. My delinquent property taxes shall be patd prior to recordatton of the
ftnal map.,
The subdivider shall cmuply with the street Improvement recmmendattons
d
outltned tn the RIverside Count), Roe Deparbnent's letter dated 20-07-88,
a cop), of tilth Is attached.
Legal access as requtred by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract
IMp boundary to a County IMlntatned road.
22. M1 road easements shall be offered for dedication to the publtc and shall .
conttnue tn force until tim ,yarntrig body accepts or abandons such
offers. AI1 dedications sha~l be free from all encmrbrances as approved
the had Cmmtssloner. Street names shall be subject to approval of
tb~inoad Ccmdssloner. "
Easements, vhen required for rondos), slopes, dretnage facilities,
utilities, etc., shall he sho~n on tim ftnal amp tf they are located
withtn the land dfvtston boundarT'. AI1 offere of dedication and
conveyances shall be sulattted and recorded as dtrected by the Count),
Surveymr.
liter and sewerage dtsposal facilities shall be Installed fn accordance
with the prevtsfons set forth tn tim liverside CountJr Health Ikpartmnt's
letter dltod 9-22-88, a copy of which ts attached.
11m subdivider shall comply vlth tim flood control recmmendattons
eutltned by the IUversfde Count flood Control Dlstrtct*l letfor dated
iO-]g-B e copy of which ts attached. if the lend dtvtston 11as
within an edentel flood control drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of
Ordinance 460 IplrO rtato fee for the construction of ires drltnlgt
facilities strut1 Im ~co~lected by the Road Commissioner, (~mended it P.C. on
IS. The subdivider sire11 c ly vtth the ftre ImproveMat recomendattons
outltned fm the CountyFoffre copy of which
letter
dated g-g-U, I
FIBrebel ' s
6o
ts eftached.
Sukitvtslom phasing, Including any proposed comon open space area
tmrovment phutng, tf applicable, shill be subject to Pllnntng
IklartiMet al;roval. My proposed phestng shall provide for adequate
vehicular access to all lo9 te each phase. and she, substantial1),
conforE to the tntent and purpose of the subdivision approval.
17. Lob cream b), thts subdivision shall compTy wtth the following:
20-19-~+
VE3TTRG TENTATIVE 1leer I0. 23267 kl. rz
Creditiota ef Appronl
Page 3 '
a. A11 lots shall have a etateam stze of 4500 square feet net.
b. Graded but undevelo ed land shall be mtntotned tn a reed-free
coodillon and shal~ be etaher planted vtth tntertm landsca tng or
routdad vlth other erostoe control assures as approved Cy the
~|rector of Building end Safety.
Prior te RECORDAT:ON of the ftnal map the follrdtng conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prior to the recordsalan of the final mpthe applicant shall submit
m-ltten clearances to the RIverside County Road and Survey Department
tIEr 911 portSneat requirements ovaltried tn the attached approval
letters free the folioring agenctes have been met:
County fire hpertmnt
County flood Control
County Parks Departmnt
County n
Prtor to the recordallan of the ftnal map, Change of Zone No. S1SO
shall be approved by the Board of Supervisors and shall be effective.
Lots c sated by this land dirtsloe shall be tn conformace kith the
r
development standards of the zone ulttateljr applled to the property.
Prtor to recordertoe of the ftnal map, the project stte shall he
aenexod Into C.S.A. X43.
Prter to recorktloe of the final mp, the subdivider shell convey to
the County fee staple tttle, to all comeon or comeon open space areas,
free and clar of 811 1tens, taxes, assessment, leases (recorded and
unreco ed) end easements, except those easements ~htch tn the sole
discre'on of the Countjr are acceptable. As a condition precedent'as'-
the faun;jr accepting tttlo to such areas, the subdivider shall submit-
the foiled documents to the Planntng De rimerig for roytoy, vhtc~-~
nets shan~l be subject to the approval o~thet delarlaent and the
OfflceefthecountyCounsel:
1) Akclaratto~ of covenants, conditions and restrictions; and
2) A s.l~p. lo document conve ¶rig tttll to the-purchaser of an
d
Jnd|vt us1 lot or untt ~ht~ provtdes that the declaration of
covenants, conditions and restrictions Is tncorlaratod thoreta by
reference. .
Tbe-declaraUon of covenants, conditions and restrScttons suingtrod
far raytee shell a) provtde for a tam of 60 ars, (b p, ovlde for
--tkLpttabllclBpnt O~ I ikeFe, t~ymmefIx-elsoctl~n ,~l~,l,ed ,f
113fi1~ TEXT~ TRACT IB. 23267 Aml. f!
Conditions ef Approval
Page4
o~-~~,; vr ls~h tndtvtdu.I1 le't Gr unit end (c) can,at,. Lh. fullywing
.ah avisions
lag any provision tn thts Declare,ion to
shall app ~r:
the folioMint provision 1
The where' association established hereta
dormnt, be :,1voted, by Incorporation or c se
request of County of RIverside, and the pro
association sl uncoedttfonally accept free
RIverside, County's damrid, ,tale to 811
the 'camon parttcularl~ described
attached hereto. ductston to requtre
proper, o~nors' as~ tatIon and the ductston
assoctat(ioe uncondtt accept tttle
sial1 be at the sole d
1, tf
at the
meets'
of
of
t'A'
)n of the
that the
*consnon ares"
;re,ton of the ~f RIverside.
the event that the
conveyed to the properl
thereafter shall mm sac
continuously mtntatn such
transfer such cannon arise or
written consent of the
liverside or the County's succ~
omerl" association shall have
elch Individual lot or ant
of any ~uch
mtntonancl assessment.
be prtor to all other 1t~
assessment or other doc
Irel, or lart thereof, ts
as: ;tton, the Issoclltton,
'cmmon ', shill mnlge and
and shall not sell or
thereof, absent the prtor
of the County of
creating
gerest. The propert
right to assess the o~ars o~
the reasonable cost of
have the right to l ten
ts tn the payment of a
once created, shall
equent to the no,tee of
assessment lien.
This I)eclaratton she1 he temtnated.
or ~from absent
of I of the
Cmmt_~'s seccesso ~rest. A
coesl ered ' ttal* If tt affects
statenonce of seaman BrIBe ·
;ubstanttel ly' amended
'tar written consent
of RIverside or the
rodmen, shell be
extent, usage or
the event in~ conflict between this !kcla ,ton
ArUcles v.., the I3~lavl, or the
lie
gulat otis, tf en~r, this
and the
oldlets:
.Ion shall
Once apprIved, lie declaration of covenants, conditions and
restrictions shall be recorded at the lie tim that the ftnal mp Is
recorded°
VESTING TDfTATIVE 11MT 10. 23267 Awl.
Candle¶nee ef Approval .
Page 5
e. The developer shill be responsible for mintnuance and upkeep of all
slopes, landscaped areas and trrt alton s~stem unit1 such t me as
those operations are the responstFHltttes of other parttea ·s a~proved
by the Platotrig DIrector.
f. Prtor to recordalton of the final map, in Environ·his1 Constraints
Sheet ([CS) shall be prepared tn conjunction vlth the ftnal mp to
delineate 1denttiled environ·eta1 concerns and shall be permeant1
ftled vlth the office of the County Surveyor. A copy of the ECS shal~r
be transmitted to the Pllnntng Depart·at ~or raytoy and approval.
The approved [(:aS shall be forwarded vtth coptea of the recorded ftnal
map to the Planning Oepsrlnent and the Departrant of ktldtng and
Safety.
g. The notice appearing tn Sectton 6.a. of Ordinance No. 625, the
RIverside County RIght-to-Faro Ordinance, shill be placed on the
Envtromental Constraints Sheet, vtth thtl. tract 1dentilted therite,
tn the eerier prevtded tn sltd Sectton 6.a., ·s betrig located partly -
or vholly utthtn, or vlthtn 300 feet of, lind zoned for primarily
agriculture1 purposes by the CountJr of RIverside.
h. The follwtng note shall be placed on the Environ·eta1 Constraints
Sheet: 'County Environrants1 :Impact Report No. 28~ as prepared for
thts property and ts on fill It the Rfverstde County Planntng
~plrtn~nt.'
t. The E.C.S. notes found tn the letter from the Count 6nologist dated
October 15, :1988, I copy of vhlch ts attached, shall ~ placed on the
Envtromental Constraints Sheet.
Prtor to the.Issuance of 6RADI!t6 PERHITS the fellertrig conditions shall be
satisfied:
a. Prtor ta the 1seeinca of grading perutea deistled can open spice
am landscaping led Irrigation plans shall be lulmlttd for Planntng
Department approval for the phase of devel oimnt to process. The
1am shall be certified by · landscape architect, aM shall provtde
~or th$ fo11Mng.
1. Permanent autmattc Irrigation systems $h$11 be testslied on ill
lindsuped ·rees roqutrtng Irrigation.
2. Perhaps and landscaped butldlng setbacks shall be landscaped to
provide visual screening or · transition 1eta the prtea use area
of the stte. Leacalm elmeats shall tnclude eir~ bemtng,
greed cover, shrubs lad $pectmn tree tn conjunction vtth
monndertng stdewlks, benches and other destrtin mntttes ~here
appropriate is ·pproved bY the Plsnntng galafront.
VESTING TEXTATIVE 1tACT I0. 23267 J~l.
Conditions ef Appeal
Pap 6
3. Landscaping plans shell Incorporate the'us· of specten accent
trees at kr/vlsu·l focal points ~tthtn the project.
4. were street trees cannot be planted lrlthtn rt hi-of-ray of
Interior streets and project parkvaJrs due to Insufficient road
right-of-vaT, the~ shall be planted outside of the road
fight-of-May.
5. Landscaping plans shell Incorporate natty· end drought tolerant
pl·nts vhero approprl·te.
6. All existing spectmen trees and significant rock outcroppings on
sub act pro arty shall be shown on the proJect's gradtrig plans
the sha~l note ~hose to be removed, rolecared end/or retained.
ad
n
7. A11 trees shall be mtntmum double staked. Veaker and/or slov
grwtng trees shall be steel staked.
AW oak trees removed vtth four 4) 1rich or larger trunk dismeters
b. shall he replaced on · ten (1~) to one (Z) baste u approved by the
h
Planning Director. Repllcemnt trees s 111 be notld on approved
landscaping pleas.
protection 1an shall be prep·red b a quail
nethods o~ protecting the stgDn{flcant biological resources and
Navies krberr7 found oe sit·. This plan shall be subnetted to the
Plannln! Deportment for raytoy end ·pproval.
d. earl.el redIn activities, · qualified 'biologist shall be refitned by
the divertper ~ monitor the grading activities end to see that the
ap d btel tc·1 resource protection pl·nts 1elmanted. Proof of
Safe prior to the 1sannee of ktldtng parstie. The biologist shall
havet~ fight to halt or divert gredtng procedures, if necessarT, tn
order to taplment the biologtc·l resource protacttoe pl·n.
Archae~oltst. Thts surve~ shall tnclude data collection, test
tmsttgaUon, · report prepared b~ the Archaeologist shall be
suballied to the Pleaeta Deportment and the Archaeological Research
Unit ·t Ia Univarsttar of Zallfornt· of Riverside, for' revtee and · '
VEStinG TDfTATtVE ~ I0. 232S7 Pad.
Cereal tines af Pflmwal
Page 7 ·
dateretention of canplainness. Following approval of the report, the
Planning Department Ir111 issue clearance for the release of gradtrig
peaits.
f. If my archieologlcll resources' &re uncovered during grading
ac~4vtttes or trenching, ell acttvtrJes shall cease ski an
archaeologist shill be consulted. Any reconne~dattons of the
archeeologt. st shall be adhere to.
9- The old adobe structure found Viihie Open Space lot 603 shall be
preserved.
h. All existing native specimen trees on the sub3ect property shall be
preserved abefever feasible. kidere the3r cannot be preserved they
shall be telscaled or replaced vith specimen trees as approved by the
Planning Director. lieplacement trees shall be noted on approved
landscaping plans.
I. 6riding plies shall conform to Board adopted Hillside Development '-
Standards: M1 cut and/or ftll slopes, or individual coe~fnat~ons
thereof, ahfch exceed ton feet tn verttcal hetght shall be mdtfted by
an appreprtate cabtuition of a Special terracing (benchtrig) plan,
Increased slope retto (t.l., 3:i re~jtntng ~alls, end/or slope
planting comb¶ned vtth irrigation. ~k{1 driverays shall not exceed e
fifteen percent grade.
J. All cut slopes located ad3acent to ungreded nature1 terrain and
exceeding toe (:ZO) feet in vertical height shall be contour-graded
incorporating the tel loving grad¶ng techniques:
1) The an le of the reded slope shall be gredus11~r adjusted to the
angle :~ the naturl~ terrain.
2) Angular form shall be discouraged. The graded fern shall reflect
the n~taral receded terrain.
3) 1he toe and loire of dopes shall be rounded vith curves utah
l~ir~t destgned in pertton to the total bet ht of the slopes
dratnage a~41~°staPbtlIV permit such rouM~ng.
4) libere cut or f111 ale exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, the
hor4zontal contours :l~esthe slope shall be curved In · continuous,
undulattng fashion.
the Otrector of klldlng end hfet3r.
rr3Tli TESTAfig 11tMT IlO. 23267 Red.
Coalitions ef Alqmwal ,.
1. Prior to the tssuance of gradtrig per·tie, a qualified lain·eCologist
shall be re··teed by the developer for consultation end cement on the
proposed gradtrig tdth respect to potential pale·el·logical tmpact, s.
$1mald the Iraleon··laSts· find the potential ts htgh for 1epic· to
significant resources. · IN'e-grade men·trig between the laleontologtst
and the excavation and gradtn contractor shell be arranged. lihen
necesssr/. the pal·on·el·gila· or representative Shell have the
authority to tamp·tart1 dtvert, redtract or halt gradtng acttvtt7 to
allen recoverjr of foSll'TI.
Prior to the tssuance of BUXLDZNG PERHZTS the fallentrig conditions shall
be satisfied:
!ira Imlldtng Perwrits shill be lssued by the Court·Jr of RIverside for
self restdeett·l lot/ant· Withtn the project beandefy unit1 the
developer's successor's-tn-tnterest praytales evtdence of cam 11ance
viii pobltc factlltJ~ ftnsnct measures. A cash sue of one-~undred
dollars ($200)per 1o untt sh:~l be deposited with the RIverside
b. Prior to the sutatttal of butldtng plans to the Department of ktldtn
and Safe·/ae acoustics1 study shall be performed by an acoustlca~
engtneer to establish ·ppro flit· mitigation tonsures that shall be
ap lind to Individual dwelFt units withtn the subdivision to reduce
amPCleat Interior nots· levelsngto 45 Ldn and extertor nots· levels to
Es L~.
c. All street 11ghts and +other outdoor 11ghtln shell be sho~n on
electraell pleas subedited to the De art·n· of Ltldtng and $afet~
for plea kheck approval and sh·l~l creel}. with the reWIre·ants of
RIverside CaN·tar Ordinance lie. 65S and the RIverside Court·Jr
Cmprehenshe beers1 Plan.
Prior te Is·caeca of butlding Fernits. detatled park slth and rtpartan
area dayale t 1ins shall be subedited to the Planetrig Depart·n·
for app~A~el~n.. 11~:se plans shell canto· with guidelines found In the
appreved des1 mane1 (F. xhlbtt It). The parks shall tnclude acttve
recreational 1Pastures such is ptcnlc tables. barbecue ·re·s. tot lots.
etc. Race·ends·tons found in the letter from George Baliarts of the
Coney Parks Depertment, e~or[[ of .hlch ts attached. shill be
and 0 a
Include lm the design of the pen Sp cl Arias.
DmmlopNmt of this project shall canto· to the racecaned··fans found
CaM·tar Geologic Report h. 488.
VU~nG TEX~m~~-BO. 232S7 ind.
Coattin d Appnwal ,
Page !
f. For the security and safety of future residents, the following crtme
p. reveetton measures shall be considered durtng stte and butldtng laJmut
~lestla.
a. Proper ltghttng tn open areas;
b. VIsibility of doors and windows from the street and between
Imildtngs;
c. Fencing heights and atefinis;
d. klaquate off-street parktag; and
e. A clearly understood method of
EmergenCy response.
street ambertag to facilitate
Prior to the tssuance of butldfn mtts, cmstte landscaping and
g' Irrigation plans shall be svtattt~ ~r Planntng Department approval. '-
The plans shell address all areas and aspects of the tract requfrfn
ledscaptng end Irrigation to be 1natalled tncludtn but not 1 t~:o~
to, perlcviy planting, street trees, dope lan~ , and tndlvt~al
treat yard landscaping, and shall confore to t~ stewards set forth
tn the tract'S approved I)estgn IMnual (Exhtbtt FI).
h. Rnof-muntnd mchantcal equtpMnt shall not be permitted withtn the
t. M1 front yards sial1 be provtdnd with landscaping and automatic
irrigation.
.1-. A plat plan shall be submitted to the Planntng De rimeat rsuant to
hottea 18.30 of Ordinance No. 348 eccompan~ by al~uaPPlicable
f111q fee, as a plot plan that is not subject to the California
Endrorfeental QuIIt~y Act' ts not transmitted to aey governeta1
aFlaCF other time the liverside County Planetog I)epertment. The plot
ensure the conformace of the final stte development Vtth
lea shall
the tract's appre d Destge liana1 (Exhtblt n), and fJm11 confute the
fallrating elmant:-'e
1. A ftnal stta plan shmrln the lots butldtng footprints, all
setbacks, fence and/or va~llse and ~[oor plan and elevation
esstgments to Individual lots.
One (1) color and mtertals temple board (mxtmum stze of 8 X 13
ticbee by 3/8 1rich thick) containing mile color texture and
mtertal saltthee or phot raphi ~M,h ,y be ;rOE suppllere'
bractares). lndlcatm on the°~ard the nature, address sat phone
VESTING TEXTATIVE IUCT nO. 23267 And. i!
Condltaom of Apprvval
Page SO
nudeere of both the staple board prepafar and the project
a pitcent, tre evebar, led the menlecturer end product numbers
:Kern posstblec~trade nnms also acceptable).
and materials board. The wttten color and eatertel descriptions
shall be located on the elevation.
architectural elevations for paranent ftllng, heartrig bodX raYtar
and agenCy distribution- All wittrig must be legtble.
Satd plot plan shell requtre the approve1 of the Planntng DIrector
prtor to the Issuance of any butldlng pamtts for lots teeladed vIthtn
the lot plan. The submittal of plot plans prtor to the tssuence of
butld~ng pamtts nay be phased provided:
1. A separate plot plan shell be submitted to the Planning Departrant
for each phase, vhtch shill be Iccompented by lpproprllte filing
feel,
2. Each Individual plot plan shall be approvod by the Plenntng
Otrector rtor to the tssuence of butldtng perntiS for lOtS
tatladed vTthtn plot plea.
that
k, A fencing plon shall be submitted for Planning Department approve1.
This plan shall be tn substantial conformInca vtth the Design Nanus
(Exhibit 14) and take trite account any reconnendettons of the requlre~
notse study,
Prtor to the tsseence of OCCUPANCY PEaSITS the following conditions shell
be satisfied:
e. All landscaping end Irrigation shall' be Installed tn accordance vtth
approveel plato prior to the Issuance of occupanCy pernlts. If
scalenil c~mdtttoes do at permit plantIn , Interim landscaping end
erosion control miserel shell be uttltz~ IS lpproved by the Planning
Director and the Director of lutldtng and Safety,
b. Prior to occupancy, yells and fences shall be 1natalled tn accordance
vI th approval pl arts.
requt~l mils shell be detarotnnd lay the ecousttca~hstudY where
applicable,
VESTING TEXTATIVE TRACT 10. ~32S7 J~l. I!
Conditions ef ApFrevel
Pr¶er to occupancy, the no! hb4rhood ark s4te assoc4ated v4th that
phase of development sha~l ha deve~:ped tn iccordance with approved
plans.
e. Prior to occupancy, the Nell site open space lots associated vith that
se of dayale nt shall be improved in accordance vtth the Design
~hannual (Exhibit H~and epproved Landscaping Plans.
GN:sc;bc
I0/Z2/88
· . · ~' 4S"'t ·
i('.b;~xT OFFICE OF ROAD CONMISS;ONER 6 COU l,'9 'f 'yj 1988
ms; ,.., -- . ·
RIVEH~Iu~ UOUNTt
~toNr 7, Zg, P~NNING DEPA~TMEN~
bray D. Smoee
~ONI &CDUleTIOI~19t
IIqFEIIlllt, tA6tl'lllm · Iltll
tll, lPml4~l I11tl tl*l-1ll4
liverside County Irtannlng Commission
4060 Lemon Street
RIvers Ida, CA 92502
Re: Tract Nap 23267 - Amend
khadule A - Team i
Ladles and bnthmn:
Iflth respect to the conditions of approval for the referenced tentative land
division map, the Road Departing recommends that the landdivider provide the
following street farovetoing plies and/or road dedications In accordance vltn
Ordinance 460 and RIverside County Road Zerovetoing Stlndlrds (Ordinance 461).-_
It Is understood that the tongstire rap correctly shoes acceptable centerline
profiles, all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses with
appropriate Q's, aml that their omission or unacceptabllity el7 require the nap
I
to be resets, tied for further consideration. TheSe Ordinances and the follovln~l
conditions are essential parts and a raWfreeing occurring tn ONE is as binding
· as though occurring In a11. They are Intended to be coeplementar~ and to
improvemetal. A11 West ins
describe the conditions for a complain design of the I
regarding the true maiming of the conditions shill be referred to the bad
Camel ss tonar'S Office.
1. The 1eeldivider shall protect downstream properties ira damages
catrim by alteretlon of the drainage parietal, I.e., contentri-
fle of diversion of fiN. Protection slu11 be provided by
· constructin; a,'3eqeite drainage facilities Including enlarging
extatl facilities or b~ lecurln a drllnage easement or b},
both. "~11 irateage tilemeets sba~l be ShOtall on till find amp
and rated as follows: 'Drainage bsement - ne leildlqo
· abstractions, or tecroaclmentl b lind f1111 Ire allneed". The
Fretaction sial1 be as !pprevnd [y the lied Departing.
l~e landdivider shall acce t and properly dispose of ill offsite
drainage timwing onto or ~roogh the site. hi the event the
bed Condsslemer peruIts tM use of streets for drainage
pu as, the roytalons of Article X! of Ordinance No. 460
udl~applT. Sr~uld the qua tit es exceed the
n t Street
upscity or the use of streets be prohibited for drainage
purposes, the subdivider shill provide edeWsto drainage
facilities as approved b), the bad Departing.
3. IbJor drainage is Involved on this landdivision and Its resolution
sbet1 lie as approved b~, the Road Department.
4. 'A" Street shall be improved within the dedicated right of va~r In
accordance with Coun~ Standard NO. lOl, (76'/~00),
S. "l' Street (~aees Avenue) sbe11 be traproved within the dedicated
right of vaky in accordance with Nodtried County Standard NO. ZO~
(64'18~')-
aS' Street and 'C' Street (south of Creek Lane) shall be laproved
6. within the dedicated right of way in accordance with Cow t3r
Standard NO. i03, Section A. (44'/66'). n
7. The resinleg Interior streets shall be Improved within the
Standard . 104,
dedicated rl ht of ~Y
Section A. ~40'lSO'). In accordance with Count~ No
8. The landdivider shall conply with the Callruns recoanendatlons as
outlined in their letter da~;ed Hatch 30s ~g88 (a cop~ of which Is
attached), prior to the recordatlon of the fins1
g. 11e landdivider shall provide utlllt, Y clearance froe Roncho Guilt-
orals Hater District prior to the recordatlon of the final map.
A copl of the finn1 mp shall be submitted to Callruns, DIstrict H,
Post Office Box ill, San Boraardlnoe California 9Z403& Attention:
ProJect Bovelolmnt for raylee and approval prtor to recordatlon-
ll. ~he nixIs centerline gradient shall not exceed lSl.
1Z.' The miniwee cantorline radii shajl be 300' or as approved b~ the
Itoal Bepsrtsent*
with concrete curl; and gutter
f match up liphilt concrete
Tract Ibp ~3267 - Amend
Paving; reconstruction; or resurfacfng of existtrig paving as
diremined I~ Callruns vfthln a 71 foot half vtdth dedicated right
of WY tn accordance with State Standard lie. A2-8.
All driveways shall cantata to the applicable RIverside Coun~
Standards and shall be shown on the street t ovamint plans. A
miniwe-of four feet of fat1. height curb shala~rbe constructed
betveedrlvev~,ys,
way line to prevent silting of sidewalks as approved hy the Road
Commissioner.
The miniram garage setback shell he 30 feet meaiured from the face
Of Curb.
Concrete sidewalks shell be constricted throughout the landdivision
in accordance ~th County Standard lie. 400 led 401 (curb sidewalk).
M access red (located north of Teomcula Creek slang the extension
lg, of el" Street, diems Avenue to the east) to the nearest paved road
maintained hJr the County shall be constructed within the public
right of ve to aCCOrdSKI with County Standard NO. lOSt SeCttO
l, (31'/SO'~ it a grade and alignment as approved b~ the Road
Coueissloner. This is omcessarS for circulation purposes, n
20. Prtaer~ and sacoedar]r access roads (at the locations or Lea Lands
Sirfit and the extensioe or hrk Avenue, eSw SLreat) to the niares:s
paved road maintained b]r the County shall be constructed vtthin th
Road Comdsslonnr. This Is'else notes rS ·
Trsc;. IMp 23257 - Mind
41~t~r 7, 1988
Prior to the recordalton of tht final map, the developer shall
deposit with the Riverside County Road Department, s cash sum of
$150.00 per lot as mitigation for traffic signal t acts. Should
the developer choose to defer the time of lyeeel,age may Inter Into
I witten agreement with the County deforrTng said payant to the
time of Isleanti of I building pemlt.
22. laprovement plans shall be based upon e centerline prattle extending
a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and
alignment is approved b), the Riverside Can Red Coalssimmer.
Cmmletiou of road improvements does not i~Pt~ acceptance for
maintenance by County.
23- Electrical and cannonitalians trenches shall be preytried tn
accordance with Ordinance 461, Standard 817.
24. Pslialttc mulston (fog see1) shell be aimlied at less than
farteen da~ following placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall
be ep 1 led at a rate of O. OS gallon per square yard. Asphalt-
emelsV~n shall confoe to Sections 37, 3~ and 94 of the State '
Standard Specifications-
28. Standard tel-de-sacs and knuckles and off-set tel-de-sacs shall be
metrutted throughout the landdivision.
26. Corner cutbacks tn conference vlth County Standard He. 808 shill
M sheen on the fine1 amp and offered for dedication.
27. Lot access sial1 be restricted on State Highway 79, oAe Street and
I 1
· 8° Street (~mes Avenue) end so noted on the f na map.
30,
beddivisions creating cut or f111 slopes adjacent to the straits
~ba11 provide erosion control, sight.distance control and slope
taints as ipproved by the bad Department.
A11 centerline intersections shall be at gO° with a minimum SO*
taBleat measured from fief 1iN.
11m street dust n and teemant concept of this project shill be
courdinated wi~ Roncho VIllages Assessment District I1S9 and TR
$
rac{ ~ 23267 - Amnd l!
CtOIMr ~,
a~ S
Street lighting shall be required in accordance with Ordinance 460
and 46] throughout the subdivision. The hunt/Service Area (CSA)
Administrator determines whether this proposal quellfins under in
existing assessment district or not. If not, the 1and owner shall
ftlt an application with LAFCO for annexation Into or creation of
I eLI halrig Assessment Districts In accordance with 6overnmental
Code ~ on 5SO00.
I
A striping plan is _required for State , 7~, °As Street, and
Street (~mes Avenue). The removal ofH~ axlstl striping shall
be the res MJblllty of the applicant. Traffic ~gnJng and
striping sC11 be done by County forces with all incurred costs
borne b), the eppl Icent.
GH:lll
Ver7 tru17 7ours,
bad DTvtston Engineer
· " County of Riverside
Baytreasure1 lealib Services hem reviewed Trees )imp 23267,
Amended lqo, I dated September 6, 1985- Our current
camsou will remain am stated lm our letter Stead April 12, 1985,
. COUNTY OF RIVE RSIDE
ummmmmm, mm,mmm
m. Lmmmm
mmem,~
DEPARTMENT
,- of HEALTH
1988
ewe my,, m'mmm~ mama. ~mom~ mayram mm m~mm · m~mmm~"mem '~ ,
RlVI3eSIZ~COUNTY PLA]~ING DElfT.
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside. CA g2S02
APR 18 19a ~~ ~
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTM-'NT
em, memmmm&m~ mfmem
:m
,me mmmemm rammum
mmmm~,~-~ m~mmm
lttnt Grog Moll
Rl:l Tract Map 23267; That portion of Parcel 1.1.3 and · of
Parcel Hap 18993 recorded in book 134. PaQes 13 through 18
of Parcel Maps An Riverside Cotu~ty. California.
till Lots)
Gentlemen:
~he Department of Public Health has roytoyed Tentative Map
No. 23267 and recommends thaLt
X valor system shall be anttailed according to
.plans and specification as approved by the vatmr
company and the Health Department. Permanent
primdis of the plane of the vatmr system shall
be submitted im triplicate, vlth a minimum scale
not Jess thin one inch equals 200 foot. along vtth
the original dravsng to the County Surveyor. The
prints $h$ll 1hey the internal pipe diameter.
location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and
Joimt specifications. and the site of the main
at Use JLmctims of the nov system to the
riSeLing system. The plans shall comply im
all respects vtth Dlv. S, Part l, Chapter 7 of
the California Health and Safety Code, California
Administrative Code, Title Jl, Chapter IS, and Ownoral
Order He. I01 of the Public Stiltties Commission of the
State or california, vhen applicable.
lelelml
.... t~fet7
.e hda
t
.... · Luche
-~-Dtetrict
ameememe~trvica -lath B. Davidsou
..... -.T I~at, r
"" ........~ ...... ,ipll ~ater
-- ' ! f. Edt s.n
- 'If. hi
_,Jone
t i tportatton f8
an High School
L zr of Come roe
Count7 Avtatfon
Cams ;s toner Iresson
RIVE.qSh~'= C,'v
p%,ANNINO DE~.R~|.:'~NT
VESTING Tgd~r 23267 - (tm-i) - I.A. 325&6
- heron ~maricau Corp. - hneho/ec/f~c
- gauche Cartfours Area -/tr·t
lupervteortaZ Dbtrtct - South of !libnay
71 and Vest of Harprite load - I-I Zone
- Schedule A- 113.7 acres into H6 %on
926016-0O2403 .'~'~ '
usa described above. irons vitb the attached case eat. A Land
ve mariaI ham been tentative%7 schedu%od for ~prt% 21. list. Zf it
~hon p to Imbl,tc huthi, ·
· rccoemndattou are requested prior to iprt% iAe tSll t: order that v~
0- the ·tuff report for thb particular use. '
.7 question taBardLaB thle StaRe piemoo do not basilate to tootact
- 1363
.... Tenting Tract 23267. abeaid he required to annex to an appropriate
--slan~7 uhich provides park and re~reattoe services. ~naexatioa viII
." mitigate impacts of Lu~reased population to he served end fees (park
development), 1h8%1 be used to acquire and deist · perk site,
mud tLLtaSimuet u. C.;~m~.neral Hanstot. Valley-Vide Recreation and ,--.
Distx i ..
· ,. F" FLOOR 4~:J09 OASIS STREET, ROOM
~',,a --p.-, .........
leiverszdo County Plinning Dept.
Page Two
ALan; grog Heal
April 12, :leas '
The plus shall be signed by 8 registered engineer and
valor company with the follov~ng certification: "!
certify that the design of the valor system in Tract
Map 23267 is in ,ccordance with the viter system
sip,asiDe plans of the R,ncho C, lzforni& Water Di,trxct
and that the v&ter ,stYles.storage ,rid diltribution
,y, tem viii be ,dequ, te to provide v, ter ,ervzco to
ouch tract. Tht, certification does not conltttute ,
guartntee that it viii ,apply v, ter to ,uch tract it
gay ,peciftc qu,ntttZe,. flow, or pro,sure, for fire
protection or any other purpo,e'. This tortiSle,tiDe
sh,ll be ,xgned by · re,pen,ibis offic**l of the v,ter
1'his Dep, rtment has · statement from the R,ncho C, lifornm,
Water D~strmct ,greein9 to serve domestic water to o,ch ,nd
every lot in the subdivision on demand providing
satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the
lugdivider, ]L vial be necessary for the fininci&l
arrangements to be made prior to the recordaLien st the
final map.
· This Department has s statement from the Eastern HunsclpaJ
eater District agreeing to 811ov the subdivision sewage
system to be connected to the severs of the District. The
sever system shall be installed according to plans and
specifications as ipprovod by the District, the County
Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the'
plans of the sever system shill be submitted in
along with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor. The
prints shill ahoy the internal pipe diameter, location
manholes, cempietm profiles, pipe end :sink specificsLiens
and the size of the severs it the 3urictime of the new syste~
to the existing system. k single plat indicating locitiDe
of sever lines and VaLor lines shall be · portion of the
sewage plus end profiles. The plans shall be signed by ·
registered engineer and the sever district with the
following certifiestiDaL "! certify that the design of the
sever system in Tract Map 33202 is in accordance with the
sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water
District and thlt the waste disposal system is adequate at
this time to treat the anticipated vastms from the proposed
tract." The
Riverside County Planning Dept.
PaVe Three
ATrN: Greg Nail
April 32, IgS8
LaeUts _ge£_Lbt_ctGe£di en_eg_ bt_ Oi -ala.
viii be necessary for tinancsal.arrangement. s Lo be made
przor to the recordsLion st the final amp.
it viii be necessary for the annexst.ion proceed2ngs to be
completely tinalized prior to recordsteen of the ftna~ map.
u~~N&lrtznez. St. San3tar~an
Environmental Health SerY2ces
SM:%ac
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
IIIVIIIIIDt. C, ALIIPOIINIA IllOl
October 18, 1988
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
R~verside, ~ Clliforn4a
Attention: Regional Team No. l
Greg Meal
Ladies and Gentlemane
Re, Vesting Tract 23267
Amended No. 2
This is a proposal to divide approximately 194 acres for single
family housing in the Tamecola area, The sits is located along
both sides of Temecula Creek about 1200 feet west saMarteries
Road,
This project is located on the floor of Tamsouls Valley and is
subject to both riverins flows from Temecula Creek and.sheeting
offsite storm floes from two other sources, The main course of
Tamecola Creek flays through the center of the tract. Storm
water from t 800acre watershed to the north traverses the north-
ern half oft his project. Due to poorly defined drainage pat-
terns, it is probable that large amounts of storm water emanating
from tributaries north of Tesscola Creek and from fir to the east
may sheet west, generally parallel to Tamecola Creek, and across
the site. Unless these storm flows are dealt with by upstream
development in the watershed, the developer will have to con-
struct drainage facilities to protect this project.
Oneits storm runoff is proposed to be conveyed vii both streets
and storm drains to Temecula Creek Channel, Several acres of
oneits ares attic southeastern tract boundary is proposed to be
diverted to the Nighboring develolmant. The applicant (Thetam
America Co~p.) ks submitted dotsenSation that the developer to
eajt (OreatAm~ican Development Co.) plans to accept this run-
off. A donwent shoving evidence of this agreement should be
submitted t~ the District for review prior to recordorion of the
final map.
The improvements to Temecula Creek are proposed as a part of
Assessment District 159. The Diatrict's interest in the con-
figuration oft be main channel is limited to its adequacy as a
flood prosmosLem facility. l~ should be noted that the present
design does not alloy for habitat mitigation within the channel,
nor does it spaei~cally provide for Joint use of the facility
(e.g., equestrian or bicycle trails). A change in channel con-
figureSion or right of way width say require redosign of this
proposal,
Riverside County
Planning Department
Rat Vesting Tract 23267
Amended No, 2
October Za, 1988
The developer*s Exhibit 'Be proposes to collect storm flows from
the 800 acre canyon at De Petrol· Road and convey them to
Temecula Creek in s trapezoidal channel, Two collection dikes
are proposed on the east side of MarSarias Road to capture s~orm
flows traveling parallel to Tamecalm Creek, These flows would
combine with the northern stream Just north of Highway 79,
Following are the Dlstrict*s reconnendationst
1- Temecula Creak Channel should be constructed throught
this tract ·s shown on the tentative map,
,
Both Temacula Creek Channel and the drainage facilities
proposed to convey storm flows from the north end east
should be built to District standards, Some of these
facilities are proposed to be constructed by Assessment
District 159. If these have not been installed by the
time grading permits ere requested, it viII be necessary
for this tract to construct drainage structures necessary'-
to protect it from tributary lO0-year storm flows,
Evidence of a viable maintenance mechanism should be sub-
sLitted to the District end County for review and approval
prior to record·ties of the final map,
A portion of the proposed project is in a flood plain and
may affect "waters of the United States", 'wetlands" or
"Jurisdictional itret2ibedl", therefore, in accordance
with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance
Program end Related Regulations (44 CFR, Parts 5g through
73) and County Ordinance No- 458t
k flood study consisting of KEC-2 calculations, cross
seaSons, sips and other data should be prepared to
the satisfaction of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) and the District for the purpose of
raising the effective Flood Insurance ate Map of
the project site, The submittal of the study should
be concurrent with the initial submittal of the
related project improvement plans and final District
approval will not be given until · Conditional Letter
of Nap Revision {ClDMA) has been received from FEMA,
be
A ~ of appropriate correspondence and necessarY
permits from those government agencies from which
approval is required by Federal or State law (such as
~.~ of Engineers 404 rmit or Department of Fish
and Game 1603 agreament~should be provided to the
District prior to the final District approval of the
project,
RIverside County
Planning Department
Rot Vesting Tract 23267
Amended Me, 2
October 18, 1988
gel
lOel
Onsits 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, 'Drainage easements shall be kept free
of buildings sad obstructions".
Offsite drainage facilities should be located within
publicly dedicated drainage easements obtained from the
affected property owners. The documents should be
recorded and m copy submitted to the District prior to
recordsalon of the final map.
The 10 year storm flow should be contained within the
curb and the 100 year storm flow should be contained
within the street right of way. When either of these
criteria is exceeded, additional drainage facilities
should be ~nstalled.
Drainage facilities outletting 8ump conditions should be
designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows.
Additional emergency escape should also be provided.
The property*s street and lot grading should be designed
in a mnnar that perpetuates She existing natural
drainage patterns with respect to tributary drainage
area, outlet points and outlet conditions, otherwise, a
drainage easement should be obtained from the affected
property owners for the release of concentrated or
diverted storm flows. A copy of the recorded drainage
easement should be submitted to the District for review.
prior to the recordsalon of the final map,
Development of tilts property should be coordinated with
the development of adjacent properties to ensure that
Matercourses remain unobstructed and stomaterm are not
diverted frm one watershed to another, This my require
the construction of temporary drainage facilities or
offsite construction and grading.
A copy of the improvement plus, grading plans and final
map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic
calculations should be submitted to the District via the
Road Department for review and approval prior to
recordmelon of the final sap, Grading plans should be
approved prior to issuance of grading permits.
River side County
Planning Department
Ret Vesting Trsct 23267
Amended So, 2
October 18, 1988
Guessions concerning this setter may be referred to Bob Cullen of
this off~ce et 714/787-2333,
cos PJL!FPAC
~Csbab
Very truly yours,
OHN H, .~ASHUBA
enior Civil Engineer
,ANDRnEPROTECTK:~
rm[gaiT
RuminW&r~ .kills
4Ol0tm,.mirmLSuk IlL
p,~na,, CA tZS01
Aims
TIAC2 23267 - A!.lDmrn 12
eith respect to the cond/tionm of approval for the above referenced land division,
the Fire Department racemeride the foZZowtul fire protection memoares be provided
in accordncevith Riverside County Ordiuauces ud/or receSsteed fire protection
errandsIdea
TXit, Z FaOTBCTION
Schedule ,ha fire protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6waiwx2J") located
sue at each street intersection and spaced an more than 330 feet apart in any
directJoe, vAthue portion of any lot frontate unto than 165 feet froam hydrant.
mntmm fire flow ebeXl be XMO Glm for I hours duration at lO PSI.
Appl/caut~developer shall furnish one copy of the Mater system plans to the Fire
Pierim shdX coefom to firs hydrant types, location end
:;:.::~::':-.':,::':,".;..,.-.., ,, ,,.. ,,-..,.,.--.. ,-..,.**,
aitued/apprmmed by · reSistmild civil inSAnemr and the local Mater capany with
.,. ,o,,-,~, ....,,,.-,o-. -, ..--, .,., .,. :;:,,:,:~,|~: ;.:::: ';1::'"
accordance MIlk the requiremute prescribed by I Y
llm requiredstar Byetat, tMludinl fire hydrants, ahalJ be installed end accepted
by the aptreplete water aleBoY prbr to ~ e~uttbZe buildInS mteriat
t~or to t~,~atiou of ~e f/seX up, the appt/eautldeveXoper shm~ pr~ide
dEanate or 8ec~ mccuo am affixed b7 the ~nt7 ~d Depar~nt,
HITIGATIOB
frtor to the recordalien of the finLimp, the developer abaft deposit with the
Riverside Comty Fire Department, a sash sm of 0400.00 per lot/unit aa micASac/°a
for fire protectfoe impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of
permeate belie may enter into s written stresseat with the County deferrimS said
payment to the tim of Lmeumsce of m buLldinS permit.
questins regarding the ueauinl of. conditions shall be referred to the
r~amtnl and [nitnearing staff,
IAYIIOND !. REGX!
Chief Fire DepartBent ~lanner
IF
borl· S- Tares, Plauuinl Officer
t
:IiVEq)iDE COU ;y
-FLAnninG DEPA:I;n En;
October )2, 1988
Htghlend Soils Engineering
183Z S. Commercenter Ctr~le, Sutte A
SIn lerurdtnot CA 92408
Attention: Fir. Robert C. 14anntrig Nr. Barren L. $herltng
Nr. Sitliana T. Altae~er
SUBJECT: AIqutst-Prtolo/Ltquef
Job No.: 07-6556-010-00-00
Rancho California Area
Gentlemen:
ie lave revteved/our report entttled "Fault Hazard and Preliminary
GeotecMJcal Investigation, 242~ Acres, Southwest of the Intersection of
KlrgarJta Red and State Htghuly 79, Bancho California, RIverside County,
Your telart defendned that:
Exploretot/fault trenches I 3 end 4 exposed fault offsets associated
with the acthe Vtldoeer flu{t. The localton of thts fault ts shown on
Plots ~A, BOotechnical Map of 7our report.
lie satiate data for the tlstnorl (blildomr fault) Fault Zone located
-ee site Is ms lollors:
lledme Probable hrthqueke 07.0
picktar Raintrade)
Fiek' Immd Acceleration - 0,63g
llratlm of Strong Notion - 30 seconds
The settleant orenits1 under setsatc 1Mdtng for the on-stte and
ledrock aiterls~s Is modeaM to vet7 low, respectlve11.
h Feinttel for liquefaction ts considered htgh tn the larger
dateage ceerses within hubs end Ilolf Valleys on the stte.
LI election my occur tn the fore of differential settlement, sand
IoTls, ud lateral spreading.
4090 LEMON STREET, F" FLOOR
FIVER~DE. CAUFORNik 92501
Ci'lq 7874181
OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA g220'
(819) 342-8:' :' '
fitSbland Sotls fainaria
October 1:. 1988
S. A Binor landslide urea my be located at the central portion of the
site, shoe on Plate ]A, Geetechnical Kip. ..
6. The alluvial soils genera11Jr are considered to have a 1or expansion
· potential. The siltstunes within the Pauba formation on site can be
moderately to kighly expansive.
7. The fie grained alluvial soils in the ma3or drainage courses are
generally coupfeasible tn the upper five feet.
8. TIm current area designated as the lO0-year floodplain for ~emecUla
Creek exceeds the seisMic-Induced flood 1needalton area .that vould
result during instantaneous failure of Skinner or Vat1 ieservolrs.
Only the 1must area of hubs Valley Mould be affected.
g. 6round fissure development Is considered I significant hazard vtthtn
the southmat portion of the .site, due to the presence of active
faulttrig In this area.
Your report racemended that:
.
A SO foot setback zone from both sides of the kftldoemr Fault Zone ts
requtred for hueme eccupanc7 structures, This setback ts designated on--
Plate M, ieotachfncal p.
The fellwing will roteffete the liquefaction potential on this site:
a. A compacted f111 mt along with I gravel blanket and additional
foottrig reinforcement should be used for structures.
b. Structural lethacks from tops of f111 slopes toeing Into
liquefaction prone areas should be used.
c. Lateral spreading hazards along hubs Creek are mitt lied bJr the
placeant of Loma Lteda Drive and the 100 foot wide ~uildlng
illrock ares. ThIs affects Lots 490403
d. 6rudl aloe Teemcull Creek will 1evolve the placement of upwards
of )SeTtle ~ compacted ft11 over the 8-10 feet of recoewnended
allude1 removals, In order to nearly aliatelLs the potential for
eml 124; either the lullcling setback should be Increased to twit!
the aleira built or post-tenstoned slabs ted additional foundsalon
relafercemet for Iota
f TIn gee4e_dmlcal an tnaer should raytar the project grading plans
to dunlop e fu~CJ~er destge inforaatton,
Alluvial sells should be overexcavated tn the la r eatstin drainage
aed came, areas to a ednfmum depth of $ feet, ~re feaSIble tOtal
removal of loose alluvial soils to bedreck 11 racemended. As an
alternative, lettlement mowaLl aed mentiering amy be used In the
am wlli thldt Illuvlum,
HIghland Sotls Entngeertng
m 3 m
October
4. Addtttenal Investigation of the possible landslide located at the
central portion of the Ittets recoenended prtor to stte grading.
S. The SO foot huron occupanc), setback to the northeast and the propert).
bounds to the southvest of the located active fault vtll mittgala the
port,nile1 huard of ground fissure development on the site.
it ts our opl~ton that the report ws prepared In a competent runner consistent
erlth the present estate-of-the-art* and littitles the roqutrements of the
AI tst-Prtolo Special Studies Zones Act, the associated RIverside County
O~nance No. S47, and additional tufarattan requtred under the California
Envtrunmntsl Qualit' Act review. Find approval of thts report Is hereby
given. .
tie reconnend that the following conditions be satisfied before recordatJon of
the final parcel mp or Count), peaIts associated vtth thts project:
1. The "Fault Hazard Zone" shmm on Plate )A, (Geotechntcll flap) tn ),our
report abel1 be delineated on the Environmental Constraints Sheet
((.C.S.), and the' area tn bath,an the setback 1tries shall be llballd
"Fault Hazard Area."
2. A note shall be placed on the [.C.S. ststtng:
· Thts prop.re, ts affected by earth eke faulting. Structures for
human occupanc), shall not he a11owe3utn the Fault Hazard Area. Thts
constraint affects parcels 490 through 504, 602 and 603."
3. Notes shall be placed oo the final land dlvtston mp stating:
· County Geolo tc Report No. 488 ms prepared for thts property on
Ca) Februnt7 3, 1188, and ts on the RIverside Covnt~ Planning
ftle at
De rtmnt. Spoctflc Items of concern tn this report ire Is
fo~lws: acttvl earthqulkl faulting, 11Wefactton, ground
tieserase landsliding, selsmtc tadneed flooding, and uncompacted
trench backIll 1 .*
(b) 'This property ts affected b), earthquake faulttn . Strvctvros
for an eccupency shall not he e11owd tn the Yault Hazard
Ares. TM constraint affects parcels 4gO through S04, Si)Z and
M], u shown on the eccompaVtng Envtrommntal Constraints
Sheet, tim ortgtnel of which Is me file at the office of the
Riverside hunt, Survejmr.
A copy of the ftnal mp and Environants1 Constraints Sheet shell be
submitted to the Planning Department EngSneerlng GeologJst for revtev
and approval.
· Htghlen'd Soils Enlngeertng - 4 -
October
S. The exploretorl trenches ere beckfilled, but not compacted, end shill
be coalacted under the direction of the pre3ect motechattel
ef these trenches.
SAKes1
c.c. Itanpec - he DIllon
Vet/trUl~ yours,
RIVEILSZD[ COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTHENT
Roger S. Streeter - P1Phnlng Ol ector
GONG - Earl Raft
Building & Safety - Norm Lostbee (2)
Greg Nee1 - Teem :1
![ECglVEDNOV
8 1989
iVE :HDE C 'i.
PLAn ifiG DEPA: O -i
Nove~er 2,Zg89
Geo Soils, Znc.
575! Palmar Way, Sutto D
Carlsbad, California 92008
Attention: Mr. Robert g. Crtsman
Mr. Paul L. HcClay
E. Netca e
Hr. TImothy If
SUBJECT:
Alqutst-Prtolo Spectal Studtes Zone
~. O. g94-SD
Tentative Tract 23267
APN: 926-0[6-002,003,010,011,012,013
County geologtc Repor~ IIo. 48~ (update)
Rancho Ar
California ea
Gent1 men: -_
We have revtewed your report entitled 'Fault Znvestt atton, Tract 23267, Old
Vat1 Ranch, RIverside County, CA," dated August 24, ~g89.
Your report datemined that:
1. The Wildmar fault, as previously 1dentilted by HIghland Sotls
Engineering, ts not present on the project stto.
2. The fault contacts Indicated by Htghland Sotls Engtneertn are actua11.v
erostonal/strattgrephtc contacts produced by deposition ot recent
allaytam or colluvtmn agatnst bedrock of the hubs foralton along the
margtn of the Wolf Valley alluvtal platn.
3. There ts a lack of gemorphic expression characteristics of faulttrig on
the stte.
4. Based on aorta1 photographst the active trace of the I11dmer fault,
northwest of Pauba Valley, appears to bend eastward tn Pauba Valley and
dte out east of the project stte.
Your report recommended that there ts no need to place any fault related
setback or restriction In the study area.
4080 LEMON STREET. 9'" FLOOR
4;209 OASIS STREET. RO0u *~l(? ~
Geo So~ls, Inc.
November :. 1989
It ts our optnton that the report was prepared tn a competent manner consistent
wtth the present "state-of-the-art" and satisfies the requirements of the
Alqutst-Prtolo Spectal Studtes Zones Act and the associated RIverside County
Ordinance No. 547. Ftnal approval of thts report ts hereby gtven.
~ recommend that the following condition be satisfied before tssuance of any
County pemtts associated wtth thts project:
Uncompacted exploratory trench backft11 shall be addressed by the ProJect
Geotechntcal Engtneer prtor to lssuance of project gradtrig permtts.
it should be noted that County Geologtc Report No. 488 anttiled "Fault Hazard
and Preliminary Geotechntcal Znvesttgatton, 242s acres, Southwest of the
Intersection of Mar artta Road and State Htghway 79, Rancho Calltorn a,
RIverside County, CX," dated February 3, ~988 was previously prepare~ forhthts
property. Your report now supercedes only the fault setback aspects of t at
report.
Very truly yours,
OEPARTHENT
I
Engineering Geolog t 7 /
CE6-1205 ,
SAK:rd
c.c. Crosby, Mead, lenton & Assoc. -Engtneer
CDll - Earl Hart
Butldlng i Safety - Norm Los,bee (2)
Planning Teem 1, Ktm Johnson
· # ,
·
INTIIII-DIIBAFITMINTAi- LITTIN
,"' COUNTY OF RIVERBIDE
.
. _._~
October 7,
TO:
Grog Iteal, PI·~ Departsent
George hlterl·, Chief Park Planner
SUIJECT: 17 23267,23Zg9 01d Vat1 Ranch,
11n County Parks Department has reviewed the above
offers the following recommendations.
referenced document and
Parks and Recreation
Oiir departBent supports the extension of a ragtonal open space/natural green
belt along the Temecula Creek. ThtsC~s consistent with other specific plans
and develoFeent ·long this creek. r department t111 require an offer of
dedication of this area be made to the Parks Department on the final tract
maps. (legions1 Park
legtonal Park "l" is actually · local park and ts 1·cited tn a strategic
posttton to serve as · cannatty park. Zt does not quallf), as a ragtonal park
am due to its 1tatted stze; however, the htstortc adobe contained vtthin
tills area can he successfuller preserved vtth· cornunity park seattrig and
Interpreted.
Overall, the parks contained within this developBent show a lack of large
sports fields capable of lccomsodattng organized sports activities and this
m.y need to be extolned.
ComnunitI and neighborhood parks should he developed to the satisfaction of
the local auntJr service area (CSA).
Recreation Trails
:to cem~ sea . abort. The trail location and develop·ant should
adards
As indicated, on the attache exhibit No. 1., · Class I bicycle lane needs to
be provided for along the Tamecull Creek. This should he developed to counter
standards and have connecting access to local street Class II bicycle lanes.
IIr. Grog Nail, Planntng ikpartmnt
Page !
On the attached exhibit No. 1, provision for access to the Teaeculs Creek by
secondary riding and hiking trail Bast be incorporated into the project. This
concrete box cu vert under State
will utilize the proposed reinforced 1
Htghva~ 7g and provide access to the trails in the creek for residents to the
north of this project. This access/secondary trail should b· dave]sped to a
einiu vtdtb 12 feet and to county standards.
Coordination of the reposed undercrossing taproveaent is requested by our
department, i.e., rr~ rip, .1ecrueat and ·cclsI, and llntlji overhead
· clearance. (See attached deeair')
bltur~l/Histortc Resources
'me proposed site of the Old Vail Ranch project is in an ·xtreael~ sensitive
area for cultural resources. In the thorough cultural resources assessment he
Irepared, archaeologist Christopher Drover discusses the historic tvo-stor~
adobe ¥atl Ranch House and · large Lutseno indian archaeological site.
The Parks !)eparteent's HtstorJr Dtvlston cornends Ranpac Engfneertng
Corporation for Its. sensitive consideration of these cultoral resources tn the
ill. le concur vtth the roposed Etttgatton assuros of recovering arttracts
free the archaeological sties and auktag these available to the publlc In in
Interpretlye center, and preserving the Vail Ranch House through
rehabilitation end adspttye tease. A library, conmunft~ center, sm11 museum
or me·urine would a11 be ·ppro Plate uses for the house, as would'be
continued residential use tf properTJ~ mint·tried.
In addltton to the mitigation assures anttoned tn the EIR, the Parks
I)eparteent requests full-eta monitoring bJr s qualified archaeologist durtn
the grading process. This is essential due to the extreme likelihood oF
unknown archaeological1 resources existing on the site.
If say historic resources surface, Dt·ns Setder, Htsta~ Division DIrector,
h I questions
should be notified at (714)787-2SS1. Sou d yce have regarding
parks, recreation, or trill matt·re, please contact me or Harc Brewer of this
department.
68110186
C:
Paul Roeere, Director, Parks Department
Sam Ferd, Deputy Director, Parks Depart·eat
DilliS Slider, Hlstor~ Dirtsine Director, Parks Depirtaent
Ibrc Ireere Assistant Planner, Parks Department
e®
D~TBI Fobrust7 29, i988'
qiVE b|DE COU~C
'PLAflflinG DEP CmE
blessor
BuildinS nd Safety
BurysTar - Dave Dud·
tread Depart·ant
tealib - laXph Luchs
YLro fret·cries ·
Flood Control District
Yl·b & Game
U.I. footiX I·rvLc· - ruth Z. by/dean
eancho Callf. I~ater
Eastern RunicSpa1 Water
Southern Callf. Edtson
Southern Callf. Call
General TelepJone
Dept. of Transportation 18
Temcula Elem~
llslnore Union Htgh School
Temecula Chamber of M~ce
Mr. Palsnut
SSerra Club
Yalleylitde Parks
County Av4atton
Comtss toner Iresson
"" 0 ? lb88
RIVE.qSID'= C."'. '.t~-Y
pLANNING DEPAP.':
VBSTX!IG TIACT 23267 - (re-Z) - t.A. 325&&
TheSes Amrtcau Corp. - I~ncho Pacific
gauche CalLfonts Are· - first
SupervisorlaX District - South of lilTway
79 and hot of learBarite toad - I-t Zone
Sch·dula A- 193,7 scram iuto--596 lot-
- Concurrent Ca·am CZ 5150, Yll 23299
Hod 120 -A.P. 926-160-410 to 013l
0
t26-o16-o 2-003 ~
County Parks
Please rayicy the case described above, along vlth the attached use map. A Land
Division Committee matins has bus teutativ·ly scheduled for April 28, 1918. If it
chars, tt will the p tO public bearing, ·
Tour conanti and racecondition are requested prior to April l&, 9988 in order that vn
may lncXude thm is the staff report for this particular usa.
ShmaTd yon have any questions rapTdie this irene please do sot beetsate to cent·el
Stem if·el at 717-1363
Youths Trut 23267. abeaid be required to anne to an appropriate
aleacT etch ptvvtdoa park and rearserase meeTtens. Annexation vt2l
mitt·ate lap·eta of therened population to he serve and fees (park
development), shall be used to acquire and develop · park site.
DLTIt & la/as
lq./iSg print Bans aud tit. to Samuel
Xsnassr, TelloT-Vide Recreation an~ ~
4080 LEMON STREET. 9~" FLOOR 48-209 OASIS STREET. ROOM 30d
I0CT131988 ..=,
RlVl:u~ut: I;UUNTy
%ANNING DEPARTMENT
Oct, olaF 131 1988
Nr. Rtcherd NacHott, lulxrvtstng Plsnner
RIverside Comty Plsrmtn8 I)epertssnt~
4080 Leson Itreet, $th Floor
Riverside, CA If801
SUBJECT: Vest,the Tent. at. tve Tract, Hap Number 23287
Dear llr.
The follwtn9 smsmrlze8 our ftndtng8 regarding Zhe ftscal
tmact analysts for the project' 1dent~tried above. The
81~endtx attsched eummrtzee the b181o aeeum~t,tons used tn
ths snalyeta. Plesse note that these result8 reflect, t,he
current, levels of. 8errtoe provtded by the Count,y based on
FIscal Year llll - 1187 8cruel cost8 (Der c88t14 factors).
and DeDertssntel and Audtter-Cont,roller review of olxrat,tons
and factllt. y costs for servtcee revtewed uetng case st,udy
inslyate. Iteff to the ero~th Fte¢81Zs~act. Task Force end
DsSmrtsenta vecorrently reviewing 8errtoe levels proYtded
· snd Zhe need tetn~rease the level8 of 8errtoe. Current'
ffndtnge ere t~st, exist,trig levels of servt¢e 8re not,
sdsWate tnsoet, cases. Should the deetred level of eervtce
be.utilized in the ft8¢81 sn81yet8 Derformed, tt. would
significantly theresee the ooete ueocteted w~tJ~ ~hts
COUNTY FUND
(~rat~t~
IMlntensnce)
FZlCAL ZHPACT
AFTER 8UZLIXXJT
CUI4ULATZVE FZICAL
ZleACT AT IIJZUX)UT
County general
FIr1
Free Llbrary
81JITOTAL OOtMr(
Road Fund
GRAND TOTAL
(let,811)
(ll0,3e0)
(1321)
(llo,f0o)
11,230
(173,71o)
(116,416)
(120,720)
(less)
(lie,e04)
112,480
(124,344)
Itiim T. Antlens Ad,-,k :/htlve Carleaf
assTinT · LTIHRDO I · IlVglSSt CAt/QgMfZSOt · frR ff/~544
The following special circumstances spOly ~0 this Oro3e¢1;:
g, The developer assumption· ~ncTuded · factor of 2.1
persons per dwelling unit. CAD staff u1;JTtzed · factor of
Z.gg per·on· per household, which t8 cToeer ~0 the
countyv4de average for l~ts type of unit.
2. CAO e~eff has reviewed library costs wt1;h Library
personnel.and incorporated actual operations and maintenance
cost8 into the analysts. Using Ltbrary st~aff est~tmet~e8 of
the cost8 of providing the current level of service,
considering the increase tn population, this pro3ect should
result tn one-t~tBe capital fectllty coet~e of 878,263
(11brary apace, volumes) and ongotng annual operat;ton· and
Bat·tens·ca coats of 814,694. Ltbrary staff h·8 indicated
t~mt~ the current level of 8errice t8 no~ adequate.
3. Flood Control s1;aff hss ~ndtcsCed ~hst flood control
fsctl~1;tes constructad within Zone 7 ere unlikely ~0 be
sufficiently funded for Bet·tens·ca coe~e. Current
estimates ~ndtcet4 ~h·~ funding 8hortmge8 should occur for
· he next ~en year·. Suggeetad mitigation measures 4·elude ·
cash daDoatS by the proJee~ developer or use of 8n
assessment Bach·aims. The amount; of depo·tl; ~ould be
etamined by · present; value analysts and project gibing.
The mt of maintaining flood toni;r01 fact111;1·8
not be known unit1 ftnal design Dhaeee, when f~i111;y
hays been fully tden1;tfted. Floocl Control 8ZBff
~herefore, conclt~ton proJoc1; ·~prova18 1~0 tclen1;tfy ·
of financing fectlt~y maintenance and 'operat;ton
necessary) ~rtor ta recorda~ton of subdivision·.
will
need$
wt11,
illsial
bed on tJ~e analysts and usuming thai; the ·vetage sales
price of ~he units wtll be 8142,685, over811 Vesting
Tentative Tract 23287 wtll have · negative ftsc·l
butlclou~of 124,344. Af1;er butldou~, this proJet1; will have
an annual negattve ft8c·1 faeac~ to 1;he County of 173,t70
curren~ levels of 8errtee.
Znt~tml Revte. By: ~
Review Aleroved By: ,~//~'
I I
ATTACHMENT I I I
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT NO. 281
The Riverside County Board of Supervisors certified Environmental impact Report
{EIR) No. 281 in conjunction with the approval of Change of Zone No. 5150 and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nos. 23267 and 23299. The EIR included mitigation
measures to reduce environmental impacts to levels of insignificance. Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 which supersedes Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23299 has 87 fewer residential units than Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23299 and
therefore, will generate less traffic and result in reduced impacts to the environment
and to public services and utilities. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26861 will
involve minimal grading and therefore, is unlikely that any additional amount of
earth movement will result in any increased significant impacts. The Conditions of
Approval are adequate to mitigate any potential impacts regarding drainage and non-
renewable fossil resources to levels of insignificance.
Pursuant to Section 1516q of the California Environmental Quality Act, this addendum
has been prepared to demonstrate that the changes resulting from the proposed
Change of Zone and New Vesting Tentative Tract Map and Revised Tentative Tract
Map will not result in new or substantially increased significant impacts. that there
have bean no changes in the circumstances surrounding the project that would
require important revisions to the EIR due to new significant impacts, and that no
new information has arisen which would indicate that the project will have significant
effects not previously discussed or underestimated, or that alternatives or mitigation
measures not previously considered would substantially reduce any significant
impacts. By reducing the number of residential units, the new project will reduce
the level of impacts on the environment and on public facilities and services.
A: \VTM23267 30
CITY OF TEMECULA
L VICINITY MAP "% CASE NO.
~_ P.O. DATE
CITY OF TEM~'~ULA ~
ZONE MAP
CASE NO.
P.C. DATE 3 -/~-'9 tj
CITY OF TEMECULA
F
¥A
|
.// ~
· .~r'i' ,
'~ 2,~ D HAWI.
.. SP'II3'
L
SWAP MAP
,!
ATTACHMENT 6
TCSD AGREEMENT
/-
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive · Temecula, California 925c~)
Ronald .L Patios
May~x
Patrlcla H. Birdsall
May~r Pro Tern
KmNI F. Wndw~ans
Counalmm'nlx'r
Peg
Councilmeml:~'
J. Sml Mufmz
Councilmeml3er
David R DIe
C~y Manager
1714| 694-19~
FAX 17;41 694-1999
September' 30, 1991
Ray Casey
Presley of San Diego
15090 Avenue of Science, Suite 201
San Diego, CA 92128
RE:
TRACT MAP NO. 23267 AND 26861 CLEARANCE AS TO PARK
LAND DEDICATION AND/OR IN LIEU FEES.
Dear Mr. Casey:
TCSD Staff has reviewed the conditions as set forth in the CounW of
Riverside/City of Temecula Conditions of Approval and recommend that
the City Council APPROVE Tract No. 23267 and 26861 subject to the
developer or his assignee entering into an agreement with the Temecula
Community Services District to conform to the following:
Neighborhood Park "A' which consists of a One acre park located
within Sub Tract No. 23267-4 shall be-developed to TCSD
standards and the attached conceptual design prior to the
issuance of the 50th building permit.
Neighborhood Park 'B" located within Sub Tract No. 23267-2
consists of an approximate 2.9 acre reservoir which the developer
has agreed to drain and level to be contiguous with the remaining
6.3 acres of proposed park land to meet his current Quimby
Requirement and to allow for a total land dedication within this
tract of approximately 9.2 acres. The total 9.2 acres shall be
developed to TCSD standards and the attached conceptual design
prior to issuance of the 50th building permit for Tracts No.
23267-1,2, and 3.
To date, all known interior slope areas are hereby conditioned to
be maintained by an established Home Owners Association {HOA).
Exterior slopes bordering an arterial street may be dedicated to the
TCSD for maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards an
completion of the application process.
Should you have further questions my telephone number is (714) 694-
6480.
Applicant or his assignee agrees to the aforementioned conditions as
signified below.
Yours truly,
CITY F TE
~CIIo. e
s Administrator
C
-?
l
/
ATTACHMENT 7
RCFC Statement dated July 22, 1991
Releasing Tract 23267 from A.D.P. Fees
J~ly 22, 1991
CF_'.)SBYI
MEAD
!BEi TO}
}& ASSOCIATES
JUZ 25
.Riverside county Flood control
and Water Conservation Dis~ict
1995 Market Street
Riverside,-California 92502
Attention:
subJe :
Mr. Howard Dickerson
Murrieta Creek Drainage.Area Fees
vesting Tentative Tract No.-232.67
Job'..No. 225~64
Dear'Mr~ Dickerson: :
The'City of Temecula has requested that Crosby Mead Benton &
:Associates provide confirmation from-.the Riverside Cou~nty 'Flood
.Control and Water Conservation Dis=rict'-that Vesting -Tentative
Tract No. ~3267 lies outside of the boundary of the. Murrieta Creek
Drainage Area and is therefore no~ subject to the fees .associated
.~i=h.that.Drainage Area. More generally, we wish to confirm that
the Tract .does not lie in any currently organlzed.Dra~nage 'Area.
Vesting Tentative TractNo. 23267 lies adjacent to and southerly.of
-State Highway 79 between Pala Road and Mar. garita-Road, in the City
.of Temecu!a,. as depicted on the attached .map. The northeasterly
corner ..of the site lies approximately 1,950. feet from the'
intersection .of Highway 79 with Margarita Road.
~n an effort to simplify the process of obtaining this confirmation
we'.have,prepared. the following statement, which.~e believe to be
correct. Please re-~iew the following statement and, if the
statement is correct, so indicate by signing below in..=he place
provided: .
Vestim. g Tentative Tract'Map No. 23267 does not lie within the
-.boUndaries ofthe Murrieta CreekArea Drainage ~lan'and is not
'subject to 'the requirement to pay the'Area Drainage Fees
associated with this Plan. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23267 does not lie within the boundaries of any -presently
organized Area'Drainage Plan and .is not subject to a
requirement to pay the ~ea Drainage Fees associated with any
such Plan.
Howard DickerSon ·
'~5C E' Corn,no ~eol. Suite 2C0 · CorasOOd. Coi;forn~o C2gOe. , e'.'~,43~-1210 * Fox 6T~1435-2;~-~
:July 22, 1991
Page 2
Riverside County Flood Cont .... ;.d
Water Conservation Distj;~=
Mr'~ Howard Dickerson
'.. '; ';' If =he.statements made in the paragraph prirr=ed above ~re corrects,
'... p-lease indica. te. your_agreement with ~he facts stated in ~he'.
: '·paragraph by signing in the-space provided just below it. Please
'.'. -' r~turn-~he signed letter to me at our offices. We would very much
."' ".appreciat& it if you' would-also transmit. a fax copy of the signed
. ':" ~.et. ter to me at (619) 438-2765 .
so tha-~ I may. gave, the City staff
· ; ~!!-. th.e'.'confirmatio,: ~he~"'desire a= =he earliest possible moment.
'.;" '7/-: :'Thank you .for. your ass~.stance.
.. ~espectfully,
.. Al~nder.w.'Urquhar~.- '
..... - = ...-' .'Proj sot Manager .
awu/:J aC
:~' mUrckdrn;fee
CoI~/of- Hurrieta Creek ..Draina.ge' Area Map with Trac~
· No.. 23267 marked thereon
-.. ",c~:" Nr. victor DeCastro
f
ATTACHMENT 8
Memorandum of Understanding preventing building permits
from being issued for lots located in the 100 year flood plain
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
Attn: Nancy M. Harlan
The Presley Companies
19 Corporate Plaza
Newport Beach, CA. 92660
Memorandum of Understanding
This Memorandum of Understanding is enterea into on
this day of , 1992 by and between The Presley
Companies, a California Corporation ("Presley") and The City
Temecula.
RECITALS
A. Presley is the owner of certain real property in
the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California,
commonly described as "Old Vail Ranch" or "Bridlevale", and more
particularly described on Exhibit "A" (the "Presley Property").
B. Presley is developing the Presley Property as a
residential community. Pursuant to the subdivision map act
Presley wishes to record Tracts 23267-3 and 23267-Final of
vesting Tentative Map No. 23267. Portions of these tracts are
within the Temecula Creek Flood Plain as delineated on the Flood
Insurance Rate Map published by The Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA). Assessment District 159 proposes to construct a
Flood Control Channel through Tracts 23267-3 and 23267-Final on
behal~ of the developer and funded by developer/property owner
bond sales. The Channel construction will physically remove
those properties in question ~rom the "100 Year Flood Plain".
AGREEMENT
The parties agree as follows:
1. 'This Agreement shall be binding upon and benefit
the parties and their successors in interest as owners of the
Presley Property and shall encumber the Presley Property until
all of the obligations of this Agreement have been fulfilled.
This Agreement shall be recorded and shall run with the land.
2. Presley hereby agrees not to obtain any Building
permits for lots (see attached list) of Tract 23267-3 and lots
(see attached list) of Tract 23267-Final until such time as the
Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) has been received from
FEMA for the Temecula Creek Channel.
3. Presley hereby agrees to fully disclose the flood
insurance requirements to potential buyers of lots within the
flood plain. Presley understands flood insurance shall be
required of the buyer until such time as the Letter of Map
Revision (LOMR) has been received from FEMA. Presley further
understands that The City of Temecula will not release any
improvement bonds within Tracts 23267-3 and 23267-Final until
such time as the LOMR has been received.
4. Presley shall require any development successor or
assign to Tracts 23267-3 or 23267-5 become a party to this
Memorandum of Understanding as a condition of lot transfer.
5. All exhibits attached and referred to in this
Agreement are incorporated as though fully set forth in this
Agreement.
6. In any action seeking enforcement of any of the
terms and provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party in
those actions shall be awarded, in addition to taxable costs,
damages, injunctive or other relief, its actual costs and
expenses incurred in that action including, but not limited to,
its ~ctual attorneys' fees.
7. All notices, request, consents, and other
communications required or permitted under this Agreement shall
be in writing (including telex, telegraphic, and telecopier
communication) and shall be (as elected by the person giving such
notice) hand delivered by messenger or court service,
telecommunicated, sent by a professional overnight courier
service (such as Federal Express, DHL or Emery) with invoice
prepaid, or mailed (airmail, if international) by certified mail
(postage prepaid), return receipt requested, addressed to:
If to Presley:
with a copy to:
The Presley Companies
c/o Presley of San Diego
15090 Avenue of Science ~201
San Diego, CA. 92128
Attention: Gerald P. Hordeman
Telephone: (619) 451-6300
Telecopier: (619) 487-7307
The Presley Companies
19 Corporate Plaza
Newport Beach, CA. 92660
Attention: Nancy M. Harlan,Esq
Telephone: (714) 640-6400
Telecopier: (714) 640-1710
If to City
Temecula
City of Temecula
43180 Business Park Drive
Suite 200
Temecula, CA. 92390
Attention: Mr. Scott Field
City Attorney
Attention: Mr. Tim Serlet
City Engineer
Telephone: (714) 694-6400
Telecopier: (714) 694-6488
Each notice shall be deemed delivered (a) on the date delivered,
if by personal delivery, (b) on the date telecommunicated, if by
telegraph, (c) on the date of transmission with confirmed answer
bach, if by telex or telecopier, (d) twenty four (24) hours after
deposit with a professional overnight courier service, if sent by
such service, and (e) seventy two (72) hours after deposit in the
U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, if by certified mail. By giving to
the other parties at least fifteen (15) days written notice, the
parties to this Agreement and their respective successors and
assigns shall have the right from time to time and at any time
during the term of this Agreement to change their respective
addresses, and each shall have the right to specify as its
address any other address within the United States of America.
8. This Agreement contains all of the agreements of
the parties with respect to the matters contained in this
Agreement. All prior or contemporaneous agreements or
understanding, oral or written, are merged in this Agreement and
shall not be effective for any purpose. No provision of this
Agreement may be amended or modified except by an agreement, in
writing, signed by the parties or their respective successors-in-
interest, and expressly stating that it is an amendment of this
Agreement.
9. If, for any reason, any paragraph, section,
sentence, clause or phrase contained in this Agreement becomes or
is held by any Court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal,
null or void, or against public policy, the remaining paragraphs,
sections, sentences, clauses or phrases contained in this
Agreement shall not be affected and shall remain in full force
and effect.
10. This Agreement is executed in and shall be
governed by the laws of the State of California.
11. The City of Temecula hereby agrees to record the
attached quitclaim deed nullifying this agreement upon receipt
the (LOMR) for Temecula Creek Channel.
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been
executed by the parties as of the date first written above.
Presley:
THE PRESLEY COMPANIES, a
California Corporation
P.
e~'or ic esi en
By: Wil~ia~ Bf ro er
P b t
Vice President
City:
CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
Patricia H. Birdsall
Mayor
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
By:
Tim D.
City Engineer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: ,/j~T~
Scott F. Field
City Attorney
By:
June S. Greek
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss:
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
· th's ~\ . day of ~~, , 19~, before
name is
me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that
by his signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon
behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
Signature
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
¢
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
) ss:
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO w~e
t is ~k~ day o , 19~/--, before
personally no to be the person whose
me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that
by'his signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon
behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
)
) ss:
)
., before
On this day of persoAa~y appeared
me,
PATRICIA H. BIRDSALL personally known t~ me to be the person
whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized
capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person
or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the
instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
)
) ss:
)
On this day of , 19 , before
personally appeared
me,
DAVID F. DIXON personally known to me tA be the person whose name
is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me.
that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by
his signature on the instrument the person or the entity upon
behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
PRESLEY PROPERTY
PARCEL A
THOSE PORTIONS OF PARCEL I AND PARCEL: OF PARCEL NAP NO. 18993 AS
It~CORDF~ IN BOOX 134 AT ~J~2E 13 ~XR2U~H 18 INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL
NAPS IN THE OFT/CZ OF ~ CX3aN~ IZCOZU::~ OF ~ co13'r~ OF
CO,-~,-,AN*CZNG AT TH~ HOST ]rOJ~'ENr~Ly CORNXR OY SAID PARCEL
TKF. WCE N01~eKEASTaRLy ALONG Ta3 SOu-.~:xxa.aLY ~tZGHT OF WAY ~ OF STA~
~~Y 79, 102 ~ 20~Y OF ~ ~r.~ OF S~D NIQ~AY 79
M EHO~ ~ I~D P~L ~ NO. 18993e NO~ 73' 23~ 17" ~T,
84.20 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m~n~nz
~NCE ALONG SAID C=~ZERLIB'E NORTH ?3' 23e 17" EAST, A DISTANCE
3015.18 FEETI
Tw~qCZ SOUTH 16' 36e 43s EAST, 102.00 FEET TO TI~ SOUTheRLY RIGHT
OF WAY LINE OF HIGhrAY 7t I
THEN(= S0UTSIA2TE~Ly ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH X CENTRAL ANGLE
09' 51e 27" AN ARC DZBTAI~CE OF 275.2? FE=T;
TEENeE SOUTH 26* 21e 10" EAST, 99.17 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A
CURVE CONCAVE TO TSZ SOUTBWZBT AND KAVlNG A RADIUS OF 1600. O0 FE=T~
T/~NCE SOVTKEASTI3tLY ALONG &AID CURVE TKROUG~ A CENTRAL ANGLZ OF
17' 21e 41" AN ARC DIBTANC2 OF 414.13 FZETX
TgINCI SOUTH 0t' 02' 29" EAST, 129.77 FEET TO A POINT ON A NONTANG-
ENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLy AND RAVING A P/Di'US OF 2268.lS FEET AND
A RADIAL BEARING TO SAID CURV~ BiIZ]4'G SOUTH 09' 06t 29" ,FAST/*
· KENC~ ROaTRZaSTERLY ALON~ SAID CORVZ THROUGH A ~ ~G= OF
11' 24e 40" ~ ~C DZ~~ OF 451.87 ~T ~ X ~l~ 0N ~
~~Y L~ 0F B~D P~L 2 ~ OF P~ 3 ~R S~D ~CEL ~
18993 ~
EXHIBIT "A"
PAGE 1 of 4
T/IZNCE I~ ALIQW3 IAZD EABTZRLY LINE IClT3TH 21' 1.5' 55'
:EAST, S!I.ll FEET TO 'EXZ XC)8l $~TZXT,,I' (~ad, A&.OZ SAID :PARCS::L
2, SAID JOINT IX331'G ALSO TBI: MD!':' ITORTBZMTERLY CORNER OF SAID
:I,AlU:==,
'I'HXNa 8txj-~.r, STZXLY AZDTG THI: CQI,,(ON PARtSL LINE OF BAlD PARCI:Z3
AND 3 BC4:/TN 73' 23' 2.7" wr. aT~ 2117.49 FZET~.
T/rENC3 LEAVING BAIl:) COMX01'I' I~ARCrL L.I1rE N'ORT~ 44' 1~' 01" wrar,t
83.38 FEET;
SOUTH 45' 43~ 59" WZET, 100.00 F'DT~
T/[ZNCZIOUTH44* 16w 01" FAST, 29.98 FZZTTO&POINTON SAZDCOM:MON
PARCr. L LIN3 msz.'kw.a~TPARCZF. L 2 AIrD PARC3:L 3r
Tww~C~ SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG BAIl)
73' 23t 17~ WFJT, 399.21 FEr~ TO ~ ~ COR1TER OF 8AID
PARC3:L 2 IZ33T13 ALSO T/~ MOST SO~TZP, LY CX3RNZ2 OF SAID
PARClL 13
THENCE SOUTHW~STE!X= ALONG TSE Cu~M.~I[ PARCZL LINZ B~N ~ZD
P~CEL I 2 P~ 3 i~ 73' 23t 17w ~2T, 183.00 ~ ~ ~
MOST SO~T, ~'nw~ ~~ OF ~ P~L I ~C ~O ~
MOST NORWAY ~~~ 8~ P~ 31
THI~CZ ~OR~HWF, S'~Lr ~ THI IOCT/ZlrFaTERL! ~ OF SAID PARCrL
1 AND AL~O ~ 8~u~-~~Y ~ OF ~D P~aL ~ NO. 18993
NOR~ 16e 311 43N~, 230.00 ~~A~~~B~-
LY ~ ~ ~ A ~
~G A~~ OF 4695.00 ~T~A~~~C~ ~D~
~ I~ 18"36e 43"
THENCE NORT~m~STEILY AI~NC SAID CURVE ~ A CTaTRAL ANGLZ OF
03' 40* 5/"ANAIC DZSTANCZOF 301.84 FEITTOAPOIh'TON SAID CURV~
AND A RADIAL BZ~RING TO SAID POINT K~ING SOUTH 20' 17' 35" EAST;
TKZNCX NORTH 20" SSI 00e W~IT, 201.61 FEET TO ~ B,1EOZNNI'NG OF A
CURVE COdCAVE NORTI~J~TIRLY AND EKVZ:NG A RADIUS OF 1650.00 FqEET;
TTrENCE NORTHMISTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TKROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLZ OF
04' 18: 17" AN aRC DISTANCE OF 123.~7 FEETX
EXHIBIT "A"
PAGE 2 of 4
PX.N~L B
PARCEL 3 AND PARCEL 4 OF lAID PARCZL NAP NO. 18)93.
EXCEPTING Tww;tXFROM ~ "NOT A PART" Pa~ wPARCEL PWS' AND
wpARC~L 1q47", ~ Sl"EXS, IN ~V~ OF ~O ~I~O~ WA~
DZ5~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 21, 1967 ~ ~l~ ~~
34389 O~ O~~~~S O~ S~D~~ OF~~~D AS SHO~
ON 8~ 4 ~ S OF I~D P~L~ ~. 1899S-
TOTAL AREA FOR PARCEL A AND B IS 203.12 ACRra leORE OR LESS.
EXHIBIT 'A"
PAGE 3 of 4
EXHIBIT "A"
PAGE 4 of 4
EXHIBIT "B"
LOTS LYING ENTIRELY OR PARTIALLY WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE 100-YEAR-
FLOOD, AS MAPPED BY FEMA
TRACT 23267-3 (the current 23267-3, not the proposed "new" 23267-3
LOTS I THROUGH 79, and
LOTS 165 THROUGH 214
TRACT 23267-FIIrAL (the current 23267-Final, not the proposed "new"
23267-Final
LOTS i THROUGH 13, and
LOTS 20 THROUGH 29, and
LOTS 40 THROUGH 59, and
LOTS 95 THROUGH 103, and
LOTS 106 THROUGH 119
"EXHIBIT "B"
PAGE 1 of 3
· I
VS~O ~Z800-
-I
EXHIBIT "B"
PAGE 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT 9
FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT
CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT
TRACT MAP NO. 23267-3
IMPROVEMENTS
Streets and Drainacle
Water
Sewer
TOTAL
FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE
SECURITY
$ 1,930,000.00 $
$ 370,500.00 $
$ 343,500.00 $
$ 2,644,000.00 $
DATE: May 14, 1992
MATERIAL & LABOR
SECURITY
965,000.00
185,500.00
172,000.00
1,322,500.00
*Raintenmnce Retention (10~ for one ,veer)
*(or Beads if ~ork is caq~let4d)
264.400.00
Monument Security
City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs
Fire Mitigation Fee
RCFC Drainage Fee Due
Signalization Mitigation Fee - SMD #9
Road and Bridge Benefit Fee
Other Developer Fees I Quimby )
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
58,740.00
-0-
83,200.00
NIA
31,200.00
-0-
NIA
Planning Department Fee
Comprehensive Transportation Plan Fee
Plan Check Fee
Inspection Fee
Monument Inspection Fee
$
$
$
$
$
316.00
8.00
89,849.00
78,727.50
2,937.50
Total Inspection/Plan Check Fees
Less Fees Paid To Date {Credit)
Total Inspection/Plan Check Fees Due
171,838.00
171.838.00
-0-
AGENDAS/ARO06
ITEM NO. 19
APPROVAL:
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER'~'¥~-
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Anthony Elmo, Chief Building Official,'~
May 26, 1992
License Agreement with Temeka Advertising for Installation of
Directional "Kiosk" Signs Within The City Right Of Way
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve an award of and authorize the City
Manager to execute a License Agreement to Temeka Advertising, 43339 Business
Park Drive, #102, Temecula, California 92590, for the installation of the City's
"Kiosk" signs.
DISCUSSION:
On October 22, 1992, the City Council adopted Ordinance 91-40 with direction to
staff to develop a directional "Kiosk" Sign Program to provide an effective uniform
method of directing attention to development projects. A Kiosk, by definition, is a
free standing, multiple sided structure whose main purpose is to display signs or
information which in this case will be for the purpose of directing traffic to new
residential developments and City and public facilities.
Request for Qualifications were distributed to approximately nineteen (19) firms as
step one of our ~election process. A committee made up of City Council and staff
members was formed to review the qualifications of each responding firm and select
the four (4) most qualified firms. The four (4) firms were then asked to prepare a
presentation before the committee with the top ranked firm being asked to submit a
cost proposal. The top four (4) firms were selected as follows:
Motivational Systems, Inc.
Temeka Advertising
Temecula Homebuilders Association
The Imagination Group
After observing the presentations of each of the top four (4) firms, the committee
chose Temeka Advertising to request a cost proposal from and enter into license
negotiations with. Temeka Advertising then prepared several renderings of kiosk
designs for the committee's consideration. Once the design was chosen, the design
and information about the program was presented to the local builders association for
their input.
The committee has reached an agreement with Temeka Advertising for a four (4) year
period, in which Temeka will be licensed to install and maintain the kiosk signs along
with performing the abatement of illegally placed directional signs on weekends.
Temeka Advertising has agreed to provide a maximum of two (2) sign slats per kiosk
for indicating direction to various City facilities. The lease cost for each slat on the
kiosk will be a minimum of $62.66 for a single face sign and $86.53 for a double face
sign per month during the first year of the four (4) year agreement. This includes a
2% administrative expenses which will be remitted to the City of Temecula for
administrative expenses. The annual anticipated revenue for administrative efforts is
$5292.00 and $7308.00 respectively. This constitutes repayment for expenses
incurred during the RFQ selection procedures and ongoing monitoring of the program
by City staff. A one-time construction cost of a maximum $185 will be charged each
lessee. A review of cost and level of participation will be conducted annually each of
the remaining years of the agreement in an effort to regulate any annual lease cost
increases.
v:\wp\egende.rep\cccmO526.kak
AGREEMENT
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
TI-HS AGR~I~MENT, made and entered into this 26th day of May , 19 9_22, between
the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City" and Temeka
Advenisin~, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant".
The parties hereW mutually agree as follows:
SERVICES. Consultant shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A attached
hereto. Consultant shall market the program on behalf of the City while
maintnining ownership of the sign structures, and complete the tasks according
to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A.
PERFORMANCE. Consultant shall at all times, faith~dly, industrially and.to
the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described
herein.
PAYMENT. Compensation to Consultant will be derived solely fwm the
leasing of space on each "kiosk" directional sign.
SUSPENSION. TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT OF AGI~mMENT.
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 pwvides otherwise.
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.
BREACH OF CONTRACT. In the event that Consultant is in default fo}
cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or
duty to continue contracting with 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, ff
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
V :~W'p~CONTRACT~/.AGR-04
,
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 enti~ed at law, in equity or under this
Agreement.
TERM. This Agreement shall commence on May 26,1992, and shall
remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but
in no event later than May 26,19
Any disputes regarding performance, ddault 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
fmal.
Consultant shall select an arbitrator fwm a list pwvided 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 sea_. 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 Consultant and may not be used, reused or
otherwise disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant.
IND~~ 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 shah 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
V:\V/P~CONTRACTVX'F,M]~.A{3R-04
2 ~
10.
11.
12.
out of performing services hereunder.
LEGAL RESPONSIBHXFIES. The Consultant shall keep itseft 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.
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
mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the City Manager
of the City of Temecula', located at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
Califomia 92590 and the Consultant at 43339 Business Park Drive. #102.
Temecula. California 92590 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.
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.
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).
2. Insurance Services Office form no. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering
V:\W'~CONTRAC'I'VrP, MI~.AOR-04
3
Do
Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025.
Workers' Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of the
State of Cnlifornia 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.
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 Serf-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.
General Liability and Automobile Liability coverage. The City of
Temecuia, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be
covered as insureds as respect: 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.
V:\W~CONTRACT~.AGR-04.
C,
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 serf-
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.
Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage. The
insurer shall agree to waive all fights of subwgation against the City of
Temecuh, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses
arising from work performed by the Consultant for the City.
Verification of Coverage. ContracWr shall furnish the City with
certificates of insurance effecting coverage requited by this chuse.
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 axe to be
received and approved by the City before work commences. The City
reserves the fight 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
coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements
stated herein.
Any deductibles or serf-insured retentions must be declared to and
appwved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer
shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or serf insured retentions as
respects the City, its officers, officials and employees; or the
Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and
rehted investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
V:\WP\CONTRAC"I~'~,MI~.AGR-(~
13.
14.
LICENSES. The Consultant and subconsultant shall obtain all necessary
licenses, including but not limited to City Business License.
INDEIVfNIFICATION. 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 AGR.RRMRNT. This Agreement and any documents or instrument
attached hereto or referred to heroin 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.
EFFECTIVE DATE AND EXECUTION: This Agreemere shall be effective from
and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreemere may be
executed in counterparts.
V:\WI~.CONTRACTXT~MI!XA.AOR-04
IN WITNESS WI~F, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CONSULTANT
CITY OF TEMECULA
By: By
Title Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
revised2/21/92
V:\WP\CONTRACT~I.AGR-04
7
EXIIlRITA
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
Temeka Advertising Cremeka) shall perform the following tasks with the understanding that
Temeka wffi market the kiosk program on behalf of the City and that Temeka will own the
sign structures:
1. Upon the decision of which sign is to be used, Temeka wffi then provide a
final de, sign within five (5) working days.
2. Sign locations will be provided to the City of Temecuh within ten (10)
working days after the execution of the agreement.
3. Ground leases will be obtained if necessary within ten (10) working days of
acceptance of sign locations.
4. All necessary permits wffi be obtained for the directional signs.
5. Temeka will meet with City and utility personnel to spot each location to
insure no destruction of underground utilities.
6. Within sixty (60) calendar days of the execution of the agreement, Temeka
will manufacture and install directional signs at the City appmved locations.
Temeka will manufacture the directional signs according to the following specifications:
1. Sizes of structures and shts will follow the city of Temecuh's ordinance
guidelines.
2. All shts shall contain only the name of the subdivision and a directional
arrow. Copy shall be upper-case Halvetica Medium.
3. For Safety reasons, arrows will be phced in this sequence:
1. Left, 2. Straight, 3. Right.
4. Temeka wffi allow for a maximum of two (2) shts per sign for directing
traffic to City/Public facilities (i.e., parks, City Hall, libraries, etc.) if needed.
5. Directional signs shall only be placed at locations appmved by the City of
Temecula.
V: ~ Wi~CONTRACT\TBI~iKA. AGR-04
EXtIIBITA
TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
Structures will be provided with standardized cobble landscaping at their base.
There shall be no additions, tag signs, streamers, attention-getting devices, or
other appurtenances added to the sign as originally approved. Further, no
other directional signage may be used such as posters, portable signs, trailer
signs or temporary subdivision signs.
In the event that it becomes nocessary for whatever reason to physically
remove or relocate one or more of the directional signs, then upon the request
of the City of Temecula, Temeka agrees to promptly move said sign at its sole
cost and expense and to then reinstall it at such new location as directed and
authorized by the City of Temecula.
Temeka will market the program as such:
Temeka will set up a meeting with all developers located in the City of
Temecula to discuss:
A) Program
B) Locations
C) Fees
D) Sign-ups
Temeka will service the City of Temecula as such:
Initially, identify all illegal off-site permanent signs located within the City of
Temecula limits and report them to the City of Temecula.
Each weekend remove all weekend directional signs. We will report each
weekend activity by Tuesday a.m.
V:\WI~CONTRACT~.AGR-04
9
EXHIBITB
PAYMENT SCHRBULE
Lease schedule for the "Kiosk" Directional Sign Program:
Single Face
Double-Face
First Year $ 62.66 $ 86.53
Second Year $ 66.14 $ 91.33
Third Year $ 73.09 $100.94
Fourth Year $ 76.58 $105.75
,
The mounts represent an added 2 % overhead fee.
The City and Temeka Advertising agree to meet annual to review lease price
and participation.
Temeka Advertising agrees to maintain annual lease prices with a participation
of 80 % or more.
The above listed fees are based upon a four (4) year contract agreement
representing a 33 % discount to participating developers.
V:~WI~CONTRAC'T~T~M]]KA.AOR-04
ITEM
20
ORDINANCE NO. 92-11
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE'
CITY OF TEMECULA AIYlI-IORIZING THE
SEIZURE, IMPOUNDMENT AND TERMINATION OF
OWNERSHIP RIGHTS IN ABANDONED,
NEGLECTED, OR CRUELLY TREATED ANIMALS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula, adopted Ordinance No. 90-04
on February 27, 1990. Said Ordinance, adopted by reference, Riverside County Ordinance No.
630.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 597.1, Subdivision (e) , the City
of Temecula hereby determines that California Penal Code Section 597.1 shall be operative in
the City of Temecula and that Penal Code Section 597f shall not be operative.
SECTION 3. Any dog, cat or other animal which is abandoned, neglected, sick, lame,
feeble, is unfit for the labor it is performing, or that in any manner is being cruelly treated may
be impounded and disposed of in a humane manner as hereinafter provided.
SECTION 4. Whenever any peace officer or animal control officer has reasonable
grounds to believe that very prompt action is required to protect the health or safety of the
animal or the health or safety of others, the officer shall immediately seize the animal and
comply with the procedure established in Section 4 of this Ordinance. In all other cases, the
officer shall comply with the provisions of Section 5 of this Ordinance. The cost of caring for
and treating any animal prope~y seized under this Ordinance shall constitute a lien on the animal
and the animal shall not be returned to its owner until the charges are paid, unless the hearing
officer determines that the seizure was unjustified.
SECTION 5. Whenever an animal control officer or peace officer seizes or impounds
an animal based on a reasonable belief that prompt action is required to protect the health or
safety of the animal or the health or safety of others, the officer shall, prior to the
commencement of any criminal proceedings provide the owner or keeper of the animal, if known
or ascertained after reasonable investigation, with the opportunity for a post seizure hearing as
hereinafter provided to determine the validity of the seizure or impoundment, or both.
1. The Health Department shall cause a notice to be affixed to a conspicuous place
where the animal was situated or personally deliver a notice of the seizure or impoundment, or
both, to the owner or keeper within 48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays. The notice
Ords 92-11 -1-
shall include all of the following:
a. The name, business address, and telephone number of the officer providing
the notice.
b. A description of the animal seized, including any identification upon the
c. The authority and purpose for the seizure, or impoundment, including the
time, place, and circumstances under which the animal was seized.
d. A statement that, in order to receive a post seizure hearing, the owner or
person authorized to keep the animal, or his or her agent, shall request the hearing by signing
and returning an enclosed declaration of ownership or right to keep the animal to the Health
Department within 10 days, including weekends and holidays, of the date of the notice. The
declaration may be returned by personal delivery or mail.
e. A statement that the cost of caring for and treating any animal properly seized
under this section is a lien on the animal and that the animal shall not be returned to the owner
until the charges are paid, and that failure to request or to attend a scheduled hearing shall result
in liability for this cost.
2. The post seizure hearing shall be conducted within 48 hours of the request, excluding
weekends and holidays. The hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of
Section 10 of this Ordinance.
3. Failure of the owner or keeper, or of his or her agent, to request a hearing within the
prescribed time period, or to attend a scheduled hearing, shall result in forfeiture of any right
to a post seizure hearing or right tO challenge his or her liability for costs incurred.
4. The Health Department, or law enforcement agency that directed the seizure shall be
responsible for the costs incurred for caring and treating the animal, if it is determined in the
post seizure hearing that the seizing officer did not have reasonable grounds to believe every
prompt action, including seizure of the animal, was required to protect the health or safety of
the animal or the health or safety of others. If it is determined the seizure was justified, the
owner or keeper shall be personally liable to the seizing agency for the costs of the seizure and
care of the animal, and the animal shall not be returned to its owner until the charges are paid
and the sizing agency or hearing 0ffieer has determined that the animal is physically fit or the
owner demonstrates to the seizing ageney's or the hearing officer's satisfaction that the owner
can and will provide the necessary care.
SECTION 6. Where the 'need for immediate seizure is not present and prior to the
commencement of any criminal proceedings the Health Officer shall provide the owner or keeper
Ords 92-11 -2-
of the animals, if known or ascertainable after reasonable investigation, with the opportunity for
a hearing prior to any seizure or impoundment of the animal. The owner shall produce the
animal at the time of the h.earing unless, prior to the hearing, the owner has made arrangements
with the agency to view the animal upon request of the agency, or unless the owner can provide
verification that the animal was humanely destroyed. Any person who willfully falls to produce
the animal or provide-the verification is guilty of an infraction, punishable by a fine of not less
than two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) no more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00).
1. The Health Department or law enforcement agency shall cause a notice to be affixed
to a conspicuous place where the animal was situated or personally deliver a notice stating the
grounds for believing the animal should be seized. The notice shall include all of the following:
notice.
a. The name, business address and telephone number of the officer providing the
b. A description of the animal to be seized, including any identification upon the
c. The authority and purpose for the possible seizure or impoundment.
d. A statement that, in order to receive a hearing prior to any seizure, the owner
or person authorized to keep the animal, or his or her agent, shall request the heating by signing
and returning the enclosed declaration of ownership or right to keep animal to the officer
providing the notice within two days, excluding weekends and holidays, of the date of the notice.
e. A statement that the cost of caring for and treating any animal properly seized
is a lien on the animal, that any animal seized shall not be returned to the owner until the
charges are paid, and that failure to request a hearing within the prescribed time period, or to
attend a scheduled hearing shall result in a conclusive determination that the animal may
properly be seized and that the owner shall be liable for the charges.
2. The preseizure hearing shall be conducted within 48 hours, excluding weekends and
holidays, after receipt of this request. The hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the
procedure established in Section 10 of this Ordinance.
3. Failure of the owner or keeper, or his or her agent, to request a hearing within the
prescribed time, period or to attend a scheduled hearing, shall result in a forfeiture of any right
to a preseizure hearing or right to challenge his or her liability for costs incurred pursuant to this
Ordinance.
SECTION 7. If any animal is properly seized under this Ordinance, the owner or keeper
shall be personally liable to the seizing agency for the cost of the seizure and care of the animal.
Furthermore, if the charges for the seizure or impoundment and any other charges permitted
under this Ordinance are not paid within 14 days of the seizure, or, if the owner, within 14 days
Ordn 92-11 -3-
of notice of availability of the animal to be returned, fails to pay charges permitted under this
Ordinance and take possession of !the animal, the animal shall be deemed to have been
abandoned and may be disposed of by the impounding officer.
SECTION 8. If the animaa requires veterinary care and the seizing agency is not
assured, within 14 days of the seizure of the animal, that the owner will provide the necessary
care, the animal shall not be returned to its owner and shall be deemed to have been abandoned
and may be disposed of by the impounding officer. A veterinarian may humanely destroy an
impounded animal without regard to the pre~ribed holding period when it has been determined
that the animal has incurred severe injuries or is incurably ill or crippled. A veterinarian also
may immediately humanely destroy an impounded animal afflicted with a serious contagious
disease unless the owner or his or her agent immediately authorizes treatment of the animal by
a veterinarian at the expense of the owner or agent.
SECTION 9. No animal properly seized under this Ordinance shall be returned to its
owner until, in the determination of the seizing agency or hearing officer, the animal is
physically fit or the owner can demonstrate to the seizing agency's or hearing officer's
satisfaction that the owner can and will provide the necessary care.
SECTION 10. All hearings conducted pursuant to this Ordinance shall be conducted by
the Health Officer or his designee (Hearing Officer), who shall not have been directly involved
in the subject action and shall not be subordinate in rank to the person seizing or impounding
the animal. Hearings shall be conducted in the following manner:
1. The Hearing Officer may continue the hearing for a reasonable period of time, if the
Hearing Officer deems such continuance to be necessary and proper or if the owner or custodian
shows good cause for such continuance.
2. The Health Department shall have the burden of proof to establish, by a
preponderance of evidence, the existence of the condition or conditions which give rise to the
need for the seizure or impoundment.
3. In a case where the Department is also seeking to terminate the owner's rights in the
animal, the Department shall have put the owner or keeper of the animal on due written notice
thereof and shall establish the existence of the owner's or keeper's acts or omissions resulting
in cruelty or neglect to the animal be clear and convincing evidence to a reasonable certainly.
4. The Department shall present its case first, followed by the party against whom the
seizure or impoundment is being proposed. The Department may present rebuttal in the
discretion of the Hearing Officer.
5. Oral evidence shall be taken only on oath or affn'mation.
6. Each party shall have the right to call and examine witnesses, to introduce exhibits,
Ords 92-11 -4-
to cross-examine opposing witnesses on any other matter relevant to the issues even though that
matter was not covered in the direct examination, to impeach any witness regardless of which
party first called the witness, and to rebut evidence.
7. The hearing need not be conducted according to technical rules relating to evidence
and witnesses. Any relevant evidence shall be admitted if it is the son of evidence on which
responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs, regardless of the
existence of any common law or statutory rule which might make improper the admission of
such evidence over objection in civil actions. Hearsay evidence may be used for the purpose
of supplementing or explaining other evidence, but shall not b e sufficient in itself to support a
finding unless it would be admissible over objection in civil actions. The rules of privilege shall
be effective to the extent that they are otherwise required by statute to be recognized in the
hearing. Irrelevant and unduly repetitious evidence shall be excluded.
8. At the conclusion of the hearing, each side shall be given an opportunity to
summarize its position.
9. Within three (3) working days after the conclusion of the hearing, the Hearing Officer
shall render, in writing, his findings, decision and order thereon, and shall give notice, in
writing, of said findings, decision and order to the owner or custodian of the animal.
10. In the event a sufficient Quantum of evidence presented at the hearing supports a
determination for seizure, impoundmerit, and/or termination of the owner' s rights in the animal,
the Hearing Officer as a part of his decision may order, but is not limited to ordering, that one
or more of the following actions be undertaken:
terminated.
a. That the owner's and/or custodian's rights in the dog, cat or other animal are
b. That the owner or custodian of the dog, cat or other animal shall remove the
animal(s) from the premises by a specified date.
c. That the Health Department personnel after a specified date, shall impound
the animal or animals.
d. That the Health Department shall sell, give away, or otherwise dispose of, the
animal(s) with the owner or custodian of the animal(s) being responsible to reimburse the City
for all costs and expenses including, but not limited to, board, care, veterinary services, and
costs of disposal. If the animal(s) are sold, the proceeds from the sale shall go to the City or
agency as designated by the City.
11. A decision upholding seizure or impoundment shall become effective upon issuance.
12. A decision terminating an owner's rights in the animal shall become effective 30
Ords 92-11 -5-
days from the date the decision is m~ed unless a stay of execution is granted.
SECTION 11. Every such, disabled, infirm or crippled animal, except a dog or cat,
abandoned in any part of the City of Temecula the County of Riverside may be immediately
killed by the Health Department of law enforcement agency or their designees if, after a
reasonable search, no owner of the animal can be located. It shall be the duty of all peace
officers and animal control officers to cause the animal to be killed or rehabilitated and placed
in a suitable home on information that the animal is stray or abandoned.
SECTION 12. Any peace officer, humane society officer, or animal control officer shall
convey all injured cats and dogs found without their owners in a public place directly to a
veterinarian known by the officer to be a veterinarian who ordinarily treats dogs and cats for a
determination of whether the animal shall be immediately and humanely destroyed or shall be
hospitalized under proper care and given emergency treatment.
If the owner does not redeem the animal within the locally prescribed waiting period, the
veterinarian may personally perform euthanasia on the animal. If the animal is treated and
recovers from its injuries, the veterinarian may keep the animal for purposes of adoption,
provided the responsible animal control agency has first been contacted and has refused to take
possession of the animal.
Whenever any animal is transferred to a veterinarian in a clinic, such as an emergency
clinic which is not in continuous operation, the veterinarian may, in ram, transfer the animal to
an appropriate facility.
If the veterinarian determines that the animal shall be hospitalized under proper care and
given emergency treatment, the costs of any services which are provided pending the owner's
injury to the responsible agency or department shall be paid from the dog license fees, fines, and
fees from impounding dogs in the city, county, or city and county in which the animal was
licensed or, if the animal is unlicensed, shall be paid by the jurisdiction in which the animal was
found, subject to the provision that this costs be repaid by the animal's owner. The costs of
caring for and treating any animal seized under this Section shall constitute a lien on the animal
and the animal shall not be returned to the owner until the charges are paid. No veterinarian
shall be criminally or civilly liable for any decision which he or she makes or for services which
he or she provides pursuant to this section.
An animal control agency which takes possession of an animal pursuant to Section 11 of
this Ordinance shall keep records of the whereabouts of the animal for a 72-hour period from
the time of possession, and those records shall be available for inspection by the public upon
request.
SECTION 13. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, any peace officer
or any animal control officer may, with the approval of his or her immediate superior, humanely
destroy any stray or abandoned animal in the field in any case where the animal is too severely
Ords 92-11 -6.-
injured to move or where a veterinarian is not available and it would be more humane to dispose
of the animal.
SECTION 14. Every owner, driver or keeper of any animal who permits' the animal to
be in any building, enclosure, lane, street, square or lot within the City of Temecula area of
Riverside County, without proper care of attention shall be guilty of an infraction or
misdemeanor as hereinafter specified. Such individual shall be deemed guilty of a separate
offense of each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the
provisions of this Ordinance is committed, continued or permitted. Any individual convicted
a violation of this Ordinance shall be:
1. guilty of an infraction offense and punished by a fine not exceeding one
hundred dollars ($100.00) for a first violation;
2. guilty of an infraction offense and punished by a fine not exceeding two
hundred dollars ($200.00) for a second violation. The third and any additional violations shall
constitute a misdemeanor offense and shall be punishable by a free not exceeding one thousand
dollars ($1,000.00) or six (6) months in jail, or both. Notwithstanding the above, a first offense
may be charged and prosecuted as a misdemeanor. Payment of any penalty herein shall not
relieve an individual from the responsibility for correcting the violation.
SECTION 15. Upon the conviction of a person charged with a violation of this
ordinance, all animals lawfully seized and impounded with respect to the violation shall be
adjudged by the court to be forfeited and shall thereupon be transferred to the impounding
officer for proper disposition. A person convicted of a violation of this Ordinance shall be
personally liable to the seizing agency from all costs of impoundmerit from the time of seizure
to the time for proper disposition. This Ordinance shall not prohibit the seizure or impoundment
of animals as evidence as provided for under any other provision of law.
SECTION 16. This Ordinance is not intended, nor shall it be construed in any way, to
affect Sections 31101 or 31752 of the Food and Agriculture Code.
SECTION 17. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this
Ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or applications of the provisions of this Ordinance
which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application and, to this end, the
provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 18. Section 13 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 630 adopted by reference
in Ordinance No. 90-04 on February 27, 1990, is hereby repealed.
Ords 92-11 -7-
SECTION 19. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause copies of this
Ordinance to be posted and published as required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 26th day of May, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patficia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 92-12 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the !12th day of May, 1992 and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 26th day of May,
1992, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Ords 92-11 -8-
ITEM NO.
21
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
May 26, 1992
City Council/City Manager
Mark J. Ochenduszko, Assistant City Manager
1) The Environmental Assessment to locate a park south of
Margarita Road, east of Stonewood Road, and 2) Condemnation
of the same property for park and recreational purposes.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is requested that the City Council:
1. Open the Hearing, Review Facts, Accept Comments and Close the
Hearing;
2. ADOPT the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental
Assessment (EA) Number 8; and,
3. ADOPT the Resolution of Necessity to Initiate Eminent Domain
Proceedings for the Acquisition of the Property.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Temecula m.ade offers to purchase approximately 20.23 acres of real
property located on the South side of Margarita Road, approximately 400 feet east of
Stonewood Road for public park and recreational purposes. The subject property is
located immediately west of Temecula Elementary School and is shown on Exhibit A.
The offers to purchase this real property were made on November 8, 1991, and again
on November 21, 1991, pursuant to and in compliance with, the provisions of Section
7267.2 of the Government Code and was for the full amount determined to be just
compensation for the property and any improvements thereon. In the discussions
that occurred, the City and the property owner, Mr. Eion F. McDowell, have been
unable to arrive at a mutually agreeable sale price for the property. As a result, the
City Council must initiate eminen~ domain proceedings if it wishes to proceed with the
park project. The City notified Mr. McDowell on February 10, 1992, that a hearing
to discuss whether the property should be acquired by eminent domain was scheduled
for February 25, 1992. The public hearing was continued to May 12, and again to
May 26, 1992 to allow the property owner to obtain a separate real estate appraisal
and continue negotiations with the City for the purchase of the property.
Since that time, staff has frequently contacted and attempted to negotiate with Mr.
McDowell regarding the subject property. Unfortunately, these meetings have been
unsuccessful.
ANALYSIS:
An Initial Environmental Study was prepared pursuant to the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act on January 3, 1992, for the acquisition of the
property and the development of a community park on the site. The Initial Study was
circulated to organizations that have a statutory or regulatory interest in the project,
or that could potentially be impacted by the project. In addition, the Notice of
Proposed Negative Declaration was sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the
site, and a copy of the Notice was posted on-site facing Margarita Road. As of
February 10, 1992, only one comment letter had been received by the City. The
Southern California Gas Company commented on January 13, 1992, that they could
provide gas service to the property without additional environmental impact. No other
comments or inquiries were received in response to the City's Notice of Proposed
Negative Declaration.
Based upon an analysis of the potential environmental impacts from this Project, as
contained in the Initial Study, four potentially significant impacts have been identified.
The potentially significant impacts include: the possibility of a reduction in the amount
groundwater recharge, the loss of riparian vegetation, the loss of habitat for the
Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, and light pollution impacts on the Mt. Palomar Observatory.
It is anticipated that these potentially significant impacts will be mitigated to a level
of insignificance by the Mitigation Measures contained in the Initial Study. The
implementation of the Mitigation Measures will be undertaken by the City Community
Services Department with the assistance of the City Planning Department.
CONCLUSION:
City Staff recommends that the City Council first adopt the proposed Mitigated
Negative Declaration for this Project, and then adopt the Resolution of Necessity
stating that the acquisition of the property is in the public interest, convenience and
necessity, that it will create the greatest public good and the least private injury, and
that acquisition of the property is necessary for the Project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funds in the amount of $1,300,000 for the purchase of a parksite in this vicinity are
identified in the Capital Improvement Program under Community Facilities District 88-
12. Bond proceeds can be used for this outlay.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Vicinity Map
Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration
Initial Study for Environmental Assessment No. 8
Resolution of Necessity
Notice to Property Owner
Letters of November 8, November 21, 1991, April 20, and
May 14, 1992 to Eion F. McDowell
a:agenda.mcd
Attachment I
EXHIBIT A
VICINITY MAP
; T PRC
j
Attachment 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
X Proposed __ Final
PROJECT:
Temecula Elementary School Park Site Project,
Environmental Assessment No. 8,
APPLICANT:
Ci~ of Temecula.
LOCATION:
South side of Margarita Road between Stonewood and Moraga Roads,
adjacent to Temecula Elementary School in the City of Temecula.
DESCRIPTION:
The acquisition of approximately 20.23 acres and the construction of
a Community Park by the City of Temecula.
Based upon the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and
pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it has
been determined that the above mentioned project will have no significant impact upon the
environment. The City of Temecula
X
City Council
Planning Commission
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant impact upon the
environment, and recommends that a Negative Declaration be adopted. The mitigation
measures for this project are contained in the Initial Study.
(Signature)
Approved by: /~~r/~ Gary. Thornhill. Director of Planning
(Si/gnature) (Name and Title)
Public Review Period: January 7. 1992 to January 28.1992 .
Public Notice was given through:
__ Local Newspaper. X Posting the Site.
X Notice to Adjacent Property Owners.
Attachment 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
BACKGROUND
1. Name of Proponent:
City of Temecula
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
43174, Business Park Drive
Temecula. CA 92590
(714) 694-6400
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
January 3.1991
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment:
CITY OF TEMECULA
5. Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) NUMBER 8,
Temecula Elementan/School Park Site
e
Location of Proposal:
Southside of Maraarita Road. between Stonewood
Road and Moraaa Road in the City of Temecula
Description of Project:
The oroiect consists of: (1) the acauisition of
approximately 20 acres of vacant land adjacent to
Temecula Elementan/School: (2) the develooment
of a community Dark bv the City of Temecula:
and, (3) some incidental flood control
improvements to the Lona Canyon channel.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Yq~ Maybe No
ae
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
be
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
Ce
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
X
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
X
~S~ORMS~,A8 1
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
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?
Air. 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:
ae
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?
Cm
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
Yq~ Maybe No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
~omas~. 2
ee
fe
Discharge into surface waters, or
in any alteration of surface water
quality, including, but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved .ox~/gen
or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or rate
of flow or ground waters?
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)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare, or endangered species
of plants?
Ce
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?
Yes MBybe N__o
X
X
'X
X
X
X
~S%FORMS%EA8 3
10.
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)?
Reduotion of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
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 ailteration of the present or
planned !and use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
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?
YqS Maybe N__o
X
X
X
X
X
X
Yes Maybe N__o
11.
12.
13.
14.
Possible interference with an emerg-
ency response plan or an emergency
evacuation plan?
Populalion. 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:
ae
Generation of substantial additional
~/ehicular movement?
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
de
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
ea
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic?
fe
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?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
de
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
',S~(:)FG~S'~F~8 5
15.
16.
17.
18.
e®
Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer;or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
Human Health. Will the proposal
result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)7
be
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?
Yes Maybe N_~o
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
~S~.A8 6
III
19.
Recreation. Will the proposal result in
an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Cultural Resources.
Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
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?
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
Earth
1 .a,c,d,g.
1.b.
1 .e,f.
Yes Maybe N._~.o
X
X
X
X
No. The project will not result in unstable earth conditions, changes to unique
geologic or physical features, or the exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards. Some minor changes in surface relief will occur as the property is
developed. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Yes. The development of this site for a public park will result in the disruption,
displacement, overcovering and compaction of soils. However the overall
amount of onsite grading is expected to be relatively minor because of the lack
of significant onsite topography and the localized displacement, overcovering
and compaction associated with the development of community parks. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Yes. Some increase in wind or water erosion and deposition could result from
the construction of the proposed park facilities. The majority of the impacts are
expected to be short-term and construction related. The City will use the
appropriate best management practices to reduce and mitigate onsite erosion
and offsite deposition. The development of park facilities on this site will
reduce long-term wind and water erosion by reducing the extent and steepness
of onsite slopes and covering of the site with erosion resistant materials such
\S~FOINS~Ae 7
Ai__r
2.a,b,c.
Water
3 .a ,c ,d ,e,i.
3.b.
3.f,g ,h.
Plant Life
4.a ,c.
as turf grass and paving, and by providing appropriate improvements to onsite
drainage facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project..
No. No long-term changes in air quality, creation of odors, or alteration to the
local or regional climate are expected to occur as a result of this project. Some
short-term and construction related air quality emissions or odors may occur
during the construction process. No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
No. No alterations ;in the course or direction of flood flows, changes in the
quantity and quality of surface water, or discharges to surface waters are
expected to occur as a result of this project. The existing channel will continue
to cross the project site when the site is develoDed. The project will reduce the
exposure of people and property to water related hazards by precluding the
development of housing on the site. No significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
Yes. Some changes in absorption rates, onsite drainage patterns, and surface
runoff may occur as a result of this project. Onsite absorption rates may be
reduced as portions of the site are compacted or paved. The surface runoff
pattern may also change as the site is developed. However, because most of
the project site will not be paved it is expected to retain much of its soil
absorption potential. The project site will continue to drain into the Long
Canyon Channel. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result' of this
project.
Yes. Some changes in the amount of groundwater recharge may occur as a
result of this project if channelization in Long Canyon Channel includes a hard-
bottomed channel. Channelization may reduce the amount of area available for
groundwater recharge. The reduction in the amount of groundwater recharge
has the potential to reduce the amount of public water supply that could be
available in the future. (Residents of the Temecula Valley rely heavily on
groundwater for potable water supplies.) These impacts have the potential to
result in a significant impact on the environment. These impacts will be
mitigated in the final design of the park facility by ensuring that the Long
Canyon Channel maintains a soft-bottomed characteristics to allow the
continued recharge of groundwater. As a result of the mitigation included in
the project design, no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
Yes. The project will change the diversity of the native plant and riparian plant
species and will introduce new plant species onto the project site. The site
currently contains degraded upland grassland, degraded riparian habitat, and
4.b.
4.d.
Animal Life
5 .a ,c.
5.b.
manmade riparian habitats. No significant areas of Coastal Sage Scrub have
been identified. Development of a park facility on the site will replace most of
the existing grassland species with mixture of Bermuda Grass and Fescue, and
a variety introduced shrubs and trees. The manmade riparian area created by
the inadequate drainage facilities along the eastern property line will be
removed as a result of this project. To mitigate any environmental impacts
caused by the development of the proposed project on this site, the degraded
riparian habitat located in the main channel area will be enhanced and expanded
through the stabilization of the channel area. The channel stabilization will
encourage the propagation of adjacent riparian species onto the project site.
Because of these mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project.
No, No unique, rare or endangered species have been identified on the site.
The project site was used for agricultural purposes earlier in the dentury and the
natural onsite vegetation was significantly altered at that time. In addition, no
endangered or rare vegetative species were identified onsite in the FEIR for the
1989 Southwest Area Community Plan. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
Yes. The soils on the project site have been identified as locally important land
in earlier planning studies done by the County of Riverside. The project site is
too small for economically 'viable agricultural production is currently isolated
from other agricultural areas, and completely surrounded by urban uses. The
site was also identified as future urban development in the Southwest Area
Plan adopted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors in 1989. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Yes. The project will change the diversity of the animal species onsite and may
reduce the amount of limited wildlife habitat on the project site. Limited
populations of common small rodents, reptiles, insects, and birds are believed
to rely on the site for either habitat, food, and/or water. The majority of the
site is covered with degraded grassland area. Some limited marginal riparian
area is also found on the site. The project site is an isolated undeveloped parcel
in an otherwise developed area of the City of Temecula. No significant impacts
are anticipated as a result of this project.
Maybe. The project site is located within the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Conservation Area. While a specific site inspection has not been conducted,
it's small size, proximity to urban development, and isolation from other wildlife
habitat areas make it unlikely that the Stephens Kangaroo Rat (SKR) inhabits
the site. During the planning phase of the project, a specific site survey will be
conducted to determine if the SKR presently inhabits the site. If the Stephens
Kangaroo Rat is identified on the project site, the project could contribute to an
incremental reduction of SKR habitat. Any impacts to the SKR would be
mitigated by the Habitat Conservation Plan mitigation fees that are required by
the City of Temecula. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from
this project.
%S'%F4:)RMS'~e,6 9
Noise
6.a,b.
Yes. Some increase in noise levels may occur as a result of this project.
However, the majority of these noise impacts are expected to be of short-term
and construction related. Some long-term noise impacts may also occur as a
result of this project..The development of this site as a public park will bring
additional people to the site for both active and passive recreation. These
additional people have the potential to increase ambient noise levels adjacent
to this 13roposed site. However given the character of the noise, (primarily
people talking and children playing) the impact of the noise is not expected to
be offensive or to generate severe noise levels. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
I laht and Ginre
Yes. The light and flare will result from the lighting of activity areas for
evening and night use and for any needed security lighting. The Park Site is
located within the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District. The
lighting standards within this district require that only low pressure sodium
street and security lights be installed and all other lighting must be oriented or
shielded to reduce the glare in the night sky near the observatory. Additional
light and glare may result from the development of the site for a park facility.
The impact of the additional light and glare will be mitigated by following the
standards of the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District
(Ordinance No. 655) and through the appropriate design of the lighting system.
No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Land Use
e
Yea. The future land Use on this site will change if the site is developed for a
public park. The existing zoning on the project site is R-2-3000. The R-2-3000
zone would allow one dwelling unit per 3,000 square foot of lot area. The
project would result in development of the site as a community park with public
recreational facilities. At present, public recreation facilities are very limited in
the City of Temecula and will have less impact on the surrounding areas than
the currently allowable multiple family development. No significant adverse
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Natural Resource
9.a,b.
No. The development of a park on this site will result in a minor incremental
increase in the use of !some renewable and non-renewable resources. The use
of the proposed park facility is not expected to result in the use of a significant
amount of renewable and non-renewable resources. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Risk of Uoset
10.a,b.
No. The development of a park on this site will not result in a risk of explosion,
the release of hazardous substance, or any interference with an emergency
response plan. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Pooulation
11.
No. The development of a park on this site will not alter the location,
distribution, or growth rate of population in this area. The development of a
park in this area will result in less population in this vicinity. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Housing
12.
No. The development of a park on this site will not affect existing housing or
create a demand for additional housing in this area. No significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
Transportation/Circulation
13.a,b.
Yes. The development of a park on this site will generate additional vehicular
traffic and will generate a demand for new parking. However, the additional
traffic that would be generated and the additional parking facilities that will be
required are significantly less than would occur if the project site was
developed as a residential project under the current zoning. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
13.c,d ,e,f.
No. The development of a park on this site will not have an impact on the
existing traffic system, alter the pattern of vehicular, rail, air, or pedestrian
circulation, or increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or
pedestrians. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Public Services
14.a,b,c,f.
No. The development of a park on this site will not create a need for, or result
in any alterations to additional fire, police, or school services. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
14.d ,e.
Yea. The development of this site may require the expansion of current City
park and recreation services to staff and maintain the proposed project. The
project may require that the City government allocate future funding for site
maintenance of costs. However, the impact on theses costs on the City's
budget is not expected to be significant. (Park and recreation services are a
high priority for the City of Temecula given the historic shortage of these
facilities in the Temecula Valley.) No significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
Enerav
15.a,b.
No. The development of this project will not result in the use of substantial
amounts of fuel or energy, or result in a substantial increase in the demand for
existing sources of energy. The development of a park may result in a minor
~=ORMS~k8 11
increase in the use of .existing energy resources. Some incremental increase in
energy usage as a result of this project. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
Utilities
16.all.
Ne. The development of a park on this site will not result in a need for new
utility delivery systems, or require substantial alteration of the gas, electric,
communication, water, sewer, storm drain, or solid waste disposal utilities or
services. All utilities needed to support the proposed park facility are located
on or immediately adjacent to the site. A minor change to complete the
existing storm drain system may occur as a result of this project. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Human Health
17.a,b.
No. The development of a park on this site will not result in the creation of a
health hazard, or the additional exposure of people to any human health
hazards. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Aesthetics
18.
No. The development this project site will not result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive view, or the obstruction of any scenic view or vista. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Recrea~on
19.
No. The development of a park on this site will not have an impact on the
quality and quantity of existing recreational opportunities in the area. The
development of a park of this site will improve and increase future recreational
opportunities in this area. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of
this project.
Cultural Resour;es
20.a,b,c,d.
Maybe. No identified cultural resources or historic sites are known to occur on
the site. The SouthWest Area General Plan did not identify this area as an
"Area of Sensitivity for Archaeological Resources". The project site has been
significantly modified over the last 30 years and it is unlikely that any cultural
resources would have avoided detection or destruction. Additional analysis will
be undertaken during the planning and development of this project. Any future
impacts will be mitigated through the application of standard City paleontologic
and archaeologic development conditions. in addition, if needed, onsite
archaeologic and Native American heritage resource experts will monitor
activities on the site. Because of these mitigation measures, No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
~S~a~MS~e 12
IV MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Yes Maybe N__o
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?
X
Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to
the disadvantage of long-term, environmental 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.)
X
Does the project have impacts which are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable? (A project's 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.)
X
Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly
or indirectly?
X
~s~=oeva~e 13
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a s'gnificant effect on
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION wil be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect
on the environment, there will not be a significant effect on this case
because the mitigation measures described on arcached sheets and in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
X
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
Prepared by:
(Signature)
David W. HOGAn.
(Name and Title)
Associate Planner
Approved by:
(Bignature)
Gary Thornhill. Director of Plannina
(Name and Title)
(Date)
~r~as~.~s 14
VICINITY MAP
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 8
(Not to Scale)
' I
O
.Way
Attachment 4
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC
INTEREST, CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIKE TIE
ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC PARK AND
RECREATION PURPOSES AND ALL USES APPURTENANT
THERETO FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF
MARGARITA ROAD, EAST OF STONEWOOD ROAD, WITItlN THE
CITY OF TEMECULA
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula (hereinafter "City") hereby
finds, determines and declares as follows:
1. That the public interest, convenience and necessity require the approval as a
project of the acquisition by said City of the fee interest in and to certain hereinafter described
real property ("Property") for public park and recreational purposes and all uses appurtenant
thereto;
2. That the project is planned or located in the manner that will be most
compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury;
3. That the taking of the interest in and to the Property as above described is
necessary to such use and is authorized by Section 19, Article I of the California Constitution,
Section 38000 et seq. and 37350.5 of the California Government Code, Section 1230.010 et seq,
of the California Code of Civil Procedure, and other applicable law;
4. That the offer to purchase required by California Government Code Section
7267.2 has been made to the owner of the Property to be acquired by the City and that said offer
was rejected by the Property owner.
SECTION 1. The City hereby declares that it is the intention of the City to acqxim said
Property in its name in accordance with the provision of the laws of the State of California with
reference to condemnation procedures.
SECTION 3. That if any of the subject property has been appropriated to some public
use, the public use to which it is to be applied is a more necessary and paramount public use.
SECTION 4. Said Property hereinabove referred to, the acquisition of which is required
-1-
by said .public interest, convenience and necessity for the purposes set forth in Section One
hereof, is located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is more
particularly described in Exhibit "A" which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference and made a part hereof. A map showing the general location of the Propen'y sought
to be acquired in this proceeding is marked Exhibit "B' attached hereto and incorporated herein
by reference and made a part hereof.
SECTION 5. The City Attorney and the firm of Burke, Williams & Sorensen, as special
counsel, under the direction of the City Attorney, are authorized and directed to prepare,
institute and prosecute in the name of the City such proceedings in the proper Court having
jurisdiction thereof as may be necessary for the acquisition of said Property described in Section
4.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
SECTION 7. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon its adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 251h day of February, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
3/Re$o$ 236
-2-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA )
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 25th day of February,
1992 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
C OUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
2.36 -3-
(LEGAL DESCRIPTION)
EXHIBIT "A"
EXHIBIT "A"
Lot 14 of Tract 3334 in the City of Temecula as recorded in Book 54, Pages 25 through 30, of
maps, as recorded in the office of the Riverside County Recorder. (APN #921-300-006)
(M~P)
EXHIBIT "B"
EXHIBIT B
VICINITY MAP
Attachment 5
~NL)'ilt, L t)r rlL~iL~u
NOTICE OF INTENTION OF THE CITY OF TE~MECULA,
A GF~NERAL LAW CITY, TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF
NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE FEE
INTENT IN AND TO CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY
LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF MARGARITA ROM)
APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET EAST OF STONEWOOD
ROAD, CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
TO:
Mr. Eion F. McDowell
6501 Crista Palma Drive
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1230.010
et. seq. that the City Council of the City of Temecula intends to consider the adoption of a
Resolution of Necessity approving a project and the acquisition by eminent domain of the fee
interest in and to the real property described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto, and incorporated
herein by this reference, CPmpeny") for public park and recreational purposes and all uses
appurtenant thereto. The hearing on the Resolution will be held on February 25, 1992, at 7:00
P.M. or as soon thereafter at the Temecula Community Center, located at 28816 Pujol Street,
Temecula, California.
YOU ARE FURTHER NOTIFIED that you have the right to appear and be heard on the
issues to be considered at that hearing. The precise, and only, issues which will be considered,
are as follows:
1. Whether or not the public interest and necessity require the approval of the project,
which includes the acquisition and use of the Property for park purposes;
s
Whether or not the Project is planned or located in the manner that will be most
compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury;
3. Whether or not the property sought to be acquired is necessary for the Project; and
Whether or not the offer required by Government Code Section 7267.2 has been made
to the owner or owners of records.
If you wish to be heard at this hearing, you MUST FILE A WRITTEN REQUEST,
indicating your intent to appear and be heard, within fifteen (15) days of the mailing of this
notice by filing or delivering that written request to the City Clerk, 43 174 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California 92590; telephone (714) 69,,-1989.
You may use the enclosure for the purpose of notifying the City of your intent and desire
to be heard. Your failure to timely file a written request to appear and be heard may result in
a waiver of your fight to be heard.
For further information, contact the City Clerk's Office at Temeeula City Hail.
lune S. Greek, City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A"
Lot 14 of Tract 3334 in the City of Temecula as recorded in Book 54, Pages 25 through 30, of
maps, as recorded in the office of the Riverside County Recorder. (APN//921-300-006)
REQUEST TO BE HEARD ON RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION
OF THE FEE INTEREST IN AND TO CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE
SOIYI~ SIDE OF MARGARITA ROAD APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET EAST OF
STONEWOOD ROAD, WITHIN THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
NAME
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE
DATE
SIGNATURE
Attachment 6
City of Temecula
,-. ~.317:~ Business Pad< [:)five · Temecula. California 92590
November 8, 1991
Ronald J. Parks
Mayor
ParrIda H. Birdall
Mayor Pro Tern
Karel F. Llndemans
Councilmember
Mr. Eion F. McDowell
42601 Pradera Avenue
Temecula, CA 92590
Reference: APN No. 921-300-006
Peg Moore
CounciirnernDer
J. Sai Mu~oz
CounalrnernDer
David R DIxon
Ci~ Manager
{7141 694-1989
FAX {714} 694..1999
Dear Mr. McDowelh
The City of Temecula, a general law city, hereby offers, subject to the
usual escrow provisions and approval by the City of the soil'conditions
of the Property, to acquire your property described on Exhibit A,
enclosed herewith, for the total sum of $1,300,000, which is for land.
An independent appraisal was made of your property by the firm of
John P. Neet, M.A.!. The amount of the above offer is the amount the
City has determined to be the fair market value for your property. The
basis for that determination is explained in the attached Appraisal
Summary Statement. If you have any questions regarding this letter,
the acquisition orthe Appraisal Summary Statement, please contact me
at (714) 694-1989.
It is the City's hope that this price will be agreeable to you and that the
acquisition can begin immediately. Please advise if you have any
questions regarding this offer.
Your cooperation in this matter will be greatly appreciated.
Very truly yours,
Mark~Ichenduszko
Assistant City Manager
cc: D. Dixon
Attachments
Attachment A
APPRAISAL SUMMARY STATEMENT
PROJECT:
SOUTH SIDE OF MARGARITA ROAD
APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET EAST OF
STONEWOOD ROAD, TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA
OWNER:
MR. EION F. MCDOWELL
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:
EXHIBIT A, ATTACHED HERETO AND
INCORPORATED HEREIN
ZONING: R-2-4000 TOTAL AREA: 20.23 SQUARE FEEl'.:
ACRES
TOTAL TAKE:X
PARTIAL TAKE:
PRESENT USE AND IMPROVEMENTS TO BE ACQUIRED:
This offer is presented in settlement of the acquisition of your real property described
on Exhibit A, as follows:
ONE MILLION THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND AND NO/IO0 DOLLARS
($1,300,000.001
The amount of the offer is based upon a market value appraisal prepared by an
independent appraisal firm in accordance with accepted appraisal procedures. The
valuation is based upon an ana!ysis of recent sales of comparable sites and similar
properties in this locality with consideration to the highest and best use for
development of the property. The appraiser, in rendering an opinion of fair market
value has disregarded any decrease or increase in the fair market value of the real
property to be acquired prior to the date of valuation caused by the public
improvement or the likelihood that the property would be acquired for such
improvement.
The above determination of lust compensation is not less than the City's approved
appraisal of the Fair Market Value of the properD/. The appraisal does not reflect any
consideration of, or allowance for, any relocation assistance and payments to which
you may be entitled to receive, nor does it include consideration of certain
acquisition/escrow costs,
Fair Market Value, as used in the appraisal, means the highest price on the date of
valuation that would be agreed by a seller, being willing to sell but under no particular
or urgent necessity for so doing, nor obligated to sell, and a buyer, being ready,
willing and able to buy but under no particular necessity/for so doing, each dealing
with the other with full knowledge of all the uses and purposes for which the propera/
is reasonably adaptable and available.
it is the City's understanding that there are no separately held interests' in your real
property to be acquired such as easements, leasehold interests, tenant-owned
improvements, life estates, and water, gas, oil or other mineral rights, Should any
such separately held interests be 'identified at a later date, a separate statement of the
apportionment, based on the appraisal and the City's review appraisal, of the total just
compensation to each separately held interest to be acquired will be forwarded to you.
This summary of the basis of the amount offered as lust compensation is presented
in compliance with applicable law.
a:apl~raisl
A"r'FACHMENT B
EXHIBIT A
LOT 14 OF TRACT NO. 3334, AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN
BOOK 54., PAGES 25 THROUGH 30, INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS,
RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY.
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive · Temecula, California 92590
November 2.1, 1991
Ronald J, Parks
Mayor
Patricla I-!. Birdsall
Mayor Pro Tern
Karel R !.!rideroans
Councilmember
Peg Moore
Councilmember
J, Sai Mu~oz
Councilmember
David R DIxon
City Manager
(714) 694-1989
FAX (7141 694-1999
Mr. Eion F. McDowell
42601 Pradera Avenue
Temecula, CA 92590
Reference: APN No. 921-300-006
Dear Mr. McDoweih
On November 8, 1991, I sent you an letter offering, in behalf of the
City of Temecula, to acquire your property described on Exhibit A,
enclosed herewith, for the total sum of $1,300,000, which is for land.
This offer amount was based on a independent appraisal for the
property by John P. Neet, M.A.I., and was for an amount the City
determined to be the fair market value of the property. Since that date,
I have not received a response from you regarding the City's offer.
It is the City's hope that the noted price is acceptable to you and that
you are still interested in selling the property. Please contact me with
your response at the above noted address at your earliest convenience,
but no later than Friday, December 6, 1991.
If I do not receive a response from you by that time, I will assume that
you have refused the City's offer.
I look forward to hearing from you in the near future.
Mark J. Ochenduszko
Assistant City Manager
cc: D. Dixon
OF TEMECHLA
April 20, 1992
Eion McDowetl
42600 Pradera Way
Temecuta, CA 92390
Dear Mr. McDowelh
I have received your letter as of this date.
As you know, the public hearing regarding your 20.23 acre properr/
located south of Margarita Road and east of Moraga Road, Parcel
#921-300-006, was continued until May 12, 1992. The purpose of
the continuance was to allow you to obtain a separate appraisal from
a certified real estate appraiser (MIA) so that you and I could further
discuss the Cky's interest in purchasing your property. This letmr is to
invite you to meet with me so that we can jointly consider atl the
possibilities and options related to tills ma=er.
Rease contact me at your earliest convenience. It is my hope tlnat you
are in fact obtaining a separate appraisal based on the current zoning
and entitlement status that exists for the property and that you and I
can meet no later than Friday, April 2~,.
I look forward to hearing from you soon. You can reach me at my
office at (714) 694-1989.
Sincerely,
Assistant City Manager
bcc: City Council
D. Dixon.
4:5174 5LISINES P.~nK Dmv~ · T,_,.~EC~.~ G~UI"OI~NIA g~2-~C>J3 · PHONE (714)6,a4'lgeg · F.:,X (714} 694-1999
CITY
OF TEMECULA
May 14, 1992
Eion McDowell
42600 Pradera Way
Temecula, CA 92390
Dear Eion:
This letter is to confirm our meeting of Monday, May 18, at '4:00 p.m.,
to discuss the City's purchase of your property. I look forward to
reviewing your appraisal with you at the meeting and furthering our
discussions. As you know, the City Council continued the issue of
Eminent Domain related to your property to the meeting of May 26,
1992.
If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call. I look
forward to seeing you on Monday, May 18.
Sincerely,
A~y Manager
MJO:ks
a:en~nent.dom
43174 BUSINF.~ PARK DI~I'c'E * TEMECULA. CALII=OI~NIA g2590 · PHONE (714) 694-198g · F,.~((714) 694-igg9
ITEM NO.
22
APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
DATE: May 26, 1992
SUBJECT: Item No. 2~'
Application Ordinance
PREPARED BY:
Approval Authority for Subdivision and Land Use
City Clerk June S. Greek
BACKGROUND: The staff will finalize a staff report on this item and forward
it to you under separate cover.
jsg
ITEM NO.
23
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAl,,
CITY ATTORNEY "'
CITY OF TEMECUIA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
May 26, 1992
Tentative Tract Map No. 22761, Second EXtension of Time
RECO1VIMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council:
ADOPT Resolution No. 92- upholding the Planning
Commission' s approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 22761, Second
Extension of Time based on the Analysis and Findings contained
in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
BACKGROUND
The proposed Second Extension of Time is for an 80 lot residential subdivision on 28 acres,
located within Rancho Highlands (Specific Plan No. 180). The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the Second Extension of Time on December 16, 1991.
The focus of discussion at the Planning Commission related to Ynez Road improvements and'
the construction of the recreation center/park site required by the Specific Plan. The Ynez Road
improvements were conditioned at that hearing to be completed prior to any future certificates
of occupancy for the site. In the intervening months subsequent to Planning Commission
consideration, Staff has been working with the applicant to fmalize park design to satisfy
concerns of the Rancho Highlands Homeowners Association.
In order to address the concerns of Staff and the property owners adjacent to the project site with
respect to improving the park, the applicant has agreed to a Condition of Approval for timing
of the park site construction. The Condition of Approval approved by the Planning Commission
states that the park site must be fully improved prior to July 1, 1993 or prior to the 2501h
certificate of occupancy for the entire Specific Plan area. The applicant has already submitted
and received staff approval for the design of the park site.
S\STAFFRFr'd2761-2.CC
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the pwject by a vote of 3-0, with
Commissioners Blair and Fahey absent.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments: 1.
2.
4.
5.
6.
Resolution - page 3
Conditions of Approval (mended by Planning Commission,
December 16, 1991) - page 9
Planning Commission Minutes (December 16, 1991) page 16
Planning Commission Staff Report (December 16, 1991) - page 17
Fee Checklist - page 18
Park Site Exhibit - page 20
SX-qTA~61-2.CC 2 ~
ATTA~ NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO.
S~STAFFRFF~2761-2.CC 3
ATTACH1VIF-NT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92-__
A RESOL~ON OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING ~ SECOND EXTENSION
OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 22761 TO
SUBDIVH)E 28 ACRES INTO 80 SINGIJ~. FAMH.Y
RF~IDENTIAL LOTS LOCAT~.D IN ~ RANCHO
HIGHI.&NDS SPECWIC PLAN NO. 180, AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 923-020-038 (PORTION).
Vv~:EI~R~4~, Coleman Homes Fried the Second Extension of Time for Tentative Tract
Map No. 22761 in accordance with the Riverside County Laud Use, Zoning, Planning and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Second Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Map application was
processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WtW~REAS, the Planning Commission considered said Second Extension of Time for
Tentative Tract Map on December 16, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity
to testify either in support or opposition;
WITE~AS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Second Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Map;
WI4'EREAS, the City Council considered said Second Extension of Time for Tentative
Tract Map on May 26, 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 for Tentative Tract Map No. 22761;
NOW, TFIF~R~FORE, TIrE CITY COUNCIL OF TFrE CITY OF TE1VIECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following fmdings:
A. 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:
general plan.
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the
S\STAFFRPT~2761-2.CC 4
2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
a. 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.
b. There is litfie or no probability of substalltial detriment to or
interference with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan.
c. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area
Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temeeula 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.
C. 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:
plan.
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general
2. The City Council finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this rifle, each of the following:
a. There is reasonable probability that the Second Extension of Time
for Tentative Tract Map No. 22761 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal
being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
b. 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.
c. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
D. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be
appmved unless the following findings are made:
specific plans.
That the propose~ land division is consistent with applicable general and
SXSTAFFRPT~22761-2.CC 5
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
3. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
type of development.
4. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
proposed density of the development.
5. 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.
6. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements
are not likely to cause serious public health problems.
7. 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 ff 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 shah apply only to
easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent
jurisdiction.
E. The Council in approving the proposed Second Extension of Time for Tentative
Tract Map No. 22761, makes the foilowing 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 hw, due W the fact that the project is consistent with existing site development
standards in that it proposes articulated design features and site nmenities 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 lo the fact that the pwject 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 hws,
due to the fact that the pwposed use conforms with those uses listed as "allowed" within the
zoning designation of Specific Plan 180.
4. The site is suitable to accommodate the pwposed land use in terms of the
size and shape of the lot configuration, circuhtion patterns, access, and density, due to the fact
that; adequate area is provided for all proposed residential structures; adequate landscaping is
pwvided 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.
S\STAFFRPT~2~61-2.CC 6
5. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public
health or weftare, due to the fact that the conditions stated in the approval are based on
mitigation measures necessary to reduco or eliminate potantial 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 enviroment as determined in the Negative Declaration for the project, due to the fact
that impact mitigation is realized by conformante with the project' s Conditions of Approval.
8. The project has acc~table acxess to a dedicated fight-of-way which is open
to, and useable by, vehicular traffic, due to the fact that the project curren~y proposes access
points from Ynez Road which has been deterlnined 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 axe 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.
F. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Second Extension of Time for
Tentative Tract Map No. 22761 is compatible with the health, safety and weftare 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
reaffn-med.
SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City Council of the City of Temecula approving the Second
Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Map No. 22761 To subdivide 28 acres into 80 Single
Family Residential lots located in the Rancho Highiands Specific Plan No. 180, and known as
Assessor's Parcel No. 923-020-038 (portion) subject to the following conditions:
Riverside County Conditions of Approval dated August 16, 1989.
City of Temecula Conditions of Approval dated July 18, 1991.
City of Temecula Conditions of Approval dated May 26, 1992.
S\STAFFRPT~2761-2.CC 7
Section 4.
The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOFrED this 26th day of May, 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDSALL
MAYOR
I ttERERy CERT~Y that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Tcmecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 26th day of May, 1992 by the
following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL~ERS:
COUNCHMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
JUNE S. GB~
CITY CI,F_aK
S~qT~61-2.CC 8
ATTACH1V~-NT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
(AlVIF~NDED BY PLANNING COMMISSION, DECEMBER 16, 1991)
S~STAPFRPT~2761-2.CC ~}
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Tract Map No. 22761
Second Extension of Time
DEPARTMENT OF PUBHC 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 RF, CORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
Prior to recordation of the final map, said agreement shall require construction and
completion of the recreation center and private park prior to the issuance of the
Certificate of Occupancy on the 250th unit in Specific Plan No. 180 or by July 1, 1993,
whichever comes first; a bond in an amount set by the Public Works Depaxtment shall
be provided; prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy of any unit in Tentative
Tract 22761 or 22762, Ynez Road shall be improved with A/C paving, curb, gutter and
sidewalk per the approved plans, and the pertinent Conditions of Approval.
,
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.
,
Prior to reco~dation 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.
s~T^mu,rm~6~-2.cc 10
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
A precise grading plan shall :be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review
and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil Engineer for
location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shah issue a Final Soils Report addressing
compaction and site conditions.
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.
Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code,
City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be
in substantial conformance wiffi the approved rough grading plan.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed
upon the property or pwject, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as
required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project. The fee to be paid shall
be in the mount in effect at the time of payment of the 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 pwject 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 mount 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 mount of such fees). By execution of this Agreement,
developer will waive any right to protest the provisions of 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 mount thereof.
Condition No. 12 of the Engineering Department Conditions of the First Extension of
Time, approved by Planning Commission on October 1, 1990, shall'be deleted.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMF2qT PERMITS:
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 circuhtion as required by the City Engineer.
S\STAFFRFr~2761-2.CC l 1
TEMECULA CO1VIMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT:
10.
Prior to RECORDATION of the final map the applicant or his assignee shah pay the
fair market value of 1.04 acres of required parkland to comply with City Ordinance No.
460.93 (Quimby). The amount to be paid shall be dearmined by TCSD staff within
thirty (30) days prior to recordation of said map. A fLf~y percent (50%) private
recreation credit as defined in City Ordinance NO. 460.93 (Quimby), shall be applied
towards the required parkland in lieu fee.
11.
Exterior slopes bordering an arterial street shah be offered for dedication to the TCSD
for maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards and completion of the
application process.
S~I'AFFRPT~2761-2.CC 12
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Tract Map No. 22761
First Extension of Time
Commission Approval Dam: October 1, 1990
Expiration Date: July 18, 1991
Plannin~ Delmrtment
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. (Amended per Planning Commission
October 1, 1990. )
The subdivider shall submit to the Planning Director verification that Section 10.35 of
Ordinance No. 460 has been previously satisfied or an agreement with CSA 143 which
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that the land divider has provided for the
payment of parks and recreation fees in accordance with Section 10.35 of Ordinance No.
460. The agreement shall be approved by the City Council prior to the recordation of
the final map. (Amended per Planning Commission October 1, 1990.)
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.
Engineering Department
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this project, and shall
be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the tree meaning
of the conditions shall be referred to the Engineering Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all eXisting easements, traveled ways, and
drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further
consideration.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act, and all
applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
$~TAFFRP~:~61-:.CC 13
The developer shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
EasU~rn Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Flood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Eagineering Depamnent;
Riversid~ County Health D~arUnent; and
CATV Franchise.
Prior to fmai map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent
to Develop. Conduit shail 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 BUII BING PERMIT:
8. The subdivider shah submit four prints of a precise grading plan to the Engineering
Department. The plan shah comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, and
as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions of Approval. The plan shall be
drawn on 24" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil Engineer. (Amended per Planning
Commission October 1, 1990.)
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
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.
10. ALl street improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
11.
Pavement striping, marking, traffic and street name signing shall be installed per
requirements of the City Traffic Engineer.
12.
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed
upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public facility mitigation as
required under the EIR/Negative Declaration for the project, in the amount in effect at
the time of payment of the fee. If an interim or final public facility mitigation fee or
S~TAFFRFl'~761-2.CC 14
district has not been f'mally 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. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees
in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the mount of such
fees) and specifically waives its right to protest such increase.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
13.
Traffic striping, marking and street name signing plans shah be designed as directed by
the Department of Public Works.
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 circuhtion as required by the City Engineer.
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT:
15.
Prior to RECORDATION of the fmal map the applicant or his assignee shah pay the
fair market value of 1.04 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~STAFFRPT~2761-2.CC 15
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTNENT
SUBDIVISION
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22761
MINOR CHANGE NO. I
DATE: August 16, 1989
STANDARD CONDITIONS
The subdivider shall: defend, tndmlf , and hold harmless the County of
RIverside, tts agents, officers, and m~Toyees from any clatm, actton, or
proceeding agatnst the County of RIverside or tts agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set astde, votd, or annul an approval of the County
of Riverside, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body
about ~thtn the time pertod provided for in California Government Code
concerning Tract No. 22761, Htnor Change No. 1, which action ts brought
Sectton 66499.37. The County of RIverside wtll promptly nottry the
subdivider of any such clatm, action, or proceeding against the County of
RIverside and wtll cooperate fully tn the defense. If the County fails to
promptly notify the subdivider of any such clatm, action, or proceeding or
fatls to cooperate fully tn the defense, the subdivider shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, Indemnify, or hold harmless the
County of Riverside.
2. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of Californi'
Subdivision Pap Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule
A, unless modified by the conditions listed below.
This conditionally approved tentative mp will expire two years after the
County of RIverside Board of Supervisors approval date, unless extended as
provided by Ordinance 460.
The final amp shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all
the requirements of the State of California Subdivision Pap Act and
Ordinance 460.
5. The su~dtvtder shall submit one copy of m soils report to the Riverside
County $urveyor's Office and t~o copies to the Department of Butldtng and
$mfety. The re rt shall address the sotls stability 8nd geological
conditions of ~estte.
If mny grading is proposed, the subdivider shall submtt me print of
comprehenshe grmdlng plan to the Depmrtaent of Bulldlng End $mfety. The
plmn shall camply atth the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, ms amended
by Ordtnmnce 457 and ms mybe additionally provided for in these
conditions of approval.
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 22761, Hinor Change No. 1
Page 2
7. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Departant of Building and
Safety prior to commencement of any grading outside of county maintained
road right of way.
8. Roy delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordarGon of the
final flap.
9. The subdivider shall comply with the street improvement reconnendations
outlined in the Riverside County Road Department's letter dated June 13,
1989, a copy of which is attached.
10. Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract
map boundary to m County maintained road.
11. All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons Such
offers. All dedications shmll be free from all encumbrances as approved
by the Road C~mmisstoner. Street nmmes shall be subject to approval of
the Road Commissioner.
12. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities,
utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located
wi thin the land division boundary. A11 offers of dedication and
conveyances shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the County
Su rveyo r.
13. Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance
with the provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department's
letter dated May 12, 1989, m copy of which is attached.
outlined by the Riverside County Flood Co t o '
June 7, 1989, m copy of which is atta2hed. ~f the lend division lie)
within an adopted flood control drmtn~ge area pursuant to Section 10.25 o
Ordinance 460, rappro rtmte fees for the construction of area drainage
facilities shell be c~lected by the Road Coemrlsstoner.
15. The subdivider shmll comply with the ftre Improvement recomnendattons
outlined tn the County Fire Marshal's letter dated May 11, 1989, m copy of
vhtch is attached.
r n e
1989, m copy of which ts attached.
17. The subdivider shall comply with the conditions set forth tn the
Department of Building and Safety Grading Dtviston's letter dated July 20,
1989, m copy of which is attached.
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 22761, Htnor Change No. i
Page 3
0e
The subdivider shall comply ~th Caltran's letter dated Nay 22, 1989, a
copy of whtch ts attached.
Subdivision phastng, lncludtn any
lapreverent phastn , If applicable, proposed common open space area
shall be sub;Ject to Planntno
Deparl~ent approval. Any proposed phastng shall provtde for adequat~
vehicular access to all lots In each phase, and shall substantially
conform to the tntent and purpose of the subdivision approval.
The subdivider end all successors In triterest shall comply with the
proviSIons of I)evelopment Agreehint No. 3 end Spectftc Plan No. 180.
Lots created by thts subdivision shall comply wtth the following:
a. All lots shall have a ffrlntmum stze of 7200 square feet net.
b. All lot 1an th to wtdth rattos shall be tn confo~mance wtth
3.8C of OrdTnance 460.
Section
Ce
Corner lots and through lots, tf any, shall be provtded with
additional area pursuant to Section 3.88 of Ordinance 460 and so as
not to contain :less net area than the least amount of net area tn
non-corner and through lots.
d. Lots created by this subdivision shall be tn conromance with the
development standards of the S.P. zone.
ee
When lots are crossed by major publlc uttllty easements, each lot
shall have a net usable area of not less than 3,600 square feet,
exclusive of the uttltty assent.
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained
condition and shall be etther planted krith tnter4m
Portdad vlth other eroslea control measures is
I~trector of Butldtng and Safety.
tn a wed-free
landscaping or
approved by the
Prtor to RECORDATZON of the ftnal mp the telloving conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prtor to the recordalton of the ftnal Imp the applicant shall submtt
wttten clearances to the RIverside County Road and Survey Department
that all pertinent requtrgaenta outltned tn the attached approval
letters from the telloving agenctes have been met.
TENTAT:ZVE TRACT NO. 22761, Htnor Change No.'
Page 4
County Ftre Departnent County Health Depar~ent
County Flood Control County Planntng Department
Buildtrig and Safe~y, Land use and Gradtng DIvisions
Celttans
b, The camnon open spice area shell be shasta is a numbered lot on the
f~nal sup and shall be sunaged by a aster property oemers'
association.
:.
c. A proper~y oemer's association wtth ~he unclualtfted rtght to assess
the owners of the Individual untts for reasonable mintchance costs
shall be established and continuously mtn~atned. The association
shall hive the rtght to 1ten the property of the owners who default tn
the payment of thetr assessments,. Such 1ten shall not be subo~dtnat. e
to any encumbrance other than a ftrst deed of trust provided such deed
of t~ust ts rode tn good filth and for value and ts of record prior to
the 1ten of the association.
d, 1~te, le ;~e~datte~ e~ lke ~tea~ rap, the aebdtvtde, 6'ka~ aeavey te
~--.e of ~e GWR~ i~t:~, (Deleted b~ Planntng C~isston 8-Z6-89)
(~le~d b7 Plinntng ~ssfon
TENTATZVE TRACT N0. 22761, Htnor Change No. 1
Page 5
be at ~ee~, d$ll~eltea of ~e ~a~ d a4ve~e4de, (Deleted by
Planntng ~sston
eeeet4q ~e losesmat 44OR, (DeleUd by Planntng Co~ss~on
8-16-89)
~eo~ eee~ (blared b7 Pllnntng ~sston ~X~Sg)
-ee{e;~ (bleta b7 Planning ~tsston ~89)
hi apart ~ dM;lPel4H ~ I~lnnlntl~ lend414ons and
me., (ble~ b7 Planntng itsstart
Prior to recordalton of the final subdivision rap, the subdhJder
shall subm4t the followJag decants to the Planning Deplrlmnt for
redewe uhJch documents shall be subject to the approval of that
department end the Office of the Count7 Counsel: (Added by Pllnntng
Canalsstart 8-26-89)
l) A declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions; and
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. ZZ76Z, Htnor Change No. ]
Page 6
2)
A sample document conveying tttle to the purchaser of an
Individual lot or unit ~htch provides that the declaration of
covenants, conditions and restrictions is incorporated therein by
reference.
The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions submitted for
revlew shall (I) provtde for a minimum term of 60years, (b) provide
for the establtsl~ent of a ropert~ mmer$' Issociltton comprised of the
owners of each Individual f;t or gntt, (c) provtde for ownership of the
common area by either the property whets' issoctatton or the owners of
each Individual lot or untt I$ tenlnt$ In colmnon Ind (d) contain the
following provisions verbatim: (Added by Planntngg Conwntsston 8-Z6-89)
"Notwithstanding any provision tn thts Declaration to the contrary,
the foilowing provision sha]l apply: (Added by Planning Comission
8-Z6-89)
The property owners' association established herein shall manage and
continuously matntatn the 'common area', more particularly described
On Exhibit ' ' attached her·tot·rid shall not sell or transfer the
'common area', or any part thereof, absent the prior wrttten consent
of the Planning Director of the County of Riverside or the County's
successor-in-interest. (Added by Planntng Commission 8-16-89)
The property whets' association shall have the rtght to assess the
owners of each Individual lot or untt for the reason·b}· cost of
maintaining the 'common area' and shall have the rtght to lien the
property of any such owner w~O defaults tn the payment of a
maintenance assessment. An assessment 1ten, once created, shall be
prior to all other 1tens recorded subsequent to the notice of
assessment or other documnt creating the assessment lien. (Added by
Planntng Cemm..tsston 8-Z6-89)
Thts Declaration shall not be termlnated, 'substantially' ~mended or
property deannexed therefrom absent the prior ,rttten consent of the'
Planntng Dtrector of the County of Rherstde or the County's
successor-In-Interest. A proposed amndment shell be considered
'substJnttll' ff the exte t, usage or maintenance of the
If tt a ects n
'common area'. (Added by Planntng Commission 6-16-89)
In the event of any confllct bel~een thts Declaration and the Arttcles
of incorporation, the Bylaws or the property oimers' aSSOCIatIOn Rules
and Ilegulettons, tf any, thts Iiclaratton shall control." (Added by
Plenntng Camfission 8-16-89)
Once approved, the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions
shall be recorded at the same ttme that the ftnal map is recorded. (Added
by Planntng Cmmdsston 8-16-89)
TENTAT/VE TRACT NO. 22761, Htnor Change No. 1
Page 7
e. The developer shall comply ~th the following parkway landscapin9
conditions:
Prior to the tssuance of butldtn permtts, the developer shall
secure approval of proposed landscapllng and trrt atlon plans from
the County ROad and Planntng Deparment. AYl landscaping and
Irrigation pllns and spoctftcattons shall be prepared in a
reproducible format suttable for permanent ftltng with the County
Road Department.
2)
3)
The developer shall post a landscape performance bond whtch shall
be released concurrently with the release of subdivision
pe ormance bonds, uaranteetng the vtabtltty of .all landscaping
whtch wtll be Installed prtor to the assumption of the maintenance
responsibility by the d4strtct.
The developer, the developer's successors-in-interest or
assignees, shall be responsible for a11 parkway landscaping
maintenance'until such time as maintenance ts taken over by the
district.
fo
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of a11_.
slopes, landscaped areas and Irrigation system· unttl such time as
those operations Ire the responsibilities of other parties as approved
by the Planning Director.
Street 11ghts shall be provided ~thtn the subdivision tn accordance
wtth the standards of Ordinance 46~ and the following:
z)
Concurrently trlth the ftllng of subdivision Improvement plans w~th
the Road Department, the developer shall secure approval of the
proposed street 11ght layout first from the Road Deparl~ent's
trlfftc eng4neer and then froin the appropriate uttltty purveyor.
2) Following eppreval of the street 11ghttng layout by the Road
Oepertment'S trafftc engineer. the developer shall also ftle an
application trlth LAFCOfor the formttoe of · street ltghttng
dtstr4ct, or In exatton to In extstlng 11ghtlng district, unless
n
the stto ts rlthtn in extsttng 11ghttng district.
3)
4)
Prtor to recordalton of the fins1 mp, the developer shall secure
condltton·l approval of the Stret 11ghttng application from
· LAFCO, unless the stte ts wtthtn an extsttng 11ghttng district.
suladtted to the Department of Bu41dtng and
Safety for plan check Ipprov·l and shall comply ~th the
liverside CotmLy pZanningEapartmenL
Page Two
October S, 1987
This certification shall be Signed by I responsible
official or the valor company* 12lt,ilaOl,llalX-tt.
This Department has I ELatemerit from the Rancho California
VaLor District agreeing Lo serve:domestic valor to each and
every lot in the subdivision on demand providing
satisfactory financial arrangements are completed v~Lh the
subdivider, It viII be necessary for the financial
arrangements to.be made prior Lo the recordsLion o[ the
final map.
This Department has a statement from the Eastern Municipal
VaLor District agreeing to a~lov the subdivision sewage
system Lo be courtscLod to the severs of the D~str~ct- The
sever system shall be installed according to plans ~d
specific&Lions &s approved by the District, the County
Surveyor and the He&lib EMp&rtmenL* Permanent prints or the
p~ans of the sever system shill be submitted in triplicate,
along with the original driving, to the COaTSLy Surveyor, The
prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of
manholes, complete profiles, pipe aJ~d Joint specifications
and the size of the severs at the 3~znctton of the nov systeA
to the existing rystem, A single p~tt indicating location
of sever lines a~d valor lines shall be t portia& of the
sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by u
registered engi~er and the sever district with the
following certification: "l certify %hat the design of the
meyer system in Tract Map l1761 is in accordance with the
sever OySteR expansion plans of the hoterrs Municipal VaLor
Dimtrtct and that the waste disposal system is &deFaatm at
this %iBm to arm&% the anttctp&tmd wastms from the propoem
tract. ® Zbt,J t J_wul ,kt_tulm td-t,i bt- rduLY m
will be necessarY for the finss~cial arrangements to be
made prior to the recordtalon of the final sap,
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Acbatntstrsttve Center
Riverside, California
1linteleelS (tt--~ltlT.a
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AN
Ve have reeleyed this case and have the folharlng cements:
Except for nuisance'nature local runoff uhtch mY traverse portions of the
property the project ts constderod free from orcftnary storm flood hazard.
HotfeVer, I StOrm Of Unusual magnitude could cause some damage. New construc-
tion should cmplyrlth oll applicable ordinances.
The topography of the ares consists of eel1 defined ridges and natural ester-
courses vhtch traverse the property. There t; adequate area outstde of the
natural estercourses for butldJng sties. The natural eatercourses should be
kept free of buildings and obstructions tn order to mtntstn the na.~ral
drainage patterns of the area and to prevent flood damage to new butldt~
A note should he placed on an environmental constraint sheet ststtng, 'All new
buildings shall be floodproofed by elevating the finished floors a mtntmum of
]8 Inches above adjacent frogrid surface. Erosion protection shall be provided
for mobile ha supports.
Thts project ts tn the . Area
drainage plan fees ;ha 1 be paid in accordance etth the applicable 1
I
ru 01 and
regulations.
The l~o_posed zoning ts consistent rlth extsttng flood hazards. Some flood
control facilities or floodproofing sty be required to fully develop to the
taplied denstry,
The Dtstrict's report dated is sltll current for this pre,4ect.
The Dlstrtct doeis lot object to th lire;iosod Itnor change.
Thts FrtJect ts apart ef , The project at11 be
f stem fieed mard able tmprovmnts have been constructed tr
free · enter),
accordance vtth approved plans.
The attached ants epply.
;;Tr Oh11 Engineer
RIV'gRSIDE COUIfI'Y
FIILEDF, PARTIv[DIT
IN C:OOIqRATIO N WITH THE
C, ALIFORNIA MPAIIrTIdEN'T OF FOR'E STRY
/13rE CHIEF
5-11-89
PImmtq & !f~nee~nl CNY.
IJ~. CA 92sOl
C/14) 7874~
With respe~ t~ the amndttlons of spprovil for ~e ~e referenced l~d division,
~ t~e ~~t rs~: .v~s ~e foll~t~ fire p~te~ton measles ~ provided
in ac~r~ce v~ Xtv~s~de ~Y ~dl~ces ~d/or recognized fire pro~ect~on
mn~ds:
file P!~CTION
Schedule sam fire prot®c~ton approvod standard fire hydrants (Gex4ux2t'), located
one at each or. rest intersec~ion and elmcOd rm more thin 330 feet sp~rt in any
dlrec~ion, vt~h no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a hydrant.
~ntsmn fin flow eh~ll be 1000 GIm for 2 hours duration at 20 PSZ.
kppltcint/develolar shall furnish one gg~y of the water systa plus to the Fire
Departmat for review. Plans shall conform to fire hydrant types, location and
aimginS, sad, the sTste~ sh~ll ,set the fire floe requirements. Plans shall be
,igned/s~provod b~ a registered civil ing~neer and the local water company with
the follov~ng ¢er~ificattonz 'l cez-~Ll~ that the design of the water system is
in accordance with the requlrmnts presc~lbed by the i~tverside County Tire
The required eater syotsm, including fire byerants, shall be irises:led and
a~ceprad by the sWroPriate valor qincy prior to any ocmd~ustlbe building
tutorial being p3J~ed on sa individual lot.
Lit I--4'ia4 4s shale be oons~ with fire retardsat roofing tutorial a~
tkmc:ibod in Beet:Leo 3~03 Of the Onlfoz~ ilallding Code, Jlmy ~food IA:Lnglel
or shakes shall kava · C/ass el' ratLug sad shall be e~provod by the Fire
Do~t i~lor to Jastallsr, Lon*
Prior to the reeorbtion of the fine/mr, the dmlol~ ~ ~sit vi~ Qe
~vus/do ~ 9m ~t · mh m of H~-~; ~/~t u ~gatior
b f~ ~t~ ;~* ~d b de~ ~m ~ defer as ~ of
~~, b/~ my ~ ~ · ~lt~ e.,~ sat vl~ ~e ~ty deferring
md ~nt W ~ ~ of ~n~ of a ~1~
N/CHAEL Z. GRAY. Plarmxnq Offxcer
Nay 17~ 1989
Administrative Center · 1777 Atlanta Avenue
Riverside, CA 92507
Rivererda n~_z~my,/,l~ J)aa&r. tment iL4Y ] 8198~
Attention: ellcti Ira"~leld
County Adm strettve Center __RfVrlISlOf~
4080 Lemon Street PLANI~INQDEp~
Rfverstde. CA 92501
RE: Tract 22761 - Htnor Change fl
Ladtes and Gentlemen:
The LInd Use Dtvtston of the Department of lutldtn9 and Safety
has the following comments end conditions:
Prior to the tssuance of butldtng permtts, the developer shall
obtatn Planntng Department approval for 811 on-stem and off-
stte stgnage advertising the sale of the subdivision pursuant
to Sectton 19.6 of 0rdtnance 348.
FIreplaces Bay encroach 1' into requtred mtntmum S' side yard
setback.
Mechanical equipment Bay not be located In requtred mtntmum 5'
stde yard setback.
Stte located tn I Spaeta1 Studies Zone -- G-199.
Developer Agreement #3 fees due prtor to butldtng permtt
lssuaice.
Very truly yours, ,
kiminletration i7141 882-8840 · (714) 787-2020
NEXT I,D~z
.d~._Please make the fello-ing · cordirish of Ikoproval:
,~__o. Prior to commencing ·RY'~radtl~g emcme~Sng 5e cubic
the O,~er Of that OrOOertY shall Obtain i groOime
from the Department of Building and Safety
permit
PriOr tO BOOrOval Of this uae/$ubdivi$io~ · gra~i~V permi~
and approval of the rough grading s~all ~e obtaine~ from
the B~ilding and Safety Department.
Owner ShO]l OOtai~ e grading Oermit end approval
tonitrueS from the S-ildinV onO So,sty Department.
material ts p]aceO or moveat Peawires a grading
PriOr tO OCCupanCY and/or I;eginning actual use
permit, · VraOing permit a~d approval O~ the graOi~
~e o~taineO from the Baildang a~d Safety
Provide vertfiCstio~ that the emilSing grading
metmiSted and ·Oaroval to construct ~as obtained from
Bwildtng and Earcry- .
The_Grading Beetion hal ~ COmment on this site.
For the final ~r·dtv~B plan - Please provide the applicable
informetto~ from bunty grading Forms
II&-B
IIk-Zll
114,-13& Rev. JIBe
· -: ,,i', ZZ? /
PZe&se refer to department fo~ 284-86, 284-::20, 284-2:
sad 14-46' Zor 8p~Zl~Ze
~a~g IZ~- - . - . - ' ' '
In e~ ~ Lane a .~~
v~b be ashdad '$~ ~s ~u raylay ~ga-:~ ov
Repo~.
~c. hwide · ~ oZ ~e hybologic-h~~c
!r~[de cle~u Xe~an l~ ~e lollcrag
depa~~U · P~a~g '
· · . F~ooe Cont~oZ -
Road Depa~an~
· ' cond,4,tions of approril on the approved case,
· licked luds~pe.
raYlay,
review. .. ·
iefer to an= speciZ~G pl~ rela~ed to ~s p~e~.
This prope~
P~=en=ial S~sidence area. hr Soa~ iesolu~ion 88-61,
additional geote~hnl~ml information Is required.
Observe slope saTiaTes fr~a ~~ areas and s~~es.
per se~on 7011 ud Z~ ~9-1 of ~e Unifo~ Bulldi~V
Coda as modified ~ O~~ce 4S7, .-
Drive~y ~des all be ~% or Xus.
Ihov sUee= ~ pad ~m~loM. '~e ~= a 1%
[~n.] c~ be ~U~ed fm h~ oZ Fad to ~ee=.
I y &r r
iIA'lt ~ e,t ~ ~" ! 'Y'II&. llAtlPCIIATlEN ~ t~maO
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTAlleN
MAY I? 89
Develolmant RaYlay
Ol-ltlV-15-4.83
Your Reference:
2TM 22761
Ranthe Highlands
&tiealien SIs. Felicia Bradfield
County of liverside
4080 laxon Street
livenida, CA 92501
barb. Bradfield:
Tha~kyo~ for the opporttmlty to roylay the proposed Tentative
Trace Map No. 22761 l~ed sou~vss~srly of hn~o ~ltfo~ia
hd ~d Xnez l~d, ~st of l-lS ~~o~lifo~ia-
~lease refer to ~e mtU~ed ~vel~ent ~tev Fon vhich
decants ~1trsns' re~iraents for ~ls pro~e~- Conf=~ance
vt~ ~sse conditions is ~i~d for lss~ncs of 8n ~crosc~snt
Xf any york Is ne~ess,ry within the state highvsy right of way,
the developer must obt~lnanancrOachsentparutt front he
Celttans Diettier I persitOff~eeprlortobogirmtngvork,
Zf additional infersutton is desired, please call Nr. Thomas a.
levilie at (714) 313-4314.
Diettier ler~tts Baginset
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 22761, Htnor Change No. 1
Page 8
requt'rements of Riverside County Ordinance r4o. 655 and the
Riverside Coun!ty Comprehensive General Plan.
Prior to recordatt;n of the final rap, an Environmental Constraints
Sheet (ECS) shal~ be prepared in conjunction with the final map to
delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently
filed with the office of the County Surveyor· A copy of the ECS shall
be transmitted to the Planning I)eparl~ent for review and approval.
The approved ECS shall be lonerdad with copies of the recorded final
map to the Planning Deparlmnt and the I)eparl~ent of Building and
Safety.
t. The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints
Sheet: 'County Geologic Report No. 199 & G.R. 199 (update) was
prepared for this property and is on file at the Riverside County
Planning Department. Specific item of concern in the report are as
follows: The following note shall be placed on the Environmental
Constraints sheet: "Structure for hunan occupancy shall not be
allowed wt thin the 50 foot setback associated with the Wi ld~ar
Fault."
A copy of the final map and Environmental Constraints sheet shall be
submitted to the Planning Department Engineering Geologist for review
and appoval. ~
k. The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints
Sheet: 'This property is located within thirty (30) miles of Nount
Pal ena r Observa tory. '
Prior to the recordatton of the final rap, the subdivider shall
provide a final geologic report for Planning Department approval. The
report shall be performed by a qualified geologist 'using standard
scientific mthedelogy. Any mitigation measures proposed shall be
incorporated Into the design of the ftnal mp and directed by the
Pll~ntng DIrector. Thts report shall be noted on an Environmental
Constraints Sheet, vherever necessary.
me
Prior to recordalton of the ftnal rap, the subdivider shall prepare
and submit I witten report to the Planning Director of the County of
Riverside demonstrating compliance vtth those conditions of approval
and Eittgatton measures of this amp led Environmental Assesssent Nos.
4 vhtch BUSt be satisfied prior to rocordatton of the
319 3 and 3~084
ftnal amp. The Planning Dtrector amy requtre inspection or other
monitoring to usure such compliance.
22. Prior to the issuance of GRADXNG PERKITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
TENTATZVE TRACT NO.. 22761, Htnor Change No. 1
Page 9
Detailed Common open space area landscaping and irrigation plans shall
be submitted for Planning Department approval for the phase of
development in process. The plans shall be certified by a landscape
architect, and shall provide for tl~e following: (Amended by Planning
Commission 8-16-89)
Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all
landscaped areas requiring irrigation· (Amended by Planning
Commission 8-16-89)
Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be opaque
up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at mturtty. (Amended by
Planning Commission 8-16-89)
All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from
view with )lndscaptng and decorative barriers or baffle
tree)ants, as approved ~a~: Planning Director. Utilities shall
be placed underground. ed by Planning Commission B-16-B9)
Parkways and landscaped INtldtng setbacks shall be landscaped to
provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area
of the site. Landscape elements shall include earth benr. ing,
ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees in conjunction with
meandering sidewalks, benches and other pedestrian amen,ties where
appropriate as approved by the Planning Department. (Amended by
Planning Commission 8-16-89)
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent
Planning Conmnisston 8
6. Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of
interior streets and project larkways due to insufficient road
right-of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road
_ right-of-way. (Jimended by Planning Commission 8-16-89)
Landscaping plans shall
plants when appropriate.
8-16-8g)
Incorporate nattve and drought tolerant
(Amended by Planntng Co·mission
M1 extsttng specimen tries and significant rock outcroppings on
the subject property shall be shown on the proJect's grading plans
end shall note those to be removed, rel0cated end/or retained.
(Amended by Plsnntng Colmntsston 8-16-89)
9. All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
rowing trees shall be steel staked. .'(Amended by Planntng
~m~ntsston 8-16-~g)
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 22761, Htnor Change No. 1
Page :ZO
All approved gradin and butldtng
of post and beam ~oundattons or plans shall reflect the utilization
the appropriate combination of spltt
level pads and pest end beam foundations when development ts proposed
distance of thirty (30~e feet,or
Comtsston
8-:Z6-89)
b. If the pro3ect ls to be pMsed, prior to the approval of grading
permits, an overeli conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the
Planntng Directorfor approval, The 1an shall be used guideline
for subsequent detatled gradlng p~;ns for as a
Individual phases of
development and shall lnclude the following: (knended by Planning
Commission 8-~6-89)
Techniques which ~t11 be uttltzed to prevent eroston and
sedtmentatton dur4n and after the grad4ng process. (Amended by
Planntng Commission L}6-Bg)
z)
Approximate ttme frames for gradtn and Identification of areas
which my be graded durtng the hT try ratn months of
gher probabtl
January through Yarch. (k~ended by Planntng Commission
3} Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. (Amended by Plannin~'I
Commission 8-16-8g)
4) Areas of tamporary grading outstde of a particular phase.
(Amended by Planning Commission 8-16-89)
c. Driveways shall be destgned so as not to exceed a ftftaen (ZS) percent
grade. (Amended by Planntng Ca,mission 8-Z6-Bg)
d. Grldtng plans shill conform to Board adopted Htllstde Development
Standards: All cut and/or ftll slopes, or Individual combinations
thlreof, whlch exceed ton feet tn verttcal hetght shall be modtfied by
an appropriate cometnation of ·spectal torticing (benchtng) plan.
increase slope ratto (i.e., 3:l), retaining tells, and/or slope
lanttng combtried ~th Irrigation. All drtveNlys'shl11 not exceed a
tfteen percent grade. (keendad by Planntng Cmmtsston 8-Z6-Bg)
ee
All cut slopes located adjacent to eegraded natoral torratn and
exceeding ton (lO) feet tn verttcal hetght shall' be contour-graded
InCorporating the folioring gradtng tocMtques: (Amended by Planntng
Comlsston 8-16-89)
Z) The angle of the graded.slope sbe11 be gradually ad3usted to the
angle of the natural terratn.
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 22761, Htnor Change No. 1
Page 11
2) Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall reflect
the natural rounded terratn.
3) The toes Ind tops of slopes shall be rounded wtth curves ,ith
red11 destgned ~n proportion to the total hetght of the slopes
where drainage and stability pemtt such rounding.
4) k/here cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet tn horizontal length, the
horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved tn a continuous,
undulsttng fashion.
f. Natural features such as ~ter courses, spedmen trees and significant
rock outcrops shall be protected tn the stttng of tnd~vtdua] building
pads on final grading plans. (Amended by Planning Co~tsston 8-Z6-Eg)
g. Prior to the tssuance of gradtrig permtts, the developer shall provide
evtdence to the Dtrector of Building and Safety that all adjacent
off-stte manufactured slopes hive recorded slope easements and that
slope maintenance responsibilities have been assigned is approved by
the D~rector of Bu~dtng and Safety. (Amended by Planntng Cu~misston
8-16-89)
h. Prtor to the tSsuance of gradtng permtts, a qualified paleontologist
shall be ratatried by the developer for consultation and comment on the
proposed gradtrig ~th respect to potential paleontologica~ ~mpacts.
Should the paleontologist find the potent~a~ ts h~gh for tmpact Impact
to significant resources, a pre-grade meeting betwee, the
paleontologist and the excavation and gradtrig contractor shall be
arranged, k/hen necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall
have the luthortty to temporarily dtvert, redtract or halt gradtrig
acttv~ty to allen recovery of fosstls, (Amended by Planning
Commission 8-16-89)
t. Prtor to the tssuance of gredtng permtts, a drainage study ~ndtcattng
on- and off-stte flo~ Fatterns end volumes, probable trapacts, and
proposed mitt alton assures shall be prepared and shall be approved
by County ~tood Control Dtstrtct and Calltans. (Mended by Planntng
Ccssdsston 8-16-89)
All d~e111ngs shall be located a mtntmum of ten feet from the top end
tops of all slos over ten feet tn verttcal he1 ht unless othervise
approved by the P~lnntng Dtroctor. (Mended by I?lanntng Cowa~sston
8-16-89)
k. Return1 dratnage courses shall be retatned tn thetr natural sate
wherever possible. (Mended by Planntng Coewtsston 8-16-89)
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 22761, Htnor Change No. 1
Page 12
31
All brow dttches, terrace dratns and other minor swales where required
shall be 11ned wtth natural eroston control mtertals or concrete, as
approved by the Planning Director end Butldtng and Safety. (Amended
by Planntng CamIsaiah 8-16-89)
Any tmport or export of materials shall be tn accordance with County
Ordinances No, 457 and No, 565 respectively, (Amended by Planning
Comtsston 8-26-89)
Prtor to the issuance of gradtrig permtt, the subdivider shall prepare
and submit a ~rttten report to the Planntng Dtrector of the County of
RIverside demonstrating compliance ~th those conditions of approval
and mitigation measures of this map and Environmental Assessment Nos.
31943 and 31084 ~htch must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a
grading permtt, The Planning Director my require Inspection or other
monitoring to assure such compliance. (~mended by Planning Camisaiah
8-16-89)
Prtor to the issuance of BUZLDZNG PERNITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
No butldtng permtts shall be tssued by the County of Rherstde for any
residential lot/unit wtthln the project boundary unt11 the developer'~--.
Successor's-In-Interest provides evtdence of compliance with publi.
factltty financing measures, A cash sum of one-hundred dollars ($ZO0)
per lot/untt shall be deposited ~th the RIverside County Department
Of Butldtng and Safer is mitigation for 11brary
(Amended by Planntng ~om~rlsston 8-16-89) public development.
b. Prior to the submittal of butldtng plans to the Department of Butldtn
and Safety an acoustical study shell be performed by an .acousttca~
· '° """"" """"" '"""' '""
applied to Individual cke111ng unttssubdhtston to reduce
ambtent tritertar notse levels to 45 CNEL and extertor notse levels to
6rCNEL. (Amended by Plenntng Commission 8-16-89)
Prtor to the tssuance c~ butldtng parefits, composite landscaping and
Irrigation plans sM11 be sub81ttld for Planntng I)eperment approval.
The plans shall address ell areas and aspects the tract requiring
landscaping end Irrigation to be tastelied Including, but not ltmtted
to, perkay plantln , street trees, slope planting, and Individual
frontyard landscaping. (Amended by PlanntngCoEtsstonB-16-ag)
d. All dve111ngs to be constructed vtthtn thts sulxftvtston shall be
destgned and constrvctod vlth fire retardant (Class A) roofs as
Commtss on
epproved by the Coun~ Ftre lkrshal. (ApE dad by Plenntng
n
8-26-89)
TENTATIVE TRACT NC. 22761, Ntnor Change No. 1
Page I3
ee
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment Shall not be permitted within the
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving
devices shall be permitted with Planntng Department approval.
(Amended by Planntng Commission 8-16-89)
f. Buildin separation between all buildings excluding fireplaces shall
not be Vess than ten (10) feet. (Amended by Planning Commission
e-ls-eg)
All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet.
(Amended by Planning Commission 8-16-89)
All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic
irrigation· (Amended by Planntn9 Commission 8-16-89)
:Prior to the issuance of a butldtng penni t, the subdivider shall
prepare and submit a written report to the Planning Director of the
County of Riverside demonstrating compliance with those conditions of
approval and mitigation measures of this map and Environmental
Assessment Nos, 31943 and 31084 which must be satisfied prior to the
issuance of a butldtng permit. The Planning Director may require
inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. (Amended by
Planning Commission 8-16-89)
Detatled common open space area landscaping and irrigation plans shall
be submitted for Planning Department approval for the phase of
development in process. The plans shall be certified by a landscape
architect, and shall provide for the following: (Amended by Planning
Commission 8-16-89)
1. 'Permanent automatic Irrigation systems shall be Installed on all
landscaped areas requiring irrigation.
2. Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be opaque
_ up to a minimum Night of six (6) feet at mturity.
3. All utility service ams end ,enclosures shall be screened from
vtew with landscapln end decorative bmrrters or baffle
IS ipproved ~y
the Planning Director. Utilities shall
treemerits,
be placed underground.
4. Parkeys and landscaped bulldtng setbacks shall be landscaped to
provide vlsual scmntng or a transition lnto the prtmry use area
of the slte. Landscape elements shall tnclude earth bermtng,
ground coyarm shrubs and specimen trees tn conjunction with
meandering sidewalks, benches and other pedestrian amentales where
appropriate Is approved by the Planning Department,
·
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 2276%, Htnor Change No. %
Page %4 "
5. LandScaping plans shall Incorporate the use of specimen accent
trees at key vtsual focal potnts wtthtn the pro~ect.
blhere street trees cannot be planted
tntertor streets and project parkways due
right-of-ray, they sha]l be planted
rt ght-of-way.
~thtn r~ght-of-way of
to Insufficient road
outside of the road
7. Landscaping plans shall Incorporate nathe and drought tolerant
plants ~here appropriate.
All extst~ng spectmen trtes and stgn4flcant reck outcroppings on
the sublect property shall be sho~n on the prolect's grading plans
and shall note those to be removed, relocated and/or retained.
g. All trees shall be mtntmum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked.
Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERNITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
ee
All landscaping and Irrigation shall be ~nstalled tn accordance with
approved plans prtor to the tssuance of occupancy permits, If
seasonal conditions do not permtt planting, tntedm landsca;ing ar~-
eroston control measures shall be utt1~zed as appPoved by the Plannir,,
D~rector and the Otrector of Butldtng and Safety.
Notwithstanding the preceding conditions, vherever an acoustical study
ts requtred for notse attenuation purposes, the hetghts of a11'
requtred walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where
applicable.
Concrete stdevalks shall be constructed throughout the subdtv(ston tn
accordance vlth the standards of Ordinance 46Z.
S{reet trees shall be planted throughout the subdivision tn accordance
krlth the standards of Ordinance 460.
Prtor to the tssuance of an occupancy pemtt, the subdivider shall
prepare end submtt· ~rttton report to the Plsnntng Dtrector of the
County of Ittveretde demonstrating compliance wlth all remtntng
conditions of approval and adtlgatton tonsures of thts mp and
Envtromntal Assessment Nos. 3Z943 end 3:t084. The Plsnntng Dtrector
my requtre Inspection or other ant toting to assure such compliance.
Fa:mp
August 140 1989
BIIIAIIITMINTAI, LBq*I'IIII
COUNTY OF RIVERBIDE
'PLANNZNG DEPARTKENT
T0: Fel lct a Bradfield - Spoctftc Plans
FROH: Steve A. Kupfeman - Engineering Geologist
RE: Tentat1 ve Tract 22761
Slope Stability Report No. 14 (update)
The following reports have been revteed relattve to slope stabt]lty it the
subject st re:
· $1 ope Stabt 1 tty Eva1 uatt on for the Proposed Res( dent1 al Devel oi~ent,
Tentative Trlct 22761, Rancho California, RIverside County, CA," by
Leighton and Associates, dated Ouly 19, 1989.
2. "Response to County of RIverside Revtew Letter," by Leighton and
Associates, dated August 9, 1989.
These reports detemtned that:
The ;.-oposed fill slope ad,lacent to Ynez Road ~111 be stable agatnst
both deep-seated fatlure and surftcfal fatlure.
2. The proposed fill slope should be stable agalnst both the deep-seated
and the sufftc(al slopo fatlure under seismic conditions.
These reports racemended that:
The recmmendattons tncluded tn the General Earthcork and Grading
Specifications (Appendix D) of the Leighton geotechntcal report dated
,lune 16, Zg8g, should be Incorporated tnto destgn and construction.
2. All cut slolms should be observed bY an engineering geologist duFtng
gr, mng.
Cut and fill slopes should be provt:ded with appropriate surface
dralnage features and landscaped (with druught-telerent vegetation) as
soon as posstble after grldt ng to ltntmSze the patentin1 for eroston.
Banns should be protided at the top of fill slopes, and brov dttches
should be constructed at the top of cut slopes. Lot dratnage should be
directed such that surface runoff on the slope face ts mln(mtzed.
Felt ct a Bradf~ el d
August 15, 1989
The other portton of ftll slopes should be etther overbuilt by 2 feet
(mintmEn) and trtmmed back to the ftntshed slope or cempacted tn
tncreents of 5 feet (maximum) by a sheepsfoot roller is the ft11
placed and then trackwalked to achteve the ftnal configuration.
These reports saltsly the Genera] Plan requtrment for a slope stability
report. The reconnenclattons made tn these reports shall be adhered to tn the
clestgn and construction of thts pro,tect.
$AK:al
OFf/C/OF K3AD C~MMJ~J~bTe & COUNTY f~/~v~Yc)~
dune 13. 1gag
Riverside County Planning
4080 Leeon Itreet
Riverside, Ci g2S01
Tract NIp 22762
nor Change # Z
Schedule A - Team SP
Ladies and Gentlemen=
With respect to the conditions of approval for the referenced ~enca~iv
land division nap, the Road bpar~uent rat·BRands that the landdivide
provide the foil·ring street Isprovesent plans and/or road dedications
accordance rich Ordinance 460 and Riverside County Road lmprovelne~
Standards (Ordinance 461). It ts understood that the tentative ed
correctly shove acceptable canterline pro~iles, all existins easements
traveled rays, and drainage courses vith appropriate O's, and
shiesion or unacceptabllity my require the map to be resubmitted .
further consideration. these Ordinances and the foil·ring conditions at
essential ports and a requirement occurring in ONZ is as binding
though ecru:ring in all. they are intended to be complementary and
describe the conditions for · complete design of the improvement.
questions regarding the true Boanine of the conditions shall be referre
to the Road Comaissionsr*s Office.
1. The landdivider snail protect downstream properties from
dmuges caused by siteration of the drainage potterns,
i,·., concentration of diversion of flow. )retortion
snail be provided by constructing adequate drainage
facilities including enlarging existing facilities and/
or by sscuri · drainage easement. All drainage
oasesones sha~l be eJuen on the final nap and noted as
foilms oDrainage Baseseric - co building, obstructions.
or encroachRents by land fills are allsued'. The
protection saall be as approved b~ the Road Deportment.
2. ~e landdivider shall ·ccapt and properly dispose of
ell offsite drainage flowing!onto or through the site.
Xn the event the Road CreeLseisner peraLto the use o~
· ·treats for drainage ImrposeS0 the provisions o~ Article
ZZ of OrdLnanca So. 460 vin apply. Should the
quantities exceed the serescRap·city or the use o~
streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the
subdivider shall provide adequate drainage facilities
as ·pprowed by the Rend Deportmnt.
2~UNTr dJ~TIVZ alTER · 4OOO L~ ~, idvmuid, ~V~IOI
Tract ~ap 22762 - Minor Change
Ju~e 23. 1989
Page 2
&uSer drainage is involved on this landdivis'ion and its
resolution shall be ·s epproved by the Rood Department,
cA" and at" Streets shall be improved within the dedicated
sight of way in accordance with County Itandard No. 104,
lection A. (40'/60')
'D= Itreet shall be improved within the dedicated right of
way in accordance with County Standard so. 10S, Section A.
(36*/60*)
)reece Lane and abe Itreet shall be improved with 34 feet
of asphalt concrete pavement within · 45 foot part width
dedicated right of way in accordance with County Standard
No. I03, Section A. (22'/33')
Concrete ·idawalks shall be constructed throughout the
landdivision~in accordance with County Standard No. 400 and
401 (curb sidewalks).
tries Road (northerly of Rancho Vista Road) shall be
improved with concrete curb and gutter located 38 feet from
centerline and match up asphalt concrete paving~
reconstruction; or resurfacing of existing paving as
determined by the Road Commissioner within a S0 foo~ hal~
width dedicated right of way in accordance with Count~
Standard lie. 101.
~nez Road (southerly of Rancho Vista Road) shall be
improved with concrete curb and gutter located 32 feet from
centerline and match up asphalt concrete paving:
reconstruction; or resurfacing of existing paving as
dotemined by the Road Commissioner within a 44 foot half
width dedicated right of way in accordance with County
Standard No. 102.
a; secondary access road to the nearest paved road
maintained b~ the County shall be constructed within the
bile fight of way in accordance with County ltandard ~o.
~06, Section B, (3 '/0') ·t · grade and alignment as
Prior to the. rooordation of the final mp, the developer
shall deposit with the Riverside Count Road De rtaent, a
cash om o~ $1S0.00 · 3Dt as mit~gation ~ traffic
Signal impacts. lboulFthe developer to defer the time of
payment, · written agreeseat my be entered into with the
bunt deferring said payment to the tire of issuance of a
building permit,
13,
F~ge 3
Improvement plans shall be based upon · centerline profile
mxtmnd~ng m minimum of 300 f~et beyond the projec~
boundaries mt's grade and sliVnaent am slaproved by tAe
Riverside County load Commissioner. Completion of
road Xmprovceents does nut ~ly scceptsnce for main-
tenants by County.
Electrical snd manStations trenches shsll be provided
accordance rich Ordinance 461, Standard
Aspbaltic emulsion (fog Hal) shall be applied not
than fourteen days foliovine placement of the ssphal~
surfacing and shall be'applied st s rate o~ 0~0S gallon per
square yard, Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section 37,
39 and 94 of the State Itandard Specifications.
Standard cul-de-sacs sball be ~onstructed throuVhout the
landd~vision.
Corner cutbacks in con~omnce vith County Standard No. 80.5
shall .be shown on the final sap and offered for dedication.
r~t access shall be restricted on Ynez Road and
the
bnddivisions creating cut or fill slo~s adjacent to the
control and slo~ ensuehis ss appzoved by the
b~rmnt.
T~e lsnddivibr sMll pr~ide utility clearance [r~ hncho
~lifcrnta bier District prior to the recordstion ~ the
fi~l
The sinis~ centerline radii s~ll ~ 300 feet cr ss
a~r~sd by ~e Rmd b~rmnt.
~e ~nm ~t fr~Uges ~ong ~e knuckles ~11 M 35
All driveea s shall onnfora to the applicable Riverside
County Ita~:rds.
the miasmas farage setback Shall be l0 feet measured from
tIM face of ourb.
All centerline intersections shall be at S0* with s minimum
10* tangent measured frm flo~ line or as sppzoved by the
load teamfastener*
Tract,Msp 22761 - Ntnor CKsnge tl
dUne 13o 1989
Page 4
The street design and inprovement
21760 and
concept o~ this projec=
Pm 22?08, TR 22204, TR
Very truly yours,
County of Riverside
O: R2VD. S~I)~ COZ2NTY I'ZJ3NXNG DZP~.
DATE: May 12, 1989
KEAZ. TR S?EC~L~.~ST ~7
IE: 11ACT lOP 22761, tnlOR CBAXGZ # I
lmvLrmmemCal lealob Serv~cmm m,.~m mired Itnor (~mmm~m lo.
ms, y S, 1919 . Our mrrrent cameratin ~ train am ratatrod
our letter dated Igt. dmrd,'1187.
I)d.:tmC
I dated
tA~ 1 S bS3 ~
OCT 0 5 '.
Riverside Count}r Planning Commission
· 000 Lemon St, RIVE~SrDE C
Riverside, CA lit01 PI, ANNING DEP,
lIB:; ~IAC~Ii~P 02761: Being t subdivision of t portion of
19 of Paubs Lind Led VaLor Co. tl IhOwA by Hap filed in Book
II, Page S0? of )hpI, Records of Ben Diego County
California.
(gO Lots)
Gentlemen:
The Department of Public Health has reviewed Tentative
~o, 'SZ761 and recessrids that:
A water lyeten shall be installed according to
plane Led specification is approved by the water
company Led the Health Department. Permanent
prints of the pleas of the water system shsl!
be submitted in triplicate. vZth a minimum is&Is
not lees then one inch equals 200 feet. lions
the original driving to the County Surveyor. The
prints Ihlll show the internal pipe dingier.
location of valves Led fire hydreats; pipe
3oint specifications, Led the site of the main
It the 3unction of the new eyeto to the
existing system. The pleas shall sobply in
all respects with Div. l, Part l, CAIpter 7 of
the California Health Led Safety Code. California
Administrative Code. Title 22, Chapter 16, and General
' Order Me. 102 of the Public Utilities Commission of the
State of hlifornil,when applicable. The plans shall
Be lieled by a registered engineer and water company
with the..fslleving certification: °! certify that the
design of the water oyster in Trait Map 22761 is in
accordLess with the water system expansion plus of the
It&ache California Water District Led that the water
service, storage and distribution system will be
adequate to preyado water service to ouch tract.
his certification dose mot constitute a iv&re&tee that
it will supply water to such tract at any specific
Quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or
any other purpose'.
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTF. S
(DECE1VIBER 16, 1991)
s~r^mu,r~76n-~.cc 16
QOB4MZBBZON MINUTES
CHAZRMAN HOXgLAND requested that staff present both Items 8
together.
DECEMBER 16, 1991
and 9
8. EXTENSION OF TIME TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22761
8.1 Second Extension of Time for a 80 lot residential
subdivision on 28 acres within Specific Plan 180, located
on the west side of Ynez Road, North of Pierce Lane.
9. EXTENSION OF TIME TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 22762
Second Extension of Time for a 50 lot residential
subdivision on 16.86 acres within Specific Plan 180,
located on the west side of Terra Vista Road, South of
Ynez Road.
MARK RHOADE8 summarized the staff report. 'Mr. Rhoades
handed out Conditions of Approval pertaining to the
Recreation Center and park-site and read them into the
records.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND requested clarification of the
Conditions of Approval of the Recreation Center and park-
site.
COMMISSIONER FORD asked who the improvement bond would be
made out to.
JOKNCAVANAUGH stated that the bond should be made out to
the City.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 8:25 P.M.
LARRY SMITH, Coleman Homes, stated that the had just
received the revisions and wanted clarification. He
stated that in his discussions with staff, he understood
that Coleman Homes would be required to build the
recreation facility, to be completed by the 250th
Certificate of Occupancy, or July 1, 1993, not at the
250th Building Permit as stated in the Conditions of
Approval. Also, he had that same understanding regarding
the completion of the improvements to Ynez Road.
COMMISSIONER FORD asked if staff had any problems with
the completion of the recreation center at the Issuance
of Certificate of Occupancy for the 250th unit.
GR.RY KING concurred with the amendment to the
Condition.
PCMIN12/16/91
-9- DECEMBER 18, 1991
PT.~NNZHG ~TBBZO~ MZZ411~'EB
D~*CRKB~R 16, 1991
BOBERT BZGHETTZ stated that the improvements to Ynez Road
were required prior to the issuance of Building Permits
because this is a key portion of the Ynez Corridor
Project, and the City Engineer would like this key
portion completed first.
~IMALLMON, 43954 Gatewood Way, Temecula, stated that the
developer had been very cooperative with the homeowners
and thanked the developer and staff for all their
efforts.
COMMIBBZONERCHINIAEFF stated that the improvement of the
roads should be tied to the Certificate of Occupancy. No
Certificate of Occupancy issued until roads are complete.
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved to close the public hearing
at 8:40 P.M. and ~dODt Resolution No. 91-(next)
recommending that the City Council approve Second
Extension of Time for Tentative Tract No. 22761 based on
the analysis and findings contained in the staff report,
including those presented at the public hearing, with the
following modifications, that prior to recordation of the
final map, said agreement shall require construction and
completion of the recreation center and private park
prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy on
the 250th unit in Specific Plan No. 180 or by July 1,
1993, whichever comes first; a bond in an amount set by
the Public Works Department shall be provided; prior to
the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy of any unit in
either tract, Ynez Road shall be improved with A/C
paving, seconded by CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND.
COMMISSIONER FORD requested clarification of the bond
requirement.
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stated:that the developer shall
post a bond with the City or shall show proof that a bond
has been posted in sufficient amount to construct the
facility, CHAIRMAN HOAGLANDconcurred with the amendment.
AYES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Ford, Chiniaeff,
Hoagland
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 2
COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF moved tO close the public hearing
at 8:45 P.M. and Adopt Resolution 91-[next) Approving the
Second Extension of Time for Tentative Tract No. 22762
~ PCMIN12/16/91 -10- DECEMBER 18, 1991
~Y.B, NNXNO e0)IMXNBION MXN1)T~N D~eEMBER 16, 1991
based on the analysis and findings contained in the staff
report,-including those presented at the public hearing,
with the following modifications, that prior to
recordation of the final map, said agreement shall
require construction and completion of the recreation
center and private park prior. to the issuance of the
Certificate of Occupancy on the 250th unit in Specific
Plan No. 180 or by July 1, 1993, whichever comes first;
a bond in an amount set by the Public Works Department
shall be provided; prior to the issuance of a Certificate
· of Occupancy of any unit in either tract, Ynez Road shall
be improved with A/C paving, seconded by COMMISSION FORD.
AYES: 3
COMMISSIONERS:
Ford, Chiniaeff,
Hoagland
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 2
COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey
_11
.......... i II
' I I'1 ' I
..... IIIII I ........ I II
'27. "':":" "F'_'_ '_','_ .......... ~_" '_ ' .... ' ...........
m mm
; -] ............ 1.[. 11
........... i_l 1_ t II I, II I II ' I ' '11
......... ' · " '-" ' - ' ; ....... ~--ii] ill -- ·
PCMIN12/16/91 -11- DECEMBER 18, 1991
ATTA~ NO. 4
PLANNING COMM'r~SION STAFF I~gPORT
(DECEMBER 16, 1991)
S\STAFFRlq~22761-2.CC
17
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning Commission
FROM:
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
DATE:
December 16, 1991
SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Map No. 22761-Second Extension of Time
Pursuant to the attached memorandum from the Department of Public Works, the applicant
has complied with run-off and erosion control requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission: ADOPT Resolution 91-_ RECOMMENDING THAT
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE the Second Extension of Time for
Tentative Tract No. 22761 based on the Analysis and Findings
contained in the staff report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
vgw
$%,STAFFRPl'~2761-2.'rrM 1 ~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Douglas M. Stewart, Deputy City Engineer
November 4, 1991
Tract Map No. 22761, Second Extension of Time
On August 13, 1991, the Department of Public Works sent letters to all developers with
active and inactive subdivisions within the City of Temecula. Said letter requested that all
erosion and run-off control be in place no later than October 15th of this year.
The developer for Tract Map No. 22761 .and Tract Map No. 22762 has failed to comply with
the established deadline in conformance with the conditions of their grading permit and the
subdivision conditions of approval. Therefore, the Department of Public Works respectfully
requests that both Second Extensions of Time for Tract 22761 and Tract 22762 be continued
to the December 16, 1991, Planning Commission meeting to allow time for staff to resolve
the issue with the developer.
vgw
~ S~STAFFRF~22781-2.TTM 3
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning Commission
Douglas M. Stewart, Deputy City Engineer
October 21, 1991
Tract Map No. 22761, Second Extension of Time
On August 13, 1991, the Department of Public Works sent letters to all developers with
active and inactive subdivisions within the City of Temecula. Said letter requested that all
erosion and runoff control be in place no later than October 15th of this year.
The developer for Tract Map No. 22761 and Tract Map No. 22762 has failed to comply with
the established deadline in conformance with the conditions of their grading permit and the
subdivision conditions of approval. Therefore, the Department of Public Works respectfully
requests that both Second Extensions of Time for Tract 22761 and Tract 22762 be continued
to the November 18, 1991, Planning Commission meeting to allow time for staff to resolve
the issue with the developer.
vgw
5%STAFFRPT~2761-2.TTM 4
Case No.:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 21, 1991
Second Extension of Time-Tentative Tract Map No. 22761
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
RECOMMENDATiON:
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING' LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Coleman Homes
Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates
Eighty (80) lot residential subdivision on 28 acres.
Second Extension of Time.
Between Rancho California Road and Santiago Road, west
of Ynez Road.
Specific Plan 180 (Rancho Highlands)
North:
South:
East:
West:
R-A-5 (Residential Agricultural,
minimum)
SP 180 (Rancho Highlands)
R-1 (One-Family Dwellings)
I-15 (Interstate 15)
5 acre
Not requested
Vacant
North:
South:
East:
West:
Multi-Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Single Family Residential
Interstate 15
Total Acreage:
No. of Lots:
Open Space Lots:
Proposed DU/Acre
Proposed Minimum Lot Size:
28
80
1
2.8
7,200 sq.ft.
S~$TAI:FqqPT~2781-2 .TTM 5
BACKGROUND
Tentative Tract No. 22761 was originally approved by Riverside County in July of 1988. The
first time extension was approved by the City of Temecula in October 1990.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Tract ~'~lap No. 22761, is a proposal to subdivide approximately 28 acres into eighty (80)
single family residential lots with a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. The subject site
is located south of Rancho California Road, west of Ynez Road and easterly of I-15. The
project is consistent with the approved Specific Plan No. 180.
FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY
The proposed density of 2.8 units per acre is consistent with the Southwest Area Community
Plan. In addition, Staff finds it probable that this project will be consistent with the new
General Plan when it is adopted, because of the existing pattern of area development.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission re-affirm the Environmental Impact Report
No. 177 completed for Specific Plan No. 180.
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
develoDment 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 proDosed 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 prol~osed 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 180.
The site is suitable to accommodate the prol~osed 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.
S%STA~2781-2.TTM 6
e
Tentative Tract Map No. 22761 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.
e
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.
e
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 Ynez Road 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 her.in incorporated by reference, due to the fact
that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, and Conditions of
Approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
vgw
ADOPT Resolution 91- RECOMMENDING THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVE The Second Extension of Time
for Tentative Tract No. 22761 based on the Analysis and
Findings contained in the staff report and subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution - page 8
Conditions of Approval - page 13
Staff Report-First Extension of Time - page 19
Exhibits - page 20
S~STAFFRFT~2761-2.TrM 7
ATTACHMENT N0, 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-_
S%STAFfflPT%22761-2.TTM 8
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE SECOND EXTENSION OF
TIME FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 22761, An 80 LOT .RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISION ON 28 ACRES AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF ASSESSOR°S
PARCEL NO. 923-020-038.
WHEREAS, Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates 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 TEMECU LA
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-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 t'he following requirements are met:
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
plan.
Be
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~STAFFRFT~2761-2.TTM 9
(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, (hereinafte~ "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 appr0ving 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 amenities commensurate
with existing and anticipated residential development standards.
S%STAI=FRPT~2761'2.TTM I 0
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(9)
(10)
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 180.
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.
Tentative Tract Map No. 22761 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 Ynez Road 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,
S\STAFFRFl~2761*2.TrM 11
(11)
That said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and
environmental documents associated with these applicants 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.
;ECTION II. Environmental Compliance.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby determines that the previous
environmental determination Adoption of EIR No. 177 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 Second Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Map No. 22761 for a 80 Lot
residential subdivision on 28 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:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONER
SLSTAFFRFT~2761-2.TTM 12
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S%STA~2761'2-TTM 13
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
STAFF REPORT
FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME
S~TAFFRPT~2761-2.TTM I 9
Case No.:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 1, 3990
First Extension of Tim
Tentative Tract Map No. 22761
Minor Change No. 1
Prepared By: Richard Ayala
Recommendation: Approval
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNI~NG LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Coleman Homes
Robert Bein, William Frost ~, Associates
Eighty (80) lot residential subdivision of 28 acres.
First Extension of Time.
Between Rancho California Road and Santiago Road,
west of Ynez Road.
Specific Plan 180 (Rancho Highlands)
North: R-A-5
South: SP 180
East: R - 1
West: I - 15
( ResidentialAgricultural,
5 acre minimum)
( Rancho Highlands )
( One-Family Dwellings)
( Interstate 15 )
Not requested.
Vacant
North:
South:
East:
West:
Multi-Family Residential
Single Famiiy Residential
Single Famiiy Residential
Interstate 15
Total Acreage :.
No. of Lots:
Open Space Lots:
Proposed DU I Acre
Proposed Minimum Lot Size:
28
80
1
2.8
7,200 sq. ft.
~_ STAFFRPT\TM22761 1
ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
Specific Plan No.
adopted by the Riverside County Board of
Supervisors on June 5, 1984. Amendment No. 1 to
this Specific Plan, Change of Zone No. 5105, and
Tract No. 22761 were adopted by the Board on July
18, 1988. The Amendment switched Planning Area
Nos. 8 and 9 {Tract No. 22761 ) from the very low
residential category of 0-2 DU/AC to the low
residential density category of 2-5 DU/AC.
180, Rancho Highlands, was-~
Minor Change No. 1 to Tentative Tract No. 22761
was originally approved by the Riverside Board of
Supervisors on November 14. 1989. The application
was submitted for the reconfiguration of streets and
adjoining lot layouts to increase land use and
circulation efficiency.
Tract Map No. 22761, Minor Change No. 1 is a
proposal to subdivide approximately 28 acres into
eighty (80) single family residential lots with a
minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. The subject
site is located south of Rancho California Road, west
of Ynez Road and easterly of )-15.
Desicln Considerations
The proposed subdivision has bean designed in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance Nos.
348, 460 and Specific Plan No. 180. The main access
to the project is Preece Lane. The project has bean
designed to provide increase land use and
circulation efficiency.
Density
The proposed subdivision (Tract No. 22761, Minor
Change No. 1) according to Specific Plan 180,
requires proposed subdivisions to range from 2-5
DUIAC. The proposed subdivision consists of 2.8
DU/AC. Thus, meeting Specific Plan No. 180
density requirement for residential development.
The proposed density of 2.8 units per acre is
consistent with the 5outhwest Area Community Plan.
In addition, Staff finds it probable that this project
will be consistent with the new General Plan when it
is adopted.
ST A F F R PT\TM22761 2 ~
ENV I RONMENTAL
DETERMI NAT I ON:
FINDINGS:
On July 18, 1988, the Riverside County Board of
Supervisors adopted a Negative Declaration for
Environmental Assessment Nos. 31943 and 3108~ to
be applied to Tract Nos. 22761, 22762, and 21760.
Amended No. 2, at which time determined that the
Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract No.
22761, Minor Change No. 1 will mitigate any
envjronemtnal concerns.
There is a reasonable probability that
Tentative Tract No. 22761, Minor Change
No. 1 will be consistent with the Cityts future
General Plan, which will be completed within
a reasonable time in accordance with State
Law.
There is not a likety 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.
The proposed use or action complies with
State planning and zoning laws.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the circuJation
patterns, access, and density.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the public health or
welfare.
Tentative Tract No. 22761, Minor Change
No. 1 is compatible with surrounding land
uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height,
density, and coverage is likely to create a
compatible physical relationship with
adjoining properties.
The proposal will not have an adverse affect
on surrounding property, because it does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the Initial
Study for this project.
~' STAFFRPT\TM22761 3
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with this application are herein
incorporated by reference...
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
APPROVE Tentative Tract Map No. 22761,
Minor Change No. 1, based on the analysis
and findings contained in the Staff Report
and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
RA:ks
Attachments:
1. Conditions of Approval
5TAFFRPT\TM22761 4
ATTACHMENT NO; 4
EXHIBITS
S\STAFFRPT~2761 ~2.TTM 20
CITY OF TEMECULA
le Sac
Location Map
~%/IC.-tk.ttT'~
CASE NO.V'rt"~
EXHIBIT NO.
~P.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA
SP-180
CASE NO.VTI4 Z,2..'~e,.I I
CITY OF TE'MECULA
(,t8o)
CASE "o.V'TI',"IZ'Z7~I
r-
EXHIBIT NO.
~,P.C. DATEtI--t4'~
_~. r:ll~.r ASSm 7,7,761'I
C NO.V
EXHIBIT NO.
kP.C. DATE II-N-"ll ~)
ATTACIIMENT NO. ~
F]~-~ CHI~CKLI.~T
S~STAPPRFI"~2761-2.CC 18
CASE NO.:
CITY OF TEME~
DEV!~JI)~ FFJ,. C!t~.CKI.IgT
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11761, SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Fee
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)
Consistent with Specific Plan
Consistent with Future General Plan
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 1
1 st Extension of Time
Condition No. 11
2rid Extension of Time
Condition No. 2
2nd Extension of Time
Condition No. 7
2nd Extensmn of Time
Condition No. 3
1 st Extensmn of Time
Condition No. 5
1st Extension of Time
Condition No. 5
2rid Extensmn of Time
SXSTA.n~m276~-:.CC 19
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
PARK SITE EXm~IT
S\STAF~61-2.CC 20
"')i
ITEM NO.
24
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY A'ITORNEY .'
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER ,~- "-
CITY OF TEIVIECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
May 26, 1992
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103, Second Extension of Time
RECOMM'I?,NDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council:
ADOPT Resolution No. 92- upholding the Planning
Commission's approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23103, Second Extension of Time based on the Analysis and
Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
BACKGROUND
The proposed Second Extension of Time is for an 18-lot residential subdivision on 29.2 acres
located within the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the Second Extension of Time on March 16, 1992.
Discussion at the Planning Commission hearing was limited to consideration of air flow impacts
to the Callaway Vineyards to the east and noise impacts on future residents which may result
ff wind machines are required to be installed in the future, and to providing a landscape
maintenance easement for the Temecula Community Services Department (T.C.S.D.).
Impacts relative to the vineyards have been minimized by the vertical re-alignment of Butterfield
Stage Road. In addition, the applicant has stated a willingness to disclose potential wind
machine noise impacts to future property owners.
The T. C. S .D. has requested that the applicant provide easements for slope maintenance adjacent
to arterial streets. That request was added as a condition of approval by the Planning
Commission on March 16, 1992.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed project by a vote of 5-0.
~' S\STAFFRFI'123103VTM. CC I
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments: 1.
2.
4.
5.
6.
Resolution - page 3
Conditions of Approval (amended by Planning Commission, March 16,
1992) - page 9
Planning Commission Minutes March 16, 1992) - page 13
Planning Commission Staff Report (March 16, 1992) - page 14
Fee Check List - page 15
Exhibits - page 17
vgw
Sk~TAFFRPT~I~3VTM.CC 2 ~
ATTACH1V~,~ NO. 1
RESOLIYI'ION NO.
S\STAFFih~f'k23103VTI~[.CC 3
ATTAINT NO. 1
RESOLU~ON NO. 92-__
A RF~OLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY
OF TEMECULA AlPROVING ~ SECOND EXTENSION
OF TIME FOR VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.
23103 TO SUBDIVIDE 29.2 ACRF~ INTO 18 SINGLE
FANffi-Y RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED IN THE
MARGARITA VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 199 AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 919-340-014, 016,
018 AND 923-200-009, 010, 016, AND 923-210-001, 014 AND
923-721-021. (PORTIONS)
WFrRRI~.AS, The Marlborough Development Corporation fried the Second Extension of
Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 in accordance with the Riverside County Land
Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WI:W~REAS, said Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map application
was processed in the time and manner prescribed by State and local hw;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Second Extension of Time for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map on March 16, 1992, at which time interested persons had an
opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WI~~, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map;
WHEREAS, the City Council considered said Second Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map on May 26, 1992, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to
testify either in support or opposition;
WItF~REAS, at the conclusion of the Council hearing, the Council approved said
Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103;
NOW, T!:W. RRI~ORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETER.MINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings:
A. 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\STAFFRFr~3 1 (B VTM .CC 4
general plan.
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the
2. The planning agency f'mds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
a. 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.
b. 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.
c. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
B. 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 Piaa 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 whilo the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General
Plan.
C. 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:
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general
2. The City Council finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building penits, pursuant to this rifle, each of the following:
a. There is reasonable pwbability that the Second Extension of Time
for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 pwposed will be consistent with the general plan
proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or
interference with the future adopted general plan ff the proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan.
c. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state hw and local ordinances.
D. Pursuant to Section'7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be
approved unless the following findings are made:
S\STAF~ 103VTM.CC 5
specific plans.
That the propomed land division is consistent with applicable general and
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plnns.
3. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
type of development.
4. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
proposed density of the development.
5. 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.
6. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements
am not likely to cause serious public health problems.
7. 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.
E. The Council in approving the proposed Second Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 23103, makes the following f'mdings, 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 pwject 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.
2. Them is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future and adopted general plan, if the proIx3sed use or action is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan, due to the fact that the project is in conformante 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 Plan 199.
S\STA~103VTM.CC (~
4. The site is suitable W accommodate the pwposed land use in terms of the
size and shape of the lot configuration, circuhtion patterns, access, and density, due w the fact
that; adequate area is pwvided for all proposed residential structures; adequate landscaping is
pwvided along the project' s public and private fwntages; and the internal circulation plan should
not create traffic conflicts as design pwvisions are in conformance with adopted City standards.
5. The pwject as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public
health or weftare, due to the fact that the conditions stated in the approval are based on
mitigation mcasures 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 pwject is consistent with the current zoning of the subject site.
7. The pwject as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built
or natural environment as determined in the Negative Declaration for the pwject, due to the fact
that impact mitigation is realiTed by conformance with the pwject's Conditions of Appwval.
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 pwject currently proposes access
points from Butterfield Stage Road which has 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 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.
F. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Second Extension of Time for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 is compatible with the health, safety and weftare 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 pwject, and the Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby
reaffirmed.
SECTION 3. Conditions. That the City of Temecuh City Council hereby approves the Second
Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 to subdivide 29.2 Acres inW 18
single family residential lots located in the Margarita Village Specific Plan No. 199 And known
as Assessor's Parcel Nos. 919-340-014, 016, 018 and 923-200-009,010, 016, and 923-210-001,
014 and 923-721-021 (Potions) subject to the following conditions:
S\STAFFRFI'X231(BVTM.CC 7
Riverside County Conditions of Approval dated September 28, 1988.
City of Temecula Conditions of Approval dated May 28, 1991.
City of Temecula Conditions of Approval dated May 26, 1992.
Section 4.
The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 26th day of May, 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDSALL
MAYOR
I HF. MEBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of
the City of Tcmocula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 26th day of May, 1992 by the
following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
CO~CILMEMB~:
CO~CK.MEMBERS:
CO~CH,MEMBERS:
JUNE S. GPPPK
CITYCLERK
S~STA~I0~VTM.CC 8
ATTACHM'~ NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S\STAFFRPT~23103 VTM. CC 9
ATYACItMI~NT 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103
Commission Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
March 16, 1992
November 8, 1992
PLANNING DEPARTM~,NT
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.
The subdivider shall submit In the Planning Director verification that Section 10.35 of
Ordinance No. 460 has been satisfied regarding payment of parks and recreation fees in
accordance with Section 10.35 of Ordinance No. 460. Verification shall be submitted
prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy.
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.
This conditionally approved Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
23103 will expire one (1) year after the original expiration date, unless extended as
provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration date is November 8, 1992.
,
The subdivider shall comply with the original Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract
Map No. 23103 (see attached) except as amended herein.
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
,
Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the applicant or his assignee shall pay the fair
market value of 0.23 acres of parkland to satisfy Quimby requirements. The amount to
be paid shall be determined by TCSD staff within thirty (30) days prior to the recordation
of said map.
S\STAFF~I03VTM.CC 10
All known slope and open space areas are hereby conditioned to be maintained by an
established Homeowner' s Association (HOA). Exterior slopes bordering an arterial sWee~
may bc dedicated street shall be offered with an easement to the TCSD for
maintenance following compliance to TCSD standards and completion of the application
process. All slope and open space areas shah be identified by numbered lot, with the
square footage of said areas noted on the final map. (Struck and revised at the Planning
Commission meeting on March 16, 1992).
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The following are the Department of Public Works additional 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 shah be referred to the appropriate staff person of the
Department of Public Works.
It is understood that the Subdivider has correctly shown on the tentative map all existing
and proposed easements, traveled ways, improvements constraints and drainage courses,
and their omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and
revision.
The subdivider shall comply with all previous Conditions of Approval for this project
except as amended or superseded herein.
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.
Subdivider shah deposit with the City of -Temecuh an amount sufficient to cover the
construction of that portion of Butterfield Stage Road between where the westerly
property line intersects with the westerly right-of-way line and extends to intersect with
the centerline of the street. This portion of Butterfield Stage Road shall be completed
by the developer of Tract Map No. 2.3209, and said funds shall be reimbursed to the
developer of Tract Map No. 23209 upon completion of the improvements.
The vertical design of Butterfield Stage Road shall be as approved by the City of
Temecula.
Maintenance for slopes, drainage devices and open space areas must be provided by
Temeeula Community Scrviecs District or the Homeowners Association. The limits of
each maintenance area must be defmed by numbered lots on the map. (Stuck at the
Planning Commission meeting on March 16, 1992).
A median island shall be shown on the street improvement plans and shall be constructed
within Butterfield Stage Road per City standard No. 100 and as directed by the
Department of Public Works, or bonds shall be posted, as part of the street improvement
plans.
sxsrA~u, rus ~ 0sv-n,t cc 11
Sidewalks shall be constructed along both sides of Phcer Loudeaonne and Chemin
Clinet, or bonds shall be posted, as part of the street improvement plans.
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits:
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, developer must obtain a National Pollutant
Discharge ~iimination System (NPDE3) permit from the State WaterResources Control
Board. No grading shall be permitted until a NPDES permit is granted or the project is
shown to be exempt.
Prior to Issuance of Building Permits
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities imposed
upon the property or project, including that for traffw and public facility mitigation as
required under the ~,/Negative Declaxation for the project. The fee to be paid shall
be in the mount in effect at the time of payment of the fee. ff an interim or final public
facility mitigation fee or district has not been finally established by the' date on which
developer requests its budding 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 fight to protest the provisions of 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.
S\STAF~IO3VTM.CC 12
ATTACHMENT I I
CITY OF TEMECULA
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103
Cl. ty. Counclut Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
May 28, 1991
November 8, 1991
Plannincl DeDartment
1. Unless previously paid, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the
applicant shall compl)~ 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.
2. The subdivider shall submit to the Planning Director verification that Section
10. 35 of Ordinance NO- L~60 has been satisfied regarding payment of parks and
recreation fees in accordance with Section 10.35 of Ordinance No. ~60.
Verification shall be submitted prior to issuance of any certificate of
occupancy.
3. 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.
u, . This conditionally approved Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23103 will expire one (1) year after the original expiration date,
unless extended as provided by Ordinance ~60. The expiration date is
November 8, 1991.
5. The subdivider shall comply with the original Conditions of Approval for
Tentative Tract Map No. 23102 (see attached) except as amended herein.
Enqineerincq Department
The following are the Engineering Department 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 Engineering
Department.
STA FFRPT\VTM23103
1
It is understood that the Develo.oer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration. ~
6. The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act.
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
7. The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered
Civil Engineer, subject to all the requirements of the State of California
Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance No. ~60.
8. Submit letter from adjacent property owner that the proposed drainage on
their property is acceptable to them.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
9. As deemed necessary bY the City Engineer or his representative 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:
- Engineering Department;
- Riverside County Health Department;
- CATV Franchise; and
- Parks and Recreation Department. ~
10. All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication t~
the public and shall cnntinue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
City Engineer.
11. Vehicular access shall be restricted on Butterfield Road and so noted on the
final map.
1Z. Easements, when req~uired for roadway slopes, landscape easements, drainage
facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located
within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances
shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
1;3. A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC~,R's) shall be
prepared by the developer and submitted to the Director of Planning, City
Engineer and City Attorney. The CC~;R's shall be signed and acknowledged
by all parties having any record title interest in the property to be developed,
shall make the City a party thereto, and shall be enforceable by the City.
The CC~;R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded. The
CC~,R's shall be subject to the following conditions:
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
The CC~,R's shall be prepared at the developeras sole cost and expense.
The CC~;Rss shall be in the form and content approved by the Director
of Planning, City Engineer and the City Attorney, and shall include
such provisions as are required by this approval and as said officials
deem-necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents.
The CCF, R~s and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's
Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering
Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent
with the final map. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City.
The CCF, R~s shall provide for the effective establishment, operation.
management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas and
facilities.
The CCE, R~s shsll provide that the property shall be developed,
operated and maintained so as not to crate a public nuisance.
The CC~;R~s shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the
condition required by the CCE, R~s, then the City, after making due
demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and
perform, at the owneris sole expense, any maintenance required
thereon by the CCi;R~s or the City ordinances. The property shall be
subject to a lien in 'favor of the City to secure any such expense not
promptly reimbursed-
i. The declaration shall contain language prohibiting further
subdivision of any lots, whether they are lettered lots or
numbered lots.
ii.
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently
maintained by homeowner~s association or other means acceptable
to the City. Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted
to the Planning and Engineering Divisions prior to issuance of
building permits.
The developer, or the developer~s successor, shall execute a current Public
Facilities Agreement with the City of Temecula which provides for the payment
of the sum of money per residential unit then established by Resolution of the
City Council, prior to the issuance of any building permits for any individual
lots.
15.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformante with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb
and gutter, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights,
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
signing, striping, traffic signal systems,
devices as appropriate.
Storm drain facilities.
Landscaping ( street and parks ).
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
and other traffic control
e. Undergrounding of existing and proposed utility distribution lines.
The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated
with adjoining developments.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. ~61 and as approved by the
City Engineer-
Prior to recordorion of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation
Should the developer choose to defer the time
towards traffic signal impacts.
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.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the propert~
line.
The subdivider shall submit four prints of a comprehensive grading plan to
the Engineering Department. The plan 'shall compty with the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, and as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 2LI" x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check.
The subdivider shall submit four copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer-
All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer-
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
25.
26.
On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be
contained within drainage easements shown on the final map A note shall be
added to the final map stating "Drainage easements shall'be kept free of
buildings and obstructions,"
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with
supporting hydrolocJic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the
Riverside County Flood Control District for review.
27. Adequate provisions shell be made for acceptsnca and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.
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 ISSUANCE OF .GRADING PERMITS:
29.
30.
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.
A grading permit shall be obtsinad from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintsinad road right-of-
way.
31. 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.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT:
32. A precise grading plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for
review and approval. The building pad shall be certified by a registered Civil
Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil Engineer shall issue a Final
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
33. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code, City Grading Standards and accepted grading practices. Th'i
final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
3~. 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.
ST AFFR PT\VTM23103
5
35.
36.
37.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all
times with adequate detours during construction,
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 1~ days followinc"
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gal lo~q
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos, 37, 39, and
9~ of the State Standard Specifications,
Develo er shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
or final public facility mitiggtion f~ or di~ri~ has not been fine y
established by the date on which Developer requesB iB building permits for
the proje~ or any phase ther~f, the Developer shall execute the Agreement
for Payment of Public Facility Fee, a copy of which has been provided to
Developer. Developer understands that said Agreement may require the
payment of f~s in excess of those now estimated (assuming benefit to the
project in the amount of such fees) and specifi~ily waives its right to protest
such increase.
Transportation EnclineerinCl
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
38.
39.
A signing plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the City Engineer for Chenin Ciinet and Placer Loudeaonne and shall be
included in the street improvement plans.
Condition No. 7 in the County of Riverside Road letter dated July Z2,
shall be deleted.
Prior to designing any of the above. plans, contact Transportation Engineering
for the design requirements-
Condition No. 28 in the County of Riverside Road letter dated July 22, 1988
shall be modified to read: A signing and striping plan shall be designed by
a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer for Butter'field
Stage Road and shall be included with the street improvement plans.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
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-
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
u, 3. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and
striping plans.
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
Buildin~l f; Safety DeOartment
Submit approved tract map to the DepaFtment of Building and Safety for
addressing prior to submittal for Structural Plan Review.
Obtain land Use and Building Department clearances, ..
School fees shall be paid to Temecull Unified School District,
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
7
RZVERSIDE COUNTY PLANH/NG DEPARTHENT
SUBDIVZSION
CONDZTIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23103
DATE: 9-28-88
A!~NDED NO. I
STANDARD COffi)XTIONS
1. The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County of
RIverside, tts agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding agatnst the County of RIverside or tts agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the County
of Riverside, tts advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body
concerning Tentative Tract 23103, Amended No. 1, which action ts brought
about within the time period provtded for in California Government Code
Section 66499.37. The County of Riverside ~11 promptly nottry the
subdivider of any such clatm, actton, or proceeding against the County of
Riverside and wtll cooperate fully in the defense. If the County fails to
promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or
fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the
County of Riverside.
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California
Subdivision Pap Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule~
Bo unless modified by the conditions listed below.
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the
County of Riverside Board of Supervisors approval date, unless extended as
provided by Ordinance 460.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor sub3ect to all
the requirements of the State of California' Subdivision Pap Act and
Ordinance 460.
i5. The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the Riverside
County Surveyor's Office and two copies to the Department of Building and
Safety. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
6. If any grading is proposed, the subdivider shall submit one print of
comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Building and Safety. The
lan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 7D, as amended
~y Ordinance 457 and as maybe additionally provided for in these
conditions of approval.
j
Conditions of Approval
TentJtlve Tract No. 2:3Z03, Panended No. 1
Page 2
.,)
7. A grading penntt shall be obtatned frm the Department of Bullding and
Safety prior to cmnencemnt of any gradlag outstale of county maintained
f
road Hght · say.
11.
12.
8. Any delinquent property taxes shall be petd prtor to recordatton of the
ftnal rap.
g. The subdivider shall comply ~Ith the street Improvement reconnendattons
outltned In the RIverside County Road Department's letter dated 7-22-88 a
copy of. vhtch t s attached,
Legal access. as requtred by Ordinance 460 shall be provtded from the tract
map boundaT~ to a County maintained road.
All road easements Shall be offered for dedication to the public and sha~q
continue tn force unttl the governing body accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from aql encumbrances as approved
by'the Road Connisstoner. Street names shall be subject to approval of
the Road Commissioner.
Ea s eraeats, vhen requt red for roadway slopes, dra ~ nage fa c t 1 t t~ es,
utilities, etc., shall be shove on the f~nal map tf they a~e located
w~thtn the land d~vtston boundary. All offers of dedication and
conveyances shall be submitted and recorded as d~rected by the County
Surveyor.
Vater and sewerage d~sposal facilities sha~l be Installed tn accordance
with the provisions set forth tn the RIverside County Health Depar~ment's
letter dated 6-23-88 a copy of vhtch t5 attached.
The subd~v~der shall comply wtth the flood controq recommendations
outltned by the RIverside County Flood Control D~strtct's letter dated
6-}~-B8 9-27-88 a copy of vhtch ts attached. If the land d~v~s~on 11es
vtthtn an adopted flood control dratnage area pursuant to Sectton 10.25 of
ON.lnance 460, appropdate fees for the construction of area dratnage
facilities shall be collected by the Road Conntsstoner. (Amended by
Planntng Conmission 9-28-8B}
15. The subd¶vtder shall comply vtth the ftre Improvement recommendations
outltned In the County Ftre NaT~hal's letter dated 9-29=88 a copy of ~htch
ts attached.
16. Subdivision phastng, Including any proposed comon open space area
phastn , if applicable, shall be sub;lect to planntng
Improvement ~ by proposed phastng shall provtde for adequate
l)epartment approva .
vehicular access to all lots tn each phase, and shall Substantially
conform to the tateat and purpose of the subdivision approval.
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No, 23Z03, Amended No, 2
Page 3
17, Lots mated by this sulxHvtston shall camply' with the following:
a All lots shall haveia lintme size of I acre gross.
b. &11 lot length to vtdth ratios shall be in conformsnee wtth Section
3.8C of Ordinance 460.
c. Corner lots and'through lots, if any, shall be provtded with
additional area pursuant to Section 3,88 of Onltnance 460 and so as
not to contain less net area than the least amount of net area in
non-corner and through lots,
d. Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development stand&rds of the Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No.
zone.
e. When lots are crossed by ma~or publtc utility easements, each
shall have a net usable area of not less than 3,600 square
exclusive of the utility easement.
f. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping
provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the
Director of Building and Safety.
g. Trash bins, loading areas and incidental storage areas shall be
located away and visually screened from surrounding areas with the use
of block walls and landscaping.
1B. Prior to RECDRDATIDN Of the final map the following conditions shall be
"satisfied:
a. Prior to the rocordation of the final map the applicant shall submit
written clearanceis to the Riverside County Road and Survey Deparl=ent
that all pertinent requirements outltned in the attached approval
letters from the following agencies have been met,
County Fire Department
County Rood Control
County Parks Department
Rancho Water District
bO
County Health Department
County Planning Department
Eastern Punictpal Water Dist.
Prior to the recordatton of the final map, General Plan Amendment No.
150, Specific Plan No. 199, Amendment No. 1, Development Agreement No.
5, and Change of Zone No. 5107 shall be approved by the Board of
Supervisors and shall be effective. Lots created by this land
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23103, Mended No. 1
Page 4
.)
'dtvtstm~ shall be tn conformrice with the development s,tandards of the
'zone ulttmtely lpplled to the proper~y.
Al1~ existtrig structUres on the subject proper~y shaq1 be moved prior to
recOrderton of the ftnal rap-
Impacts to the TemecUla Elementar~ end Elstnore Unton High School Dtstrtct
shall be mitigated at the develolaent ippltcaUon stage tn accordance v4th
the district policies.
The common open space area shall be shown as a numbered lot on the ftnal
map and shall be managed by a master pruperty o~ners association or CSA.
8
(Amended by Planning Commission g-28- 8)
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23103, Amended No. 2
Page 5
22.
J~msfref,~- (/Wendeal by Planning Comm ss - -
tn~.~fL.,i~,.4.F~fr~.,_t.t~t.~,cttr~LH~fr.fnft-l-~-JfrL~ol.~-~- (~mended by
P1 anntng C~mmt sst On 9-28-88)
(Amended by Planning Cotmission 9-28-B8)
Prior to the recordaUon of the final map, the subdivider shall convey to
the County fee simple title, to all con~on or co~on open space areas,
free and clear of all liens, taxes,' assessment, leases (recorded and
unrecorded) and easements, except those easements which in the sole
discretion of the County are acceptable, As a conditions precedent to the
County accepting title to such areas, the subdivider shall submit the
fol 1 owtng documents, to the P1 anning Department for revieW, whtch
documents shall be subject to the approval of that department and the
Office of the County Counsel: (Amended by Planning Ccmnmtsston 9-28-88)
1) A declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions; and (Amended
by Planning Con~ission 9-28-88)
2) A sample document conveying title to the purchaser of an individual
lot or unit which provides that the declaration of covenants,
t
conditions and restrictions is incorporated there n by reference,
(Amended by Planntng Comtsston 9'28-B8)
The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions submitted for
review shall (a) provide for a term of 60 years, (b) provide for the
establishment of a property owners' association comprised of the owners of
each individual lot or unit and (c) contain the following provisions
verbatim: (Amended by Planning Coffnission 9-2B-BB)
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23103,/mended No. 1
Page 6
· Notvlthstandtng any provision tn thts Declaration tO the contrary, the
1
folioring provision shall mpPY: (~nded b~ Plinntng ~tss~on
The property camera issoclatton established herein shall, tf dormant,
be activated, b' Incorporation or othendse, at the request of the
County of Ittver~de, rand the preparty o~ners* association shall
unconditionally a~cept from the County of Riverside, upon the County's
dedston to requt. re activation of the property o~ners' association and
t~tle to the 'croon a~a' shaql be at the soqe
~unt~ of Rivedtale. {~nded b~ Planntng Cmtss~on 9-Z6-88)
In the event that the coenon area, or any part thereof, ts conveyed to
the property o~mers' assodatton, the association, thereafter shall
own such 'cocoOn area., shall manage and continuously matntain such
'co,~on area', of any part thereof, absent the prior ~rttten consent
of. the Planning Director of the County of Riverside or the County's
successor-In-interest- The property owners' association shall have
the rtght to assess the owners of each individual lot or unit for the
reasonable cost of maintaining such 'common area', and sahll have the
lien the property of any such owner who defaults in the
r~ ght to
payment of a maintenance assessment. An assessment lien, once
created, shaql be prior to all other liens recorded subsequent to the
notice of assessment or other document creating the assessment l~en.
(Amended by Planning Commission 9-28-88)
This Declaration shall not be terminated, 'substantially' amended or
property deannexed therefrom absent the prior wrttten consent of the
Planning Director of the County of Riverside or the County'x
successor-tn-~nterest- A proposed amendment shall be considered
'substantial' tf tt affects the extent, usage or maintenance of the
'coenon area'. (Amended by Planning Commission 9°28-88)
In the event of any conrltct between this Declaration and the Articles
of IncorporatiOn, the S~laws, or the property owners' association
Rules and Regulations, tf any, this Declaration shall control."
{Amended by Planntng Co~nlsston 9-28-B8)
Once approved, the decqaratton of covenants, cond(ttons and restrictions
shall be recorded at the same time that the final map ts recorded.
(Amended by Planning Commission 9o28-88)-
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract ~. 23103, k~ended No. 1
Fag. 7
24.
25.
The. developer shall comply ~th the following parkwa~ landscaping
conditions end Specific Plan No, 199, Amendment No, 1:
1) Prior to recordatton of the final map the developer shall ftle an
application with the County for the formation of or annexation to, a
parkway maintenance district for lentdrive Tract No, 23102 in
accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, unless the
project ts within an existing parkway maintenance district'.
2) Prtor to the issuance of butldtng perfts, the developer shall secure
approval of prop ed landscaping and irrigation plans from the County
Road and Planntng°~par~nent- All landscaping and irrigation plans
and specifications ~haql be prepared tn a reproducible format suttable
for permanent ftltag with the County Road Department.
3) The developer shall posta landscape performance bond which shall be
released concurrently .~dth the release of subdivision performance
bonds, quaranteetng the vtabtltty of all landscaping which will be
installed prior 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 parkway landscaping maintenance until"'
such time as maintenance is taken over by the district.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all
slopes, landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those
operations are the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the
Planning Director.
$treet lights shall be provided within the subdivision in accordance with
the standards of Ordiaance 461 and the following:
1) Concurrently with the filing of subdivision improvement plans with the
Road Department, the developer shall secure approval of the proposed
f engineer
street light layout first from the Road Department's traf ic
and then from the appropriate utility purveyor.
2) Following approval of the street lighting layout by the Road
Department's traffic engineer, the developer shall also file an
application with! LAFCO for the'formation of a street lighting
district, or annexation to an existing lighting district, unless the
site is within ani existing lighting district.
3) Prior to recordatton of the final map, the developer shall secure
conditional approval of the street lighting application from LAFCO,
unless the stte is within an extsttng ltghttng district.
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23103, Amended
Page 8
·
26.
4) All street lights and other ouMoor lighting shall be show~ on
electrical plans submitted to the Department of Bu'tldtng and Safety
for plan check' approval and shall comply with the requirements of
Riverside Counts Ordinance No. 655 and the Riverside County
Comprehensive General Plan.
Prior to the tssuance of GRADING PERHZTS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
a. Prior to the Issuance of grading pemtts, detailed cmon open space
area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning
Department approval for the phase of development tn process. The
plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide
for the follovrtng.
1). Permanent automatic irrigation systens shall be installed on all
landscaped areas requiring irrigation.
Z) Landscape screening where requtred shall be designed to be opaque up
to a minimum height of six (6) feet at
3) All utiltty service areas and enclosures shall be screened from view
wtth landscaptn.g and decorative barriers or baffle treatments, as
approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall be placed
underground. :
4) Parkways and landscaped building setbacks shall be landscaped to
provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of
the site. Landscape elements shall include earth berming., ground
cover, shrubs and specimen trees in conjunction with meandering
sidewalks, benches and other pedestrian amentries where appropriate as
approved by the Planning Departnent and Specific Plan No. 199
Amendment No. 1.
5) Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees
at key visual focal points titbin the project.
6) I~ere streets trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of interior
streets and project parkways due to insufficient road right-of-way,
they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-way.
7) Landscaping plans shall Incorporate native and drought tolerant plants
where appropriate.
8) All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the
subject property shall be shown on the project's grading plans and
shall note those to be removed, relocated and/or retained.
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No, Z3Z03, Amended No. 1
Page 9
All t~ees shall be Elntmum double staked.
trees shall be steel staked.
Weaker and/or slow growing
All existing nattve specimen trees on the subject property shall be
preserved wherever feasible. Where they cannot be preserved they shall be
relocated or replaced with spectmen trees as appreved by the Planntng
t
DIrector. Replacement trees shall be noted on approved landscap ng plans.
2B. If the project ts to be phased, priorto the approval of grading permtts,
an overall conceptual fading plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Director for approval, The plan shall be used as a guideline for
subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development and
shall include the following:
1)
z)
Te=hntques which w(11 be uttltzed to prevent erosion and sedimentat,on
durtng and after the grading process,
~proximate time frames for grading and identification of areas which
may be graded during the higher probability rain months of January
through Rarch.
29.
3) Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
4) Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall provide
evidence to the Director of Building and Safety that all adjacent
off-site manufactured slopes have recorded slope easenents-and that slope
maintenance responsibilities have been assigned as approved by the
Director of Building and Safety.
30. Grading plans shall conform to Board adopted Hillside Development -
Standards: All cut and/or fill slopes, or individual combinations
thereof, which exceed ten feet in vertical heights shall be modified by an
appropriate combination of a spectal terracing (benchtng) plan increase
slope ratio (t,e. 3:1), retaining walls, and/or slope planting combined
with irrigation. All driveways shall not exceed a fifteen percent grade.
31. A11 cut slopes located adjacent to'ungraded natural terrain and exceeding
the grading techniques:
1) The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the angle
of the natural terrain.
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No. 23103, Mended No. 1
Page 10
32.
Z) Angular form shall be discouraged. The graded form shall reflect the
Mtural rounded terrain.
3) The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves with radii
designed tn proportion to the total height of the slopes where
dratnage and stability permit such rounding.
4)
Where cut or ftll slopes exceed 300 feet tn horizontal length, the
horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous,
undulattng fashion.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
With to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building
and Safety the developer will demonstrate compliance with the
acoustical study prepared for Tract 23103 Amended No. 1 which
established appropriate mitigation measures to reduce ambient interior
noise levels to 45 Ldn and exterior noise levels below 65 Ldn.
b. Building separation between all buildings including fireplaces shall
not be less than ten (10} feet.
c. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of 1D feet.
33. In accordance with the written request of the developer to the County of
Riverside, a copy of which is on file, and in furtherance of the agreement
between the developer and the County of Riverside, no building permits
shall be issued by the County of Riverside for any parcels within the
subject tract until the developer, or the developer's
successors-in-interest provided evidence of compliance with the terms of
said Development Agreement No. 5 for the financing of public facilities.
34. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall
be satisfied:
Wall and/or fence locations shall substantially conform to attached
Figure III-2B of Specific Plan No. 19g Amendment No. 1. {Amended by
Planning Commission g-2B-BB)
All landscaVtng and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved pans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. If
seasonal conditions do not permit planting, interim landscaping and
erosion control measures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning
Oirector and the Director of Building and Safety.
Conditions of Approval
Tentative Tract No, Z3103, Amended No, 1
Page 11
35.
c. All landscaping and Irrigation shall be installed in acoordance wtt~.
approved plans and shall be verified by a Planning Department field
tnspectton.
d. Not withstanding the preceding conditions,the heights of all required
t
walls shall be determined by the acoustical study where appl cable.
)~oncrete sidewalks shall be constrocted throughout the subdivision in
accordance with the standanls of Ordinance 461 and Specific Plan No.
199 Amendment No. 1-
f. Street trees shall~be planted throughout the subdivision in accordance
with the standards of Ordinance 460 and Specific Plan No. 199
Amendment No. 1
Development of Tentative Tract No, 23103 Amended No.1 conform to shall
comply with the provisions of Specific Plan No. 199 Amendment No. 1 and
DeVelopment Agreement No. 5.
KG:mp
11,1,1 llAllKIrr OTIIIL'I'
P. O. IOZ 1033
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Riverside County
Planntng Departsent
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attention: Regional Team No. lie:
t,:,.,
Area: '/~*c~f~ V~|leT
We have reviewed this case and have the following co~ents:
Except for nuisance nature local runoff ~htch may traverse portions of the
property the project is considered free from ordinary storm flood hazard.
However, a storm of unusual magnitude could cause some damage. New construc-
tion should comply with all applicable ordinances.
The topography of the area consists of~ell defined ridges and natural water-
courses which traverse the property. There is adequate area outside of the
natural watercourses for building sties. The natural watercourses should be
kept free of buildings and obstructions in order to maintain the natural
drainage patterns of the area and to prevent flood damage to new buildings.
A note should be placed on an environmental constraint sheet stating, 'All new
buildings shall be floodproofed by elevating the finished floors a m~nimum of
]8 inches above adjacent ground surface. Erosion protection shall be provided
for mobile home supports."
This pro~ect is in the and
drainage plan fees shall be paid in accordance with the applicable r~lesArea'
regulations.
The proposed zoning is consistent utth existing flood hazards. Some flood
control facilities or floodproofing may be required to fully develop to the
implied density.
/'/' The District's report dated ~r,~e I'7, ~i~ts still current for this pro~ect.
The District does not object to the proposed minor change.
The attached co~nents apply.
Very truly yours,
CO:
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
Chief Engineer
JOHN H. KASHUBA
Senior Civil Engineer
DATE: fer~ . ;?, r~r.
m~ I,,, L"Z~WARDS
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
till Id&llKl'f ~
P. O. BOX loll
l~ONsr ('~14) 'YIT-OOQB
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrat/ve Center
R/verside, California 92501
Attentionz Specific Plan
Kathy Gifford
Ladies and Gentlemen= Rez Tract 23103
This is a proposal to divide about 29 acres in the Temecula
Valley area. The site is along the west side of Butterfield
Stage'Road. This tract is within Specific Plan 199 for which
the drainage plan has been approved-
Our review indicates that the area consists of well defined
ridges and natural watercourses that traverse the property from
the east to the v~st- The applicant proposes to accept these
offsite flows across Butterfield Stage Road with culverts and
daylight the flows in their natural paths on the property.
Onsite flows would be drained with streets.
Following are the District's recommendations=
1. This tract is located within the limits of the Murrieta
Creek/Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan for which
drainage fees have been adopted by the Board. Drainage
fees shall be paid as set forth under the provisions of
the 'Rules and Regulations for Administration of Area
Drainage Plans', amended February 16, 1988=
a. 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
fine/parcel map is waived, drainage fees shall be
paid as a condition of the waiver prior to recording
a certificate of compliance evidencing the waiver of
tim parcel map: or
A~ t~e option of the land divider, upon filing a re-
qnired iffidavit requesting ale ferment of the payment
ol Ices, the drainage fees may be paid to the Build-
ing Director at the time of issuance of a grading
pern~t or building permit for each approved parcel,
whichever may be first obtained after the recording
oE the subdivision final map or parcel map= provided
lx~wever, this option to defer the fees may not be
exercised for any parcel where grading or structures
Riverside County
planning Department
Rec Tract 23103
- 2 -
June 17, 1988
have been .initiated on the parcel within t~e prior 3
year period, or permits for either activity have been
issued on that parcel which remain active-
2- A~equate inlets end outlets should be provided to the
proposed culverts under Butter field Stage Road- The ap-
propriate capacity of the culverts should be provided-
3- Erosion protection should be provided along all the fill
slopes which are exposed to the potential erosion
hazards ·
4. Onsite 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, 'Drainage easements shall be kept free
of buildings and obstructions'-
5- Offsite drain;age facilities should be located within
publicly dedicated drainage easements obtained from the
affected property owners- The documents should be re-
corded and a copy submitted to the District prior to
recordation of the final map-
6- All lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent street
or an adequate outlet-
The 10 year storm flow should be contained within the
curb and the 100 year storm flow should be contained
within the street right of way- When either of these
criteria is exceeded, additional drainage facilities
should be installed·
8- Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be
designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows.
Additional emergency escape should also be provided-
9- The property's street and lot grading should be designed
in a manner that perpetuates the existing natural
drainage patterns with respect to tributary drainage
area, outlet points and outlet conditions, otherwise, a
drainage easement should be obtained from the affected
property owners for the release of concentrated or di-
verted storm flows- A copy of the recorded drainage
easement should be submitted to the District for review
prior to the recordation of the final map.
Riverside County
planning Department
Re: Trec~ 23103
June 17; 1988
should be implemented
immediately fo downs~-ream properties or
of debris on'co
facilities *
diverted ~rom one ~atershed to another-
the construction of temporary drainage facilities or
construction and grading-
offsiteent lens0 grading plans and final
A copy of the improvem. P drolo~ic and h~raul. ic cal-
fion of the final map.
prior ~ issuance of grading permits.
0uestions concerning this matter may be referred to Robert Chia:
of th~s office at 714/787-2333- ·
CO**
ConununitY Services
Engineer ing, Inc ·
Very ~ruly yours,
KENNETH L- EDWARDS
RC:sef
J
R 335-14f~-S0
~une ?, 298B
Riverside County Planning Departmmnt
4080 LemOn Street, 9t~ Floor
Riverside, CA 92502
Attention: Mr. Rcm Goldman:
Reference: Tentative Tract No. 23103 - Lot 18
Variance for Lot Depth to Width Ratio
Dear Mr. Goldman:
We are requesting a variance fran the County of Riverside in regard to
Ordinance 460, Section =.8.C. for Lot 18 of Tentative Tract No. 23103, Amend
Map No. 1. This section requires that the lot del~-h shall not exceed 2 1/2
times the lot width.
Upon reviewing the proposed tentative, the County of Riverside Road Department
has stated that no vehicUlar access will be allowed from private property onto
Butterfield Stage Road. We can only provide access to the area previously
known as Lot 19 by combining Lots 18 and 19. This single lot has its access
on/y frc~ Street 'C'.
By not ConOining these two lo~s, the area previously kno~m as Lot 19 becomes
inaccessable and virtually land locked. Based on these conditions and
requirements, we therefore, request a variance fran aforementioned section of
Ordinance 460.
Thank you for your help in expediting this matter.
Very truly yours,
CX~TY ENGINEERING XNC.
BU/em
co: RiCk Niec, Marlborough Development
Bob Brink, Turrini and Brink, Planning Consultants
e
OFFICE OF ROAD COMMISSIONER & COUNTY SURVEYOR
July 22, 1988
Riverside County Planning Cmntssion
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA92501
Tract Map Z3103.- Amend
Schedule A - Team SP
Ladies and Gentlemen:
With respect to the conditions of approval for the referenced tentative land
division map, the Road Department recommends that the landdivider provide the
following street improvemnt plans and/or road dedications in accordance with
Ordinance 460 and Riverside. County Road Improvement Standards (Ordinance 461).
It is -understood that the tentative mp correctly shows acceptable centerline
profiles, all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses with
appropriate Q's, and that their omission or unacceptabilttY may require the map
to be resubmitted for further consideration. These Ordinances and the following
conditions are essential parts and a requirement occurring in ONE is as binding
as though occurring in all. They are intended to be complementary and tn--
describe the conditions for a complete design of the improvement. All question.
regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the R~ad
Commissioner'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
existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement or by
both. All drainage easements shall be shom on the final map
and noted as follows: 'Drainage Easement - no building,
obstructions, or encroachments by land fills are allowed". The
protection shall be as approved by the Road Department.
2. The landdivider Shall accept and properly dispose of all offsite
drainage flowing onto or through the site. Xn the event the
Road Commissioner permits the use of streets for drainage
purposes, the provisions of Article XI of Ordinance No. 460
will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street
capacity or the use of streets be prohibited for drainage
purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate drainage
facilities as approved by the Road Department.
Tract .Map 23~03- Amend
July 22, 1988
...Page 2
3, IqajJor drainage is tnvolved on this landdivision and tt, s resolution
shall be as approved by the Road Department,
4. Butterfield Stage Road (Including RCWD stte) shai1 be improved
within the dedicated .right of way in accordance with County Standard
No, 100, (43'/55').
5. "C" Street shall be improved wtt, hin the dedicated right of way in
accordance with County Standard No, 103, Section A, (44'/66'),
6. "B' and 'S" Streets shall be improved within the dedicated right
of way in accordance with County Standard No. 104, Section A. (40'/
60').
7. The landdivider will provide a left turn lane on Butterfield Stage
Road at the intersection with 'C' and 'S' Streets as approved by
the Road Department.
'B. The landdivider shall provide utility clearance from Ranch, Calif.
Water District prior to the recordation of the final map.
The maximum centerline gradient shall not exceed 15%.
The minimum centerline radii shall be 300' or as approved by the
Road Department.
The minimum lot frontages along the cul-de-sacs and knuckles shall
be 35 feet or as approved by the Road Commissioner.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable Riverside County
Standards.
When blockwalls are required to be constructed on top of slope, a
debris retent'ion wall shall be constructed at the street right of
way line to prevent silting of sidewalks as approved by the Road
Commissioner.
· lract Hap 23103 - Amend
,)u~y 22, 1988
Page :~
The minis garage setback shall be 30 feet measured from the face
of curb. ,
15. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed throughout the landdivision
In accordance with County Standard No. 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk).
16. Prior to the recordErton of the final map, the developer shall
deposit with the Riverside County Road DeparUnen~, a cash sum of
$150.00 per lot'as mitigation for traffic signal impacts. Should
the developer choose to defer the time of pa3naent, he may enter into
a written agreement with the County deferring said payment to the
time of issuance of a building pemtt.
17. Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending
a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries at a grade and
alignment as approved by the Riverside County Road Comissioner-
Completion of road improvements does not imply acceptance for
maintenance by County.
i8. ~ectrical and comnuntcations trenches shall be provided in
accordance with Ordinance 461, Standard 817.
19. Aspbaltic 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 gall.on per square yard. Asphalt
emulsion shall conform to Sections 37, 39 and 94 of the State
Standard Specifications-
2D. Standard cul-de-sacs and off-set cul-de-sacs shall be constructed
throughout the landdivision.
21. Corner cutbacks in conformante with County Standard No. BO5 shall
be shown on the final rap and offered for dedication.
ZZo Lot access shall be restricted on Butterfield Stage Road and so
noted on the final map.
23. Landdivisions creating cut or fill slopes adjacent to the streets
shall provide erosion control, sight distance control and slope
easements as approved by the Road Department.
I
24. All centerline intersections shall be at 90° with a minimum 50
tangent measured from flow 1 ine.
~ract Hap 23103 - Amend
. ,~u~Y 22, 1988
Page 4
·
25. The street design and improvement concept of this proSect shall be
coordinated with TR 23100, TR 23101 and SP 199.
26. Street lighting shall be required in accordance with Ordinance 460
and 461 throughout the subdivision. The County Service Area (CSA)
Administrator determines whether this proposal qualifies under an
existing assessment district or not. Zf not, the land owner shall
file an application with LAFCO for annexation into or creation of
a "Lighting Assessment District" tn accordance with Governmental
Code Section 56000.
27. All private and public entrances and/or intersections opposite this
proSect shall be coordinated with this proSect and shown on the
street improvement plans.
28. A striping plan is required for Butterfield Stage Road. Traffic
signing and striping shall be done by County forces with all
incurred costs borne by the applicant.
29. The landdivider shalt comply with this deparlunent's recommendations
for SP 199 as outlined in our letter dated June 2, 1988.
Very truly yours,
Gus Hughes
Road Division Engineer
GH:lh
IN COOPEILATION WITH THE
CJdJFOIINIA DEPAFTTMENT OF FORESTI~Y
PAY HEBILsaRD
File ClllEF
~--20-18
Ea~lineerinl CXric¢
Lame~ Arm. &disc l!
I~lvenkic. CA 9250 I
717.6606
TEAH l, KATHY GIFFO~D
23103
Wltb respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division,
the Fire Department recmende the foliostuB fire protection measures be provided
In accordance vlth Xiverstde County Ordinances end/or recognized flre protection
standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
Schedule ~C" fire protection approved standard fire ~ydrants, (6"x~'xg|') located
one at each street intersection and spaced no more than 660 feet apart in any
direction, vith no portion of any lot frontage more than 330 feet from's hydrant.
l~lnimum fire flo~ shall be 500 CPM for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the ~
Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to fire hydrant types, locacit
and spacing, and, the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall
be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company
~ich the foliovine certification: 'I certify chat the design of the water system
is in accordance vith the requirements prescribed by the Kiverside County Fire
Dept.~
The required vster system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted
by the appropriate vater agency prior to any combustible building material being
placed on an individual lot.
~ITIGATIOH FEES
Prior to the recordscion of the final map, the developer shall deposit ~ith
the R~verside County Fire Department s cash sum of $~00.00 per lot/unit as mitigstioc
for fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time
of payment, he may enter into a ~ritten agreement with the County deferring
said payment to the t~ne of issuance of a building permit.
All questions regarding the meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the
Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYI4~HD R. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
By
George Tacum, Deputy Fire Ratshal
RIVERSZDECOUKvTY PLAI~ING DEPT.
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside. CA 92502
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
mesLll
MIll
I!
ll.,lla
kill ILlIll
lOtel. e.,&lle let.
WILl IPllwll
lieriM "'lff
Isflllti,, ~e.i MIll
ii;le teND~m I'I"`tTI
lUllIll
J
Attn: Kathy Girford
RE; Tract Map 23103; Being a portion of the Rancho Temecula
granted by the government of the United States of America to
Luis Vignes by patent dated January 18, 1860. and recorded
2n the Office of the County Recorder of San DIego County,
California xn Book 1 of patents at Page 37 and a portion of
the Ranthe Pauba Government of the United States of America
to LuZs Vignes by patent dated January 19. 1860 and recorded
2n the office of the San DIego County Recorder ~n book I at
Page 45.
(19 Lots)
Gentlemen:
The Department of Public Health has reviewed Tentative Map
He. 23103 and recommends that:
A water system shall be installed according to
plans and specification as approved by the water
company and the Health Department- Permanent
prXndts of the plans of the water system shall
be submitted in triplicate, with a minimum scale
not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along with
the original drawing to the County Surveyor- The
prints shall show the internal pipe diameter,
location of valves and fire hydrants; pipe and
3oXnt specifications, and the size of the main
at the 3unction of the new system to the
existing system- The plans shall comply in
all respects with Div. 5, Part Z, Chapter 7 of
the California Health and Safety Code, California
Administrative Code, Title 22, Chapter 16, and Genera]
Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the
State of California. when applicable.
Riverside COUnty Planning Dept.
P&~e Tvo
At&n: Kathy Gifford
April
The plans shall be signed by · registered endSneer and
v&ter company vith the/o~lovZng cert~fxc·t;on:
certify that the design of the water system 1~ Tract
Nap 23103 is in accordance with the v·ter systen,
expansion plans of the Rancho California Water Dxstr~ct
and that the water service,storage and dlstrZbution
system viI1 be adequate to provide rarer service to
such tract. This certification does not constitute
guarantee that it viI1 supply v·ter to such tract at
any speclfic quantities, flovs or pressures for fire
protection or any other purpose". This certification
shall be signed by · responsible official of the rarer
to the ~E~!~!_f~_ib!_record~!~-~f-!~!-f
Th~s Department has · statement from the Rancho
Water D~str~ct a~reeing to serve demestic rarer to each and
every lot ~n the subdivision on demand providing
satisfactory f~n·nciil ·rrangements are completed v~th the
subdivider. It v~ll be necessary for the financial
arrangements to be made prior to the recordat~on of the
f~nal map.
Th~s ~epartment has a statement from the Eastern
~ater D~str~ct agree~n~ to allow the subd~vislon sewage
system to be connected to the sewers of the D~strjct. The
sewer system shall be installed accordxn.~ to plans and
spec~f~catxons as approved by the District, the County
Surveyor and the Health ~epartment. Permanent prxnts of the
plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate,
alon~ w~th the original dravxng, to the County Surveyor. The
prxnts shall show the internal p~pe d~ameter, location of
manholes, complete profiles, p~pe and 3oxnt specifications
and the size of the severs at the 3unction of the new system
to the existin9 system. A single plat ind~catin9 locatxon
of sever lXnes and rarer lines shall be · portion of the
sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a
registered engineer and the sever district v~th the
folioring certification: 'I certify that the design of the
sever system in Tract Nap 23103 is in accordance vith the
sever system expansion plans of the Eastern Hunicxpal Water
District and that the vaste disposal system is adequate at
th;s time to treat the anticipated vastes from the proposed
tract.' _Th_!_~!O!_~!~_~!_!~eX~!d_~9 the Coun~X
Riverside County Plann~n~ Dept.
Page Three
ATT~: Kathy G~fford
April 18. 1988
Surve~2r°2' ~ftlce to review tt least tvo veekx l~r~o~ to th~
It vail be necessary for financial arrangements to be made
prior to the recordatxon of the f~nal map.
Environmental Health Services
SM:tac
).
Board of Dirsctars:
l~cbsrd D. Steffey
president
Jsa~s A- Dgby
St. V~ pmiz~t
Rslpb Dslly
DouS KulberS
Joa A. l~uudiu
Jdfrey L. Minkkr
T.C.P.o~
Officers:
Sun T. MiI~
Gener~
Phil~ip L. Forbes
Dar~wr of Finsn{~
~reasur~
Norrosa L- Thorns
D~ ~
~omu R. M~st~
D~mr ~ ~U~s
Bgb~ J- ~
D~ of A~
D~ ~
Ruun ud ~
anne ~6, 2.988
Subject: Water Availability
Reference: Vesting Tract 23~03
Gentlemen:-
please be advised that the above-referenced
would be available upon completion of financial
arrangements between RCWD and ~he prope~Y o~er-
Water availability vould be con=ingent upon the
prope~Y owner signing an Agency Agreemen= which
assigns wa=er management rights, if any, to R~D-
If R~D can be of luther se~ice to you, ple, ~
contact this office,
Very truly yours,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Senga P- DohertY
Engineering Services Representative
FO12/jkw169f
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTR]
2rn~ DIAZ ROAD · POST OFFICE BOX 174 · TEMECULA, CA 92390-0174 · (714) 6764101 · FAX (714~ e
,aZO/O/eg
Eastern Municipal Wat,r Di, rict
April 15, 1988
Riverside County Planntng I:)epat~ment
4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor
Riverside, California 92501
w--G
PLA~;-*.~!NG DE.?,~r.T~:.:'-i;'i
SUBJECT: YESTZNG TRACT 23103 (Gtfford)
The District ts responding to your request for conm~ents on the subject
project(S) relative to the provision of water and sewer service. The items
checked below apply to this project review.
The subject pro~ect:
Zs not within EHW0's:
X water service area
sewer service area
Must be annexed to this District's Improvement District No. in or~er
to be eligible to receive domestic water/sanitary sewer service.
Will be required to construct the following facilities:
a.) Water Service
b.) Sewer Service Coments were submitted to Riverside Co. (Feb.,
15, 1988) regarding SP 199 - Am tl. This is to reiterate those comments that
sewers are to be gravity, regionally sized and no sewers will be allowed on
private lands, or along lot lines. They are to be in streets.
?4~n Sen Jetrote Stn. et · Point Oillee Box 858 · Hornet. CilLIornie 92343 · Telephone (l)41 925-1676
ATTACtlIV~,NT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
FROM
MARCH 16, 1992
S\$TAFFRPT~23103VTM.CC 13
pLANNIN~ COMMISSION MINUTFS
MARCH 16.1992
11.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 23103, SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME
11.1 Prooosal for second.extension of time for an 18 lot residential subdivision on
?9.2 acres. SDecifi~ Plan No. 199. Located on the west side of Butterfield
Stage Road. northerly of Rancho California Road.
Planner Mark Rhoades summarized the staff report.
Chairman Hoagland opened the public hearing at 10:15 P.M.
Brian Esgate, Community Engineering, 5225 Canyon Crest Drive, Riverside,
representing Marlborough Development Corporation, requested Condition No.
4 be amended to read "1992" and advised that regarding Condition No. 12, the
vertical design of Butterfield Stage Road has been approved by the City Council
as of November 12, 1991 and the applicant has submitted plans based on that
alignment.
John Moramarco, 32740 Rancho California Road, Temecula, representing
Callaway Vineyard and Winery, reiterated that potential property owners should
be advised of the possible implementation of wind machines in the future and
Callaway Vineyard and Winery will be asking the City and the developer to pay
for wind machines if there is frost damage to the vineyard.
Dorian Johnson, Marlborough Development Corporation, advised that the
development has attempted to keep the natural air flow passages open and the
disclosure issue is a part of the overall sales package of Chardonnay Hills.
Community Service Planner Gary King advised that staff would like Condition
No. 7 revised to require an offer of dedication for an easement.
It was moved by Commissioner Fahey, seconded by Commissioner Blair to
close the public hearing at 10:25 P.M. and Adoot Resolution No. 92-(next)
recommending approval of the Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 23103 subject to the Conditions of Approval, correcting the
date on Condition No. 4 and revising Condition No. 7 to the satisfaction of staff
and the applicant, and based on the findings contained in the staff report. The
motion was carried unanimously.
PCMIN3/16~92
3~20~92
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PIANNING :COMMIgSION STAFF I~EPORT
FROM
MARCH 16, 1992
-~STAFFRIs~2310'~VTM-CC 14
Case No.:
RECOMMENDATION:
STAFF REPORT
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
March 16, 1992
Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative TraCt Map No. 23103
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
ADOPT Resolution 92-,_ recommending approval of the Second
Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval and based on the
Findings contained in the Staff Report
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
Marlborough Development Corporation
Marlborough Development Corporation
PROPOSAL:
Second Extension of Time for an 18 lot residential subdivision on
29.2 acres.
LOCATION:
West of Butterfield Stage Road between La Serena Way and
Rancho California Road.
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
Specific Plan No. 199 (Margarita Village)
North:
South:
East:
West:
R-T (Mobile Home Subdivision and Mobile Home
Park)
SP (Specific Plan No. 199, Margarita Village)
A-1-10 (Light Agriculture 10 Acres Minimum)
SP (Specific Plan No. 199, Margarita Village)
Not requested.
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant (Rough Graded)
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Single Family Residential
Agriculture
Single-Family Residential
S~$TAFFRPT~3103-2.VTM
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Total Acreage:
Total Lots Proposed:
Proposed Density:
Proposed Minimum Lot Size:
29.2 acres
18 lots
0.6 DU/AC
1.0 acre
BACKGROUND
Vesting Tentative Tract Map N0. 23103 was recommended for approval on September 28,
1988 by the Riverside County Planning Commission in conjunction with Tract Nos. 23100
Amended No. 1,23101, and 23102 Amended No. 1, All four tracts implement Village B of
the Margarita Village Specific Plan (SP 199 Amended. No. 1 ) which was previously approved
by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on September 13, 1988. Subsequently all four
tracts {231 O0 Amended No. 1,23101, 23102, and 23103 Amended No. 1 ) were approved
by the County Board of Supervisors on November 8, 1988. The First Extension of Time for
Tentative Tract 23103 was approv. ed by the City Council on June 11, 1991.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No, 23103 is a proposal to subdivide approximately 29.2 acres
into 18 single family residential tots averaging approXimately 51,400 square feet (1.18 acre)
with a minimum lot size of one acre. The subject site is located west of Butterfield Stage
Road between La Serene Way and Rancho California Road.
ANALYSIS:
Desion Considerations
The proposed subdivision has been designed in accordance with the standards of Ordinance
Nos. 348. 460 and Specific Plan No. 199. The main access to the project is Butterfield Stage
Road to the east.
Density
The proposed subdivision {Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103) is consistent with the
Density Designation for Specific Plan No. 199 of .4-2 DUIAC. The actual proposed
subdivision density is 0.6 DU/AC. The density of the proposed subdivision reflects a
transition between the agricultural use to the east, and the higher density residential to the
west.
Gradino
The subject site has been rough graded. The proposed subdivision entails approximately
95,000 cubic yards of raw cut and approximately 210,000 cubic yards of raw fill which will
be imported from Tract 23100. The finished grading will be consistent with adjacent existing
residential developments.
S%STAFI:NwT~3103-2.V'TM 2
ZONING, FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY:
The proposed density of 0.6 DUIAC is consistent with the Southwest Area Community Plan
designation Of and Specific Ran No. 199 {Margarita Village). In addition, Staff finds it
probable that this project will be consistent with the new General Plan when it is adopted.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
Environmental Assessments have been prepared on all four tracts (23100 Amended No. 1,
23101,23102, 23103 Amended.. No. 1 ). Environmental impacts were assessed in EI R No.
202 prepared for the Margarita Village Specific Plan. Additional environmental evaluations
have been provided by the reports prepared for the specific plan amendment and the
acoustical studies prepared for three tracts. No significant environmental impacts have been
found. Therefore, the existing environmental determination is still applicable.
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
project site's existing Specific Plan No. 199 (Low Density Family Housing) land use
designation.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed lend 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
conformRnce 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. 23103 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
S%STAFFRFT~3103-2. V'TM 3
10.
'provide for citing of proposed development in terms of landscaping and internal traffic
circulation,
The proposal will not have an adverse effect pn 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 (Specific Plan No, 199), and also consistent with the adopted Southwest
Area Community Ran (SWAP) designation of Specific Plan·
The project as designed end conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in EIR No, 202 and the Negative Declaration adopted by
the County 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 an
independent access point from Butterfield Stage Road which has 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 prop·sad 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 these applications and her·in incorporated by reference, due to the
fact that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, Environmental
Assessment, and Conditions of Approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Department Staff recommends that the Planning
Commission:
vgw
ADOPT Resolution 92- recommending approval of the
Second Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23103 subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval, based on the findings contained in the Staff
Report.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
ReSolution - page 5
Conditions of Approval - page 11
Staff Report, First Extension of Time - page 15
Exhibits - page 16
A. Vicinity Map
B. SWAP Map
C, Zoning Map
D. Site Plan
Village "B" concept- page 17
S%$TAF-FIFT~3103-2 .V'TM
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
S~STAFFIFT~3103-2 .V'TM ~
RESOLUTION NO. 92-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF SECOND
EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23103
TO SUBDIVIDE A 29.2 ACRE 'PARCEL INTO 18 SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED WEST OF BUTTERFIELD STAGE
ROAD BETWEEN LA SERENA WAY AND RANCHO CALIFORNIA
ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSORS'S PARCEL NO. 923-210-
010.
WHEREAS, Marlborough Development, filed the Second Extension of Time for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use,
Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Extension of Time application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, said Vesting Tentative Tract Map application was approved by the
Riverside county Board of Supervisors on September 28, 1988 at which time interested
parties had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition,
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the First Extension of Time on June 11,
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
recommend approval of said Second Extension of Time;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. 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:
S%.STAFFIFT~3103-2. V'rM 6
(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 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 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 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 Third Extension of Time
for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 proposed will be
consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time,
'because the project is consistent with the existing SWAP and
Zoning Designations.
(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, because the
project is similar in use and intensity to adjacent development.
{3)
The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances, because it is
consistent with the development standards of Ordinance No.
348, which conforms with State Laws.
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,
S%STAm3103-2.VTM 7
That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general ~and specific plans,
C$
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 Planning Commission in recommending approval of the Second Extension of Time
for the proposed 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 amenaries 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 project sito's existing Specific Plan No. 199 (Low Density Family
Housing) land use designation.
S%,STAFFIFI'~3103-2 .V'TM 8
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 wifi 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. 23103 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 citing 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 (Specific Plan No. 199), and also consistent
with the adopted Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP) designation of
Specific Plan.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or
natural environment as determined in EIR No. 202 and the Negative Declaration
adopted by the County 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 an independent access point from Butterfield Stage Road which has
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 these applications and herein incorporated by
reference, due to the fact that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report,
Exhibits, Environmental Assessment, and Conditions of Approval.
As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Second Extension of Time for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
S%STAFF!qPT~3103-2.VTM 9
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
Potential Environmental Impacts were addressed by the County of Riverside for the proposed
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Nod 23103. The previous adopted Environmental Impact Report
therefore, still applies to this site.
SECTION 3~ Condtljons.
That the Planning Commission Of the City of Ternecula recommending approval of Second
Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 to subdivide a 29.2 acre parcel into 18
single family residential lots located west of Butterfield Stage Road between La Serene Way
and Rancho California Road and known as Assessors's Parcel No. 923-210-010.
A. Attachment 3, attached herato.
SECTION 4.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of March, 1992.
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 16th day of
March, 1992 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
$%STAFFIMYT~a103'2,VTM 10
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
STAFF REPORT - FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME
S~STAFFRIwT~23103*2.V'TM 15
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT
City Council
City Manager
June 11, 1991
First Extension of Time - Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103
PREPARED BY:
City Clerk June Greek
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file report
BACKGROUND: The attached staff report was prepared for the meeting of
May 28, 1991 and continued by the City Council to this date.
JSG
APPROVAL
CITY MANAGER ~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF IEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council I City Manager
Planning Department
May 28, 1991
First Extension of Time
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103
PREPARED BY:
R ECOMMEN DAT I ON:
Richard Ayala
ADOPT Resolution 91- approving the First Extension of
Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 subject to
the attached Conditions of Approval, based on the
findings contained in the Staff Report.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
Marlborough Development Corporation
Marlborough Development Corporation
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 is a proposal
to subdivide approximately 29.2 acres into 18 single
family residential lots averaging approximately
51 ,1~00 square feet (1.18 acre) with a minimum lot
size of one acre. The subject site is located west of
Butterfield Stage Road between La 5arena Way and
Rancho California Road.
BACKGROUND:
First Extension of Time application for Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 was submitted to the
City on October 22. 1990. On April 1, 1991, it was
presented to the City of Temecula Planning
commission and was approved by a ~-0 vote based on
the analysis and findings contained in the Staff
Report and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
A: VTM23103. CC
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
RA:ks
Attachments:
Planninc~ Deloartment Staff recommends that the City
Council:
ADOPT Resolution 91- approvin9 the First-~
Extension of Time for ~'~tin9 Tentative Trac~
Map No. 23103 subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval, based on the
findings contained in the Staff Report;
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Plannin9 commission Staff Report
~ dated April 1, 1991 )
Development Fee Checklist
Planning Commission Minutes
,(dated April 1, 1991}
A: VTM23103. CC
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY-OF TEME~ APPROVING THE FIR,Vr
EXTENSION ,OF TIME FOR VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 23103 A 18 LOT RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISION OF 29.2 ACRES LOCATED WEST OF
BUI-I'EKFIELD STAGE ROAD BETWEEN LA
SERENA WAY AND RANClIO CALIFORNIA ROAD
AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 923-
210-010
WHEREAS, Marlborough Development 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 hw;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tune Extension on April 15,
1991, at which time interested persons had an opporumity to testify either in support or
opposition;
WHEREAS, as the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Time Extension.
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Time
Extension on May 28, 1991, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either
in support or opposition to said Time Extension; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff
Report regarding the Time Extension;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIl, OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES IH:'-~;OLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. That the Temecula City Council here, by makes the following
findings:
A. 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
182 -1-
following requirements ar~ met:
1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
plan.
2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
z. There is a rmsonable probability that the Time Extension proposed will
be consisumt with the general plan propo~ being considemi or studied or which will be studied
within a reasonable time.
b. 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.
c. The: proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state hw and loc~ ordinances.
B. The Riverside Counly General Plan, as mended by the Southwest Area Community
Plan, (hen:inafter "SWAP') was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as the General
Plan for the southwest portion dRiverside 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.
C. The proposed Time Extension is consistent with the SWAP and meets the..,
requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Cede, w wit:
plan.
1. The City is proceeding in a timely fashion with a prepmarion of the general
2. The City Council finds, in approving trrojects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of buil~ding permits, pursuant to this rifle, each of the following:
a. Ther~ 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.
b. Then: is little or no pwbability of substantial detriment to or
interfen:nee with the fumn: adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan.
c. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requin:ments of state law and :local ordinances.
3/itsa~s 182 -2-
D. 1. Pursuant to Section 18.30(c), no Time Extension may be approved unless the
following findings can be made:
a. The proposed use must conform to all the G-enenl Plan requirements
and with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances.
b. The prol~osn~ subdivision does not affect the general healS, safety, and
welfare of the public.
2. The City Council, in approving the proposed Time Extension, makes the
/oilowing findings, to wit:
a. There is a resv~x,s, ble probobility that this project will be consistent with
the City' s future General Plan, ~ which will be complet~ in a r~asonable 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 amenides commensurate with
existing and anticipated residential development standards.
b. 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 conforrnance with existing and
anticipated land use and design guidelines standards.
c. 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 project site's existing Specific Plan No. 199 (Low Density Family Housing) land use
designation.
d. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of
the size and shape of the lot configuraxion, circulation patmrs, access, and density, due to the
fact; adequate area is provided for all proposed rexidenti~! structures; landscaping is provided
along the project's public and private frontages; and the internal circulation plan should not
create u'affic 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 eliminaxe potential adverse impacts of the project.
f. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 is compatible with sin'rounding
land uses. The harmony in scale, bulk, height, density and coverage creat~ a compatible
physical relationship with adjoining properties, due to th~ 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.
3/F,.m 112 -3-
2- 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 proI~sed project is conSistent with the current zoning of the subject site ~,.
(Specific Plan No. 199), and also consistent with the adopted Southwest Area Community Plan ~
(SWAP) designation of Specific P an.
h. The pWjea as dei,ened and conditioned will not adversely affect the
built or natural environment as determined in the Negative Declaration adopted by the County
for the project, duc to the fact that impact min'Eation is realized by conformancc with the
project's Conditions of Approval
i. The project has acceptable access to a dedicated right-of-way which is
open to, and useable by, vehicular wiffic, due xo the fact that the project currently proposes an
independent access point from Bauerfield StaZe Road which has been determined to be adequate
by the City Engineer.
j. The Desi2n of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the
rcsulting street layout are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access through
or use of the pmpc, ty within the proposed projects, due to the fact that this is clearly represented
in the site plan and the project !analysis.
k. That.said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and
environmental documents, associated with these applicants and herein incorporated by reference,
due to the fact they are referenced in the artached Staff Report, Exhibits, Environmental
Assessments, and Conditions of Approval.
E. 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 prolix ty.
SECTION 2. ConditioVs. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves the
First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract MAP 23103 for A 18 lot residential
subdivision of 29.2 acres located west of Butterfield Stage Road between La Screna Way and
Rancho California Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 923-210-010 subjcct to the '
following conditions:
A. Attachment H, attached hereto.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
3/Rssoa 112 ~=
PASSED, .~d'PROVED AaND ADOPTED this llth day of June, 1991.
ATFF~T:
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SE~L]
STATE OF CALrFORNIA)
COUNTY.OF RIVERSIDE)SS
C1TY OF TEMECULA )
I I-r!:.l~h'RY 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 1 lth day of June,
1991 by the following vote of the Council:
CO~CILMEMBERS:
NOES:
CO~CILMEMBERS:
CO~CILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
~ 3/]t,..o. 11'2 -5-
ATTACHMENT i I I
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 15, 1991
Case No.:
First Extension of Time for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103
Prepared By: Richard Ayala
Recommendation:
ADOPT Resolution 91-
recommending approval of the
First Extension of Time for
Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23103 subject to the
attached Conditions of Approval,
based on the Findings contained
in the Staff Report
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTINC ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
Marlborough Development Corporation
Marlborough Development Corporation
First Extension of Time
West of Butterfield Stage Road between La Serene
Way and Rancho California Road.
Specific Plan No. 199 {Margarita Village}
North: R-T ( Mobile Home SUbdivision
and Mobile Home Park}
South: SP (Specific Plan No. 199,
Margarita Village )
East: A-1-10 ( Light Agriculture 10
Acres Minimum )
West: SP (Specific Plan No. 199.
Margarita Village )
Not requested.
Vaunt (Rough Graded)
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ANALYSIS:
North: Vacant
South: Single Family Residential
East: Agriculture
West: Vacant
Total Acreage:
Total Lots Proposed:
Propose Density:
Proposed Minimum Lot Size:
29.2 acres
18 lots
0.6 DU/AC
1.0 acre
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 was
recommended for approval on September 28.1988 by
the Riverside County Planning Commission in
conjunction with Tract Nos. 23100 Amd. No. 1;
23101; and 23102 Amd. No. 1. All four tracts
implement Village B of the Margarita Village Specific
Plan iSP 199 Amd. No. 1) which was previously
approved by the Board of Supervisors on September
13, '988. Subsequently all four tram {23100 Amd.
1, 23101, 23102, and 23103 Amd. 1) were approved
by the County Board of Supervisors on November 8,
1988,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 is a proposal
to subdivide approximately 29.2 acres into 18 single
family residential lots averaging al~proximatety
51,1~00 square feet {1.18 acre) with a minimum lot
size of one acre. The subject site is located west of
Butterfield Stage Road between La Serena Way and
Rancho California Road.
Desjan Considerations
The proposed subdivision has been designed in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance Nos,
3~8, ~60 and Specific Plan No. 199. The main access
to the project is Butterfield Stage Road. The
project has been designed to provide increased land
use and circulation efficiency.
Density
The proposed subdivision ( Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23103) is consistent with the Density
Designation for Specific Plan No. 199 of .~-2
DU/AC. The actual proposed subdivision density is
0.6 DU/AC.
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
2
Gr'adin~l
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMI NAT ION:
FINDINGS:
The subject site has been partially rough gradr"~
and yet needs to be fine graded. The propose~'
subdivision will entail approximately 95,000 cubic
yards of raw cut and approximately 210,000 cubic
yards of raw fill which will be imported from Tract
23100, The finished grading will be consistent with
adjacent existing residential developments.
The proposed density of 0.6 DU/AC is consistent
with the Southwest Area Community Plan and
Specific Plan No. 199 |Margarita Village)· In
addition, Staff finds it probable that this project
will be consistent with the new General Plan when it
is adopted.
Environmental Assessments have been prepared on
all four tram (23100 Amd. No. 1, 23101, 23102,
23103 Amd. No. 1). Environmental impacts were
assessed in EIR No. 107 and EIR No. 202 prepared
for the Rancho Village Specific Plan and the
Margarita Village Specific Plan. Additional
environmental evaluations have been provided by
the reports prepared for the specific plan
amendment and the acoustical studies prepared fo_~
three tram. No significant environmental irapat
have been found. Therefore, Staff is not
requesting any further environmental
determination.
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.
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 ptan, due to the fact
that the project is in conformante with
STAFFR PT\VTM23103
ST A FF R PT\ VTM23103
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
project site's existing Specific Plan No. 199
(Low Density Family Housing) land use
designation.
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. 23103 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
ci rcu letion.
The proposal will not have an adverse affect
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
{Specific Plan No. 199), and also consistent
with the adopted Southwest Area Community
Plan {SWAP) designation of Specific Ran.
The project as designed and conditioned wi
not adversely' affect the built or nature.
environment as determined in the Negative
Declaration adopted by the County for the
project, due to the fact that impact mitigation
is realized Ion/conformance with the project's
Conditions of Approval.
10.
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 an
independent access point from Butterfield
Stage Road which has 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.
11.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits and environmental documen
associated with these applicants and her ~
incorporated by reference. due to the fact
that they are referenced in the attached Staff
Report, Exhibits, Environmental Assessment,
and Conditions of Approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
RA: ks
Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution 91 - . recommending
approval of the First Extension of Time for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103
subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval, based on the findings contained in
the Staff Report.
Attachments:
Resolution 91-
Conditions of Approval
Exhibits
A. Site Plan
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
NO. 23103. TO SUBDIVIDE A 29,2 ACRE PARCEL INTO 18
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS LOCATED WEST OF
BUTTERFIELD STAGE ROAD BETWEEN LA SERENA WAY
AND RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR~S PARCEL NO. 923-Z10-010.
WHEREAS, Marlborough Development Corporation filed a Extension of
Time in ~ccordanc4 with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference:
WHEREAS, said' Extension of Tim application was pr~ocessed in the time
and manner prescribed by State and local law:
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Tract
Map on April 15, 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 Extension of Time;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findin;s. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings:
A. 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:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The planning agency finds, in approving projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
permits, each of the following:
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
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 b
studied within a reasonable time.
Ib)
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.
The proposed use or action complied with all
other applicable requirements of state law and
local ordinances.
B. 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 pol-tion 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.
C. The proposed Extension of Time is consistent with the
SWAP and meets the requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the
Government Code, to wit:
(1) The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with
preparation of the general plan.
{2) The Planning Commission finds, in recommending
approval of projects and taking other actions, including
the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title,
each of the following:
There is reasonable probability that First
Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 23103 proposed will be consistent
with the general . plan proposal being
considered or studied or which will be
studied within a reasonable time.
Ib)
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.
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
The proposed use or action complies with all
other applicable requirements of state taw and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
L~60, no subdivision or extension of time may be approved unless the
following findings are made:
a) That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
b) That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
c) That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
d) That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitsbte for the proposed density
of the development.
e)
That the design of the proposed tend division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
f)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
g)
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements wilt not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at
large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed tend division.
A tend 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.
(2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval
of the proposed Extension of Time makes the following findings, to wit:
STAFFRPT\VTM231 O3
a)
b)
c)
d)
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
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
project site's existing Specific Plan No. 199
(Low Density Family Housing) land use
designation.
The site is suitable to accommodate the-~
proposed land use in terms of the size an
shape of the lot configuration, circulation
patterns, access, and density, due to the
fact that; adequate area is provided for
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.
STAFFR PT\VTM23103
9
f)
g)
h)
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103 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
{Specific Plan No. 199), and also consistent
with the adopted Southwest Area Community
Plan (SWAP) designation of Specific Plan.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the Negative
Declaration adopted by the County 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 an
independent access point from Butter'field
Stage Road which has 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.
5TAFFRPT\VTM23103
10
k)
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applicants and herein
incorporated by reference, due to the
that they are referenced in the attached Star.
Report, Exhibits, Environmental Assessment,
and Conditions of Approval.
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tentative
Tract Map is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2..~ ,Environmental Coml~iiance.
That the Cityi of Temecula Planning Commission hereby determines that
the previous Environmental Determination {Adoption of Negative Declaration for
Environmental Assessment No. 32535) still applies to said tract map. 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 EIR Nos. 107 and 202 and
in the Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative
Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted.
SECT ION 3..~. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval for the First Extension of Time for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103
for the subdivision of a 29.2 acre parcel into 18 single family residential lots Iotated
west of Butterfield Stage iRoad between La Serene Way and Rancho California
and known as AssessoPs Parcel No. 923-210-010 subject to the following condition
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION ~.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of April, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
CHAIRMAN
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
11
CASE NO.:
ATTACHMENT IV
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
First Extension of Time For
Vestine Tentative Tract MID No. 23103'
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this
project.
Fee
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 ADproval
Condition No. 1
Condition No. 2
Condition No. 37
Condition No. 18
Condition No. 3
Letter Dated 9/20188
Condition No. 31
A: VTM23103. CC
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, helct
on the 15th day of April, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
STAFFRPT\VTM23103
12
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
S~STAr-FePT~a~e-2.VTM 12
CITY OF TEMECULA
'%
\\ t / -
VICINITY
MAP
f
CASE NO.
P.C. DATE ,./-- i ~- 't1..,
CITY OF TEMECULA
:N
bU/,kc
II TA ~1 LLA¢
SP
SWAP MAP
CASE NO.
P.C. DATE ,/---/s"---q/ I
CITY OF TEMECULA
sP ~,~~N~ Sp/ZC
ZONE .MAP )
C A S E N O. y'7"'~4 .~;/~9
P,C, DATE y---/.~"..-~-"--.~
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
VILLAGE 'B" CONCEPT
S~,STAFFNq'~a1Q3-2.V'TM 13
ATTACIIMENT NO.
FEE CFfECK LIST
S\$TAF~103VTM.CC 15
C,~E NO.:
CITY OF TEME~A
DEW, II2)PMENT 1~-~- Cm~,CKLIST
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23103, Second Extension of Time
The following fees were reviewed by Staff rehtive to their applicability to this project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan (K-Rat)
Condition of Approval
Condition No.
2nd Extension of Time No. 1
Parks and Recreation (Quimby)
Condition No.
2nd Extension of Time No. 6
Public Facility (Traffic Mitigation)
Condition No.
2rid Extension of Time No. 17
Public Facility (Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Condition No.
2nd Extension of Time No. 17
Public Facility (Library)
Condition No.
2nd Extension of Time No. 3
Fire Protection
Flood Control (ADP)
Condition No.
1 st Extension of Time No. 9
Condition No.
1 st Extension of Time No. 31
Consistent with Specific Plan
Consistent with Future General Plan
s~TAmu, r~v'~.cc 16
ATTACtIS~-NT NO. 6
EX'i~RITS
s~s'rA~r~v-r~.cc 17
CITY OF TEMECULA
PROJECT
SITE '
~CttO
To San D,eOo
Location Map
CASE NO.: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23103
EXHIBIT: A
P.C. DATE: MARCH 16, 1992
VICINITY MAP
S%STAFFRPT~3103-2.VTM
CITY OF TEMECULA
I
,
SWAP - EXHIBIT B
DESIGNATION: SPECIRC PLAN
/ ./ \~\
ZONING - EXHIBIT C
Case No.: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO, 23103
P.C, Date: MARCH 16. 1992
DESIGNATION:
SPECIFIC PLAN 199
S%,STAFFRPT~3103-2.V'TM
mmm
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO.: VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23103
EXHIBIT: D
P.C. DATE: MARCH 16, 1992
SITE PLAN
S~STAFFRP'T%23103-2.VTM
ITEM NO.
25
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY ATrO~OVa' _',.'
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
May 26, 1992
Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336, Revertion to Acreage
RECO1VIM~-NDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council:
ADOPT Resolution No. 92-__ upholding the Planning
Commission's approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336,
Reversion to Acreage based on the Analysis and Findings
contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached Conditions
of Approval.
BACKGROUND
This Reversion to Acreage which will combine eleven (11) parcels into one (1) parcel was a
Condition of Approval for Plot Plan No. 239. This condition required the applicant to record
a Reversion to Acreage map prior to issuance of building permits for the plot plan in order to
ensure that no buildings crossed property lines. Plot Plan No. 239 was approved by the City
Council on November 26, 1991. This approval allowed construction of a 40,000 square foot
two (2) story office building, a 13,000 square foot single story warehouse structure, a 20,000
square foot single story operations maintenance building, a service vehicle storage yard with 250
parking spaces and an employee and visitor parking area with 287 spaces.
The Planning Commission recommended the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map No.
27336, Reversion to Acreage with a 5-0 vote at its April 20, 1992 meeting. Conditions 8 and
14 were amended by the Planning Commission at that meeting to read as follows:
"All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall
be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed and
constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider."
S~STAFFRPT~27336TPM.CC ]
14.
"As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, onsite underground drainage
facilities, located outside of mad fight-of-way, shall be contained within drainage
easements shown on the f'mal map. A note shall be added to the final map stating
drainage easements 'shall be kept free of buildings and obstruction."
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments: 1.
2.
4.
5.
6.
Resolution - page 3
Conditions of Approval (amended by Planning Commission, April 20,
1992) - page 9
Planning Commission Minutes (April 20, 1992) - page 13
Planning Commission Staff Report (April 20, 1992) - page 14
Conditions of Approval for Plot Plan No. 239 - page 15
Fee Check List - page 16
vgw
$X..qTAFIrRFrX2~36TpM.CC 2
ATTACH1M~-NT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 9 -
· ~ S\FORMS\Rr~-PM-A .CC 3
ATrAC~ NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92,-
A RESOLUTION OF T!tF. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCI~J. MAP
NO. 17336 FOR REVERSION TO ACREAGE OF ELEVEN
(11) PARCELS ON APPROXIMAT~-I-Y 11.5 ACRES
LOCATED NORTBY-RLY OF WINOIF-STER ROAD
BETWEEN CALLE EMPLEADO AND DIAZ ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARC~'J, NO. 909-310-24
THROUGH 28 AND 41 THROUGH 46.
WltE~, Rancho California Water District fried Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
W!tEREAS, said Parcel Map application was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local law;
WIIERRAS, the Planning Commission considered said Parcel Map on April 20, 1992,
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 Parcel Map;
WttEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Parcel Map
on May 26, 1992, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support
or opposition to said Parcel Map; and
WIIE~, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff
Report regarding the Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section I. FinndinEs.
findings:
That the Temecuh City
Council hereby makes the following
A. 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~FORMSXRES-PM-A.CC 4
general plan.
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the
2. The planning agency fmds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
a. There is a reasonable pwbability 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.
b. There is litfie 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.
c. The pwl~sed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state hw and local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area
Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecuh 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 p~ing in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General
Plan.
C. The proposed Parcel Map is consistent with the SWAP and meets the requirements
set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
1. The city is proceexling in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general
plan.
2. The City Council finds, in approving pwjects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this rifle, each of the following:
a. There is reasonable pwbability that Parcel Map No. 27336
proposed will be consistent with the general plan pwposal being considered or studied or which
will be studied within a reasonable time.
b. There is little or no pwbability of substantial detriment to or
interference with the future adopted general plan if the pwposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan.
c. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
~ S\FORMS\RES-PM-A.CC 5
D. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be
approved unless lime following findings are made:
specific plans.
That the proposed land division is ~nsistent with applicable general and
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable l~encral and specific plans.
J
type of development.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
4. That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
proposed density of the development.
5. 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.
6. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements
are not likely to cause serious public health problems.
7. 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 ff 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.
8. The City Council in approving the proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes
the following findings, to wit:
a. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION rIl, the Parcel Map proposed
is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
b. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No.
27336 will be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a
reasonable time and in accordance with State law. The project, as conditioned, conforms with
existing applicable city zoning ordinances and development standards. Further, the proposal is
characteristic of similar development approved by the City to date and anticipated in it's vicinity
based on current development trends.
S\FORMS'd[F,S-PM-A.CC 6
c. There is not a likely pwbability of substantial detriment W, or
interference with the City's future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent
with the Plan. The project is compatible with existing development standards which will likely
be included in the City's future General Plan.
d. The proposed use or action as conditioned complies with State
planning and zoning hws. Reference local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and Caiifomia
Governmental Code Sections 65000-66009 (Planning and Zoning Law).
e. The project as designed and conditional will not adversely affect
the public health or weftare.
f. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding
properties which are vacant now. It does not represent a significant change to the present or
planned land use of the area and the SWAP designation of Light Industrial. As conditioned, .the
project conforms with applicable land use and development regulations.
g. The project has acceptable access to dedicated fights-of-way which
are open w, and useable by, vehicular traffic. The pwject draws access from Winchester Road
and Avenida de Ventas, improved dedicated City fights-of-way. Project access, as designed and
conditioned, conforms with applicable City Engineering standards and ordinances.
h. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect
the built or natural environment as determined in the Environmental Analysis for this project.
i. Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and
environmental documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by
reference, due to the fact that they are referenced in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits,
Environmental Assessment, and Conditions of Approval.
Section II. Environmental Compliance. Pursuant to applicable portions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study was prepared for Plot Plan No. 239 which
determined the project in question will not have a significant impact on the built or natural
environment; a Negative Declaration was adopted for the project. This Negative Declaration
is reaff'trmed for Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336.
Section HI. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby approves Tentative
Parcel Map No. 27336 for the Reversion to Acreage of eleven (11) parcels located northerly of
Winchester Road between Calle Empleado and Diaz Road and known as Assessor' s Parcel No.
909-310-024 through 28 and 41 through 46 subject to the following conditions:
1. Attachment No. 2, attached hereto.
~ S\FORMS~$,S-PM-A.CC 7
Section IV. The City Clerk shnll certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOFrED this 26th day of May, 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDSALL
MAYOR
I BY~RERY 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 26th day of May,
1992 by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEIV~ERS:
COUNCILM]tV!BERS:
COUNCIIAIEMBERS:
/UNE S. GRRmK
CITY CLERK
S~FORM$~RBS-PM-A.CC 3
ATTACHlVH?.NT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336
Project Description: Reversion to Acreage of eleven (11) parcels
Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-310-024 through 28 and 41 through 46
PLANNING DEPART1VH?.NT
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act
and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Article XVI, unless modified by the
conditions listed below. A time extension may be approved in accordance with the State
Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the
expiration date.
,
This conditionally appwved tentative map will expire two years after the appwval date,
unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration date is
,
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in
the County Health Department's transmittal dated March 25, 1992, a copy of which is
attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Water
District transmittal dated March 12, 1992, a copy of which is attached.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes, landscaped
areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations are the responsibilities
of other parties as appwved by the Planning Direcwr.
Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints'Sheet (ECS) shall
be prepared in conjunction with the fmai map to delineate identified environmental
concerns and shall be permanently fried with the office of the City Engineer. A copy of
the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and appwval. The
appwved ECS shall be forwarded with copies of the recorded fmai map to the Planning
Department and the Department of Building and Safety.
SXFORUSXRnS-PU-^.CC 10
All utility systems including gas, clocUic, telephone, ~mter, sewer, and cubic TV shall
be proviand for underground, with cusemeats pwvidod as Pe4uimd,
and desi~acd and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility pwvidcr.
Telephone, cubic TV, and/or seeurity systems shall bc pro wired in the rc.sidcncc. "All
utility systems including g~aS, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shah
be provided for undergrouad, with easements provided as required, and designed
and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider." (Amended
at Planning Commission Meeting on April 20, 1992)
9. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground.
DEPART54T~NT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The following are the Department of public Works Conditions of Approval for this Parcel Map,
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 Depamnent of
Public Works.
It is understood that the Subdivider has correc~y shown on the tentative map all existing and
proposed easements, traveled ways, improvements constraints and drainage courses, and their
omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
10.
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.
11.
As deemed necessary by the Depamnent 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 Temeeula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
Parks and Recreation Depaxtment;
General Telephone;
Southern California Edison Company; and
Southern California Gas Company.
12.
Easements for sidewalks for public uses shah be dedicated to the City where sidewalks
meander through private property.
sxvom~sx~s4.~!-^.cc 11
13.
14.
15.
16.
The bount~i_ary and easements as shown on this map shall be consistent and shall be
coordinated with adjoining developments, and be consistent with the conditions of
approval for Plot Plan 239.
On site dlainage facilities, loeatod outside of ,--dad right of way, shall be contained within
drainage scasoment~ ahov~n on the final map. A note shah be added to the final map
stating "Dminagc easements shall be kcpt f~e6 of buildings and obstructions." "As
deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, onsite underground drainage
facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shah be contained within drainage
easements shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the final map stating
'Drainage easements shah be kept free of building and obstructions."' (Amended
at Planning Commission meeting on April 20, 1992)
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.
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 fur Area
Drainage Plan fee or mitigation charge has already credited to this property, no new
charge needs to be paid.
SX~O~MSUtUq'M-^.CC 12
ATTACHlVrK'~r NO. 3
HANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
FROM
APRH, 20, 1992
SXFORMSXRnS-~'~-A.CC 13
Larry Gabells, 10706 Birchfall Avenue, San Diego,
applicant, stated that he felt the block wall would be an
eyesore and could invite graffiti vandalism. ~
Gary Anderson, owner of Temecula Jeep/Eagle, indicated
that he had no problems with the screening whether it was
a wall or landscaping- Mr. Anderson did ask that
something be done about the present condition of the
property.
Gary Thornhill advised that he had received a phone call
from the Toyota dealership owner, who had reservations
about the deletion of the block wall.
The Commission as a whole expressed concern for the
adequate screening of the service bay area and indicated
that they were not in favor of deleting the requirement
for the block wall.
Chairman Hoagland asked that staff amend the language for
Condition of Approval No. 17 which references using
decomposed granite for parking.
It was moved by Commissioner Fahey, seconded by
Commissioner Blair, to close the public hearing at 7:15
P.M. and Reaffirm the previously adopted Negative
Declaration for Conditional Use Permit No. 2, Revised No.
i and Adopt Resolution No. 92-(next] approving the
Extension of Time for Conditional Use Permit No. 2,~
Revised No. 1, based on the analysis and finding~
contained in the staff report and subject to the
Conditions of Approval including Condition No. 24 and
with modification to Condition No. 17 as outlined by
staff. The motion was carried unanimously.
T~NT~TIVE PI~RCELMAP 27336
Proposal for approval of a reversion to acreaae as
required by Condition of A~Droval No. 39 of Plot Plan No.
239, located on the northerly side of Winchester Road
between Calle EmDleado and Diaz Road.
Saied Naaseh summarized the staff report·
Chairman Hoagland opened the public hearing at 7:15 P.M.
Wayne Ewing, 6104 Riverside Avenue, Riverside, concurred
with the staff report and requested that Condition No. 14
be modified to read "As deemed necessary by the Public
Works Department, on-site underground drainage facilities
located outside the road right-of-way shall be contained
PCHIN4/06/92 -4- 4/09/92
within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note
shall be added to the final map stating drainage
easements shall be kept free of buildings and
obstructions."
Doug Stewart concurred with the applicant's modification
to Condition No. 14.
Chairman Hoagland questioned the language in Condition
No. 8 relative to utility placement.
Gary Thornhi11 stated that the last sentence of Condition
No. 8 could be deleted.
It was moved by Commissioner Fahey, seconded by
Commissioner Ford, to close the public hearing at 7:20
P.M. and Reaffirm the previously adopted Negative
Declaration for Plot Plan No. 239 and Adopt Resolution
No. 92-Cnext) recommending approval of Tentative parcel
Map No. 27336 based on the analysis and findings
contained in the staff report and subject to the
Conditions of Approval, modifying Condition No. 8 as
presented by staff and Condition No. 14 as requested by
the applicant. The motion was carried unanimously.
Chairman Hoagland declared a recess at 7:20 P.M.
reconvened at 7:30 P.M.
The meeting
PCMIN4/06/92
TEMPORARY SIGN ORDINANCE
8.1 Proposal to establish standards to allow Temporary SiGns
citywide.
David Hogan summarized the staff report and advised of
corrections to the Ordinance as follows:
- The last sentences of Sections U, V, W and X be
shifted into the body of the Ordinance in Sections
C, D, E and F.
- Sub-section "T", Temporary Signs, changing the word
short. to prescribed.
- Section 19.9, sub-section "B", second line and list
deleted.
John Cavanaugh added that Page 13, Sub-section 19.9 (A)
last sentence be corrected to read" ..... approve with
cohditions, or deny any request",
Chairman Hoagland opened the public hearing at 7:40 P.M.
-5- 4/09/92
ATTACH1VHr, NT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMIgSION STAFF REPORT
FROM
APIHL ~0,
SXFORMSXILF~-PM-A.CC 14
Case No.:
RECOMMENDATION:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY 0F ~ULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 20, 1992
Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336
Prepared By: Saietl Naaseh
1. REAFFIRM the previously adopted Negative
Declaration for Plot Plan No. 239; and
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING
ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
2.
ADOPT Resolution 92- recommending approval
of Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336; based on the
Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report
and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
Rancho California Water District
Same as above
A request for approval of a Reversion to Acreage as required by
Condition of Approval No. 39 of Plot Plan No. 239.
Northerly side of Winchester Road between Calle Erapleado and
Diaz Road
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC)
North:
South:
Fast:
West:
N/A
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC)
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC)
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC)
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC)
Vacant
S~STAFFRP'f127336.TPM I
SURROUNDING
1AND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
PROJECT STATISTICS
Site area: 11.5 acres
Number of
existing parcels: 11
BACKGROUND
This Reversion to Acreage was a Condition of Approval for Plot Plan No. 239. This condition
required the applicant to record a parcel map prior to issuance of building permits for the plot
plan in order to ensure that no buildings crossed property lines. Plot Plan No. 239 was
approved by the City Council on November 26, 1991. This approval allowed construction of
a 40,000 square foot two (2) story office building, a 13,000 square foot single story warehouse
structure, a 20,000 square foot single story operations maintenance building, a service vehicle
storage yard with 250 parking spaces and an employee and visitor parking area with 287 spaces.
PROJECT DESCRIFrION
Parcel No. 27336 will combine 11 parcels into one (1) parcel. The approval of this project will
satisfy Condition No. 39 for Plot Plan No. 239.
ANALYSIS
Pursuant to Section 504 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC), the applicant is required to
eliminate the property lines currently existing on the project site to prohibit single structures
from crossing property lines. The Subdivision Map Act refers to this procedure as Reversion
to Acreage and it entails redescription of the property reflecting the project site as a single
parcel.
EXISTING ZONING, FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY
The project, as conditioned, conforms with existing zoning and subdivision ordinances affecting
the subject property, and is compatible with the Southwest Area Plan (SWAP) land use
designations of Light Industrial. The proposal is also compatible with existing and anticipated
development in its immediate vicinity. As such, Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336 will likely be
consistent with the City's General Plan recommendations for the property in question, upon the
Plan's final adoption.
S'~rA~36.TPM 2
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Pursuant to applicable portions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial
Study was prepared for Pk~t Plan No. 239 which determined the project in question will not have
a significant impact on the built or natural environment; a Negative Declaration was adopted for
the project.
A reaffirmation of this Negative Declaration is recommended for Tentative Parcel Map No.
27336.
Them is a reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336 will be consistent
with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time and
in accordance with State law. The project, as conditioned, conforms with existing
applicable city zoning ordinances and development standards. Further, the proposal is
characteristic of similar development approved by the City to date and anticipated in it's
vicinity based on current development trends.
,
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with the
City' s future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the Plan.
The project is compatible with existing development standards which will likely be
included in the City' s future General Plan.
,
The proposed use or action as conditioned complies with State planning and zoning laws.
Reference local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and California Governmental Code Sections
65000-66009 (Planning and Zoning Law).
,
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public health or
welfare.
The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding properties which are vacant
now. It does not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the
area and the SWAP designation of Light Industrial. As conditioned, the project conforms
with applicable land use and development regulations.
,
The project has acceptable access to dedicated rights-of-way which are open to, and
useable by, vehicular traffic. The project draws access from Winchester Road and
Avenida de Ventas, improved dedicated City rights-of-way. Project access, as designed
and conditioned, conforms with applicable City Engineering standards and ordinances.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the Environmental Analysis for this project.
S\STAF~336.TPM 3
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference, due to the fact
that they are referonce~t in the attached Staff Report, Exhibits, Environmental
Asse, ssmellt, and Conditions of Approval.
STAFF
RECOMMI*~NDATION: 1.
~ the previously adopted Negative Declaration
for Plot Plan No. 239; and
ADOPT Resolution 92- recommending appmvai of
Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336; based on the Analysis
and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to
the attached Conditions of Approval.
vgw
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution 92- - blue page 5
Conditions of Approval - blue page 11
Initial Study - blue page 15
Exhibits - blue page 16
Vicinity Map
SWAP Map
Zoning Map
Tentative Parcel Maps No. 27336
Pl~t Plan NO. 239
S~FAFFR,FI"~336.'I"PM 4
ATTACtlMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
S~qTA~36,TPM 5
ATTACH]VfENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF T!:IF. PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECO1VIMENDING APPROVAL
OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27336 FOR
REVERSION TO ACREAGE OF ELEVEN (11) PARCELS ON
APPROXIMATELY 11.~ ACRES LOCATED NORTFIERLY
OF WINCHESTER ROAD BETWEEN CALLE EMILEADO
AND DIAZ ROAD AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NO. 909-310-024 THROUGH 28 AND 41 TttROUGH 46
WHEREAS, Rancho California Water District fried Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WIEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and lo~1 law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Parcel Map on April
20, 1992 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 Tentative Parcel Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING CONIMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Seaion I. Findings.
following fmdings:
That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the
A. 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:
general plan.
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the
2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
S~qTAFFRF~27336 .TIlIM 6
a. Them 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.
b. Them is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or
interference with the future adopted general plan ff the proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan.
c. The pwposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as mended by the Southwest Area
Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as
the General Plan for the southwest potion 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.
C. The proposed TentatiVe Parcel Map 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.
2. The Planning Commission f'mds, in recommending approval of projects
and taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each
of the following:
a. Them is reasonable probability that Tentative Paxeel Map No.
27336 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or
which will be studied within a reasonable time because the project is consistent with the existing
SWAP and Zoning Designations will have minimal impact on the surrounding properties.
b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or
interference with the future adopted general plan ff the proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan because the projects will have minimal impact on the surrounding
properties;
c. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances because it is consistent with the development
standards of Ordinance No. 460, w~ch conforms with State Laws.
D. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be
approved unless the following findings are made:
S\STAFFRPTX27336.TPM 7
1. That the proposed land division reversion to acreage is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans. (REVISED ON APRIL 20, 1992 AT THE PLANNING
COMMISSION ~G).
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division reversion
to acreage is consistent with applicable general and specific plans. (REVISED ON APRIL 20,
1992 AT TIlE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING)
3. That the site of the proposed land division reversion to acreage is
physically suitable for the type of development. (REVISED ON APRIL 20, 1992 AT THE
PLANNING COMMISSION M~-k'TING).
4. That the site of the proposed land division reversion to acreage is
physically suitable forthe proposed density of the development. (REVISED ON APRIL 20, 1992
AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING).
5. That the design of the proposed land division reversion to acreage or
proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially
and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. (REVISED ON APRIL 20, 1992 AT
THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING).
6. That the design of the proposed land division reversion to acreage or the
type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. (REVISED ON
APRIL 20, 1992 AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION I~-~G).
7. 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 pwvided 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.
E. The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the proposed Tentative
Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit:
1. There is a reasonable probability that Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336 will
be consistent with the City's future General Plan, which will be completed in a reasonable time
and in accordance with State hw. The project, as conditioned, conforms with existing
applicable city zoning ordinances and development standards. Further, the proposal is
characteristic of similar development approved by the City to date and anticipated in it's vicinity
based on current development trends.
2. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment W, or interference
with the City' s future General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the Plan.
The project is compatible with existing development standards which will likely be included in
the City's future General Plan.
S~qTA~336.TI*M 8
3. The proposed use or action as conditioned complies with State planning
and zoning hws. Reference local Ordinances No. 348, 460; and California Governmental Code
Sections 65000-66009 (Planning and Zoning Law).
health or welfare.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the public
5. The proposal will not have an adverse effect on surrounding property. It
does not represent a significant change to the present or planned land use of the area. As
conditioned, the pwject conforms with applicable land use and development regulations.
6. The project has acceptable access to dedicated rights-of-way which are
open to, and useable by, vehicular traffic. The pwject draws access from Winchester Road and
Avenida de Ventas, impwved dedicated City rights-of-way. Project access, as designed and
conditioned, conforms with applicable City Engineering standards and ordinances.
7. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built
or natural environment as determined in the Environmental Analysis for this project.
F. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 11I, the Tentative Parcel Map is compatible
with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
SECTION H. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study prepared for Plot Plan
No. 239 indicated that although the proposed project could have a significant impact on the
environment, there would 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 a Negative
Declaration, therefore, was granted. Parcel 27336 reaffirms the Negative Declaration prepared
for Plot Plan No. 239.
SECTION 1II. Conditions. That the City of Temecula Planning Commission
hereby approves Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336 for Reversion to Acreage of eleven (11)
parcels on appwximately 11.15 acres located northerly of Winchester Road between Calle
Empleado and Diaz Road and known as Assessor' s Parcel No. 909-310-024 through 028 and 41
through 46 subject to the following conditions:
1. Reference Attachment No. 2.
SECTION IV.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of April, 1992.
JOHN E. HOAGLAND
CHAIRMAN
S\STAFF~336.TPM 9
I In~-RERY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of ihe City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 20th day of Apffi,
1992 by the following vote of the Commission:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
SXSTAI:~336.TPM 10
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S\STAFF~336.TPM
11
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336
Project Description: Reversion to Acreage of eleven (11) parcels
Assessor's Parcel No.: 909-310-024 through 28 and 41 through 46
PLANNING DEPARTlV~,NT
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act
and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Article XVI, unless modified by the
conditions listed below. A time extension may be appmved in accordance with the State
Map Act and City Ordinance, upon written request, if made 30 days prior to the
expiration date.
This conditionally appmved tentative map will expire two years after the approval date,
unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration date is
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map.
The applicant shall Comply with the environmental health recommendations outlined in
the County Health Department's transmittal dated March 25, 1992, a copy of which is
attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho Water
District transmittal dated March 12, 1992, a copy of which is attached.
The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes, landscaped
areas and irrigation systems unffi such time as those operations are the responsibilities
of other parries as approved by the Planning Director.
Prior to recordation of the fmai map, an Enviromental Constraints Sheet CECS) shall
be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identified environmental
concerns and shall be permanen~y filed with the office of the City Engineer. A copy of
the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The
approved ECS shall be forwarded with copies of the recorded fmal map to the Planning
Depaxtrnent and the Department of Building and Safety.
sxs'r^FF~,n'x:Ta36.n,u 12
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall
be pro,,~ided for underground, with oasc, ments provided as required,
and designed and eon,atrueted in accordance with City Codcs and thc utility providcr.
Tclophonc, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be prc wired in the residence. "All
utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shah
be provided for underground, with easements provided as required, and designed
and constructed in accordance with City Codes and the utility provider." (Amended
at Planning Commission Meeting on April 20, 1992)
9. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground.
DEPARTIV!V. NT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The following axe the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this Paxeel Map,
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 Subdivider has correcfiy shown on the tentative map all existing and
proposed easements, traveled ways, improvements constraints and drainage courses, and their
omission may require the project to be resubmitted for further review and revision.
PRIOR TO RBCORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
10.
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.
11.
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;
CATV Franchise;
Parks and Recreation Department;
General Telephone;
Southern California Edison Company; and
Southern California Gas Company.
12.
Easements for sidewalks for public uses shall be dedicated to the City where sidewalks
meander through private property.
S\STAFFRFF~,27336.TPM 13
13.
14.
15.
16.
The boundary and easements as shown on this map shall be consistent and shall be
coordinated with adjoilling developments, and be consistent with the conditions of
approval for Plot Plan 239.
On site drainagc faeilitics, lecated outside of road right of ~ay, shall be contained within
drainage oasemonts sho~n on the fmai map. A note shall be added to the fmai map
stating :"Draisage easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions."
deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, onsite underground drainage
facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shah be contained within drainage
easements shown on the final map. A note shall be added to the fmal map stating
'Drainage easements shah be kept free of buildings and obstructions."' (Amended
at plavning Commission meeting on April 20, 1992)
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
impwvements.
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 Corttwl 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.
S\STAFF~136 .TPM 14
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
TS: CITY OF TEMECULA
~ A : Saied Naaseh
vironmental Health Specialist
FM
mE: SAN 53 S - PARCEL MAP NO. 27336
DATE: 03-25-92
IV
The Department of Environmental Health Division has
reviewed the Parcel Map No. 27336 for this proaect and
cannot make any recommendations until a sanitation
letter ls flled. The requirements for a SAN 53 letter
are as follows:
A satisfactory soils percolation test to
prove the pro3ect feasible.
A clearance letter from the appropriate
CalifornZa Reqional Water Quality Control
Board. NOTE: For pro3ects wlthln the
San Dlego Water Quality Control Board
sphere of influence, a wrltten clearance
shall be required prlor to lssuance of
a SAN 53.
3. Two copies of the parcel Map.
A "will-serve" letter from the
aqency/a~encies servln9 potable water.
Should the proaect be served sanitary sewer services,
this Department would need only:
A "will-serve" letter from the agency/agencies
serving potable water and sanitary sewers.
2. One copy of the Parcel Map.
If the pro3ect is to be served water by existlng wells,
pumps and water tanks, a water supply permlt wlll be
required (contact the DEH, EnQ~neerlng Section at
275-8980). The requirements for a water supply permlt
are as follows:
City of Temecula
Page Two
March 25, 1992
Attn: Saied Naaseh
Satisfactory laboratory tests (bacteriological,
organic, inorganic, general physical. and general
mlneral) to prove the water potable.
A complete set of plans showinq all details of the
proposed and exlstlng water systems: sizes and
types of plpe and calculations showing that
adequate quantlty and pressure can be maintained
(California Waterworks Standards - California
Health and Safety Code and California
administrative Code, Title 22). These plans must
be signed by a registered clvic engineer.
SM:dr
] anch0
Water
March 12, 1992
RECEIVED
'1 h:,'n;,. R.
Mr. Saied Naaseh
City of Temecula
Planning Department
43180 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
SUBJECT: Water and Sewer Availability
Parcel Map 27336
Rancho California Water District Headquarters Site
Dear Mr. Naaseh:
Please be advised that the above-referenced property is located within the
boundaries of Rancho California Water District (RCWD). Water service,
therefore, would be available.
Currently, RCWD has an inter-agency agreement with Eastern Municipal
Water District to provide sewer service to this area.
If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P. E.
Manager of Development Engineering
SB:aj~I/FEG
cc: Senga Doherty, Engineering Technician
ATTA~ NO. 3
INITIAL STUDY
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Backqround
1. Name of Proponent: ~ Rancho California Water District
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
28061 Diaz Road. Temecula. CA
{714) 676-4101
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
August 26, 1991
Agency Requiring
Assessment:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
Plot Plan No. 239 (PP 239)-Rancho California Water
District Headquarters Complex
Location of Proposal:
Between Avenida De Ventas and Winchester Road.
approximately 3/4 mile west of Diaz Road
Environmental Impacts
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
Yes
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Mavbe No
Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
X
Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil?
X
Substantial change in topography
or ground surface relief features?
X
de
The destruction, covering or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
X
S~,STAFFRP"F~239-PP 27
YeS Mavbe No
Air.
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
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?
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRP'T"%239.PP 28
Yes Maybe No
eg
ge
Plant
Change in the amount of surface
'water in any water body?
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 rate
of flow or ground waters?
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?
Life. Will the proposal result in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
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?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Yes Maybe No
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)?
Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
Deterioration to existing fish or
wildlife habitat?
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 use of an area?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial increase in the rate of
use of any natural resources?
Substantial depletion of any non-
renewable natural resource?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRP'T'~23S .PP 30
Yes Maybe No
10.
11.
12.
13.
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?
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic ?
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\STAFFRPl'~239.PP 3 1
.Yes Maybe NO
14.
15.
16.
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:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
Maintenance of public facilities,
inc. luding roads?
f. Other governmental services:
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
Use of substantial amounts of fuel
or energy?
Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy,
or require the development of new
sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
Power or natural gas?
Communications systems?
Water?
Sewer or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage?
Solid waste and disposal?
X
.X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S%STAFFRP'r~,239,PP 32
Yes Mavbe No
17.
18.
19.
20.
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 result in the
alteration of or the destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building,
structure, or object?
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?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S\$TAFFRP'i'~239.PP 33
Y~S Mavbe 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 project's
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
S%STAFFRP"T~239.PP 34
III Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
Earth
1.a.
1.b.
1.C.
1.d.
1.e,
1.f.
1.g.
Air
2.a,b,c.
No. Construction is not proposed at depths sufficient to adversely affect
geologic substructures of the site. Similarly significant grading/fill
activities are not' proposed - no significant impacts.
Yes. Compaction and overcovering of soil is necessary to implement the
proposal. The relatively nominal scale of this project does not indicate
likelihood of significant impacts on regional topography or soil
characteristics.
No. Reference Items 1 .a and 1 .b. The subject site is essentially level at
present. Further, fill activities of significance are not proposed.
No. No unique geologic or topographic features currently exist on the
subject site.
No. Nominal alterations in regional surface erosion patterns can be
expected if this project is eventually realized. Proposed additional on-site
structures and paving will likely reduce erosion at the project site;
resulting in additional off-site drainage discharge volumes. Impacts on
regional drainage characteristics are insignificant as mitigated by project
specific drainage conveyances. (Reference City of Temecula Engineering
Department Conditions of Approval.)
No. Construction is not proposed that would logically affect distant
beach sands. Neither should the project produce deposition/erosion
potentially modifying stream channels or lake beds.
No. The subject site is not affected by known earthquake, landslide,
mudslide or ground failure hazards. Further, all proposed fill/compaction
and subsurface construction shall conform to applicable City and Uniform
Building Code standards.
No. Addition of. localized air pollutants will result from increased vehicle
traffic accessing the project site with little or no noticeable regional
impacts. Short term increases in localized pollutants and associated
noxious odors are likely during construction activities. Impacts are not
considered significant regionally.
Water
3.8.
3.b.
3.c.
3.d,e.
3.f,g.
3.h.
3.i.
Plant Life
No. The proposed structure is not located within defined marine or fresh
water flows.
No. currently permeable ground will be rendered impervious as a result
of this proposal. Consequently, surface runoff and absorption rates on
the project site itself will change. Site drainage shall conform with plans
approved by the City of Temecula. Necessary improvements to effect
proper site drainage shall be as indicated in the attached drainage plans
and project conditions of approval. No significant impacts on drainage
patterns are anticipated. Reference also Item 1 .e.
No. 'Plans proposed at this time indicate no potential adverse on or off
site flooding impacts. Proposed drainage plans and all related necessary
improvements shall be as specified by the City Engineering Department.
Ho. Increased runoff from the project site may nominally increase
surface levels and turbidity of off-site bodies of water with no impacts
of significance.
No. Reduced permeation at the project site may eventually affect
underlying groundwater. Impacts of this project individually are
considered insignificant.
No. water consumption rates typical of small commercial/industrial
projects is proposed. All water consumption activities are subject to
monitoring and allowances specified by the applicable purveyor.
Proposed vehicle washing activities shall utilize recycled water per
applicable local and state requirements, Landscaping and irrigation shall
respect current drought conditions affecting the City as specified. in the
project Conditions of Approval and exhibited by the proposed project
landscape and irrigation plan concepts.
No. Reference Item No. 3.c.
4.a-d.
N0. The project site is currently barren of all vegetation, new plant
Species which may be introduced as a result of required site landscaping
cannot be considered invasive because of the referenced lack of existing
on-site vegetation. Similarly, no impacts are anticipated on agricultural
assets.
S~'STAFFRPT%239'PP 36
Animal Life
5.a-c.
No. Minor losses of common urban species, e.g., small lizards, insects,
rodents, and their habitats may result from this project. NUmerically and
qualitatively, these losses are considered environmentally insignificant.
Further, if not previously paid, the applicant is required to submit
Stephen's Kangaroo Rat habitat procurement fees in the amount
specified by City ordinance. Such monies are to be used for purchase
of suitable habitat for the Kangaroo Rat as it is gradually displaced due
to generalized development of the Temecula Valley. This proposal
contributes incrementally to regional displacement of the Kangaroo Rat.
Noise
6.8.
Mavbe. Minor increases in local ambient noise levels will occur.
No. subsequent to project implementation and commercial/industrial
occupancy of the project site. Area-wide noise impacts will be
insignificant. Proposed hours of operation shall conform with normal
business hours of operations, generally considered to be between 7:00
A.M. and 8:00 P.M. Short term construction noise levels generated may -
result in temporary localized disturbances considered insignificant as
adjacent properties are currently vacant.
Light and Glare
No. While the pPoject could potentially impact night skies, the proposal
is required to comply with applicable Cit~//Palomar Observatory lighting
policies and ordinance(s). These policies and ordinances address
potential night-sky lighting impacts of development proposals that might
logically affect activities of the Mr. Palomar Astronomical Observatory.
Land Use
NO. The project is consistent with underlying land use ordinances and
Southwest Area Plan guidelines affecting the subject property. No
change in Land Use designations is proposed in conjunction with this
project; no anticipated impacts.
Natural Resources
9.a ,b.
No. The proposal is of limited scale and will not logically deplete
substantial amounts of renewable or non-renewable natural resources.
S\STAFFRPT~239.PP 37
Risk of UpSet
lO.a,b.
No. Use and storage of hazardous substances e.g. waste oil/petroleum
products'proposed has been reviewed and approved in concept by the
Riverside County Fire Department and the Riverside County Department
of Environmental Health Services. Potential risk of upset involving
hazardous substances e.g. fuel, oil, petroleum wastes, is reduced to
insignificance through compliance with the attached project Conditions
of Approval.
Population
11.
No. The project does not contain population relocation elements.
Housing
12.
No. No housing is proposed to be added nor deleted.
TransDortati0n/Circulation
13.a,c.
No. Commercial/industrial construction of relatively limited scale is
proposed, generating similarly limited amounts of destination traffic.
Traffic generated will consist primarily of daily Rancho California Water
District operations vehicles and commuting employees. Nominal
amounts of visitor traffic can also be expected. Regionally, traffic
impacts of this individual project are determined to be insignificant.
Further, the project is required to contribute monies to area-wide, as well
as localized public improvements (e.g., signalization mitigation)
proportionate to the proposal's anticipated impacts as determined by the
City Public Works Department.
13.b.
Yes. In compliance with City ordinance and project specific
requirements,the project provides a total of 537 additional off-street,
improved parking spaces as referenced in the proposal's Conditions of
Approval (attached), and as indicated on Staff Report Exhibit D.
13.d.
No. The project will attract additional destination traffic, primarily
employees and service vehicles, to the subjec~ site upon its
implementation. Impacts on regional circulation patterns are expected
to be insignificant given the proposal's limited scale. Reference also
Item 13.a.
13.e.
No. The project is not in a location which will logically affect
waterborne, rail or air traffic, nor does it propose addition-3r deletion of
such facilities.
S~,STAFFRPT%239 .PP 3 8
13.f.
Maybe. Increases in traffic generated by this proposal may consequently
increase the possibility of traffic accidents. Impacts are likely to be
unnoticeable in view of the proposal's limited scope and proposed
infrastructure improvements supporting the project.
Public Services
14.a-c.
Maybe. New commercial/industrial development may generate at least
nominal increased demands for police and fire protection services, utility
provisions and, indirectly, schools. Mitigation is realized through project-
specific building permit fees, assessment districts, property taxes, and
similar funding mechanisms.
14.d.
14.e.
14.f.
Maybe. Construotion is not proposed which will directly impact schools
or parks. However, the applicant is required by state law to contribute
applicable school fees as partial mitigation for secondary impacts on
school systems resulting from the commercial/industrial development
proposed.
YeS. Construction of new roads and associated increases in road
maintenance activities in the immediate vicinity of the proposal will be
required due to proportionate increases in traffic generated locally.
Mitigation of such impacts are as specified by the City Public Works
Department in the project's Conditions of Approval, attached.
No. Impacts on other governmental services have not been identified at
this time.
Enerey
15.a,b.
No. Reference Item Nos. 9.a. and b.
Utilities
16.a-f.
No. Service line extensions and increased demands can be expected for
the utilities referenced. The facility itself supports regional water
acquisition and distribution activities. No significant impacts are
anticipated.
Human Health
17.a,b.
No'. The project does not include introduction of potential health hazards
of significance to the region; nor are there existing identified health
hazards at the project site. Potential hazards associated-with use ,3nd
storage of toxic materials on the subject site are mitigated per the
attached project Conditions of Approval.
S\STAFFRP'T'%239 .PP 39
Aesthetics
18.
No. The application has been reviewed for architectural quality and
compatibility by the City, and is considered appropriate in the context of
existing and proposed development in its vicinity.
Recreation
19.
N0. Additional recreational assets are not proposed, nor are they to be
deleted in conjunction with this project; direct impacts on recreational
facilities are not anticipated.
Cultural ResOurces
20.a.
No. Construction is not proposed that will logically affect known
archaeological religious or cultural assets; no identified impacts.
20.b.
No. The proposal is not within an identified historic
preservation/conservation district. As such, impacts on the existing
character of historic assets in the region are unlikely.
21 .a,b,
c,d.
N0. Reference Item Nos. 1-20.
S~,STAFFRPT%239 .PP 40
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 signi-
ficant effect on the environment, there will not be a signi-
ficant 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.
Auaust 26. 1991
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
S\STAFFRPT%239 .PP 4 1
ATTACHlViEN'T NO. 4
EXtHBITS
CITY OF TEMECULA
./
'SITE
CASE NO.: Tentative Parcel Map No, 2733~
EXItlRIT: A
P.C. DATE: April 20, 1992
\
VICINITY MAP
S~STAFF~F~336.Tr~
CITY OF TEMECULA
/
/
SITE
SWAP - Exhibit B
\\
\\
///
/
ZONING - Exhibit C
Case No.: Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336
P.C. Date: April 20, 1992
x,x,~\
\\
\
Designation:
Designation: Light Industrial (LI)
SITE
Manufacturing-Service Commercial (M-SC)
SkqTAFFRIrfX27336.TPM
CITY OF TEMECULA
TENTATIVE
IN THE CiTY OF TEMECULA tCCI, I~ OF IUVIflII~(eSTATE: OF C~IA
PARCEL MAP NO. 2.7~36
, /
ADj. r"1~r'' ',3
n
:'i ~"/"
::/
WINCHESTER
CASE NO.: Tentative Parcel Map No. 27336
EXHIBIT: D TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27336
P.C. DATE: April 20, 1992
S\STAFFR.PT'~7336.'ITM
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO.: Tent2~ve Parch Map No. 27336
EXIHRIT: E
P.C. DATE: April 20, 1992
PLOT PLAN NO. 239
ATTACHlViP~NT NO. ~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
PLOT PLAN NO. 239
S\FOR.M~\RE..~PM-A.CC 15
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Plot Plan No: ~39
Project Description:
Construction of the new Ranch0
California Water Distric~
HeAdnuarters Complex all;
follows:
- 40,000 square feet 2
story office building
- 13,000 square feet single
story warehouse structure
- 20,000 square feet single
storyoperations/
maintenance building
- Rancho California Water
District Employee, Service
.Storage Yard & Visitor
Parking Areas totaling 537
spaces
Assessor's Parcel No,:
909-120-094
(Parent No.)
Plannin~ Deoartment
The use hereby permitted by this plot plan is for construction of the new
RanchO California Water District Headquarters Complex as follows: 40,000
square feet 2 story office building, 13,000 sq.ft. single story' warehouse
structure, 20,000 square feet single story operations/maintenance building and
supporting Rancho California Water District employee, service storage yard and
visitor parking areas.
The permittee shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula,
its agents, officers, and employees from any claims, action, or proceeding
against the City of Temecula or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set
aside, void, or annul, an approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory
agencies, appeal boards, or legislative body concerning Plot Plan No. 239. The
City of Temecula will promptly notify the permittee of any such claim, action,
or proceeding against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the
STAFFPeT%231 .lIP
16
defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the permittee of any such claim,
action or proceeding, or fails to cooperate fully in The defense, The permittee
shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the
City of Temecula.
This approval shall be used within two {2) years of approvaj date; otherwise,
it shall become null and void. By use is meant the beginning of substantial
construction contemplated by This approval within the two (2) year period
which is thereafter diligently pursued to completion, or the beginning of
substantial utilization contemplated by this approval. This approval shall expire
on ·
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as
shown on Plot Plan No. 239 marked Exhibit D, or as amended by these
conditions.
Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, (3) copies of a Parking,
Landscaping, Irrigation, and Shading Plans shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for approval. The location, number, genus, species, and container
size of the plants shall be shown. Plans shall meet all requirements of
Ordinance No. 348, Section 18.12, and shall be accompanied by the
appropriate filing fee.
All landscaped areas shall be planted in accordance with approved landscape,
irrigation, and shading plans prior To the issuance of occupancy permits, or
within the time frame specified by the City Planning Director and City Building
Official. An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed and all landscaped
areas shall be maintained in a viable growth condition. Planting within ten (10)
feet of an entry or exit driveway shall not be permitted to grow higher than
thirty {30) inches.
Five hundred and Thirty-seven parking spaces, designed in accordance with
Section 18.12, Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, shall be provided as
shown on the Approved Exhibit D. The parking area shall be surfaced with
aspbaltic concrete paving To a minimum depth of 3 inches on 4 inches of Class
II base.
A minimum of 5 handicapped parking spaces shall be provided as shown on
Exhibit D. Each parking space reserved for the handicapped shall be identified
by a permanently affixed reflectorized sign constructed of porcelain on steel,
beaded text or equal, displaying the international Symbol of Accessibility. The
sign shall not be smaller than 70 square inches in area and shall be centered at
the interior end of the parking space at a minimum height if 80 inches from the
bottom of the sign to the parking space finished grade, or centered at a
17
STAFFRPT%231.FP
minimum height of 36 inches from the parking space finished grade, ground,
or sidewalk. A sign shall also be posted in a conspicuous place, at each
entrance to the off-street parking facility, not less than 17 inches by 22 inches,
clearly and conspicuously stating the following:
10.
11.
12.
13.
14o
15.
"Unauthorized vehicles not displaying distinguishing
placards or license plates issued for physically handicapped
persons may be towed away at owner's expense. Towed
vehicles may be reclaimed at or
by telephone ·
In addition to the above requirements, the surface of each parking place shall
have a surface identification sign duplicating the Symbol of Accessibility in blue
paint of at least 3 square feet in size.
A Plot Plan application for a Sign Program shall be submitted and approved by
the Planning Director prior to occupancy.
Building elevations shall be in substantial conformance with Exhibits F.1, F.2.
Materials used in the construction of all buildings shall be in
conformance with Exhibits F. 1, F.2 and Exhibits 1.1, 1.2.
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from ground view.
material shall be subject to Planning Department approval.
substantial
Screening
Prior to the final building inspection approval by the Building and Safety
Department, a six foot high decorative wall shall be constructed the perimeter
of the. project's proposed vehicle storage yard as illustrated on the project site
plan, Exhibit D. The required wall shall be subject to the approval of the
Director of the Department of Building and Safety and the Planning Director.
All trash enclosures shall be constructed prior to the issuance of occupancy
permits. As a minimum, each enclosure shall be six feet in height and shall be
constructed of materials architecturally compatible with the primary facility,
utilizing a steel gate which screens bins from external view.
Landscaping plans hsall incorporate the use of minimum 24" box canopy tress
along streets, and within parking areas. Additional landscaping as approved by
the Planning Director shall also be provided along the project site's
northeasterly perimeter wall.
16.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall comply with
Ordinance No. 663 (Staphen's Kangaroo. Rat Habitst Conservation and
Procuremerit) by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is based on
the gross acreage of the parcel proposed for development. Should Ordinance
No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior
to the payment of the fees required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall
pay the fee required under the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by
County ordinance or resolution.
17.
Seven (7) Class II bicycle racks shall be provided in convenient locations as
approved by the Planning Director to facilitate bicycle access to the project
area.
18.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, performance securities, in amounts to
be determined by the Director of Building and Safety to guarantee the
installation of planrings, walls, and fences in accordance with the approved
plan, and adequate maintenance of the planting for one year, shall be filed with
the Department of Building and Safety.
19.
Contingent upon availability of irrigation water, prior to the issuance of
occupancy permits all required landscape planting and irrigation shall have been
installed and be in a .condition acceptable to the Director of Planning. The
plants shall be healthy and free of weeds, disease, or pests. The irrigation
system shall be properly constructed and in good working order. Alternatively,
installation of landscaping may be secured by bonding means, and in amounts
specified by the Director of Planning; and installed at such times as irrigation
water is in adequate supply as determined by RCWD and the City Planning
Director.
20.
Within forty eight (q9) hour3 of tho approval of tho project, tho
applioant/dovoloper shall dolivor to the Ranning Doportmont o cashlore chock
er toonay ardor payohio to tho County Clark in tho amount of Ono Thou=and,
Twe I lundrod, Soventy Fivo Dollars (61,27E.00), which inoludos thc Onc
Thousand, Twe I lundred, Fifty Dolloro (61,250.00) foo, in complionec with A43
31F./8, requirc, d by Fish and Gomo Codc Secticn 711.-4(d)(2) plus thc Twenty
Fivo Dollar (626.00) County administrativc foo to onoblo tho City to filc tho
Notice of D=tormination requirod under !~ublie Rosources Code Section 21152
and 14 Col. Code of Regulations I r,X:)7~;, If within such forty eight (qe) hour
period thc opFlieonTJdcvoloper has not delivered to the Planning Dcportmcnt thc
ohook roquirod obovo, tho approval for tho projoot grantod horoin shall bc void
by tooson of failuro ef oonditien, F~sh and Gomo Code Ceetion 711 .q (c).
21.
All of the foregoing conditions shall be complied with prior to occupancy or any
use allowed by this permit.
Engineering Deoartment
The following are the Engineering Department Conditions of Approval for this project,
and shall be completed at nO cost to any Govommont Agonay, the City of Temecula.
All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the
Engineering Department.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
22.
As deemed necessary by the City Engineer or his representative, the developer
shall receive written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho Califomia Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Engineering Department;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
23.
The !developer shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to
the Engineering Department. The plan shall comply With the Uniform Building
Code and Chapter 70 as may be additionally provided for in these Conditions
of Approval. The plan shall be drawn on 24"x 36" mylar by a Registered Civil
Engineer.
24.
The developer shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report specifically related
to the project site to the Engineering Department. The report shall address the
soils stability and geological conditions of the site, as well as the structural
design of driveway and parking lot areas.
25.
A Geological Report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and
submitted at the time of application for grading plan check, and shall address
the restricted use zone, fault line area; and areas of potential liquefaction and
subsidence as identified by the report prepared by Schaefer Dixon Associates,
dated June 7, 1989 and August 15, 1989, for PM 21383.
b'rAFF!~31 .PP 20
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outaide of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
No grading shall take place prior to the improvement plans being substantially
complete, appropriate clearance letters having been received, and subsequently
approved by the City Engineer.
If grading is to take' place between the' months of October and April, erosion
control plans will be required. Erosion control plans and notes shall be
submitted and approved by the Engineering Department.
All site plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and street
improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency with approved plans.
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.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times
with adequate detours during construction.
The subdivider shall construct or post security and an agreement shall be
executed guaranteeing the construction of the following public improvements
in conformance with applicable City standards.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, and traffic control devices as
appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
33.
c. Landscaping (street parkway).
d. Undergrounding of proposed utility distribution lines if needed.
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.
STAFFRPT%231.PP 21
34,
35.
Drainage calculations shall be submitted to and approved by the CiW Engineer,
All onsita a~d offsite drainage facilities shall be installed as required by The City
Engineer,
Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface
drainage entering the property from adjacent areas,
36,
All concentrated drainage directed toward the public street shall be diverted
through the undersidewalk drains,
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT:
37.
A precise grading plan and site improvement plan shall be submitted to the
Engineering Department for review and approval. The building pad shall be
certified by a registered Civil Engineer for location and elevation, and the Soil
Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing compaction and site
conditions,
38,
LOT Line Adjustment 21 shall be approved by The Planning Department and a
copy of The recorded documents shall be provided by the applicant TO The
Department of Public Works prior to any building permits being issued,
39,
40.
41.
42.
A Parcel Map for reversion to acreage shell be prepared and submitted to th_~e
Planning Department To be recorded over the affected parcels of Parcel IV:,
21383, The Parcel Map shall be recorded prior to issuance of any building
permits.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall deposit with the
Engineering Department a cash sum as established per acre as mitigation for
traffic signal impact,
Prior to building permit, The 'subdivider shall notify The City's C.A.T.V.
Franchises of the intent to develop, Conduit shall be installed to C.A.T,V.
Standards prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy,
Developer shall pay any capital fee for road improvements and public facilities
imposed upon the property or project, including that for traffic and public
facility mitigation as required under The Negative Declaration for The project,
The fee to be paid shall be in the amount in effect at the time of payment of
the 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
STAFFRP'T~23i. PP
22
PRIOR
43.
44.
45.
46.
Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of which has been
provided To ~leveloper. Concurrently, with executing This Agreement, developer
shall post a bond to secure payment of The Public Facility fee. The amount of
The bond 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 of 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; nrovided That developer is not
waiving its right To protest the reasonableness of any traffic impact fee, and The
amount thereof.
TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY:
A minimum flowline grade shall be 0.50 percent.
Oneire improvement plans per City Standards for The private streets or drives
shall be required for review and approval by the City Engineer.
All landscaping adjacent to driveway approaches shall be installed TO provide
for adequate site distance.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards or
a commercial curb return approach may be used and shall be shown on the
street improvement plans in accordance with County Standard 400 and 401
(curb sidewalk). The easterly driveway on Winchester Road, and the two
driveways on Avenida De Ventas shall be a minimum width of 36 feet. The
Two westerly driveways on Winchester Road shall be a minimum width of 30
feet.
Riverside County Fire DeOartment
With respect To the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced plot plan,'
the Fire Department recommends the following fire protection measures be provided
in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
47.
The Fire Department is required to set a minimum fire flow for the remodel or
construction of all commercial buildings using The procedure established in
Ordinance 546.
23
STAFFFIrr~239 .PP
49,
50.
51,
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
The applicant/developer shall provide or show there exists a water system
capable of delivering 4000 GPM for a 3 hour duration at 20 PSI residual
operating pressure, which must be available before any combustible material
is !place on The job site.
A combination of on-site and off-site super fire hydrants, on a looped system
(6"x4"2~x2½), will be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet
from any portion of the building as measured along approved vehicular
travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent,
hydrant(s) in the system.
The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later point in the permit process to
reflect changes in design, construction type, area separation or built-in fire
protection measures.
The applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of The water system plans to the
Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types,
location and spacing, and, the system shall meet the fire flow requirements.
Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water
company with the following certification: "1 certify that the design of the water
system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside
County Fire Department."
The applicant/developer shall install a complete fire sprinkler system in all
buildings. The post indicator valve and fire department connection shall be
located to the front, within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 f{"
from the building(s). A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire
sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans.
The applicant/developer shall install a supervised waterflow monitoring fire
alarm system. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval
prior to installation, as per UBC.
A statement that the building will be automatically fire sprinklered must appear
on The title page of the building plans.
Occupancy separation will be required as per the Uniform Building Code,
Section 503.
The applicant/developer shall install panic hardware and exit signs as per
Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. Low level Exit Signs, where exit
signs are required by Section 3314(a).
Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes.
STAFFRPT%239.PP
24
58.
59.
60.
61.
The applicant/developer shall install portable fire extinguishers with a minimum
rating of 2A-10BC, Contact a certified extinguisher company for proper
placement of equipment..
Applicant/developer shall be responsible for' obtaining underground or
aboveground permits from both the County Health and Fire Departments.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall be
responsible to submit a check or money order in the amount of $558.00 to the
Riverside County Fire Department for plan check fees.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant/developer shall deposit,
with the City of Temecula, a check or money order equaling the sum of 25¢ per
square foot as mitigation for fire protection impacts. This amount must be
submitted separately from the plan check review fees.
62.
Applicant/developer shall be responsible to install a fire alarm system. Plans
must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to installation.
63.
Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed in the
Building and Safety Office.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the Planning and
Engineering staff.
Riverside Counw DenartmWnt Of Health
The Environmental Health Services has reviewed Plot Plan No. 239 and has no
objections. Sanitary sewer and water services should be available in this area. Prior
to any building plan review for Health clearance, the following items are required:
64. "Wilt-serve" letters from the appropriate water and sewering agencies.
65.
· A clearance letter from the Hazardous Services Materials Management Branch
(Jon Mohoroski, 358-5055), will be required indicating that the project has
been cleared for:
Underground storage tanks
Hazardous Waste Generator Services
Hazardous Waste Disclosure (in accordance with AB 2185)
Waste reduction management
66. Waste Regulation Branch (Waste Collection/LEA approvals).
STAFFRPT%23".PP 25
Note: Any current additional requirements not covered, can be applicable at time of
Building ,Plan review for final Environmental Health Service clearance.
Ciw of .T, emecula Denartment of Ruildinn and S;few
67.
A request for street addressing must be made prior to submittal Building Plan
Review.
68.
The applicant/developer shall comply with applicable provisions of the 1988
editions of the Uniform Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Codes, 1990
National Electrical Code, California State Administrative Code, Title 24
Handicapped and Energy Regulations and the Temecula City Code.
69.
Lighting on site and located on structures shall c_omply with Mount Palomar
Lighting Ordinance No. 655.
26
ATTACHlV~-NT NO. 6
FEE CHY~CK LIST
sxvo~,mx~.s-m-^.cc 16
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELO PMRNT FER CRRCKLIST
CASE NO.: Tentative Parcel Map 27336
The following fees were reviewed by Staff rehtive to their applicability to this project.
F~
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 16 of
Plan No. 239
Plot
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
N/A
Condition No. 42 of
Plan No. 239
Plot
Public Facility
(Traffic Signal Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Library)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Consistent with Specific Plan
Consistent with Future General Plan
Condition No. 40 of
Plan No. 239
N/A
Condition No. 61 of
Plan No. 239
Condition No. 16
N/A
Plot
SWOW_MSUtaS-PM-^.CC 17
ITEM NO. 26
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE:
May 26,1992
SUBJECT:
Proposed Fiscal Year 1992-93 Annual Operating Budget
Prepared By:
Grant M. Yates, Senior Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review the proposed annual Operating
Budget for the Fiscal Year 1992-93, make adjustments if desired and adopt Resolution
92- entitled:
RESOLUTION 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING THE OPERATING
BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 FOR THE CITY
OF TEMECULA AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON
CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE VARIOUS
DEPARTMENT BUDGETS.
DISCUSSION: Staff is proud to present the Fiscal Year 1992-93 Proposed
Operating Budget. The FY 1992-93 budget includes projected general fund revenues
of $12,356,801 with proposed expenditures and other uses of $11,880,354. This
proposed expenditure level leaves a margin of $476,447 between projected general
fund revenues and projected expenditures and other uses. The City Council has
identified an objective of developing and maintaining, a reserve for economic
uncertainties of 10% or $1,171,914 in Fiscal Year 1992-93. In addition to the 10%
reserve for economic uncertainties, undesignated unreserved fund balance at June 30,
1993 is projected to be $1,659,429 or 14% of the general fund. The revenue
projections include approximately $300,000 in sales tax revenue that will not be
available in subsequent years due to sales tax reimbursement agreements with Costco
and Community Facility District 88-12.
The proposed FY 1992-93 Operating Budget includes funding for three new positions
in the Planning Department for case processing, four new positions in Engineering to
manage the City's aggressive CapitalsImprovement Program, and six new positions in
Engineering to replace Willdan Associates to perform the plan check function.
The proposed budget also includes Internal Service Funds for Insurance, Vehicles,
Information Systems, and the Copy Center. Charges for depreciation of vehicles and
equipment will allow the City to develop fund balances specifically for the purchase
of replacement vehicles and equipment in future years.
The Fiscal Year 1992-93 proposed budget is a conservative, balanced budget,
developed in consideration of tlie City Council's priorities. This proposed budget will
provide for increased staffing and service levels while effectively utilizing all resources
currently available to the City. The Fiscal Year 1992-93 proposed budget was
developed taking into consideration the current state of the economy and the
economic uncertainty in the upcoming fiscal year. The result is a budget that will
enable the City to provide quality programs and services to the citizens of the City of
Temecula.
Staff looks forward to presenting this to you and answering any questions or concerns
that you might have.
Attachments: Resolution 92-__ to adopt Fiscal Year 1992-93 Annual
Operating Budget
City Council Recommendations
Councilmember
Pat Birdsall
FY 1992-93 PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET
City Council Recommendations
Recommendation
Fiscal Impact
Karel Lindemans
Provide funding for Business Promotion Program, which
includes funding for a staff position to assist developers
in getting projects through the approval process
250,000
Peg Moore
Sal Mu~oz
Ronald J. Parks
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY.
OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE
OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1992-93
FOR THE CITY OF TEMEC~A AND ESTABLISHING
CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS FOR
THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENT BUDGETS.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula has reviewed the proposed final
Operating Budget for fiscal year 1992-93 and has held ~iuch public meetings as are necessary
prior to adoption of the final Operating Budget, and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Temecula, California, as follows:
SECTION 1. That certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the
City of Temecula entitled "City of Temecula 1992-93 Annual Budget," is hereby adopted.
SECTION 2. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of
budget appropriations:
A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered
appropriation available to cover the expenditure.
B. The Department Head may prepare a transfer of appropriations within
departmental budget accounts up to $10,000 per transfer, with the approval of the City Manager.
C. The City Manager may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to
$10,000. Any expenditure of funds in excess of $10,000 requires City Council action.
D. The City Council must authorize transfers of funds from the Unreserved Fund
Balance and transfers within departmental budget accounts of $10,000 or more.
E. The City Council must authorize any increase in regular personnel positions
above the level included in the final budget. The City Manager may authorize the hiring of
temporary or part time staff as necessary within the limits imposed by the controls listed above.
F. The City Manager may approve change orders on Public Works contracts in
amounts up to $10,000, if sufficient appropriated funds are available.
SECTION 3. Outstanding encumbrances shown on the City books at June 30, 1992, are
hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for 1992-93.
05/20/92
4\Reso~x,258
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify adoption of the resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOFrED at a regular meeting of the City Council on
the 26th day of May, 1992, by the'following vote, to wit:
AYES: S
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
None
None
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
AI~FEST:
JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk
[SEAL]
05120192
ITEM
NO.
27
APPROVAL
CITY AlTOMY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER ')/PL_
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
May 26, 1992
Conditional Use Permit 2872, Revised No. 1
Airstrip Community Properties
RECOlVI1V[F-NDATION:
Provide direction to assist staff in providing a recommendation to
the Riverside County Planning Department.
BACKGROUND
Conditional Use Permit 2872 was an application to extend the life of an existing air strip located
southerly of Pauba Road and easterly of Via del Monte.
The above mferencetl Conditional Use Permit 2872 was approved by the Riverside County Board
of Supervisors on May 22, 1979. This Conditional Use Permit was given a five year life with
a provision for additional five (5) year extensions providing that a public use airport was not
constructed in the vicinity. In 1986, the applicant applied for, and was granted an extension of
time for the Airstrip. The applicant is now applying for a second extension of time, and the
County of Riverside has requested the City of Temecula provide comments and recommendations
prior to the County approving the extension.
One of the findings in the January 7, 1987 staff report prepared by Riverside County stated if
a public airport was built in the vicinity, further extensions would not be granted for Conditional
Use Permit 2872. Subsequent to this Conditional Use Permit being approve, d, the French Valley
Airport has been constructed. Additionally, at the time the use permit was originally approve, d,
surrounding land uses were predominan~y vacant properties and large lot residential. Since
1987, several residential tract maps have been appmved to the west of this project which will
result in thousands of dwelling units being constructed (Tentative Tract 23125 approved for 222
dwelling units and Tentative Tract 23143 approved for approximately 1100 dwelling units).
Conditionally permitted land uses are given specified periods of time to operate to allow
jurisdictions to review these uses periodically and ensure that there have been no problems with
respect to land use compatibility. At this time, Riverside County is requesting the City provide
input relative to the uses in proximity to the Airstrip. Staff is requesting the Council provide
direction to enable staff to make a recommendation to Riverside County.
S~-'TAFFRFI12S721CUP.CC
City Council/City Manager
CUP 2872, Revised No. 1
Page 2
FISCAL IMPACT
None
vgw
Attachments:
S~STAFFRPT~'/21CUP. CC 2
Zoning Area: Rancho Cal iforn ia
Supervisorial District: First Planning Comission:
E.A. Number: 30837 Agenda Item: 26
Rag ional Teem No.: One
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTHENT
STAFF REPORT
CONDITIOIIAL USE PEPJqIT NO, 2872
1-7-87
1. Applicant:
2. Type of Request:
3. Locat ion:
4. Parcel Size:
5. Existing Land Use:
6. Surround ing Land Use:
7. Exist ing Zoning:
8. Surround ing Zoning:
9. General Plan Elements:
10. Agency Recommendat ions:
11. Letters:
12. Sphere of Influence:
A irstr ip Community Assoc iat ion
Extend the 1 ire of an exist ing air strip
Southerly of Pauba Road and easterly of
V i a Del Nonte
5.05 acres recorded easerent
Existing private air strip
Vacant and 1 arge lot single
resident i al
W-2
R-R, R-A, R-A-5 and R-A-2½
LAND USE:
OPEN SPACE:
CIRCULATION:
family
Category III {rural ) 1
du/~ acre to I du/5
acres
Areas not Des ignated as
Open Space
Pauba Road 88' ROW
{Secondary}
V i a Del Monte 60 ' ROW
Av i at ion
of
of
this
See letters dated:
ROAD: 9-03-86
HEALTH: 7-23-86
FLOOD: 8-05-86
FIRE: 8-18-86
LAND USE: 10-07-86
OTHER: Rivers ida County
Department 7-23-86
Cal Trans Department
Aeronautics 8-1-86
Mr. Palomar Institute
Technology 7-24-86
OpPOSING/SUPPORTING: None as of
wr it ing
Not within a sphere of influence
BACKGROUND:
On May 22, 1979, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors approved Conditional
Use Permit No, 2236 for a private landing strip. The airstrip is a recorded
easement in favor of the Airstrip Community Association located within Tract
No. 12129. The airstr~p is held in common through the Covenants, Conditions
and Restrict ions prepared in conjunct ion with the recordat ion of Tract No
12129.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2872
Staff Report
Page 2
At the May 22, 1979, Board of Supervisors Hear ing, the Board had amended
Cond it ion No. 3 which granted a f ire year 1 lie for Cond it ional Use Permit No.
2236 with a prov is ion for 5 year extens ions prov id ing that a public use airport
is not constructed in the v ic in ity.
The applicant has submitted Cond it ional Use Permit No. 2872 to extend the 1 ire
of the existing airstrip pursuant to Condition No. 3 of the underlying permit,
Conditional Use Permit No. 2236. To date a public use airstrip has not been
constructed in !the v ic in ity of the project s ire.
Change of Zone Case No. 2428 changed the zoning des ignat ion on the site from
R-A-5 to W-2 in preparation for the conditional use permit application.
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing to extend the life of a conditional use permit for a
private small general aviation airstrip located easterly of Via Del Fbnte Road
and southerly of Pauba Road in the Rancho California Zoning Area.
LAND USE AND ZONING:
The subject site is an existing 5.05 + acre private airstrip, created on an
easement within Tract No. 12129. Surrounding land uses on all sides consist of
predom inately vac ant lots rang ing in size from 5 acres to 10 acres.
Additionally, throughout the area in all directions are scattered large lot
single family residential land uses.
The project site is zoned W-2, pursuant to Change of Zone Case No. 2428.
Private airstrips are on appropriate land use within the W-2 zone providing a
cond it ional use has been granted. Surround ing zoning is in comb inat ion of R-A,
R-A-5, R-A-2~ and R-R. The predominate zoning designation within a ½ mile
radius is R-A-5.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
The in it ial study conducted for Env ironmental Assessment No. 30837 has
ident if led no ise and high f ire potent ial as the pr imary env ironmental issues.
Noise:
As previously Indicated the property is the site of an exist ing cond it ional use
permit for an airstrip, Conditional Use Permit No. 2236. An aeronautical study
conducted by the Department of Administration, in conjunction with Conditional
Use Permit No. 2236 concluded that noise levels beyond the s{rip would not
exceed 60 dbA (CNEL) due to the number of ant ic ipated flight operat ions,
land ing strip locat ion and the fact that the airstrip would accommodate only
smal 1 general a ircraft. The Federal Av iat ion Adm in istrat ion has verbal ly
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2872
Staff Report
Page 3
indicated to staff that additional airspace analysis will not be necessary and
that the original study for Conditional Use Permit No. 2236 is transferable to
the present proposal, Cond it ional Use Permit No. 2872. In add it ion, the State
of Cal iforn i a D iv is ion of AeronaUtics has indicated in the ir letter dated
August 1, 1986, that an amended permit is not required unless the airstrip is
exp an ded.
F ire:
The project site is located within a high fire hazard area per the composite
environmental hazards map of the Rivers ide County General Plan.
Potential fire hazards due to the proposed airstrip will be significantly
reduced through the condition of approval prohibiting the storage and or sale
of petroleum products on the site and by requirin9 that the aircraft parking
and operation areas be maintained free of flareable vegetation and debris at all
t lines.
GENERAL PLAN:
The subject s Ire falls wlth in Areas Not Des ignated as Open Space and
Conservat ion on the Open Space and Conservation Map of the Rivers ide County
Comprehensive General Plan. In addition the project falls within the Rancho
California - Temecula subarea of the Southwest Territories Land Use Planning
Area. The land use pol ic ies for the Rancho - Temecula subarea state that
future land uses should generally be Category I and Category II land uses
within major commercial and industrial land uses located adjacent to 1-15. In
the outlying areas of the Rancho - Temecula Subarea future land uses should be
Category III (rural) land uses.
The subject s ire is located approximately 6 miles east of Rancho Cal iforn ia and
is therefore best described as outlying. In terms of area development and
zoning the subject site and surrounding area meet the Category III (rural) land
use des ignat ion at th is time.
It's staff opinion that due to area development, surrounding zoning, land use
constraints, general plan policies and lack of available infrastructure, the
subject site and the surrounding area will retain the existing large lot rural
resident ial oF ientat ion for a sign if icant length of time. Therefore, the
continued use of the airstrip for an additional five years will not conflict
with surround ing 1 and uses.
Therefore, based on the foregoing, staff finds the project to be compatible
with surrounding land uses. The project meets the applicable requirements of
Ordinance 348 and is consistent with the Riverside County General Plan.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2872
Staff Report
Page 4
FINDINGS:
0
The appl .cant is request ing to extend the 1 ife of an ex .st ing private
airstrip, al)proved through Conditional Use Permit No. 2236,
Cond it ional Use Permit No. 2236 was approved by the Rivers .de County Board
of Supervisors on May 22, 1979.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2236 was given a five year 1 ife with a provision
for five (5) year extensions providing that a public use airport is not
constructed in the v ic in ity.
4. Change of ZOne Case No. 2428 placed W-2 zoning over the subject s ite.
5. Surrounding land uses'are predominately vacant properties with scattered
1 arge lot rural res ,dent ial land uses.
6. Surrounding zoning is in comb,nat ion of R-A, R-A-5, R-A-2~ and R-R.
7. The initial study conducted for Environmental Assessment No. 30837 has
identified no ise and high fire potential as the primary environmental
issues.
The project site falls within Area Not Designated as Open Space on the
Open Space and Conservation Hap of the Rivers ,de County General Plan.
The project site falls within the Rancho - Temecula subarea of the South
Western Territory Land Use Plann ing Area.
The Rancho -Temecula subarea policies prescribe Category III {rural) land
uses for the out-lying areas-of the Rancho - Temecula subarea.
CONCLUSIONS:
0
Extending the life of the existing airstrip for an additional five years,
per Conditional Use Permit No. 2872, is compatible with area development.
There have been no newly constructed public use airports in the vicinity
of the subject site.
The subject site and surrounding area meet the Category III (rural) land
use des ,gnat ion at th is t ,me.
An aeronautical study prepared in conjuct ion with Cond it ional Use permit
No. 2236 concluded that the airstrip will not have a significant noise
impact upon the surround ing land uses.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2872
Staff Report
Page 5
5. The Federal Av iat ion Admin istrat ion has verbally ind lcated that the
aeronaut ical study conducted for Cond it ional Use Permit No. 2236 is
transferable to the present proposal, Cond it ional Use Permit No. 2872.
6. Potential fire hazards wR1 be mitigated through conditions of approval
prohib itSrig the storage and or sale of petroleum products on s ire and by
maintaining the site free of flammable vegetation and debris.
7. Airstrips are an appropriate land use with the W-2 zone providing a
conditional use permit has been granted.
B. The project is consistent w~th the Riverside County General P1 an.
g. All environmental concerns can be mitigated through the conditions of
approval.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Based on the find ings and conclus ions incorporated in the staff report, staff
recommends the following;
ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 30837
based on the conclusion that the proposed project will not have a significant
impact upon the environment; and,
APPROVAL of Cond it ional Use Permit No. 2872 subject to the cond it ions of
approval and in accordance with Exhibit A.
DAJ :me
12-23-86
RZVERSZDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
CONDXT/ONS OF APPROVAL
Airscrip Community Association
28465 F=ont St. Ste. 313
Temecula, CA 92390
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2872
ProJect Descr ipt ion: 'Kxtend life
f ~Q exl~ n~ r tr~
This approval shall be used within two (~) years of approval date; otherwise
It shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. By use is meant the
beginning of substantial construction contemplated by this approval within the
two (2) year period which Is thereafter d ll igently pursued to completion, or
t'~ I~g inn ing of subsrant ial ut il izat Ion contemplated by th is approval.
The development of the premises shall conform substantially with that as
shown on plot plan marked Exhibit A , or as mended by these
cond it ions.
2. In the event the use hereby permitted ceases operat Ion for a period of one
(1) year or more, this approval shall become null and void.
3. Any outs ide 1 ight ing shal 1 be hooded and d iretied so as not to sh ine
d lrectly upon adjoin ing property or pub1 !c rights-of-way.
The appl Icant shall comply with the street improvement recon~nendat ions
out1 ined in the County Road Department transm ittal dated 9-3-86 , a
copy of ~h ich is attached.
Water and sewerage disposal facll itles shall be Installed in accordance
with the provis ions set forth in the Rivers ida County Health Department
transmittal dated 7-23-86 m a copy of which is attached.
Flood protection shall be provided In accordance with the RIverside County
Flood Control District transm ittal dated 8-5-86 , a copy of which is
art ached;
F Ire protect ion shal 1 be provided In accordance w Ith the appropr late
section of Ordinance S46 and the County Fire Warden's transmittal dated
8-18-86 , a copy of ~h ich is attached.
CONDITIONAL USE PEFa4IT NO. 2872
Conditions of Approval
Page 2
8. The applicant shall comply ~rith 'the Department of Building and Safety
recommendations dated 10-7-86, a copy of which is attached-
9. The permit shall be granted for a period of not more than five (5) years
with five year extentions possible pro~rlded that a pubiC. use airport
is not constructed in the vicinity.
10. Aircraft activity shall be limited to no more than 10 flight operations
per month.
11. the airs=rip shall not be open to the public and the runway shall be
marked with an "X" or "R" in accordance with applicable federal air
regulations-
12. There shall be no storage'of fuel conducted on the premises unless
appropriate permits are obtained from the Riverside County Department
of Fire Protection, Riverside County Department of Weights and Measures,
and Southern California Air Quality Management District. There shall
be no sale of petroleum products condugned on the premises.
13. There shall he no flying instruction, proficiency examination for
licensing requirements, or maintenance of aircraft conducted from
the premises covered by this permit.
14. The operation permitted hereby shall conform to all other applicable
County, State, and Federal requirements affecting the operation of
airports.
15. All aircraft parking and operating areas shall be maintained free of
flammahle vegetation or debris an all times.
16. All aircraft parking and operating areas shall be treated with a soil
stabilizer at such time intervals as necessary to prevent dust.
17. Prior to any use or occupancy permitted hereby, permittee shall:
a. Comply with all applicable requirements of Riverside County
Ordinance 546. (Fire Protection)
~. Obtain clearance and/or permits from the following public agencies:
Road Department
Building and Safety
Fire Protection
Health Department
Department of Airports
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2872
Conditions of Approval
Page 3
18.
19.
20.
This permit shall become null and void on Jaunuary 7, 1992.
The property ~s located within thirty (30) miles of Mount Palomar
Observatory. Light and glare may adversely impact operations at
the observatory. Outdoor lighting shall be minimized, especially
during the late night and early morning hours. All outdoor lighting
shall be.from low pressure sodium lamps that are oriented and
shielded to prevent direct illumination above the horizontal plane
passing through the luminaire and in compliance with the attached
Lamp Type and Shielding Requirements per Fixture.
In the event the use hereby ceases operation for a pe=iod of one (1)
year or more, this permit shall become null and void.
DAJ:me
12-23-86
LeRoy D. Smoot
ROAD COMMISSIONER & COUNTY SURVEYOR
OFFICE OF ROAD COMMISSIONER 6 COUNTY SURVEYOR
September 3, 1986
COUNTY ADMINISTR&TIVE C~rNT_.lrR
RAllyING AOONESSZ PoD. BOX I~eO
RIVERSIDE, CAI--IIIrOI~.N} A 'Z'02
·TEI, EImHONE (714} 717-1814
Riverside County Planning Commission
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92051
(Expand life of the existing airstrip)
Re: CU 2872
Team i
Ladies and Gentlemen:
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced
item, the Road Department has the following recommendations:
Prior to issuance of a building permit or any use allowed by this permit,
the applicant shall complete the following conditions at no cost to any
government agency:
1. No additional right of way shall be required on Via Del Monte
since adequate right of way exists.
2. No traffic signal mitigation will be required on this project.
Prior to occupancy or any use allowed by this permit, the applicant shall
construct the following at no cost to any government agency:
3. No additional road improvements will be required at this time.
4. All work done within County right of way shall have an encroach-
ment permit.
Ld:lh
Very truly yours,
Coura y of R xr x-s de
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Planning DeparUnent - Team 1 DaTZ, July 23, 1986
Attn: David James
S~n Mar~.'nez, R.S., SeniOr S~nit~ri~n - K.:nv-l'rnTu~en'r~] I-~lth .q~.'rv']r~,~ D~v~don
Conditional Use Permit No. 2872
The Environmental Health Services Division has reviewed the Exhibit A
concerning the proposed life extension of existing airstrip
No sewer or water services are required.
FORM 4, :S/65
pL2~;~r:~R'Sluc ubun/Ty
'.' r'~G DEPARTMENT
KENNETH L.. I'DWARDS
CHIEF
1lib MARKEr ITREEr
P. O. BOX 1033
TELEPHONE (714)
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
RIVIRIIDWh ~,ALIFORNIA I1101
August 5, 1986
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attention: Regional Team No. i
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: Conditional Use Case 2872
Conditional Use Case 2872 is a'proposal to construct an airplane
landing strip in the Rancho California area. The site is located
approximately 1200 feet north of the Linda Rosea Road and Via Del
Monte intersection-
The topography of the area consists of well defined ridges and
natural watercourses which traverse the property. The landing
strip should not divert the natural flow patterns of the area-
Very truly yours,
CO:
O'Malley Engineering
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
S~Tior Civil Engineer
EWL: pml
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
RAY HEBRARD
FIRE CHIEF
08-18-86
To:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Planning & Enttineerinli Office
4080 Lemon Street. Suite ! 1
Rivehide, CA 92501
(714} 787-6606
Attn: Team I
Re: CU 2872
With respect to the conditions of approval regarding the above referenced
conditional use, the Fire Department reconnends the following fire protection
measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or
recognized fire protection Standards:
1. Fire protection measures provided with original permit, no additional
comments or conditions.
All questions regarding the meaning of the conditions shall be referred to Fire
Department Planning and Engineering staff.
WILLIAM H. Fire Marshal
cdt
October 7, 1986
Building and Safety, Land Use Division
CU 2872 - Exhibit "A"
No accessory structures (hangers, storage bldgs., etc. ) are pezmitted
unless a dwelling exists.
/dnb
GEN. FORM 4,
DATE: July 10, 1986
TO: Assessor
Building and Safety
Surveyor
Road Department
Health
Fire Protection
Flood Control District
Fish & Game
:liVr-.-,}iDE counc.u
All
PL Ring DEPA:taTIErlC
Mr. Palomar ·
Riverside County Dept. Aviation -f
'State of Calif. Division of Aero~utieS
Federal Aviation Asspc.
Commissioner Bresson
Conditional Use 2872 - (Tm-1) - E.A.
30837 - Airstrip Community Assoc. - J.B.
'Pete" Olhasso - Rancho California Area -
First Supervtsorial ~istrict - Sly of
Pauba Rd. & Ely via Del Monte - w-z Zone
- 5.05 Area - REQUEST Extend life of the
existing airstrip (cup 2236) - Hod 120 -
A.P. 926-27,926-28,926-29
Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Land
Division Committee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for August 7, 1986. If it ~
clears, it will then go to public hearing.
Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to July 25, 1986 in order that we
may include them in the staff report for this particular case.
Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact
David James at 787-1363
Planner
COMRENTS: The Aviation Department has no objection to extenalng the life of CUP #2872.
However, bec~_~use of the present growth taking place in Rancho California, we recu~_nd
that you consider the potential for future residential develoXment in this are. As
a general rule residential develoXxnent and a/~/~rcraft .operations are not
ccmpa~hle.
DATE: 7-23-86 SIGNATURE
PLEASE print name and title
G. Hardy A~ree, Assistant Director
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501-3657
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
::liVF,:I iDF, COUnt,u
PLAnninG DF, PA=aErnSnC
DATE: July 10, 1986
TO: Assessor
Building and Safety
Surveyor
Road Department
Health
Fire Protection
Flood Control District
Fish & Game
RECEIVED
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
INDIO OffiCE
Mt. Palomar
Riverside County Oept. AviatiOn
State of Calif. Division of Aeronauttes
Federal Aviation Asspc.
Comissioner Bresson
Conditional Use 2872 - (Tm-1) - E.A.
30837 - Airstrip Community Asspc. -
· Pete' Olhasso - Rancho California Area
First Supervisorial ntstrict - Sly of
Pauba Rd. & Ely via De1 Monte - w-z Zone
- 5.05 Area - REQUEST Extend life of the
existing airstrip (cup 2236) -Mod 120 -
A.P. 926-Z7,926-Zd,926-29
Please review the case described above, along with the attached case maD. A Land
Otviston Committee meettng has been tentatively scheduled for August 7, 1986. If it
clears, it will then go to public hearing.
Your comments and recommendations are requested Orior to July 25, 1986 in order that we
may include them in the staff report for this particular case.
Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact
Oavid james at 787-1363
Planner
COMMENTS:
Unable to comment by 7/25 as that is the date we received this request,
Pursuant to CEQA, the Division's concerns lie with airport-related noise
and safety impacts on the surrounding community 'and the community's
potential impact on airport operations. Since Billy Joe Airport is
already permitted, an amended permit should not be required unless the
the applicant wishes t~.ave the airport permit
airport is expanded. If
reflect a different name, the applicant should c ntact Betty Clark at
(916)322-9952.
f ( .' ~ ,.
PLEASE print name and title Sandy Hfu)nacd, Envico~menta~ ~an~ec
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TH FLOOR
RIVERSIDE CALIFORNIA 92501-3657
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
DATE: July 10, 1986
TO: Assessor
Building and Safety
Surveyor
Road Department
Health
Fire Protection
Flood Control District
Fish & Game
RiVErSiDE COUnC,u
PLAnrli!lG DEP,xREiilEllE
RIVeting.,,
PLANNI.~.G D~ ,,~uNTy
PARTMENT
RECEIVED
JUL 2 x, i986
PALOMAR OBSERVATORY
tit. Palomar
Riverside County Dept. Aviation
State of Calif, Division of Aeronauties
Federal Aviation Assoc.
Commissioner Bresson
Conditional Use 2872 - (Tm-1) - E,A.
30837 - Airstrio Community Assoc. - J.B.
"Pete" Olhasso - Rancho California Area -
First Supervisorial ~istrict - Sly of
Pauba Rd, & Ely via De1 Monte - w-z Zone
- 5.05 Area - REQUEST Extend life of the
existing airstrip (cup 2236) - Hod 120 -
A.P. 926-27,926-28,926-29
Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Land
Division Committee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for August 7, 1986. If it
clears, it will then go to public hearing.
Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to July 25, 1986 in order that we
may include them in the staff report for this oarticular case.
Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to contact
David James at 787-1363
Planner
COMMENTS:
DATE: 7/24/86 SIGNATURE /~/~
PLEASE print name and title De. Robect 3. Btucato/Asslstant Dt=ector/Paloma=
4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501-3657
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS STREET, ROOM 304
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-8277
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR I"ALOMAR OBSERVATORY lo5-34
This case is vithin 30 miles of the Palomar Observatory and is therefore
vithin the zone requiring the use of lov-pressure sodium vapor lamVs for
street lighting, as stipulated by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors.
We request that the design for other types of outdoor li~htin~ that may be
employed on this property be made consistent vith the spirit of the decision
of the Board of Supervisors vhich is intended to mitigate the adverse effects
such facilities have on ~he astronomical research at Palomar. Beneficial
steps to that end include:
1. Use the minimum amount of light needed for the task.
Orient and shield light to prevent direct upvard illumination.
Turn off lights at 11:00 p.m. (or earlier) unless, in commercial
applications, the associated business is oven past that time, in vhich
case the lights should be turned off at closing.
Use lo~-pressure sodium lamps for roadrays, valkwavs, equipment yards,
parking lots, security and other similar applications. These lights
need not be turned off at 11:00 p.m.
For further information, call (818) 356-~035.
Robert J. Brucato
Assistant Director
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA 9SlZfi TELEPHONE (ill) 35&-4013 TELEX eTS4Z': CALTECH PSD
LA~P TYPE AND SHIELDING KEQUZRE~E~TS PER FIXTURE
CLASS I-COLOR XENDITIO~ IN~ORTANT
(CZ4:u;a 2' Z~,gh~ng mane' aZZ out4boz, Z~.gh~ng used for, l;u~ ru=~ Z~r[.~;ed to ou~;:Zoo:,
cares oP ea't:~.ng a:r'eu , gsserr, b Z.~ or' ?e~cr~P cn,ea.s , b~.Z Zbc>ar'c~s and o~:hez, 8'~3'ns ,
de=ora'~ve ef.f*e~t.8, z,ecn,ea~o~,uzZ far~Z~ee m~ o~;hez' e~r~Z.a.~ appZ~o~yzs when
wZoz, z,,e~'~,~on ~.8 ~rrpoz, t,:m~.) ..
LAHP TYPE ZONE A (15 mi.) ZONE B (15-30 rot.)
Lo~ Pressure Sodium
Other above ~050 Lumens
Others 4050 Lumens & Belo~
Fully Sh4'elded
Prohibited
Fully Shielded
Fully Shielded
&llr, md
CLASS II-PARKINC LOTS, SECURITY, rrC,
(C7,ase .Er ff. ght-:.n9 mecrn8 aZZ .ou',.~m, 'Z~.ght'i. ng used fop ~,~ ncr~ Z~.rn~ted to
/.ZZu,r/.na'~on foz, uaZia~mje o .z,o-~.,aye, equ~pmenf; !~m'ds , paz,idng Zof;a and ouf. doo~, -
se=uz~ ~. ) .
'x,~, Tyyz ".._ zc~ A
LmfPressure Sodium Fully Shielded'
O~hers above Zd:)50 Lum_-~__-~ Yroh~i~ed
O~hers ~O~L~eu & B~ Prohibited
ZO]E B (15-30 mi.)
Fully Shielded
Prohibited
Allrded
CLASS Ill-DECORATIVE
Lo~ Pressure Sodium
O~hers above ~050 Lumens
Others 4050 Lumens & Belmf
Luminous Tube
Prohibited
Prohibited
Prohibited
Prohibited
Pull Shield
Prohibited
Alloved
Aliawed
EXA}~OF~~ES OF ~050
particular light is decided by
manufacturers specifications):
LUKE~S & BELO~ (The acceptability of a
its lumen output, not vatrage; check
200 ~att Standard Incandescent and less
· 150 ~att TungSten-Halogen (quartz) and less
· 75Watt ~ercury Vapor and less
· 50 ~att High Pressur2 Sodium and less
40 ~att Fluorescen~ and less
~ot allowed in Zone A, Class l.
Lights shall be shielded vhere feasible and focused to minimize spill
light into the night sky-or adjacent properties.
~axtmum of 8100 total lumens per acre or per parcel if under one (1)
acre,
Honorable Board of Supervisors and Planning Co~ssion
County of Riverside
Riverside, California
We hereby authorize Pancho Pacific Zngineering Cor~oration to
represent us in processing of subdivision and plot plan of the
following property~
APN 921-090-011, 012 and 013
Riverside County, California
Respectfully ~
Kaiser Development Company
Solana Way
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
BEING A DIVISION OF TRACT 12005-1, 12005-2 AND 12005 AS
RECORDED IN MAP BOOK 121 PAGES 50-57, BOOK 127 PAGES
15-21 RESPECTIVELY ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
Honorable Boar8 of Supervisors and Planning Commission
County of Riverside
Riverside, California 92501
We hereby authorize Rancho Pacific Engineering to
represent us in the processing of subdivision and
change of zone for the following property:
APN 926-660-001 thru 009
APN 926-650-001 thru 013
APN 926-640-001 thru 035
APN 926-690-001 thru 016
APN 926-700-001 thru 009
APN 926-680-001 thru 008
APN 926-670-004 thru 009
RiversiSe County, California
~espec~fully ·
kaleer I}evelopment C_ , '-y
I
ITEM 28
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
May 26, 1992
City Council/City Manager
Mark J. Ochenduszko, Assistant City Manager
PAVING OF 6TH AND FRONT STREET VACANT LOT
RECOMMENDATION:
a)
b)
It is recommended that Council direct staff:
regarding its interest in the temporary paving of the vacant lot at
6th and Front Streets; and
to appropriate funds as necessary.
DISCUSSION:
The City recently acquired the vacant lot at the northeast corner of 6th and Front
Streets. One member of the City Council has asked staff to explore the feasibility of
providing temporary paving on the vacant lot so that it can be used on an interim
basis for the Farmers Market and other similar activities. The lot can be temporarily
paved with three inches of asphalt for approximately $38,850.00 This temporary
improvement would not include landscaping, tire blocks, striping, or any other
improvements that would accompany the development of a permanent parking lot.
As an alternative, gravel can be placed on the lot to provide a temporary surface at
the cost of $.15,000. It should be noted, however, that there are maintenance
expenses associated with keeping the gravel in a confined area.
FISCAL IMPACT:
1)
If the City Council determines that the lot should be temporarily paved
with asphalt, $38,850 should be appropriated from Redevelopment
Agency CIP-General Contractor Account # 016-199-999-44-5804 to
016-199-999-42-5219.
2)
If the City Council determines that a temporary gravel overlay should be
utilized, $15,000 needs to be appropriated from Redevelopment
Agency CIP General Contractor Account # 016-199-999-44-5804 to
016-199-999-42-5219 Temporary Improvements.
a:pave.agn
ITEM
29
APPROVAL:
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Anthony Elmo, Chief Building Official
May 26, 1992
Consideration of an Ordinance amending
Ordinance No. 546 "Fire Protection"
Riverside County
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve the following Ordinance, First
Reading, and set Tuesday, June 9, 1992, at 7:00 p.m., as the day, date and time for
a public hearing to hear any objections to the adoption of this Ordinance whose title
appears as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 546, 'FIRE
PROTECTION' ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
BY AMENDING DIVISION VIII, FIRE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR
BUILDINGS, INSTALLATION, REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF FIRE
SYSTEMS AND APPLIANCES."
DISCUSSION:
Building and Safety, along with Riverside County Fire Department staff, has studied
and subsequently modified Riverside County Ordinance No. 546 to coincide with
provisions of the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building Code. The 1991 edition of the
Uniform Building Code is currently being presented to Council for adoption in
accordance with State of California mandate. Modification to Ordinance No. 546 is
necessary to maintain consistency of building design regulations in the City.
v:\wp\agenda,rep\cccm0526 .ord
With this modification, the provision for life safety support systems in this Ordinance
will be made :o read the same as Section 1807 of the 1991 edition of the Uniform
Building Code. The other modification staff is proposing is one that will establish
criteria that Will allow the omission of automatic fire sprinklers in certain building
types. Under this section, the construction of a four (4) hour fire resistive area
separation wall will be the only means considered to reduce the overall building area
for purposes of omitting fire sprinklers. All other modifications are administrative in
nature. All proposed modifications have been made with cooperation of the Fire
Chief.
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH~ CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMI~NDING RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 546,
"'FIRE PROTECTION" ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY THE CITY OF
TEMECUIA, BY AMENDING DMSION VIII, FIRE PROTECTION
REQ~S FOR BUILDINGS, INSTALLATION, REPAIR AND
MAINTENANCE OF HRE SYSTEMS AND APPLIANCES.
~A~, THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES B~,~I:~Ry ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Division HI, "Fix~ Protection Requi~mcnts for Buildings, Installation, Repair
and Maintenance of Fire Protection Systems and Appliances," of Riverside County Ordinance
No. 546 as the Same was incorporated by reference into the Temecula Municipal Code by City
Ordinance No. 90-04, is hereby amended as follows:
A. Section 801 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 801. The County Fire Chief shah designate the type and number of fife
appliances to be installed and maintained in and upon all buildings and premises
within City in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance and the most
current adopted edition of the Uniform Building Code.
B. Section 801.1,(a)l, is hereby mended to read as follows:
Section 801.1
(a.)
Automatic fire sprinkler systems conforming to the standards
described in NFPA No. 13 shall be installed in:
All new occupancies which exceed a fire flow of 1500 gpm
as per table A-III-A-1 or when building exceeds 30 feet in
height.
C. Section 801.1,(c), is hereby amended to read as follows:
(C.)
Area separation walls of four hour fire resistive construction with
30 inch parapets which are installed pursuant to this section may
be used to reduce the building area for fire flow computations shall
meet the specifications of the Uniform Building Code, Section
505f; however, with the exception of residential
condominiums/townhouses, the designated location of an area
s~,aration wall proposed in lieu of ftre sprinklers shall require
approval of the Administrative Authority.
D. Section 801.2 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 801.2. The "Life Safety Support System" described in this section shall
be required on and/or in all new high-rise occupancies. The minimum standards
required by this section shall be in accordance with Section 1807 or the most
current adopted edition of the Uniform Building Code.
E. Section 804(a) is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 804.
(a.)
The fwe flow shall be set by the County Fire Chief, before any
building may be constructed within the City. Each fife hydrant
curren~y existing or required to be installed on the parcel of land
to be developed shall be capable of providing the fire flow set by
the County Fire Chief purSUant to this section. In setting the
requirements for fire flow, the County Fire Chief shah use as a
guide the standards published by the Insurance Services Office in
the most current adopted edition of their pamphlet entitled "Guide
for Determination of Required Fire Flow ," provided, however that
in no case shah the County Fire Chief require a fire flow in excess
of that required by the "Guide for Determination of Required Fire
FlOW."
F. Section 805 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 805. No building constructed within the City shah be occupied or used
until the fire flows required by Section 801.1,801.2 and 804 of this Ordinance
are provided and operative.
Section 2. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this Ordinance
or the application therefor to any person or circumstance shall be held invalid, such invalidity
shah not affect the other provisions or applications of the provision of this Ordinance, which can
abe given effect without the invalid provisions or applications, and to this end, the provisions
of this Ordinance are declared severnhie.
Section 3. City Clerk. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance
and shah cause the same to be posted as required by law.
PASSE1), APPROVED AND ADO FIT~r~ this day of
ATFEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
ITEM
30
APPROVAL:
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Anthony Elmo, Chief Building Official
May 26, 1992
Consideration of Adoption of Various Building Codes and Certain
Amendments Thereto
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve the following Ordinance, First
Reading, and Set Tuesday, June 9, 1992, at 7:00 p.m., as the day, date and time for
a public hearing to hear any objections to the adoption of this Ordinance whose title
appears as follows:
ORDINANCE NO 92-_
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING CODES
WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THERETO: THE 1991 EDITION OF THE
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM
BUILDING CODE STANDARDS. THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM
MECHANICAL CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM PLUMBING
CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE,
THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF
DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM
HOUSING CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE,
THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS AND
THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM SWIMMING POOLS. SPAS AND
HOT TUB CODE."
v:\wp\agenda,rep\cccmO526,cde
DISCUSSION:
The City has a' opted, by reference, a number of model building codes, as required by
the State Heal~lh and Safety Code. When any changes are made by the State to these
model codes, the City has six (6) months to enact any modifications to the State
laws. These modifications must be based on findings related to specific, local
conditions. If no modifications are enacted by the Ci~, the State-adopted codes are
automatically invoked and govern the City's construction activities.
The State has recently adopted. the 1992 editions of the published building-related
codes. The Building and Safety Department has prepared a series of recommended
changes to modify these codes for local conditions. The staff report for the public
hearing will detail these modifications whereas focus of this report is the
establishment of a public hearing.
A public hearing date of June 9, 1992, has been set to hear any objections to the
proposed adoption of the codes and the recommended local amendments.
v:\wp\agenda.rep\cccrn0526 .cde ~
ORDINANCE NO 92-_
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF .TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING BY RRFERENCE THE FOLLOWING CODES
WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THERETO: THE 1991 EDITION OF THE
I~rNIFORM BUHI~ING CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM
BUILDING CODE STANDARDS. THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM
MECHANICAL CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM PLUMBING
CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE,
THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF
DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM
HOUSING CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE,
THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS AND
THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM SWIMMING POOLS. SPAS AND
HOT TUB CODE.
W!tE~, The City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. The following are hereby adopted by reference, as amended by Section
2 of this Ordinance, as the building codes of the City of Temecula, three (3) copies of which
are on file in the office of the City Clerk.
(A)
Uniform Building Code, 1991 edition with appendices and California State
amendments;
(B) Uniform Building Code Standards, 1991 edition;
(c)
Uniform Mechanical Code, 1991 edition with appendices and California
State amendments;
(D)
Uniform Plumbing Code, 1991 edition with appendices and California
State amendments;
(E)
Uniform Administrative Code, 1991 edition;
Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Building, 1991 edition;
(G) Uniform Housing Code, 1991 edition;
(l-r) uniform swimming, Pools. spas and Hot Tub Code, 1991 edition.
] p:~ncwcodc. '91
SECTION 2. Amendments.: The following amendments are made to the. building codes,
1991 editions, as adopted by this Ordinance:
(A) The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the Uniform
Buildin? Code, 1991 ~di~on adopted by this Ordinance:
1. Section 301fa~ is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 301 (a) Permits Required. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm
or corporation tO erect, construct eplarge, alter, repair, roof or re-roof, move, improve, remove,
convert of demolish any building or structure regulated by this code, except as specified in
Subsection (b) of this Section, or cause the same to be done unless a separate, appropriate permit
for each building, structure, or building service equipment has first been obtained from the
Building Official.
2. Section 301Co)5, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 301Co) Work Exempt from Permits. A building permit shall not
be required for the following:
Retaining walls which are not over two (2) feet in height,
measured from the top of footing to top of wall unless supporting
a surcharge or impounding flammable Class I, Class II or III-A
liquids.
Section 301 is hereby amended by adding thereto Subsection (d) to read
as follows:
Section 301(d) Requirements. No person, firm, or corporation shall be
approved to perform work authorized by the City, for building, mechanical or any sub-trade
work relating to building construction unless they are:
1. An employee of an appropriately licensed contractor; or
The property owner performing his/her own work on his/her own
property; or
An employee of the owner, provided the owner shows evidence of
worker's compensation insurance required by state law and city
ordinance, and the owner's federal tax identification number.
2 p:%n~wcodc. '91
,
All contractors and their sub-contractors must have current and
valid city business licenses.
Section 304 is hereby deleted in its entirety.
5. Table No.-3'A Building Permit Fees is hereby deleted in its entirety.
6. Section 417 is hereby mended by adding the following definition:
Patio Cover. A one story structure, open on two or more sides.
Patio Enclosure. A patio cover with exterior walls with open area of the
longer dimension and one additional wall equal to at least 65 % of the area below a minimum
of 6' 8" measured from the floor. Openings may be enclosed with insect screening or plastic
that is readily removable translucent or transparent plastic not more than .125 inch in thickness.
7. Section 2623 is hereby mended to read as follows:
Section 2623. The minimum thickness of concrete floor slabs supported
direc~y on the ground shall not be less than three and one-haft (3 1/2) inches All group R
occupancies shall have a minimum six (6) rail moisture barrier with minimum two (2) inch sand
cover.
llxception: 1. A moisture barrier shall not be required under slabs on grade
of open or enclosed patios as def'med in Section 417.
Section 2910 is hereby mended by adding thereto a new paragraph to read
as follows:
Section 2910(f) Shb Dowels. In all occupancies, slab connection from
existing slabs to new construction shall be placed at twenty-four (24") inches on center with
reinforcing steel of one half inch minimum diameter, eighteen (18") inches in length.
9. Chapter 31 is deleted in its entirety.
10. Section 3203 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 3203. The roof covering on any structure regulated by this code
shall be as specified in Table No. 32-A and as classified in Section 3204, except that no roof
covering shall be less than a Class B roofing assembly.
Exception:
1. The roof covering on any structure regulated by this code
within the Historical District Overlay, generally known as the Old
Town Temecuh Historical Preservation District, shall not be less
than a Class C roofmg assembly.
3 p: ~ncwcodc. '9 1
2. The roof covering of any structure located on a parcel with a
minimum of one-haft acre in area may have a roof covering of not
less than a Class C Roofing Assembly when approved by the
Building Official.
3. The roof covering of all re-roofing shall conform to the
applicable provisions of this section as mended herein, except that
the roof covering for the re-roofing of ten percent (10 % ) or less
of the area of any roof may consist of material comparable to the
remainder of the roof.
11. Section 3802(a) is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 3802(a) Where required. An Automatic fire-extinguishing system
shall be installed in the occupancies and locations as set forth in this section except where
Riverside County Protection Ordinance No. 546 applies. In that case the most restrictive
provisions will apply.
12. Section 4704 is hereby amended by adding the following:
Section 4704(e) Suspended Ceilings which are designed and constructed
to support ceiling panels or tiles, with or without lighting fnttures, ceiling mounted air terminals
or other ceiling mounted services shall comply with the requirements of this standard.
EXception:
1. Ceiling area of 144 square feet or less surrounded by walls
which Connect directly to the structure above shall be exempt from
the lateral load design requirements of these standards.
2. Ceilings constructed of lath and phster of gypsum board,
screw or nail attached to suspended members that support a ceiling
on one level extending from wall to wall.
Minimum Design Loads
(f) Lateral Forces.
1. Such ceiling systems and their connections to the building structure
shall be designed and constructed to resist a lateral force reaction from the partitions as specified
in Subsection 12.1815.
2. Connection of lighting fixtures to the ceiling system shall be designed
for a lateral force of 100 percent of the weight of the fixture in addition to the prescribed
vertical loading as specified in Subsection 10.
4 p:~.cwcodc.'91
(g) Grid Members, Connectors and Expansion Devices.
1. The main runners and cross runners of the ceiling system and their
splices, intersection connectors and expansion devices shall be designed and constructed to carry
a mean ultimate test load of not less than 180 pounds or twice the actual load, whichever is
greater, in tension with a 5-degree ntisalignment of the members in any direction, and in
compression. In lieu of 5-degree misalignment, the load may be applied with a 1-inch
eccentricity of a sample not more than 24 inches long each side of the splice. The connections
at splices and intersections shall be of the mechanical interlocking type.
2. Where the composition or configuration of ceiling system members or
assemblies and their connections are such that calculations of their allowable load-carrying
capacity cannot be made in accordance with established methods of analysis, their performance
shall be established by test.
3. Evaluation of test results shah be made on the basis of the mean values
resulting from tests of not fewer than three identical specimens, provided the deviation of any
individual test result from the man value does not exceed plus or minus 10 percent. The
allowable load-Carrying capacity as determined by test shall not exceed one half of the man
ultimate test value.
(h) Substantiation.
1. Each ceiling system manufacturer shall furnish lateral loading capacity
and displacement or elongation characteristics for his systems, indicating the following:
(a)
Maximum bracing pattern and minimum wire sizes.
Tension and compression force capabilities of main runner
splices, cross runner connections and expansion devices.
2. All tests shall be conducted by an approved testing agency.
Ine~allation
(i) Vertical Hangers.
1. Suspension wires shall be not smaller than No. 12 gage spaced at 4 feet
on center of No. 10 gage at 5 feet on center along each main runner unless calcuhtions
justifying the increased spacing are provided.
2. Each vertical wire shall be attached to the ceiling suspension member
and to the support above with a minimum of three turns. Any connection device of the
supporting construction shall be capable of carrying not less than 100 pounds.
5 p:~'cod~. '91
3. Suspension Wires shall not hang more than 1 in 6 our-of-plumb unless
countersloping wires are provided.
4. Wires shall not attach to or bend around interfering material or
equipment. A trapeze or equivalent device shall be sued where obstructions preclude direct
suspension. Trapeze suspensions shall be a minimum of back-to-back 11/4 inch cold-rolled
channels for spans exceeding 48 inches.
(j) Perimeter Hangers. The terminal ends of each cross runner and main
runner shall be supported independently a maximum of 8 inches from each wall or ceiling
discontinuity with No. 12 gage wire or approved wall support.
(k) Lateral Force Bracing.
1. Where substantiating design calculations are not provided, horizontal
restraints shall be effected by four No. 12 gauge wires secured to the main runner within 2
inches of the cross runner intersection and sphyed 90 degrees from each other at an angle not
exceeding 45 degrees from the plane of the ceiling. A strut fastened to the main runner shall
be extended to and fastened to the structural members supporting the roof or floor above. The
strut shall be adequate to resist the vertical component inducted by the bracing wires. These
horizontal restraint points shall be placed 12 feet on center in both to the structure above shall
be adequate for the load imposed.
2. Lateral force bracing members shall be spaced a minimum of 6 inches
from all horizonlal piping or duct work that is not provided with bracing restraints for horizontal
forces. Bracing wires shall be attached to the grid and to the structure in such a manner that
they can support; a design load of not less than 200 pounds or the actual design load, whichever
is greater, with a safety' factor of 12.
(D Perimeter Members. Unless perimeter members are a structural part
of the approved system, wall angles or channels shall be considered as aesthetic closers and shall
have no structural value assessed to themselves or their method of attachment to the walls. For
tile ceilings, ends of main runners and cross members shall be tied together to prevent their
spreading.
(m) Attachment of Members to Perimeter. To facilitate installation, main
runners and cross' runners may be attached to the perimeter member at two 'adjacent walls with
clearance between the wall and the runners maintained at the other two walls or as otherwise
shown or described for the approved system.
Lighting Fixtures
(n) Only "intermediate" and "heavy duty" ceiling systems may be used for
the support of lighting fixtures.
p:~nowcod~.'91
1. All lighting fixtures shall be positively attached to the suspended ceiling
system. The attachment device shah have a capacity of 100 percent of the lighting fixture
weight acting in! any dir~tions.
2. When "intermediate" systems are used, No. 12 gage hangers shall be
attached to the grid members within 3 inches of each comer of each fixture. Tandem fixtures
may utiliTe common wires.
3. When "heavy duty" systems are used, supplemental hangers are not
required if a 48-inch modular hanger pattern is followed. When cross runners are used without
supplemental hangers to support lighting fixtures, these cross runners must provide the same
carrying capacity as the main runner.
4. Lighting fixtures weighing less than 56 pounds shall have, in addition
to the requirements outlined above, two No. 12 gage hangers connected from the fixture housing
to the structure above. These wires may be slack.
5. Lighting fixtures weighing 56 pounds or more shall be supported
dimefly from the structure above by approved hangers.
6. Pendant-hung lighting fmures shall be supported directly from the
structure above using No. 9 gage wire or approved alternate support without using the ceiling
suspension system for direct support.
Mechanical Services
(o) Ceiling mounted air terminals or services weighing less than 20 pounds
shall be positively attached to the ceiling suspension main runners or to cross runners with the
same carrying capacity as the main runners.
1. Terminals or services weighing 20 pounds but not more than 56 pounds
shall be supported directly fwm the structure above by approved hangers.
Partition
(p) Where the suspended ceiling system is required to pwvide lateral
support for permanent or relocatable partitions, the connection of the partition to the ceiling
system, the ceiling system members and their connections, and the hteral force bracing shall be
designed to support the reaction force of the partition from prescribed loads applied
perpendicular tO the face of the partition. These partition reaction forces shall be in addition to
the load described in Subsection g. Partition connectors, the suspended ceiling system and the
lateral force bracing shall all be engineered to suit the individual partition application and shall
be shown or defined in the drawings or specifications.
7 p:~wcod~. '91
Drawings and Specifications
(q) The drawings shall clearly identify all systems and shall define or show
all supporting details, lighting fixture attachment, lateral force bracing, partition bracing, etc.
Such definition ,may be by reference to this standard, or approved system, in whole or in pan.
Deviations or variations must be shown or defined in detail.
(C) The following amendments are made to the Uniform Mechanical Code, 1991
edition adopted by this ordinance:
Section 510(a) is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 510(a) Condensate Disposal. The primary condensate line from
the air-cooling coils, fuel burning condensing appliances and the overflow from evaporative
coolers and similar water-supplied equipment shall be collected and discharged to an approved
plumbing fixture. The waste pipe shall have a slope of not less than one-eighth (1/8") inch per
foot and shall be of approved corrosion-resistant material not smaller than the outlet size as
require din either Subsection (b) or (c) below for air-cooling coils or condensing fuel-burning
appliances, respectively. Condensate or waste water shall not drain over a public way.
2. Section 1104 is hereby amended by adding the following:
Section 1104. Environmental air ducts not regulated by other provisions
of this code shall comply with this section. Ducts shall be substantially airtight and shall comply
with the provisions of Chapter 10. Exhaust ducts shall terminate outside the building and shall
be equipped with back-draft dampers. Environmental air ducts which have an alternate function
as a pan of aa approved smoke-control system do not require design as Class 1 product-
conveying ducts.
Ducts used for domestic kitchen range ventilation and domestic clothes
dryers shall be of metal and shall have smooth interior surfaces. Commercial dryer .exhaust
ducts shall be installed in accordance with their listing. For additional requirements for domestic
dryer exhaust systems, See Section 1903.
EXCEPTION:
1. Approved flexible duct connectors not more than 6 feet
in length may be used in connection with domestic dryer
exhausts. Flexible duct connectors shall not be concealed
within construction.
Bathroom and laundry room exhaust ducts may be of gypsum wallhoard
subject to the limitations of Section 1002(a). Aluminum flex ducts are not permitted to be
installed horizantally in rooms that produce steam. An angle greater than forty-five (45) degrees
from the vertical is considered a horizontal run.
8 p:Xa=wcod~,'91
(D)
The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the Uniform
plumbing Code, 1991 edition adopted by this Ordinance:
1. Section llO(a) is hereby amended to read as follows:
(a) Indirect Waste Pipe. An indirect waste pipe is a pipe that does not
connect directly with the drainage system but conveys liquid wastes by discharging through an
approved air gap into a plumbing fixture, interceptor or receptacle which is directly connected
to the drainage system.
2. Section 1213{c) is hereby amended by adding the following exceptions:
Exception: 1. The installation of natural gas line for island fixtures is
allowed beneath the shb when installed in a sleeve of non-ferrous material
sized at two (2) times the diameter of the natural gas pipe. Provisions
shall be provided for future removal of the gas pipe. The sleeve shall be
vented to the exterior and terminate a minimum of two (2) inches above
finished grade.
Exception: 2. The inst_311ation of propane gas line for island fixtures is
allowed beneath the slab when installed in a sleeve of minimum schedule
40 ABS at a minimum one (1) times the diameter of the propane gas pipe
with the proper tee fitting for hter removal. ABS must be vented to the
exterior and terminate a minimum of two (2) inches above finished grade.
3. The following chapters from the appendices are hereby deleted fwm the
Uniform Plumbing Code, 1991 edition, adopted by this ordinance.
1) Appendix E - mobile home parks and recreational vehicle parks, is
hereby deleted in its entirety.
in its entirety.
2) Appendix 11 - commercial kitchen grease interceptors, is hereby deleted
(E) The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the Uniform
Administrative :Code, 1991 edition adopted by this ordinance:
1. Section 205 is hereby mended to read as follows:
Section 205. It shall be unlawful for any person, fwm or corporation to
erect, construct, enlarge, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure in the City,
or cause the same to be done, contrary to, or in violation of any of the provisions of this code.
Any person, fwm, or corporation violating any provisions of this code shall be deemed guilty
of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof, shall be punishable by a f'me of not more than
9 p:~n~wcod~.'91
one thousand dollars ($1000.00), or by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, or by
both such free and imprisonment.
2. Section 304(c)! is hereby mended to read as follows:
Section 304(c)i Plan Review Fees. When a plan or other data are required
to he submitted by Subsection (c) of Seaion 302, a plan review fee shall he paid at the time of
submitting plans and specifications for review. Said plan review fee for buildings or structures
shall be 75 percent of the building permit fee as shown in Table No. 3-A.
The plan review fees for electrical, mechanical and plumbing work shall
he equal to 25 percent of the total penit fee as set forth in Tables Nos. 3-B, 3-C and 3-D.
The plan review fee for grading work shall he as set forth in Table No. G.
The plan review fees specified in this subsection are separate fees from the
permit fees specified in Section 304(a) and are in addition to the permit fees.
Where plans are incomplete or changed so as to require additional plan
review, an additional plan review fee shall he charged at the rate shown in Tables Nos. 3-A
through 3-13.
SECTION 3. Severability. ff any provision, chuse, sentence or pangraph of this
Ordinance of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall he held invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or applications of the provision of this Ordinance,
which can be given effect without the invalid provisions or applications, and to this end, the
provisions of this ordinance are declared severable.
SECTION 4. City Clerk. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance
and shall cause the same to be posted as required by hw.
PASSEDi APPROVED AND ADOFrED this _ day of
Patrich H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
] 0 p:~newcode. '91
ITEM
31
APPROVAL ~j
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER ..~...',~_,.
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
May 26, 1992
SUBJECT:
Temecula/Murrieta Joint Transportation Committee
PREPARED BY: Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council appoint one member of the Council to serve on the Temecula/Murrieta
Joint Transportation Committee.
BACKGROUND:
At the joint COuncil Meeting with the City of Murrieta on March 31, 1992, both Councils
unanimously voted to form a Joint Transportation Committee consisting of one City
Councilmember, one Planning Commissioner, one Traffic and Transportation Commissioner,
and a Staff member from each City to address traffic/transportation issues of mutual concern.
The areas of Concern involved the Winchester Road Corridor, French Valley Airport, the
proposed Western Corridor, and multi-modal routes.
The Planning Commission has designated Steve Ford as their representative, and the
Traffic/TranspOrtation Commission has selected Ron Roberts.
Upon selection of a Councilmember to serve on the Committee, the Public Works Department
will coordinate with the City of Murrieta's Public Works Department to arrange the initial
meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
pw01\agdrpt~92~O526\jttransp.corn 0514a
CITY OF TEMECULA
CIty Council Agenda Item Placement
SubmittalDate:
To:
From:
CIty Clerk
AQenda Item ':
Please place the fallswing Item on the (date) ..5"'/.2~//~- CIty Councl Agencla
ITEM TITLE: ,.~_,,~-2~-,~./.~_/~/~~ ._~.~.,
7
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
PLACE ITEM UNDER THE FOLLOWING HEADING:
Presentations & ProdamatJons
-//~uncl Business ·
Consent Calendar
Public Hearings**
Staff Reports
Written Communications
Unfinished Business
Councl Comments
** II a. Public Hearing Is required. the Public Hearing Notice must be provicled by the applicant to the CIty
Clerk'S Department by Friday at noon, two and one half weeks prior to the date ol the CIty CouncR meeting,
with envelopes addressed to alli properly owners required by law to be noticed. a cartBled mailing list. and
sufficient postage, I! there are special noticing requlremenls. provide !lint Irdormation on a separate sheet.
Please send copy ol Agenda and Agenda Report to:
Oe, applicant, claimant, appellant, Interested persons)
irsme) (ad4:kess)
(Attach separate sheet, II necessary)
! IcQ!!MS/AGENOA-ROST I 02 ~
Please send copy of Agenda and Aqenda Report to:
Ben N. Minamide
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
City of Murrieta
26442 Beckman Court
Murrieta, CA 92562
Ron Roberrs
Chairman, Traffic & Transportation Commission
41140 Avenida Verde
Temecula, CA 92591
Steve Ford
Planning Commissioner
29900 Villa Alturas
Temecula, Ca 92592
pwO1\agdrpt\92\0526\jttransp,com 0514a
DEPARTMENTAL
REPORTS
APPROVAL ~-
CITY ATTORNEY ~
FINANCE OFFIC ~,~~
CITY MANAGER ~$v~J__--
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Department of Public Works
May 26, 1992
Public Works Monthly Activity Report (April)
PREPARED BY: Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Monthly Activity Report for April for the
Department of Public Works.
IseOl~dtpt\92XO526~oscupt.apr 051592
000
I,-
(/') I--
' 0
0
· - o o o or,- 000 o c~j d ~
o o o o of,- oco c,) o~ w o.
O~ 0 0 0 O O~ O~ ~ O
~ o o o o ~o ~d ~ ~
,_ z
;_ 0
v
O
0
W I--
v
0
0
oo w o o o oo oo ~ o ~ o
O0 ~ 0 0 0 O0 O0 ~ 0 .--
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL:
CITY ATTORNEY
City Council/City Manager
Anthony Elmo, Chief Building OfficiaL/~--
May 26, 1992
Building and Safety April Activity Report
RECOMM EN DATI O N:
Receive and file.
DISCUSSION:
Building permit activity in April experienced a slight increase over permit activity for
March. Building related permits totaled 467 as compared to 414 in March
representing building construction valuation of approximately $10,223,660. New
housing starts for the month totaled 69. The Department collected revenue totaling
,~100,671.
Negotiations are continuing with the firm chosen to administer the City's "Kiosk" sign
program. A hearing date of June 2, 1992, has been scheduled for the hearing of the
Pujol Street public nuisance case.
The following is an update of projects of special note that staff is currently involved
with and/or recently completed:
New ConstruCtion
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems
Hungry Hunter Restaurant
Spectrum Industrial Park
5 warehouse/office - Diaz Road
Creekside Gas & Food Mart
South Front Street
100%
35%
75%
30%
v:\wp~gende.rep~,cccmO526.rpt
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER '
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM:
DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER
DATE:
MAY 26, 1992
SUBJECT:
DEPARTMENTAL REPORT
PREPARED BY:
SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
The Community Recreation Center Project will be reviewed by the Parks and
Recreation Commission on May 11 and the Planning Commission on May 18. A
public hearing concerning this project will be held by the Board of Directors on May
26, 1992.
Staff is currently working with the Temecula Valley Unified School District to develop
a lease agreement for the pool facility at Temecula Elementary School. The school
will lease the facility to the City for $1.00 per year, and the City will be responsible
for the maintenance and repairs associated with the facility.
Our new Maintenance Superintendent, Bruce Hartley, is currently developing price
quotes to irrigate and plant grass around the playground area at Sports Park. It is
scheduled to complete this work by June 30, 1992.
The Initial Bikeway Project will be considered by the City Council on May 26. This
project will include painting bike lane stripes and signs on an initial bikeway route in
the City. This initial bikeway will eventually interface with the City's overall bike way
plan.' If appr'oved, staff will move to complete the project by July 31, 1992.
The 1992 Summer/Fall Recreation Brochure has been sent to the printer and will be
distributed the first week in June. This brochure will be bulk mailed to every resident
in the City. Several programs have been added since the winter/spring brochure.
These programs include the Teen Recreation Center programs; senior citizen programs
at the Temecula Community Center; tennis lessons; and a wide variety of special
interest classes and excursions. A scholarship program is also being developed to
assist needy families in registering for our Summer Day Camp program.
Dean Davids0n, a local architect, is currently working on the construction documents
for the Senior Center Project. A Project Committee meeting was held on May 7 to
review the progress associated with the Senior Center. The construction documents
are expected to be completed and ready to release for public bid by July 1.
Construction is estimated to begin in September, with completion scheduled for
December, 1992. Further, the Fire Department has verbally informed Us that the lease
of the parking lot should be approved by the end of May.
The first Parks and Recreation Master Plan Committee meeting will be held at the end
of May. It is expected that several meetings will be held by the committee before
review by the Parks and Recreation Commission, and final approval by the City
Council,
Staff is in the process of updating the City's landscape specifications for park,
median, and slope maintenance services. California Landscape, located in Temecula,
has agreed to. continue providing maintenance services at the same cost as last fiscal
year. Based on their work performance and cost effective price, staff will recommend
to the City Council on June 9 that their contract be renewed for the next fiscal year.
The issuance of refund checks to affected property owners who were over charged
for slope maintenance services in FY 1990-91 will be distributed within the next thirty
(30) days. These efforts are being coordinated with the Finance Department.
The Selection Committee for the Park Site on Pala Road has completed the interview
process for selecting a landscape architect to design and provide construction
documents for the Park Site on Pala Road. Staff is currently negotiating a scope of
work and fina!l price with the top ranked firm for providing the design services for this
project.
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBYECT:
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMF~NDATION:
Discussion:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Planning Department
May 26, 1992
Monthly Report
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
Receive and File
The following is a summary of the Planning Department' s caseload
and project activity for the month of April, 1992:
Caseload Activity:
The department received applications for 15 administrative cases and 5 public heating
cases. The following is a breakdown of case type for public hearing items:
* Appeal (2)
* Conditional Use Permit (3)
Ongoing Projects:
General Plan: The draft of the Housing Element was sent to the State
Department of Housing and Community Development for their review on May
18, 1992. Staff has completed its review of the first screencheck draft General
Plan and provided comments to The Planning Center on May 22, 1992.
Qld Town Master Plan: Urban Design Studio (UDS) has begun work on the
background report for the Specific Plan. The first meeting of the Old Town
Steering Committee was held on May 1 I, 1992. Interviews between UDS and
affected persons and City officials are currently being scheduled for the beginning
of June, 1992.
S\MONTHLY .RFr~PR.92 ]
French Valley Airport: On May 8, 1992, Staff completed its review and
provided comments to the ALUC on the first draft of the Comprehensive
(Airport) Land Use Plan (CLUP).
T~mecula Rel;ional Center Specific Plan and l~.nvironmental Impact Report: This
Specific Plan was presented at a Planning Commission Workshop on May 4,
1992. The Commissioners gave direction to applicant and staff.
Winchester Hills and Campos Verdes Specific Plan and Environmental Impact
Report: These Specific Plans were discussed as a Workshop for the Planning
Commissioners May 4, 1992. The Planning Commissioners gave direction to the
applicant and staff.
Murdy Ranch Specific Plan and Environmental Impact R~port: This Specific Plan
was presented to the Planning Commission at a Workshop on April 6, 1992. The
Commission provided Staff and the applicant direction relative to design issues.
The applicant will be incorporating these changes into the Specific Plan.
JOhnson Ranch Specific Plan: The Johnson Ranch Specific Plan is a mix of
residential land uses and a mixed-use" resort village" core area on 1,765 acres
located adjacent to Anza Road and Borel Road, north of Rancho California Road.
This Specific Plan was submitted in early March. The Notice of Preparation was
submitted to State Clearinghouse on April 17, 1992. A DRC meeting was held
for this Specific Plan on May 14, 1992. A subsequent DRC date has not yet been
set.
ShMONTHLY.~PR.~2 2
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA
ITEM
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
HELD MAY 12, 1992
A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 8:23
PM.
PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks
ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Moore
Director Moore left due to illness.
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, City Attorney Scott F. Field and June S.
Greek, City Clerk.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None given·
CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Director Mu~oz, seconded by Director Birdsall to approve Consent Calendar
No. 1.
Minutes
1.1 Approve the minutes of April 28, 1992.
The motion was unanimously carried, with Director Moore absent.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Proposed Vacation of Easements and Transfer of Slooe Maintenance to the Villaaes
Homeowner's Association
Shawn Nelson presented the staff report.
Director Mu~oz stated he will abstain from voting since he has a residence within the
Villages Homeowner's Association.
Director Birdsall stated she is opposed to vacating these slopes since it sets a bad
precedence. She stated the City would have no guarantee that future homeowners
will maintain the slopes properly.
Minutes/051292 -1 - 05/15~92
CSD Minutes ' Mav 12. 1992
Mayor Pro Tam Lindemans asked if a reversion clause could be added, based on annual
review.
Director of Community Services Shawn Nelson, stated the slopes could be inspected
prior to the cut off date for fiscal year assessments.
President Parks opened the public hearing at 8:35 PM.
David Michaels, 30300 Churchill Court, President of Homeowners Association, spoke
in favor of the slopes being returned to the Association for maintenance. He explained
this would represent a substantial savings to the Association and he feels that the
homeowners would have a vested interest in maintaining this property in a proper
manner.
Director Birdsall asked if the entire association voted on this matter or only the Board
of Directors. Mr. Michaels answered this did not go to the individual homeowners,
however it was discussed in open meetings.
Jane Vernon, 30268 Mersey Court, spoke in favor of the City vacating the slopes and
allowing the Villages Homeowners Association to maintain them.
President Parks asked if the Homeowners Association would object to a reversion
clause. Mr. Michaels stated he would have to present it to his board for approval.
Director Birdsall asked the status of the Homeowners Association accounts receivable,
and what percentage of dues are 30 days past due. Mr. Michaels stated he would be
happy to present this information at the next meeting.
President Parks closed the public hearing at 8:50 PM.
Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko explained that the proceeding before the
Board is to adopt a resolution of intention, and other issues can be resolved at the
meeting on June 9th.
It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Birdsall to approve staff
recommendations as follows:
2.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-02
A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT REGARDING VACATION OF
THE SLOPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENTS OVER PORTION OF TRACT NOSo
207354, 20735-6, 21082-4 AND 21082
Minu~es/051292 -2- 05/15192
CSD Minutes
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Parks
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: I DIRECTORS: Moore
ABSTAIN: I DIRECTORS: Mu~oz
May 12.1992
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT
None given.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT
Community Services Director Nelson reported he has received the disc from Muni Financial
Services regarding refunds and checks will be submitted within the next 30 days.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
None given.
DIRECTORS REPORTS
Director Lindemans requested that maintenance of the Del Sol slopes be investigated.
Director Mu~oz requested that the garbage along Murrieta Creek be cleaned up.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Mu~oz, seconded by Director Birdsall to adjourn at 9:00 PM.
motion was unanimously carried with Director Moore absent.
The
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk/'I'CSD Secretary
Ronald J. Parks, President
Minute slO51292 - 3- 05/15/92
ITEM
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICEi,~~
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM:
· DAVID F. DIXON
DATE:
MAY 26,1992
SUBJECT:
ACCEPTANCE OF EASEMENT DEEDS FOR SLOPE
MAINTENANCE - VINTAGE HILLS
PREPARED BY:
SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors:
1. Accept Easement Deeds for the TCSD to provide slope maintenance services.
Appropriate $4,800 to account #019-193-999-42-5250 to process legal
documents required for dedication purposes.
DISCUSSION: The enclosed easement deeds have been reviewed by staff
to ensure that legal and landscaping requirements have been satisfied. The slope
landscaping areas have been inspected by our Maintenance Superintendent and are
acceptable to our standards· Copies of the site plans for TCSD landscape
maintenance areas are also attached for your review.
The following tracts are being recommended for acceptance:
Tract No. 22715°0, 1, 2.
Tract No. 2271 6-0, 1, 2, 3, 4.
Tract No. 22915-0, 1, 2, 3.
FISCAL IMPACT: The City collected $4,800 from the applicant to cover the
cost of processing the dedication· Therefore, it is necessary to appropriate $4,800
for outside services - account #019-193-999-42-5250. Cost to maintain the slope
landscaping areas will be included in the annual rates and charges associated with the
FY 1992-93 TCSD Assessments -Service Level C.
lr%aelM4~s~le~dedl.~ln
Recorded at request of and return
City Clerks Department
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
FREE RECORDING
This instrument is for the benefit of
the City of Temecula and is entitled
to be recorded without fee
(Govt. Code 6103}.
IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE
Parcel:
Tract #22715-0
Lots 2-13 and 35 and 36
Project: Vintage Hills
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, TayCo, a Cali£ornia
General Partnership and Vintage Hills Planned Com~unit~ Association
("Grantor"), hereby irrevocably offers to dedicate to the City of Temecula ("Grantee"), togs{her
with the right to further grant or transfer the same to others, a perpetual easement and right-of-way! for
maintaining, operating, altering, repairing, and replacing equipment and landscaping over and within the boundaries
of that certain real property. located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, more particularly described in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Area").
If GRANTEE, or its governmental entity, successors, or assigns, determines it is unable, incapable, or unwilling to
maintain said Easement Area, maintenance shall, after notice, become the responsibility of GRANTOR, with all
covenants and agreements of this easement extending to and becoming obligations of all heirs, executors,
administrators, successors and assigns of the GRANTOR.
SIGNATURE OF GRANTORS:
TAYCO, a California general
partnership
By: Costain Homes, Inc., a Delaware
B~: ,~ J~
Its:
VINTAGE HILLS PLANNED COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIOi
aCal' ornia corpor .ion ^ --~
. san Lindqui~t,/,e~siurei~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF mvcnl:l c
'. L~ _ ;~. o~ ~ before me the undersigned, A Notary Public in and for the State of California, personqlly
appeared n~c~:. ~'c~-{~ ~ ~L~C.C~c~c~, personally known to me (6r ~evcd to ,,.o on tho b3mfof
~ti3fector~ ov~ tO be the persongs) whose name(s)~are subscribed to the within instrument md
acknowledged to me that hot~he/they executed the same in his/hu/their authorized capacity(ies), and that Eby
hio/h~heir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) ac~ed,
executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
< (~ CHERYL THIEL
( 0 ARY PUBUC - CAUFCRN~A ~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
~ ('¢L~ri / ~-~ I(~~' h~fnr. r~,~,':i,e undersigned, A Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally
_~. . -E~O ~ ~ 5 ~r~7 personally known to me {or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) tO be the Oerson(s) whose name(s) is/~ subscribed to the within instrument md
acknowle ed to me that he/she~ executed the same in his/her~authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her~signature(s) On the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the within Irrevocable Offer To Dedicate to the City of
Temecula, a political corporation and/or governmental agency, is hereby accepted by order of the City Council the date below
and the Grantee consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Date
June S. Greek, City Clerk
3cltormsh.ev .ded 01 ~192
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 250
Temecula, California 92590
Revised May 5, 1992
August g, 1989
JN 24775-M32
Page 1 of 3
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD - LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENTS
TRACT NO. 22715
Those certain parcels of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 2 through 13, 35,
36, "A" and "B" of Tract No.. 22715 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 206,.
Pages 74 thorough 79 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said
Riverside County, described as follows:
PARCEL I
BEGINNING at the most northerly corner of said Lot 36;
thence along the northwesterly line of said Lot "B" North 61'29'03" East 6.00
feet;
thence along a line parallel with the southwesterly line of said Lot "B"
South 28'30'57" East 744.05 feet;
thence South 61'29'03" West 13.00 feet to a line parallel with and 7.00 feet
southwesterly from said southwesterly line of Lot "B";
thence along said parallel line North 28°30'57" West 138.99 feet to the
northwesterly line of said Lot 12 of said tract;
thence North 30'15'06" West 191.39 feet to a point in the northwesterly line of
said Lot 13 distant thereon South 61°29'03'' West 12.80 feet from the most
northerly corner thereof;
thence North 31'25'00" West 174.45 feet to a point on the northwesterly line of
said Lot 35 distant thereon South 61'29'03" West 21.63 feet from the most
northerly corner thereof;
thence continuing North 31'25'00" West 199.27 feet;
thence North 73'45'00" West 56.44 feet to the northwesterly line of said Lot 36;
Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates
TCSD - Landscape Maintenance Easements
Tract No. 22715
Revised May 5, 1992
August 9, 1989
JN 24775-M32
Page 2 of 3
thence along said northwesterly line North 3g'50'00" East 2.10 feet to an angle
point therein;
thence continuing along said northwesterly line North 61'29'03" East 69.83 feet
to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0.41 Acres, more or less.
PARCEL 2
BEGINNING at the southwesterly corner of said Lot 2;
thence along the westerly line of said lot North 4'50'00" West 15.61 feet;
thence North 86'46'14" East 323.13 feet to the easterly line of said Lot 6 of
said tract;
thence North.82'40'O0" East 72.g6 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concave
northerly, having a radius of 1149.00 feet and being concentric with and 7.00
feet northerly from that certain curve in the northerly line of said Lot "A",
shown on said map of Tract No. 22715 as having a radius of 1156.00 feet and a
central angle of 20*30'23", a radial line of said curve from said point bears
North 10'05'24" West;
thence along said concentric curve easterly 297.46 feet through a central angle
of 14'49'59";
thence tangent from said curve North 65'04'37" East 32.12 feet to the
northeasterly line of said Lot 11 of said tract;
thence along said northeasterly line South 26'03'41" East 7.00 feet to the most
easterly corner of said Lot 11;
thence South 24*55'23" East 6.00 feet to a line parallel and/or concentric with
and 6.00 feet southerly from said northerly line of Lot "A";
thence along said parallel and/or concentric line through the following courses:
South 65'04'37" West 32.26 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave
northerly and having a radius of 1162.00 feet;
thence along said curve westerly 415.88 feet through a central angle of
20'30'23";
thence tangent from said curve South 85'35'00" West 282.23 feet;
Robert Bein!, William Frost and Associates
TCSD - Landscape Maintenance Easements
Tract No. 22715
Revised May 5, 1992
August 9, 1989
JN 24775-M32
Page 3 of 3
thence leaving said parallel and/or concentric line North 4'25'00" West 6.00 feet
to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0.26 Acres, more or less
SUBJECT TO all CoVenants, Rights, Rights-of-Way and Easements of Record.
EXHIBIT 'B' attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
B#.8.
'?~z. I
41
19
4Z
ZO
- LOT
TRACT
Z5
24
' C,4LL~
/
NO. 22715,'
Pt~. ~
PzI~CEL 2
EXHIBIT "B"
T c 5 0 LANDSC:APE MA|NTE NARIC,c
EASF.,MEMT - TRACT. NO. 27_715
SHEET
IOF I
Recorded at request of and return
City Clerks Department
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
FREE RECORDING
This instrument is for the benefit of
the CiW of Temecula and iS entitled
to be recorded without fee
(Govt. Code 6103).
IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE
Parcel:
Tract 22715-i
Portions Lot 13
Project: Vintage Hills
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
q'nyCn~ n C,,nl'i~nrni~ ~.~rnl Parrnpr.~h~p
{"Grantor"), hereby irrevocably offers to dedicate to the City of Temecula ("Grantee"), together
with the right to further grant or transfer the same to others, a perpetual easement and right-of-way for
maintaining, operating, altering, repairing, and replacing equipment and landscaping over and within the boundaries
of that certain real property located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, more particularly described in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference (the 'Easement Area").
if GRANTEE, or its governmental entity, successors, or assigns, determines it is unable, incapable, or unwilling to
maintain said Easement Area, maintenance shall, after notice, become the responsibility of GRANTOR, with all
covenants and agreements of this easement extending to and becoming obligations of all heirs, executors,
administrators, successors and assigns of the GRANTOR.
SIGNATURE OF GRANTOR:
TAYCO, a California 9eneral
partnership
By: Costsin Homes, Inc., a Delaware
By(/'~~
Its:
By: Tayl~/D~ Woodrow Uomes California
By: I/:x ~
By:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF mvcnm c
L . LJ -..~.1 - ~f ~ before me, he under igned, A Notary Public in and for the S~a~e of California, personally
appeared Z~ ~,,.~ f ~ ~. ~4~, personally known to me (or prorod to mo on the ba~s~of
sat;sfo~tu~ence) ~0 be the person(s) whose name(s) ~/are subscribed to the within instrument a~d
acknowledged to me that hoiSt/they executed the same in ~/their authorized ca~acity(ies), and that by
hi~l~er/their signature(s) on the ins~rumen~ the person(s), or the emily upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
OFFICIAL SEAL
CHERYL THIEL
NOTARY PUBUC- CAUFORNIA
ORANGE COUNTY
My Comm. ~pwes June 7, 1994
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
SignatureO~V~ ,
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
--- ~.~r'; ~ ?-?-, )~q~. before me, the undersigned , A Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally
~.~peared ~lc~ ~. ~ Qfid ~~ 3.~~, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) tO be the person(s) whose name(s) is~subscribed to the wkhin instrument and
acknowledged to me tha~ he/she~ executed the same in his/her~ authorized capacit~ and that by
his/her~signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrumenL
OFF~C~A.L ~2'-
LINDA L; :;..,
O~NGE COU2:T,' ~
~ ~l~on Exp~re: ~
~mh 28. ~5
' ' ' ..... UNDA M. SMITH '
-.~ '.= ~ NOtOff Pulaic-~a
·- cou '.
t. ,, .
"~ 1~'2e.
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the within Irrevocable Offer To Dedicate to the City of
Temecula, a political corporation and/or governmental agency, is hereby accepted by order of the City Council the date below
and the Grantee consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Date
June S. Greek, City Clerk
011182
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 250
Temecula, California 92590
Revised May 5, 1992
April 22, 1991
JN 24775-M33
Page 1 of 3
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD - LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22715-1
PARCEL 1
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 13, "A" and "B" of
Tract No. 22715-1 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 205, Pages 54 through
58 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County,
described as follows:
COMMENCING at the southeasterly terminus of the southwesterly line of said Lot
"A" shown as "North 31'47'21" West 55.00 feet";
thence along said southwesterly line North 31'47'21" West 6.00 feet;
East 178.19 feet to the TRUE POI!fr OF BEGINNING.
thence South 31'47'21" East 17.78 feet;
of said lot
thence South'Sg'OB'O0" West 30.00 feet;
thence South 7'47'35" West 32.02 feet;
thence South;43'18'51" West 62.36 feet;
thence South) 30'52'O0" East 20.00 feet;
thence North:74'57'Og" East 62.36 feet;
thence North)87'56'39" East 22.83 feet;
thence North 59'08'00" East 30.00 feet;
thence South 31'47'21" East 14.11 feet;
thence North:Sg'05'O0" East 384.35 feet;
thence North 57'50'00" East 571.40 feet;
Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates
TCSD - LandScape Maintenance Easement
Tract No. 22715-1
Revised May 5, 1992
April 22, 1991
JN 24775-M33
Page 2 of 3
thence North 69'05'00" East 186.14 feet;
thence North 51'45'00" East 93.60 feet;
thence North 59'10'00" East 815.25 feet to a curve in the northeasterly line of
said Lot 13), said curve being concave southwesterly and having a radius of
3945.00 feet;
thence radially from said curve North 49'35,48" East 6.00 feet to a curve
concentric with last said curve and having a radius of 3951.00 feet;
angle of 5 ;
thence radially from said curve South 48'50'39" West 6.00 feet to said curve in'
said northeasterly line;
thence South 66'10'45" West 31.23 feet;
thence North 32'16'00" West 56.58 feet;
thence South 79'00'00" West 55.23 feet;
thence South 51°55'00" West 86.95 feet;
thence North 31'47'21" West 40.00 feet to said line parallel with and 6.00 feet
northwesterly from said southeasterly line of Lot "A";
thence along said parallel line South 58'12'39" West 1867.63 feet to the TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 6.51 Acres, more or less.
PARCEL 2
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 13 and "B" of Tract
No. 22715-1 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 205, Pages 54 through 58 of
Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County, described as.
follows:
BEGINNING at the most easterly corner of said Lot 13;
thence along the southeasterly line of said lot South 54'20'00" West 39.57 feet;
Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates
TCSD - LandScape Maintenance Easement
Tract No. 22715-1
Revised May 5, 1992
April 22, 1991
JN 24775-M33
Page 3 of 3
thence North 0'59'20" East 60.28 feet to a curve in the northeasterly line of
said lot, said curve being concave southwesterly and having a radius of 3945.00
feet;
thence radiially from said curve North 49'44'38" East 6.00 feet to a curve
concentric with last said curve and having a radius of 3951.00 feet;
angle 0 5 the southeasterly line of said Lot "B";
thence alon9 said southeasterly line South 50'26'53" West 6.00 feet to the POINT
OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING:i 0.03 Acres, more or less.
SUBJECT TO all Covenants, Rights, Rights-of-Way and Easements of Record.
EXHIBIT "B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
-.~ Lawrence L. Bacon, L.S. 3527
LS
rC SO L A AID 5 CA P~' MAIN TgNA
EASEA4ENT TRACT NO. 8Z715-1
: FIELD BOOK JOB NO.
R~uVI6ED IWA ~' 5, 199E SCALE ,
JAN./2., I999 /": 300' J.M. Za775
Recorded at request of and return to:
City Clerks Department
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
FREE RECORDING
This instrument is for the benefit of
the City of Temecula and iS entitled
to be recorded without fee
(Cove. Code 6103).
IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE
Parcel:
Tract No, 22715-2
Lot 1 and "A"
Project: vintage Rills
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
Douglas H. Matthews and Barbara M. Matthews, husband: and wife as joint tenants
("Grantor"), hereby irrevocably offers to dedicate to the City of Temecula ("Grantee"), togeither
with the right to further grant or transfer the same to otherS, a perpetual easement and right-of-way'for
maintaining, operating, altering, repairing, and replacing equipment and landscaping over and within the boundaries
of that certain real property.located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, more particularly described in
Exhibit "A" a~tached hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Area").
If GRANTEE, or its governmental entity, successors, or assigns, determines it is unable, incapable, or unwillin~l to
maintain said Easement Area, maintenance shall, after notice, become the res nsibility of GRANTOR, with all
DATED
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
On ~.-'!r,~ C~ ~ ~/C'l~l Zbefore me, the undersigned , A Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally
appeared !"~"l ;r'-~/"l,.'. ~, ',~i~ hL~ 'PI,'~- '.. ~j,~t i7:.[~ L U aH~'r 2porsonally knnwn to4ne (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory e~idence) to be the herson(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
WITNESS ~y hand and 'official seal.
OFFICIAL NOTARY SEAL
LAURA L O'HARA
NOlyPUlallc--Cailorntl
ORANGE COUNTY
I~f Conw/I. Exl3ire~ &LIG 01 1985
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This is to certify that the interest in real propert~ conveyed by the within Irrevocable Offer To Dedicate to the CiW e-
Temecula, a political corporation and/or governmental agency, is hereby accepted by order of the City Council the date brig,
and the Grantee consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Date
June S. Greek, City Clerk
013182
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 250
Temecula, California, 92590
Revised May 5, 1992
September 27, 1989
J.N. 24775-M1
Page 1 of 1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22715-2
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, State of California, being those po)rtions of Lots 1 and "A" of Tract
No. 22715-2 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 205, Pages 59 through 65 of
Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County, described as
follows:
BEGINNING at the southwest corner of said Lot 1;
thence along the westerly line of said lot North 0'19'00" West 18.00 feet;
thence North 81'38'14" East 38.86 feet;
thence South 10'09'14" East 21.81 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concave
southerly, having a radius of 1238.00 feet and being concentric with and 6.00
feet southerly from a curve in the southerly line of said Lot I having a radius
of 1244.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears
South 10'09'14" East;
thence along said concentric curve westerly 41.72 feet through a central angle
of 1'55'51" to the westerly line of said Lot "A";
thence along said westerly line, radially from said curve North 12'05'05" West
6.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0.02 Acres, more or less.
SUBJECT TO all Covenants, Rights, Rights-of-Way and Easements of Record.
EXHIBIT "B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
Lawrence L. Bacon, L.S. 3527
,. i
I
'77;.~C'.'T' NC:. 22 775 '-' 2
...' ;"".. '7' ~
~...... ~ ~
/ANDSL'APE
EA S ~tif ~N T
RANCl IO
VISTA
120~D
I
1
L
RE VISED A P~°lL Z Z I ~ I
6EPT. '27, 8d8 '
I
EXI-IIDIT
TtSP L4NDeC_.aPE Mz!INTEN/1NCE
E.48EM EN T - TZ2.,aCT NO. 'Z'2 71,5-2
SWEET I OF I ~WE~T
~obert cBeirt, ~Villiam c'f'Wst ~&c~sociates
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & SURV YO S
E E R
28765 SINGLE OAK DRIVE · SUrf 250 · RANClIO CALIFORNIA, CA 92390
(714) 676-8042 · FAX {"7t4) 676-7240 ~
SCAL5 RELD BCOK JOB NO.
I" = ,.50' 'Z4775 M I
:
Recorded at request of and return to:
City Clerks Department
City of Temecula
43174 Business Perk Drive
T/"-ecula, CA 92590
FREE RECORDING
This instrument is for the benefit of
the City of Temecula and is entitled
To be recorded wiThou~ fee
(Govt. Code 6103).
IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE
Parcel: Tract 22725-2
Portions of Lots 36-38,:
47-49 and 57
Project: Vintage Gills
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Vintage Gills Planned
Community Association-i Califor. ia corporatiP- a-d Cosrain Romes. Inc..a Delaware corporation
("Grantor"}, hereby irrevocably offers r.o dedicate to the City of Temecuia ("Grantee"-), together
with the right to further igrant or transfer the same to others, a perpetual easement and right-of-way for
maintaining, operating, altering, repairing, and replacing equipment and landscaping over and within the boundaries
of that certain real property located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, more particularly described in
Exhibit "A" artached heret0, which is incorporated herein by this reference (the ."Easement Area' ).
If GRANTEE, or its governmental entity, successors, or assigns, determines it is unable, incapable, or unwilling to
maintain said Easement Area, maintenance shall, after notice, become the responsibility of GRANTOR, with all
covenants and agreements of this easement extending to and becoming obligations of all heirs, executorS,
administrators, successors and assigns of the GRANTOR.
""NTAGE HILLS PLANNED COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
~r
COSTAIN HOMES, INC.,
}
te .~e en t~o bQ~c of 3ot~fa~tePl c~d~) to be me persen(s) whose name(s)~/are subscribed to the within
personally known to me (~r ~,ov~cl
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
S~gnature
and that by bJ,~ef/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s) or the entity upon benaft of which the
person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
< CHERYL miEL >
~ I NOT,lilt MUC - CALFOONIA
~ MyComm. li~JresJu~e 7. L994 >
{This area for official notarial seal)
instrument and acknowledged tb me that l;~li,~efthey executed the same in hL~/h~'/their authorized caDacity(ies),
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 250
Temecula, California 92590
Revised May 5, 1992
September 28, 1990
JN 24775-M23
Page i of 2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22715-:2
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, S~ate of California, being those portions of Lots 36 through 38, 47
through 49, 57 and "B" of Tract No. 22715-2 as shown on a map thereof filed in
Book 205, Pages 59 through 65 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of
said Riverside County, described as follows:
BEGINNING at!the most northerly corner of said Lot 36, said corner being a point
on a curve in the southwesterly line of said Lot "B" concave southwesterly and
having a radius of 3945.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point
bears South 50'26'53" West;
thence radially from said curve North 50'26'53" East 6.00 feet to a curve
concentric with last said curve and having a radius of 3951.00 feet;
thence along;said concentric curve southeasterly 761.03 feet through a central
angle of 11'02'10";
thence tangent from said curve South 28'30'57" East 35.30 feet to the
northeasterly prolongation of that certain course in the southeasterly line of
said Lot 57 shown as "North 61°29'03'' East 69.83 feet" on said map;
thence along said prolongation and southeasterly line South 61'29'03" West 75.83
feet to the most easterly corner of said Lot 49;
thence along the southeasterly line of said Lot 49 South 39°50'00" West 2.10 feet
to a line parallel with and 2.00 feet southwesterly from the northeasterly line
of said Lot
thence along said parallel line North 32'05'00" West 165.23 feet to a line
parallel with and 2.00 feet southwesterly from the northeasterly line of said
Lot 47;
thence along said parallel line North 36'25'00" West 77.22 feet;
thence leaving said parallel line North 36°16'00'' East 2.10 feet to an angle
point in the northerly line of said Lot 47;
Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates
TCSD Landscape Haintenance Easement
Tract No. 22715-2
Revised May 5, 1992
September 28, 1990
JN 24775-M23
Page 2 of 2
thence North 8°24'08" East 120.14 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concave
southwestelrly, having a radius of 3938.00 feet and being concentric with and 7.00
feet southwesterly from said curve in the southwesterly line of Lot "B", a radial
line of sa,id curve from said point bears South 57'04'56" West;
thence aloing said concentric curve northwesterly 213.75 feet through a central
angle of 3'06'36" to the northwesterly line of said Lot 38;
thence non-tangent from said curve North 44°00'07'' West 132.07 feet;
thence North 47°00'00" West 114.04 feet to the northwesterly line of said Lot 36;
thence along said northwesterly line North 54'20'00" East 39.57 feet to the POINT
OF BEGINN)NG.
CONTAINING: 0.81 Acres, more or less.
SUBjECT TO all Covenants, Rights, Rights-of-Way and Easements of Record.
EXHIBIT 'B' attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
Lawrence L. Bacon, L.S. 3527
C)
21
57
TRA C T
LOT'D'- 7'ZZ4CT
NO. ~27~
COZ2TE 6ZIAIT~
C~TALZ~IA
~ / o
1ZE8..4C4 ~~.Z~/
/
6~lllblT 'B ,
7'C .$D LANDSCAPE MAIMTEA/ANfE
P_A .fE,'/I£A/T TRA~T ~. ~E715'~"
SCALE J
SWEET ! OF I SWEET
~.oben cBeiz~ , cWilliam cF~st ~c~ssociates
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & SURVEYORS
28765 SINGLE OAK DRIVE · SUFFE 250 · RANCHO CALIFORNIA. CA 92390
(714) 67'6-8042 · FAX (714) 676.7240
;!ELD BOOK
JOB NO
~4C775 A4E3
Recorded at request of and return to:
Cit, Clerks Department
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
'~"EE RECORDING
,his instrument is for the benefit of
the City of Temecula and is ;entitled
to be recorded without fee
(Govt. Code 6103).
IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE
Parcel: Tract #22716
Lots 2 through 5 and
Project: Vintage Bills
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Vintage Bills Venture, a California Limited Partnership
with the right to fu~her grant or transfer the same to others, a perpetual easement f- .
maintaining, operating, altering, repairing, and replacing equipment and landscaping over and within the boundaris
of that ce~ain real prope~y located in the CiW of Temecula, County of Riverside, more pa~icularly described: in
Exhibit "A" a~ached hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Area").
~"\TED
If GRANTEE, or its governmental entity, successors, or assigns, determines it is unable, incapable, or unwilling to
maintain said Easement Area, maintenance shall, after notice, become the responsibility of GRANTOR, with .all
covenants and agreements of this easement extending to and becoming obligations of all heirs, executors,
administrators, successors and assigns of the GRANTOR.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
On L_:?,/.~/c~/,~ before me, the undersigned, A Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally
appeared ~ ','F/'c)lq_d.3' ~./q/7~'cl/TrO/l/'~-~ , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis=of
satisfactory evidence) tO be the person(s) i~hose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacityties), and that !by
his/her/their signature(s) On the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the within Irrevocable Offer To Dedicate to the City of
Temecula, a political corporation and/or governmental agency, is hereby accepted by order of the City Council the date below
and the Grantee consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Date
June S. Greek, City Clerk
3c/ferrnmlirrev .~ed O11112
ROBERT 8EIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 250
Temecula, California 92590
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD - LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22716
Revised May 5, 1992
September 27, 1989
JN 24776-M20
Page 1 of 2
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 2 through 5 and "A"
of Tract No. 22716 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 208, Pages 91 through
93 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County,
described as follows:
BEGINNING at the most northerly corner of said Lot "A";
thence along the easterly line of said Lot "A" South 12'05'05" East 6.00 feet to
a point on a non-tangent curve concave southerly, having a radius of 1238.00 feet
and being concentric with and 6.00 feet southerly from a curve in the northerly
line of said Lot "A" shown as having a radius of 1244.00 feet, a radial line of
said curves from 'said point bears South 12'05'05" East;
thence along!said concentric curve westerly 189.75 feet through a central angle
of 8'46'55" to a line parallel with and 6.00 feet southerly from.the northerly
line of said Lot "A";
thence along. said parallel line, tangent from said curve South 6g'08'00" West
78.08 feet to the southerly prolongation of the westerly line of said Lot 2;
thence alongisaid southerly prolongation and westerly line North 20'52'00" West
13.00 feet tDa line parallel with and 7.00 feet northerly from said northerly
line of Lot "A";
thence alongisaid parallel line North 69'08'00" East 78.08 feet to the beginning
of a tangent"curve concentric with last said curve and being concave southerly
and having a radius of 1251.00 feet;
thence along:said concentric curve easterly 193.20 feet through a central angle
of 8'50'55" to the easterly line of said Lot 5;
Robert Bein, William Frost
and Associates
TCSD-LandsCape Maintenance Easement
Tract No. 22716
Revised May 5, 1992
September 27, 198g
JN 24776-M20
Page 2 of 2
thence along said easterly line South 0'lg'00" East 7.15 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING.
CONTAINING~ 0.08 Acres, more or less.
SUBJECT TO all Covenants, Rights, Rights-of-Way and Easements of Record.
EXHIBIT 'B" attached and by this reference made a p~rt hereof.
I......~_ '-<'~.", Lawrence L. Bacon, L.S. 3527
if ...,~...~,:C~. ~ 'x,.,,, ""~I
1.:;~...-,--.:~. ,,,,. ~
*.:-::
~,~o~ ,,,~,~..~'/ .
/
· I
'°"'~ 19
., ,,, -
,,, , Zl 8
~ ._ CAMINO r
~ LO L;T ,,C.,~g'J AREA
"~ :.!t.~- - LOT .B,
------._ _ . ~:: :: .-::{:~. :, :.
I~ A IV C i.i OVISTA . o. .
I~OAD //
EXNIBIT "B'
TCS.D LANDSCAPE HAINTF:NANCE
EASEHENT TRACT NO.?..Z'71G
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS · SUR'V~,
(714) ~ * FAX ('71
51-1EET i OF ! ~EV/~ED ~4,4Y~/gSZ SEPT. 'Z7, 1959 J.N.247'I-~E
Recorded at request of and return to:
City Clerks Department
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
"'~EE RECORDING
, ,ds instrument is for the benefit of
the City of Temecula and is entitled
to be recorded without fee '
(Govt. Code 6103).
IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE
Parcel:
Project:
Tract ~22716-1
LOt "B" & "C'' z
Vintage Hills
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
TAYC0, a California General Partnership
("Granl:or"), hereby irrevocably offers to dedicate to the City of Temecula ("Grantee"), togerr er
with the right to further grant or transfer the same to others, a perpetual easement and right-of-way 'or
maintaining, operating, all~ering, repairing, and replacing equipment and landscaping over and within the boundaries
of that certain real property located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, more particularly described in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Area").
If GRANTEE, or its governmental entity, successors, or assigns, determines it is unable, incapable, or unwilling !to
maintain said Easement Area, maintenance shall, after notice, become the responsibility of GRANTOR, with :all
covenants and agreements of this easement extending to and becoming obligations of all heirs, executors,
GRANTOR
:ERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDG~ _ "ALL IN ONE"
. · .......
~ State of California On ~CCff (~ >~Ol}qQ~ before me, a Notary Public
': ~ personally known to me, or ~ proved to me on the basis of satisfacto~
'~ ~ .......... ; ......... evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
:~
~ ~ oF TARYS~ r his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signa-
l: ~u , ture(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of
':'
,;
~. which the person(s) aged, executed the instrument.
': .......... :' ' ' "* ' '*~ W~g~ · ·
· : Nota~ Seal:
Temecula, a political corDoration and/or governmental agency, is hereby accep~u gy ~. ~ .......... , _.
and the Grantee consents tO the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Date
June S. Greek, City Clerk
3c/forml/irrev.ded 013192
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 250
Temecula, California 92590
Revised May 5, 1992
May 10, 1991
JN 24776-M17
Page 1 of 2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22716~1
PARCEL 1
That certai!n parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, State of California, being that portion of Lot "B" of Tract No.
22716-1 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 205, Pages 14 through 20 of Maps-
in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County, described as
follows:
thence along said northerly line through the following courses:
South 79'40~00" East 335.86 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave
southerly and having a radius of 1250.00 feet;
thence along said curve easterly 192.73 feet through a central angle of 8'50'03"
to a point On said northerly line, distant along said line 69.01 feet westerly
from the most westerly corner of Lot "C" of said tract;
thence leaving said northerly line, radially from said curve South 19'10'03" West
6.00 feet tO a point on a non-tangent curve concave southerly, having a radius
of 1244.00 feet and being concentric with and 6.00 feet southerly from said curve
in the northerly line of Lot "B", a radial line of said curve from said point
bears South 19'10'03" West;
thence along a line concentric and/or parallel with said northerly line of
Lot "B" through the following courses: along said concentric curve westerly
191.81 feet. through a central angle of 8'50'03";
thence tangent from said curve North 79'40'00" West 335.86 feet;
thence leaving said concentric and/or parallel line, North 10'20'00" East 6.00
feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0.07 acres, more or less.
Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates
TCSD Landscape Maintenance Easement
Tract No. 22716-1
Revised May 5, 1992
May 10, 1991
JN 24776-M17
Page 2 of 2
PARCEL 2
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, State of California, being that portion of Lot "C" of Tract No.
22716-1 as Shown on a map thereof filed in Book 205, Pages 14 through 20 of Maps
in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County, described as
follows:
COtI~ENCING at a point in the northwesterly line of said Lot "C" being the most
southerly corner of Lot "E" of said tract, said point being on a non-tangent
curve concave southeasterly and having a radius of 1244.00 feet, a radial line
of said curve from said point bears South 27'49'43" East;
thence along said northwesterly line and curve southwesterly 45.00 feet through
a central angle of 2'04'21" to the TRUE POINT:OF BEGINNING;
thence contiinuing along said northwesterly line and curve southwesterly 309.73
feet througih a central angle of 14'15'56";
thence continuing along said northwesterly line, tangent from said curve
South 46'00'00" West 62.18 feet to a point that bears North 46'O0'O0";East 79.65
feet from ~n angle point in said northwesterly line;
thence leaving said northwesterly line South 44'00'00" East 6.00 feet to a line
parallel and/or concentric with and 6.00 feet southeasterly from said
northwesterly line;
thence along said parallel and/or concentric line through the following courses;
North 46'00'00" East 62.18 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave
southeasterly and having a radius of 1238.00 feet;
thence along said curve northeasterly 308.24 feet through a central angle of
14°15'56";
thence leaving said parallel and/or concentric line, radially from said curve
North 29'44'04" West 6.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CO!fIAINING: 0.05 Acres, more or less.
SUBjECT TO all Covenants, Rights, Rights-of-Way and Easements of Record.
EXHIBIT 'B' attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
Lawrence L. Bacon, L.S. 3527
RANCHO
/5
33
pARCEl
16
/
EXHIBIT 'B'
SKETCH
TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION
R~'VISED MAY 5., I...eg8 SCALE
M,4 Y I0 , I.~..~1 I" = ~dO'
CAL!PORN/A ROAD_
(. 1.,, \ ! ) ~ __-----~
PARCEL
A4 A IAI T,~'N~ M CE
~'AB~'MENT
,,qHEET I OF I
~qberr cBeirL , ciYilliara cFFost ~i~, c~ssociates
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS. PLANNERS & SURVEYORS
28765 SINGLE OAK DRIVE · SUITE 250 · TEMECULA. CA 92390
(7;41676.8042 · FAX (714~ 676-7240
F}ELD BOOK JOB NO
e,~ 775 ' M !7
Recorded at request Of and return to:
City Clerks Department
CiW of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
r"~REE RECORDING :
This instrument is for the! benefit of
the CiW of Temecula and! is entitled
to be recorded without fee
(Govt. Code 6103}.
IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE
Parcel:
Tract #22716-1
Z;ots 2-5
Project: Vintage Hills
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,Taylor ~oodrov Homes,
California Limited, a qalifornia Corporation and Vintage Hills Planned CO---,dniCV Association, ~
California Corp. ("Grantor"), hereby irrevocably offers to dedicate to the City of Temecula ("Grantee"), togethe
with the right to further grant or transfer the same to others, a perpetual easement and right-of-way fo
maintaining, operating, altering,. repairing, and replacing equipment and landscaping over and within the boundarir.
of that certain real property located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, more particularly described ir
Exhibit "A" attached hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference (the 'Easement Area"). I
If GRANTEE, or its governmental entity, successors, or assigns, determines it is unable, incapable, or unwilling t~
maintain said Easement Area, maintenance shall, after notice, become the responsibility of GRANTOR, with a
covenants and agreements of this easement extending to and becoming obligations of all heirs, executors
administrators, successors and assigns of the GRANTOR.
VINTAGE HILLS PLANNED COhMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
a California corpor ion
By: ,' \' '" i;/ ' C/ ~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
WITNESS my hand and Official seal,
COUNTY OF ~IIVrRCIDE ~
On ~- .:1.~ -~ D-- before me, the undersigned, A Notary Public in and for the State of California, persm~aJly
appeared ' ./~,~L-,,~ '~,' ' '-~,'~/; , personally known to.me (or. I~reved to ,~e ~n t~ b~ ~
cati3faotory e~idonoo) t0 be th~~ whose name(~ isiSsubscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that -~she/~ exec~ed the same in ~her/t~ authorized capacity(i, and that ~by
~her/~ signature~ 0n the instrument the personS), or the entity upon behalf of which the person) acted,
executed the instrument,
( ~ OFFIC~ S~ )
NOT~ ~UC - ~F~N~ ~
~ ~m. ExD,res June 7. 1994
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
ap ed V/;c~%C~_t ~ , personally known to me (or proved to me on the ~ % of
acknowledged to me that~'~she/they executed the r r i
(E~er/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument,
WITNESS my hand and Official seal.
Signatur ~VVI(~- ~t~
*,-_ .,. OFRCIAL SEAL
"..~ ~ NoUNDA M. TITH
· . .-' ~, ' tary
.--.-~ OitANGE COUNTY
· My C,~ ' ~'~ ExD/el
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the within Irrevocable Offer To Dedicate to the City
Temecula, a political corporation and/or governmental agency, is hereby accepted by order of the City Council the date belc
and the Grantee consents tO the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Date
June S, Greek, City Clerk
3clformfafirrlv.i 013192
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 250
Temecula, California 92590
Revised May 5, 1992
February 21, 1992
JN 24776-M29
Page 1 of 2
EXHIBIT 'A'
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22716-1
PARCEL 1
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, State of California, being that portion of Lot "A" of Tract
No. 22716-1 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 205, Pages 14 through 20 of
Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County, described as
follows:
BEGINNING at the most southerly corner of said Lot "A";
thence along the southwesterly line of said lot North 30'34'00" West 6.00 feet
to a point .on .a non-tangent curve concave northwesterly, having a radius of
7049.00 feet and being concentric with and 6.00 feet northwesterly from a curve
in the southeasterly line of said Lot "A" having a radius of 7055.00 feet, a
radial line of said curve from said point bears North 30'34'00" West;
thence along a line parallel and/or concentric with said southeasterly line
through the.following courses: along said concentric curve northeasterly 150.40
feet through a central angle of 1'13'21";
thence tangent from said curve North 58'12'39" East 54.32 feet;
thence leaving said parallel and/or concentric line South 31'47'21" East 6.00
feet to said southeasterly line;
thence along said southeasterly line through the following courses:
South 58'12'39" West 54.32 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave
northwesterly and having a radius of 7055.00 feet;
thence along said curve southwesterly 150.53 feet through a central angle of
1'13'21" to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0.03 acres, more or less.
Robert Bein., William Frost and Associates
TCSD Landscape Haintenance Easement
Tract No. 22716-1
Revised May 5, 1992
February 21, 1992
JN 24776-M29
Page 2 of 2
PARCEL 2
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, State of California~ being those portions of Lots 2 through 5 of Tract
No. 22716-1 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 205, Pages 14 through 20 of
Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County, described as
follows:
BEGINNING a~ a point on the southwesterly line of said Lot 5 distant thereon
South 47'23'00" East 41.14 feet from the most westerly corner thereof;
thence along said southwesterly-line North 47'23'00" West 30.69 feet to a point
on a non-tangent curve concave northwesterly, having a radius of 7065.00 feet and
w e -L t g r a in a s
7055.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from;said point bears North 30'35'29"
West;
thence along a line parallel and/or concentric with said northerly line through
the following courses: along said concentric curve easterly 147.70 feet through
a central angle of 1'11'52";
thence tangent from said curve North 58'12'39" East 55.36 feet;
thence south 37'44'53" East 20.44 feet;
thence South 57°19'48" West 166.43 feet;
thence South 48°40'00'' West 30.96 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0.10 acres, more or less.
SUBJECT TO all covenants, rights, rights-of-way and easements of record.
EXHIBIT 'B' attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
Lawrence L. Bacon, L.S. 3527
i
/ ,'nT
EXHIBIT ' ' SKETCH
TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22716-1 LOTS 2,3,4
REVI~EO M,~ Y 5, 1~gZ SCALE
F£B. 21, ID~2 I" =
I
I1~,'11
MARNA'
~ flEE T I 0 F I ~ flEE T
Robeft cBeirL,~llqiliam cF~rost ~c~ssociates
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & SURVEYORS
28765 SINGLE OAK DRIVE · SUITE 250 · TEMECULA, CA 92390
(714) 676-8042 * FAX (7141 676-7240
FIELD BOOK
JOB NO.
Z 4 7 7(~
Recorded at request of and return to:
City Clerks Department
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
FREE RECORDING
This instrument is for the benefit of
the City of Temecula and iS entitled
to be recorded without fee
(Govt. Code 6103).
IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE
Parcel:
Portion o£ No. 22/.0+1
Lot 23 and
Project: Vintage Hillq
FOR A VALUABLE COiNSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
Joseph D. Damenl:0 and Pel:ra A. Va].asakos, husband and vi. fe as ioinl: l:enanl:s
("Grantor"), hereby irrevocably offers to dedicate to the City of Temecula ("Grantee"), together
with the right to further grant or transfer the same to others, a perpetual easement and right-of-way: for
maintaining, operating, altering, repairing, and replacing equipment and landscaping over and within the boundaries
of that certain real property located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, more particularly describeCl in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Area").
If GRANTEE, or its governmental entity, successors, or assigns, determines it is unable, incapable, or unwilling to
maintain said Easement Area, maintenance shall, after notice, become the responsibility of GRANTOR, with all
covenants and agreements of this easement extending to and becoming obigations of all heirs, executors,
~,~- / 2-C~ ~ GRANTOR
DATED
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and ,official seal.
Signature ~'~n o )t L,/~ ~/n 0 ~2.
On r, Ar~cc~ ~'~. (qqr~ before me, the undersigned, A N~o. tar~y~qu~ i~r~and for the State of California, personally
appeared . ~c~.~ e p~ ~ Onr m~ ~ P~ ~pe~sonal{y ~nown to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/a~ subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/)y executed the same in his/her/~ authorized capacity(ies)~ and that: by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) ac~ed,
{.':~ [~ NOtary Public -- Calitorn,a
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the within Irrevocable Offer To Dedicate to the City of
Temecula, a political corporation and/or governmental agency, is hereby accepted by order of the City Council the date below
and the Grantee consents tb the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Date
June S. Greek, City Clerk
0131g;
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 250
Temecula, California 92590
Revised May 5, 1992
February 21, 1992
JN 24776-M31
Page 1 of 2
EXHIBIT 'A'
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22716-1 LOT 23
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of TemecUla, County of
Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 23 and "B" of Tract
No. 22716-1 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 205, Pages 14 through 20 of
Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County, described as
follows:
BEGINNING at the most westerly corner of said Lot 23;
thence along the northwesterly line of said lot North 16'20'00" East 37.00 feet
to a point on a non-tangent curve concave northeasterly and having a radius of
30.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears
North 57'57'47" East;
thence along said curve southeasterly 20.05 feet through a central angle of
38'17'48";
thence tangent from said curve South 70'20'01" East 160.68 feet;
thence North 77'50'43" East 109.28 feet to an angle point in the southeasterly
line of said lot;
thence along said southeasterly line South 39'20'00" West 57L17 feet to the most
southerly corner of said lot;
thence Sou~th 10'20'00" West 6.00 feet to a line parallel and/or concentric with
the southwesterly line of said lot;
thence along said parallel and/or concentric line through the following courses:
North 79'40'00" West 122.31 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave
northeasterly and having a radius of 1256.00 feet;
thence along said curve northwesterly 131.53 feet through a central angle of
6'00'00";
Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates
TCSD Landscape Raintenance Easement
Tract No. 22716-1 Lot 23
Revised May 5, 1992
February 21, 1992
JN 24776-M31
Page 2 of 2
thence leaving said parallel and/or concentric line, radially from said curve
North 16'20'00" East 6.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0.17 acres, more or less.
SUBJECT TO all Covenants, Rights, Rights-of-Way and Easements of Record.
EXHIBIT 'B' attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
EXHIBIT 'B' SKETCH
TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22716-1 LOT
~EY/SED NIll Y 5,/~gZ
FEB ~1, /~
23
SCALE
/"=4ZZ::7'
( /eA D. )
L=
(RA D. ~
/ DF I. 3HEET
~qbeft cBeirb ~7~ril liam cTfo st t;3~, c/qssociates
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, PLANNERS & SU VEYORS
28765 SINGLE OAK DRIVE · SUITE 250 · TEMECULA. CA 92390
i7'.u 575-8042 · I::AX :7!4~ 676-7240
FIE~_D BO0~,
JOB NO.
2~ 77a,
Recorded at request OT anO return to:
City Clerks Departmen:
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
FREE RECORDING
This instrument is for the benefit of
the City of Temecula and is entitled
to be recorded without fee
(Govt. Code 6103).
IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE
Parcel: Tract #2271~-2
Lots ll through lZ 3d
2 through 8.
Project: Vintage Ei].].s
bATED
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
Vintage Hills VentUre, a California Limited Partnership
("Grantor"), hereby irrevocably offers to dedicate to the City of Temecula ("Grantee"), together
with the' right to further grant or transfer the same to others, a perpetual easement and right-of-way for
maintaining, operating, altering, repairing, and replacing equipment and landscaping over and within the boundaries
of that certain real property located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, more particularly described in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Area").
If GRANTEE, or its governmental entity, successors, or assigns, determines it is unable, incapable, or unwilling to
maintain said Easement Area, maintenance shall, after notice, become the responsibility of GRANTOR, with all
covenants and agreements of this easement extending to and becoming obligations of all heirs, executors,
administrators, successors and assigns of the GRANTOR.
RANTO~/~d~R e 7~~
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
On --:?/_-~,/~ before me, the u.ndersigned, A Notary Public in and for the State of California, personally
appeared -~'r~/qq;.~ (]/2/l/Lr2/qUr2c~ , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person(~ whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,
executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
=e OFFICIAL S-~AL
~ ~':~ :.'~'.,:,;e ~C~l ~ Y, rrtahl:
< ' TARY p:...rJ,..,~.
u~.tlGE COUIf'
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the within Irrevocable Offer To Dedicate to the City
Temecula, a political corporation and/or governmental agency, is hereby accepted by order of the City Council the date belo,~
and the Grantee consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Date
June S. Greek, City Clerk
3c/forfnearrev.ded
013~12
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 250
Temecula, California 92590
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD - LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22716-2
Revised May 5, 1992
May 10, lg91
JN 24776-M1g
Page I of 31
PARCEL 1
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
s '2 2 shown on a'map thereof filed in Book 208, Pages 78 through
81 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County,
descri bed as: fol 1 ows:
COI4MENCING at the westerly terminus of that certain course in the southerly line
of said tract shown as "North 79'0g~55" East 25.16 feet", said terminus being on
a curve in said southerly line, concave southerly and having a radiusof 1250.00
feet, a radial line of said curve from said terminus bears South 22'19'51" West;
thence along said southerly line and curve westerly 69.01 feet through a central
angle of 3'09'48" to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
thence continuing along said southerly line and curve westerly 192.73 feet
through a central angle of 8'50'03";
thence continuing along said southerly line, tangent from said curve
North 7g°40'00'' West 335.86 feet to the most westerly corner of said Lot 14;
thence alongthe westerly line of said lot North 3g°20'00'' East 57.17 feet to. an
angle point 'thereon;
thence South; 40'03'11" East 10.21 feet;
thence South 73'55'00" East 136.00 feet;
thence South 30'20'00" East 7.87 feet;
thence South 73'00'00" East 181.17 feet;
thence South87'45'O0" East 24.00 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concave
southerly, Having a radius of 1257.00 feet and being concentric with and 7.00
feet northerly from a curve in said southerly line of said tract shown as having
a radius of 1250.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears
South 12'20'00" West;
Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates
TCSD - LandScape Naintenance Easement
Tract No. 22716-2
Revised Nay 5, 1992
Nay 10, 1991
JN 24776-M19
Page 2 of 3
thence along said curve easterly 149.93 feet through a central angle of 6'50'03";
thence radially from said curve South lg°10'03'' West 7.00 feet to the TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0.22 Acres, more or less.
PARCEL 2
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula~ County of
Riverside, Sitate of California, being those portions of Lots 2 through 8 of Tract
No. 22716-2 :as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 208, Pages 78 through 81 of
Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County, described as
follows:
CORNENCING at the southwesterly terminus of that certain course shown as
"North 19'54'09" East 32.49 feet" in the southeasterly line of Lot 1 of said
tract, said terminus being on a curve in the southeasterly line of said tract,
concave southeasterly and having a radius of 1244.00 feet, a radial line of said
curve from said terminus bears South 27°39'43" East;
thence along said curve southwesterly 45.00 feet through a central angle of
2°04'21" to the TRUE POII(F OF BEGINNING;
thence continuing along said southeasterly line and curve southwesterly 309.73
feet through a central angle of 14°15'56";
thence tangent from said curve South 46°00'00" West 62.18 feet to a point that
bears North 46°00'00" East 79.65 feet from the southwesterly terminus of that
certain course in the southeasterly line of Lot 9 of said tract shown as
"North 46°00'00'' East 65.32 feet";
thence North 44°00'00'' West 7.00 feet to a line parallel and/or concentric with
and 7.00 feet northwesterly from said southeasterly line of said tract;
thence along said parallel and/or concentric line through the following courses:
North 46°00'00'' East 62.18 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave
southeasterly and having a radius of 1251.00 feet;
thence along said curve northeasterly 311.48 feet through a central angle of
14'15'56";
Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates
Revised May 5, 1992
Ray 10, 1991
JN 24776-M19
Page 3 of 3
thence leaving said parallel and/or concentric line, tadTally from said curve
South 29'44'04" East 7.00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0.06 Acres, more or less.
SUBJECT TOiall Covenants, Rights, Rights-of-Way and Easement of Record.
EXHIBIT 'B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
Lawrence L. Bacon, L.S. 3527
IG
TI~ACT kit). 2.Z7 i(=- 4.
.-.-Z VIA TORENO Z'.RO. 8. .,oCZ. 2
· .~.,~.
PCL. !
S/.-/;',-c'T I
si-fggT
REV/SEZ~
F_XNIBIT
rCSO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
EASEMENT TRACT NO. ZZTI6-Z
PROFE~81ONAL ENGINEERS. PI..ANI~RS & ~URVEYOR8
,,14,~ )," ~/~ /l/)'~ ~/~ ~,/~ ~/ M/~ J.H.
I
r~eCoraea at request OT aria return
City Clerks Department
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA ~2590
~REE RECORDING
~s instrument is for the benefit of
the City of Temecula and iS entitled
to be recorded without fee
(Govt. Code 6103),
IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE
Parcel:
Tract #22716-4
Lots 4,5,8 through ll~an<
"A", Parcel 3 of LLA
~,Portion Lot 12)
Project: Vintage Hills
FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
Vintage Hills VentUre, a California Limited Partnership .
(" Grantor"), hereby irrevocably offers to dedicate to the City of Temecula (" Grantee "), roger. her
with the right to further grant or transfer the same to others, a perpetual easement and right-of-way: for
maintaining, operating, altering, repairing, and replacing equipment and landscaping over and within the boundaries
of that certain real property located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, more particularly described in
Exhibit "A" attached heteto,'which is incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Area").
If GRANTEE, or its governmental entity, successors, or assigns, determines it is unable, incapable, or unwilling to
maintain said Easement; Area, maintenance shall, after notice, become the responsibility of GRANTOR, with all
covenants and agreements of this easement extending to and becoming obligations of all heirs, executors,
administrators, successors and assigns of the GRANTOR.
·
7'~/~:-2-~~ -~,/~ gRANTOR
IZATED
STATE OF CALIFORNJlA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
On ~._~/.~/.~-'~/--~ before me, the undersigned, A Notary Public in and for the State of California, persomally
appear&d . ~r~crn,- ~ (~i./~ ~ ~ , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory' evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and th~ b~
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted.
executed the instrument.
WITNESS my ha~d and official seal.
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the within Irrevocable Offer To Dedicate to the City o
Temecula, a political corporation and/or governmental agency, is hereby accepted by order of the City Council the date belo~
and the Grantee consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Date
June S. Greek, City Clerk
3c/fe~melirfev .~e~ 0131 g
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 250
Temecula, California 92590
Revised Hay 5, 1992.
September 27, 1989
JN 24776-M2
Page 1 of 1
LEGAL DESCRIPTI!ON
TCSD - LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22716-4
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 4, 5, 8 through 11
and "A" of Tract No. 22716-4 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 208,.Pages
87 through 90 of Maps in the O(fice of the County Recorder of said Riverside
County, together with that portion of Parcel 3 of a Lot Line Adjustment recorded
April 12, 1990 as Instrument No. 133795 of Official Records in said Office of the
Riverside County Recorder, described as follows:
BEGINNING at the mos't easterly corner of said Parcel 3;
thence South 20'52~00" East 6.00 feet to a line parallel with and 6.00 feet
southerly from the northerly line of said Lot "A";
thence along said parallel line South 69'08~00'' West 488.04 feet to a line
bearing South 20'52~00'' East from the most southerly corner of said Lot 4;
thence North 20'52~00'' West 6.00 feet to said most southerly corner;
thence along the westerly line of said lot North 8°00'00" East 23.87 feet;
thence North 70'15'00" East 170.35 feet;
thence North 65'10'00" East 28.00 feet;
thence North 71'05'00" East 279.10 feet to the easterly line of said Parcel 3;
thence along said easterly line South 17°02'15'' East 10.05 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0.25 Acres, more or less.
SUBJECT TO all Covenants, Rights, Rights-of-Way and Easements of Record.
EXHIBIT 'B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
Lawrence L. Bacon, L.S. 3527
?,.8 ~7/2G ?..5/..4.
%N _j~_ CORTE.
. Z9 3o 91,92.
TP, ACT
~o.
I
------ VIA ~ooT~"T01~EN0 i L
TRACT 0. Z?,716-1 c~'
( '~
T~ACT I~0. ZZTlS-Z
SWEET 1 OF I 5~EET
EXHIBIT "B'
TCSD-LANDSCAPF-- MAINTF..NANCE
F-.ASENENT TRACT NO. Z2.'71G-4
Recorded at request of and return to:
City Clerks Department
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
FREE RECORDING
This instrument is for the benefit of
the City of Temecula and is entitled
to be recorded without fee
(Govt. Code 6103).
Parcel:
Tract No. 22915 Lots ~
through 13 and "A"; LOts
13 through 19 and ""B""
IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE Project: viarage HilZs
FOR gLUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
TkYCI~, ~ C~1 i forni~. lenera. 1 partnership
(*Grant6r*), hereby irrevocably offers to dedicate to the City of Temecula (*Grantee'), together
with the right to further. grant or transfer the same to others, a perpetual easement and right-of-way for
maintaining, operating, altering, repairing, and replacing equipment and landscaping over and within the boundaries
of that certain real property located in the City of Temecula, County of Riverside, more particularly described in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference (the "Easement Area").
If GRANTEE, or its governmental entity, successors, or assigns, determines it is unable, incapable, or unwilling to
maintain said Easement Area, maintenance shall, after notice, become thet responsibility of GRANTOR, with all
State of California On ~!(~('t'~ I t)
' (date)) '
i County of
.;
.:
.:
OFFICIALNOTARY SEAL
LAURA [ O'HARA
ORAN~ COUNTY
State of California, personally appeared
f ~
(name o p rson or persons)
,g,,personally known to me, or [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he_ executed the same in
~E~he/they)
(h"~her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that byeher/their signa-
ture(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of
which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
Myc,~mn. E,~.~ AUGre,m95 > WIYNESS my hand and offk;ial seal. :'
........... ' ........ ' ~,CLL.L~(',.- '~'~'Z'~'' ' :'
Notary Seal: Signature ''/''~ r~")(;~"~ '
............................................. :.....: ...... ~ ...................... ' ........................................
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE
This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the within Irrevocable Offer To Dedicate to the City of
Temecula, a political corporation and/or governmental agency, is hereby accepted by order of the Cit~/Council the date below
and the Grantee consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer.
Date , ~"
June S. Greek, City Clerk
3c/foffnslirrw.asd 01 ~1il2
ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES
28765 Single Oak Drive, Suite 250
Temecula, California 92590
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TCSD LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENT
TRACT NO. 22915
Revised May 5, 1992
October 15, 1990
JN 24870-M6
Page 1 of 2
PARCEL 1
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecuia, County of
Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 3 through 13 and "A"
of Tract No. 22915 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 217, Pages 67 through
71 of Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County,
described as follows:
BEGINNING at a point on the northwesterly line of said Lot 12 distant thereon
South 46°00~00" West 26.56 feet from the most northerly corner thereof;
thence South 44'00'00" East 61.19 feet;
thence South 46°03'00" West 103.12 feet;
thence South 48'12~57'' West 62.07 feet;
thence South 50'38'54" West 453.23 feet;
thence North 43°22'09" West 28.09 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concave
northwesterly, having a radius of 2038.00 feet and being concentric with and 6.00
feet northwesterly from a curve in the northwesterly line of said Lot 3, a radial
line of said curve from said point bears North 43'22'09" West;
thence along said curve northeasterly 22.44 feet through a central angle of
0°37~51'' to a line parallel with and 6.00 feet northwesterly from the
southeasterly line of said Lot "A";
thence along said parallel line North 46°00'00" East 594.14 feet;
thence South 44'00'00" East 6.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING;
CONTAINING: 0.73 Acres, more or less.
Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates
TCSD LandsCape Naintenance Easement
Tract No. 22915
Revised May 5, 1992
October 15, 1990
JN 24870-M6
Page 2 of 2
PARCEL
That certain parcel of land situated in the City of Temecula, County of
Riverside, State of California, being those portions of Lots 13 through 19 and
"B" of Tract No. 22915 as shown on a map thereof filed in Book 217, Pages 67
through 71 of Naps in the Office of the County Recorder of said Riverside County,
described as follows:
BEGINNING at the most easterly corner of said Lot lg;
thence along the southeasterly line of said lot South 58'15'00" West 44.80 feet
to a point on a non-tangent curve concave southwesterly and having a radius of
880.00 feet, a radial line of said curve from said point bears
South 60'55'10" West;
thence along said curve northwesterly 565.22 feet through a central angle of
36'48'04";
thence nonetangent from said curve North 28°59'34" East 61.85 feet to a point on
a non-tangent curve concave southwesterly, having a radius of 1156.00 feet and
being concentric with and 6.00 feet northeasterly from a curve in the
southwesterly line of said Lot "A", a radial line of said curve from said point "'
bears South 28'59'34" West;
thence along said curve southeasterly 590.29 feet through a central angle of
29'15'26";
thence radially from said curve South 58'15'00" West 6.00 feet to the ~INT OF
BEGINNING.
CONTAINING: 0.66 Acres, more or less.
SUBJECT TO:all Covenants, Rights, Rights-of-Way and Easements of Record.
EXHIBIT 'B" attached and by this reference made a part hereof.
Lawrence L. Bacon, L.S. 3527
L_
~CALE; I" =
,.~HEET I OF
~Lobcrt cBei~ , 'William ~.rost ~,c/qssocjat~
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, P~NNE S & SU V~ORS
~7~ SINGLE O~ DRI · SU~ ~ · TE~ECULA . ~ ~
5HE~T ~ < R R
(714 67~2 * FAX 714) 675-~
REwS~ t-~l-~Z OC~ 15, I~SO ~ Z4870-~
ITEM
NO. 3
APPROVAL
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER
MAY 26, 1992
COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER (CRC) PROJECT
PREPARED BY:
SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors:
1. Adopt Negative Declaration for the CRC Project.
2. Approve conceptual schematic design of the CRC Project.
Authorize the preparation of construction documents and release a formal
public bid for the CRC Project.
m
Adopt Resolution #92-_ declaring certain findings regarding City expenditures
in connection with the Community Recreation Center as required by United
States Department of the Treasury Regulations.
Transfer $332,000 from account #019-190-999-42-5910 to #029-190-129-
44-5802 to cover the cost of the preparation of the design, construction
documents, and project administration. These monies may be refunded to
#019-190-999-42-5910 once bond proceeds for this project are received.
DISCUSSION: A Project Committee comprised of members from the City
Council (Ron Parks and Karel Lindemans); Parks and Recreation Commission (Evelyn
Harker and Claudia Walker); CRC Foundation (Tom Langley and Timmy Daniels); and
the Arts Council (Keith Wiertz) was formed to provide a recommendation for the
location, recreation programs, project components, schematic design, and budget
costs of the CRC Project. Six (6) Project Committee meetings, including a Joint City
Council/Parks and Recreation Commission meeting have been held to receive input
concerning the design of the CRC.
After completing a soils assessment, hydrology study, and cost construction analysis,
the Project Committee is recommending that the CRC Project consist of an
approximate 26,000 sq.ft. recreation center; 25 yard x six (6) lane community pool;
350 seat amphitheater with a 650 person overflow seating area; 280 parking spaces;
and required landscaping. An environmental assessment has been completed by the
City's Planning Department, with a negative declaration given towards this project.
If the schematic design is approved, the preparation of construction documents will
begin immediately, and the estimated ground breaking for this project would be in
December, 1992.
A presentation will be given by Bob Mueting from RJM Design Group concerning the
schematic design of the CRC. Attached are copies of the schematic design, budget,
environmental assessment of the CRC Project for your review.
It is necessary to adopt Resolution #92-_ to enable the Community Services District
to recover the $332,000 from bond proceeds, if necessary.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution #92-__
Schematic Design and Budget
Preliminary Seating Configuration
Initial Environmental Study
FISCAL IMPACT: It is necessary to transfer $332,000 from account #019-
190-999-42-5901 to #029-190-129-44-5802 to cover the cost of the preparation of
the design, construction documents, and project administration.
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
DECLARING CERTAIN FINDINGS REGARDING CITY
EXPENDITURES iN CONNECTION WITH COMMUNITY
RECREATION CENTER AS REQUIRF~D BY UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
REGULATIONS (SECTION 1.103-18)
WHEREAS, on January 27, 1992, the United States Department of the Treasury (the
"Treasury") issued final regulations (Section 1.103-18) relating to the use of bond proceeds for
the reimbursement of expenditures made prior to the date of issuance of bonds (the
"Reimbursement Regulations "); and
WHEREAS, under the Reimbursement Regulations, in general, if specified requirements
are satisfied, the proceeds used for reimbursement are deemed to be spent on the date of
reimbursement; and
WHEREAS, if such requirements are not satisfied, then proceeds used for
reimbursement will remain subject to the rebate, arbitrage and other rules relating to tax-
exemption until ultimately spent; and
WHEREAS, the Reimbursement Regulations apply to tax-exempt obligations issued after
March 2, 1992, except that the Reimbursement Regulations do not apply to expenditures before
such date if such expenditures were made after September 8, 1989, and if there was objective
evidence at the time of the expenditures that the issuer reasonably expected to reimburse the
expenditure with bond proceeds; and
WHEREAS, on January 14, 1992, by its minute action authorizing execution of an
agreement with RIM Design Group, the Temecula Community Services District CTCSD")
declared its intention to reimburse certain expenditures it would make for Community Recreation
Center, the ("Project") with the proceeds of tax-exempt obligations, the Temecula Community
Services District intends to issue after June 30, 1992 the ("Obligations"). City has to date made
expenditures approximating $500,000. and intends to make further expenditures relating to the
Project in anticipation of issuance of the Obligations collectively referred to as the
("Expenditure"); and
WHEREAS, in order to comply with the Reimbursement Regulations, the public interest
and convenience require that City officially declare its intent that City reasonably expects to
reimburse the Expenditure with proceeds of the Obligations;
3/1~257 1
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND
DECLARED by the City Council of the City of Temecula as follows:'
Section 1.
The foregoing recitals are true and correct.
Section 2. City reasonably expects to reimburse the Expenditure with proceeds
from the Obligations. The reimbursement of the Expenditure is consistent with the City's
established budgetary and financial circumstances. There are no funds or sources of money of
the City, or any related person or commonly controlled entity, that have been, or reasonable
expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis or otherwise set aside to pay costs of
the Project to be paid or reimbursed out of proceeds of the Certificates.
Section 3. This Resolution is a declaration of City's official intent under the
Reimbursement Regulations.
Section 4. The maximum principal amount of the Obligations for which the
Expenditure is made is reasonably expected to be $5,000,000.
Section 5. The proceeds from the Obligations are to be used for the Project,
including, but not limited to, construction of a Community Recreation Center including but not
limited to a swimming pool, amphitheater, gymnasium and parking.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall make this Resolution reasonably available for
public inspection within thirty (30) days of the date this Resolution is adopted.
Section 7. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and
thenceforth and thereafter same shall be in full force and effect.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 261h day of May, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
3~/257 2
STATE Or CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY anrmasms)
CITY OF TE. Id~CULA )
SS
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Resolution No. 92- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the 26th day of May 1992 by the following roll call vote.
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCK,MEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
3/Rnleo/~7 3
li -.i
I .
"v'J,. 'TV'
I I
I I
RANCHO CALIFORNIA SPORTS PARK
RJM Design Group
SCHEMATIC DESIGN SPACE ALLOTMENT
SPACE
INFORMATION
OFFICE A
OFFICE B
DIRECTOR"S OFFICE
MUL TIPURPOSE
STORAGE- MUL TIPURPOSE
TEEN ROOM / GAME ROOM
STORAGE- GAME / TEEN
MEETING ROOM A
MEETING ROOM B
CRAFTS ROOM
RECEPTION
KITCHEN
RESTROOMS - MUL TIPRUPOSE
STORAGE- GYM
GYMNASIUM
STAGE @ MUL TIPURPOSE
STORAGE - STAGE
SHOWER / LOCKER
STORAGE - LOCKER / SHOWER
EMERG. PREP. STOR
VENDING - INDOORS
VENDING - OUTDOORS
UTILITY / MECHANICAL
POOL EQUIPMENT
POOL CONTROL
SUBTOTAL
CIRCULATION
ORIGINAL PROGRAM
SQUARE FOOTAGE
0
150
150
200
3,400
0
1,500
0
340
680
300i
1,000
750
700
600
8,000
1,000
0
2,500
0
300
200
0
200
500 ~
260
22, 730
2,273
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE
25,003
CURRENT DESIGN
SQUARE FOOTAGE
150
160
150
200
3,400
290
1,600
120
338
675
338
1,000
530
520
600
8,790
1,075
230
2,300
115
285
50
50
200
480i
150
23,796
2,684
COMMENTS
BLEACHER SEATS- 312
26,480
4121192 "
Page1
DESIGN GROUP, INC.
PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS
1OF2
RANCHO CALIFORNIA SPORTS PARK
CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
559-00-4
ITEM
QTY
UNIT
UNIT PRICE SUBTOTAL TOTAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT:
UTILITIES
CLEAR AND GRUB
ROUGH GRADING (ONSITE FILL)
ROUGH GRADING (OFFSITE FILI~
FOUNDATION (OVEREX.)
CURB AND GUTTER
AC PAVING
SIGNAGE
LIGHTING
STREAM EROSION CONTROL
TOTAL
SITE LANDSCAPING:
HYDROSEED
SOIL PREPARATION/
FINE GRADE
IRRIGATION
PLANTING
BLUFF TOP PROMENADE
ESTABLISH MAINTENANCE
TOTAL
CRC COMPLEX
CRC BUILDING
COMPETITION/RECREATION POOL
WADING POOL
POOL ENCLOSURE FENCE
ACCENT PAVING
MISC. FURNITURE
MOWSTRIP
RETAINING WALL 18"
RETAINING WALL 36"
AMPHITHEATRE
SHELTER
TOTAL
500
7
55,000
20,000
8,200
6,040
97,278
2,800
325,244
92,640
92,640
92,640
8,453
92,640
26,480
5,000
625
800
31,818
420
530
687
2,000
LF 170.00 85,000
AC 3000.00 21,000
CY 3.00 165,000
CY 6.00 120,000
CY 1.00 8,200
LF 16.00 96,640
LF 2.00 194,556
ALLOW 50,000
ALLOW 100,000
SF 5.00 14,000
SF 0.07 22,767
SF 0.25 23,160
SF 0.75 69,480
SF 2.00 185,280
SF 3.00 25,359
SF 0.10 9,264
SF 80.00 2,118,400
SF 110.00 550,000
LF 65.00 40,625
SF 16.00 12,800
SF 4.00 127,272
ALLOW 8,000
LF 5.00 2,100
LF 23.00 12,190
LF 75.00 51,525
ALLOW 100,000
SF 15.00 30,000
F'~ , 39
335,31
27285 LAS RAMBIAS, SUITE 250 · MISSION VIEJO. CA 92691 · (714) 582-7SI6 · FAX (714) 582-0429
RJM
DESIGN GROUP, INC.
PLANNING AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS
2 OF2
RANCHO CALIFORNIA SPORTS PARK
CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
559-00-4
APRIL 30, 1992
CRC COMPLEX LANDSCAPE
SOIL PREP/FINE GRADE 27,327 SF
IRRIGATION 27,327 SF
PLANTING 27,327 SF
ESTABLISH MAINTENANCE 27,327 SF
0.25 6,832
1.00 27,327
3.00 81,981
0.10 2,733
TOTAL
SUBTOTAL
118,87:
4,361,492
10% CONTINGENCY
436,14!
GRAND TOTAL 4,797,641
~HE ABOVE ESTIMATE DOES NOT INCLUDE MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT FEES FOR ITEMS SUCH A2
~NGARO0 RAT, MURIETTA CREEK DRAINAGE, FIRE MITIGATION, WATER TREATMENT AND
TRAFFIC SIGNAL.
RJM HAS PREPARED THIS ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST ON THE BASIS OF
BEST PROFESSIONAL JUDGEMENT AND EXPERIENCE WITH THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY. TH]
ESTIMATE, HOWEVER, REPRESENTS! ASSUMPTIONS AND OPINIONS OF THE CONSTRUCTION
MARKET AND CONTRACTOR'S METHODS OF DETERMINING ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS OVER
WHICH RJM HAS NO CONTROL.
IF THE OWNER REQUIRES GREATER ASSURANCE OF THE CONSTRUCTION COST, THE EMPLOYME]
OF AN INDEPENDENT COST ESTIMATOR IS ENCOURAGED.
27285 LAS RAMBIAS, SUITE 250 · MISSION VIF. JO. CA 92691 · (714) 582-7516 · FAX (714) 582-0429
30 APR 92
92006,10
RANCHO CALIFORNIA
SPORTS PARK
LPA
5PACE
MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM (2):
ARTS & CRAFTS ROOM (9):
MEEtiNG ROOM A (6):
MEEtiNG ROOM B (7)(8):
RECEPTION (18):
DIRECTOR'S OFFICE (17):
OFFICE A (16):
OFFICE B (16):
RESTROOMS (14):
RANCHO CALIFORNIA SPORTS PARK
LPA PROJECT NO. 92006.10
PREUMINARY FURNITURE ALLOCAtiON
ITEM
330 - 5tackable Chain
21 - 6' Fold Down Tables
PA System
12 - Stools
1 - Conference Table
21 - Stackable Chairs
I - Side Credenza
I - Wipe Board, 8'
5 - Multi-Purpose Tables
2 - Corner Tables
36 - Stackable Chairs
2 - End Credenza/Lat. Files
I - Task Chair/Stool
I - Bulletin Board
2 - Lateral files, 18"x30", 2 High
I - Executive Unit
36 '~84" w/Left Pos. Pedestal
Bridge w/overhead storage
Credenza w/2 lateral
tiles underneath
1 - Executive High Back Chair
2 - Side Chairs
1 - Task Chair
7 - Vertical fie, 2 high
7 - Task Chair
I - Vertical fie, 2 high
I - Mop Set
70 - 15'W x 78"D x 36"H
Vented Metal Lockers
or
30 - 15"VV x 18"D x 24"H and
50 - 15"W x 18"D x 36"H
Vented Metal Lockers
STORAGE LOCATION
Storage Room & Stage
Storage Room & Stage
Storage Room
Storage Room
Storage Room
IN~UM. F2
~UbTI'P~ f'c~M
,-'7_,,-'b-
30APR92
92006.10
Multi-Purpose Room
RANCHO CALIFORNIA
SPORTS PARK
LPA
I
I
I
Multi-Purpose Room (2-B)
RANCHO CALIFORNIA
SPORTS PARK
LPA
C
/\
/\
Meeting Room A
RANCHO CALIFORNIA
SPORTS PARK
I ,PA
~aUbllrb~uPO~
I I
I I t
Meeting Room B
(7)(8)
RANCHO CALIFORNIA
SPORTS PARK
LPA
30 APR 92
92006,'10
Reception/Office/Storage (18)(17)(11)
RAN-CHO CALIFORNIA
SP:ORTS PARK
LPA
I
!!IBBi!!!I
I
(~0
Restroom/Lockers ( 14 )
15" VVI~, I~' 19~
30 APR 92
92006.10
RANCHO CALIFORNIA
SPORTS PARK
LP.A
I
I ·
t
Teen Room ( 3 )( 4 )
RANCHO CALIFORNIA
I
SPORTS PARK
I ,PA
Pool Storage
30 APR 92
92006.10
RANCHO CALIFORNIA
SPORTS PA.RK
LPA
CITY OF TEMECULA
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
X Proposed __ Final
PROJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
Community Recreation Center, Environmental Assessment 11
Temecula Community Services District
South side of ~Rancho Vista Road in the Rancho California Sports Park
Construction ;of a 26,000 square foot Community Center with
recreation and meeting facilities, community pool, 350-seat
amphitheater,' walking trails, approximately 270 parking spaces, and
other related recreational and meeting facilities
Based upon the information conl~ained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and
pursuant to the. requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it has
been determined that the above mentioned project will have no significant impact upon the
environment. The City of TemecUla
X City Council
Planning Commission
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant-impact upon the
environment, and recommends that a Negative Declaration be adopted. The mitigation
measures for this project are contained in the Initial Study.
Prepared by: ~ ~
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
(Name and Title)
Public Review Period: Mav 13, 1992 to
Public Notice was given through:
X Local Newspaper. __ Posting the Site.
June 2.1992 .
_ Notice to Adjacent Property Owners.
Negative Declaration Adoption Date:
S~STAFFRPT~I 1 EA.MND
II
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
BACKGROUND
1. Name of Project:
Community Recreation Center
(Environmental Assessment 11
Location of Project:
South side of Rancho Vista Road in the Rancho
California SPorts Park adjacent to the existing Little
League ball fields.
Description of Project:
Construction of 26.000 sauare foot Community Center
with recreation and meetina facilities, community pOOl.
350-seat Amphitheater. walkino trails, aDoroximatelv
970 Darkino SDeCeS. and other related recreational and
meetino facilities in an undeveloped area of the Rancho
California Sports Park.
4. Date of Assessment:
May 11.1992
5. Name of Proponent:
City of Temecula. Community Services Deoartment
Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula. CA 92590
(714) 694-6480
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
Yes Maybe No
Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic
substructures?
X
bg
Disruptions, displacements, compaction, or
overcovering of the soil?
X
Change in topography or ground surface relief
features?
The destruction, covering or modification of any
unique geologic or physical features?
X
ee
Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils,
either on or off the site?
X
f. 'Changes in siltation, deposition or erosion?
The modification of any wash, channel, creek,
river, or lake?
Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards
such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground
failure, liquefaction, or similar hazards?
Any development within an Alquist-Priolo Special
Studies Zone?
Air. Will the proposal iresuit in:
Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?
The creation ofi objectionable odors?
Ce
Alteration of air movement, temperature, or
moisture or any change in climate, whether
locally or regionally?
Water. Will the proposal result in:
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of
water movements, in either marine or fresh waters?
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
de
Change in the amount of surface water in any
waterbody? :
Discharge into Surface waters, or in any alteration
of surface water quality, including but not limited
to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
fe
Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of
ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions, withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
Reduction in the amount of water otherwise
available for public water supplies?
Yes
X
X
X
Maybe No
_
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S~STAFFtla~ 11EA.IE~ 2
Yes Maybe NO
i. Exposure of people or property to water related
hazards such as flooding?
Plant Life, Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,or number of
any native species of plants (including trees,
shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare,
threatened, or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an
area of native vegetation, or in 8 barrier to the
normal replenishment of existing species?
d. Reduction in the acreage of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers
of any species of animals (animals includes all land
animals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish, shellfish,
benthic organisms, and/or insects)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare,
threatened, or endangered species of animals?
c. The introduction of new wildlife species into
an area?
d. A barrier to the migration or movement of animals?
e. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
Noise, Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
c. Exposure of people to severe vibrations?
Light and Glare, Will the proposal produce or result in
new light or glare?
X
X
X
X
X
S~STAFFRPT%l 1EA.IES 3
e
10.
11.
12.
13.
Land Use.
a.
b.
Will the proposal result in:
Alteration of the present land use of an area?
Alteration to the future planned land use of an
area as described in a community or general plan?
Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. An increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources?
b. The depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource?
Risk of Upset. Will the proposal result in:
ae
A risk of an explosion or the release of any
· hazardous substances in the event of an accident
or upset conditions (hazardous substances includes,
but is not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation)?
be
The usa, storage, transport, or disposal of hazardous
or toxic materials (including, but not limited to oil,
pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)?
Ce
Possible interference with an emergency response
plan or an emergency evacuation plan?
Population. Will the I~oposal 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:
ae
Generation of substantial additional vehicular
movement?
be
Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand
for new parking?
Substantial impact upon existing transportation
systems, including public transportation?
Yes Mavb~ No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
mSTAFFam t ~ EA. ES 4
14.
15.
16.
d. Alterations to present petterns of circulation
or movement of people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or sir traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
Public Servioes. 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?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
f. Other governmental services:
Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing
sources of energy, or require the development
of new sources of energy?
Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems,
or substantial alterations to any of the following utilities:
Power or natural gas?
Communications systems?
Water systems?
Sanitary sewer systems or septic tanks?
Storm water drainage systems?
Solid waste disposal systems?
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
.X
X
S~,STAFFRFT%11EA.IES 5
17.
18.
19.
20.
Will the proposal result in a disjointed or inefficient
pattern of utility delivery system improvements for
any of the above?
Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
The creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard?
The exposure 0f people to potential health
hazards, including the exposure of sensitive
receptors (such as schools and hospitals) to
toxic pollutant emissions?
AeSthetics, Will the proposal result in:
a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open
to the public?
The creation of: an aesthetically offensive site
open to public view?
c. Detrimental visual impacts on the surrounding area?
ReCreation. Will the pioposal result in an impact upon
the quality or quantity:of existing recreational resources
or opportunities?
Cultural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
or object?
Restrictions to existing religious or sacred uses
within the potential impact area?
Yes Maybe NO
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S%STAFFRFT%11EA.IES 6
III DISCUSSION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Earth
1 .a,d ,h,i.
No. The project will not result in unstable earth conditions, changes to unique
geologic or physical features, the exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards, or any construction in an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
1 .b,c.
Yes. Construction of Community Recreation Center will result in the disruption,
displacement, overcovering and compaction of soils, and a change in surface
topography. To accommodate the project, the project site adjacent to Rancho Vista
Road will be filled in to raise the elevation of the project site to approximate street
level. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
1 .e ,f.
Yes. The wind erosion, water erosion, and deposition which could result from
project construction are expected to be short-term and construction related. The
City will require the use of appropriate best management practices to reduce and
mitigate onsite erosion and offsite deposition. Long-term erosion and deposition
from the project site is expected to decrease as a result of the project because of
the required paving and landscaping. As a result, no significant impacts are
anticipated from of this project.
1.g
Yea. The project will not change or alter the existing unnamed intermittent blue-line
channel shown on the Murrieta U.S.G.S. Quad map. The existing unnamed
intermittent channel will remain in its current location at the base of the slope south
of the project. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Air
2.a ,b.
Yes. The construction of Community Recreation Center will result in short-term,
construction related increases in air emissions and may result in the local
deterioration of air quality. Some Long-term air emissions from increased
automobile usage could occur as a result of the public's use of the proposed facility.
As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated from this project.
2.c.
No. No long-term changes in air quality, creation of odors, or alteration to the local
or regional climate are expected to occur as a result of this project. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Water
No. No measurable changes or alterations in the course or direction of flood flows,
the quantity and quality of surface or ground waters, discharges to surface waters,
reduction of public water supplies, or exposure of people or property to flooding are
expected to occur as a result of this project. The existing channel and drainage
pattern will not change. The existing detention basin, west of the project site, will
continue to recharge local groundwater and will not be affected by this project. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
$'tSTAR:!iYT~I 1EA,IEi 7
Plant Life
4.a,b.
4.c.
4.d.
Animal Life
5 .a ,e.
5.b,c,d.
Yea. No endangered 0r rare vegetative species were identified on the site during
the April, 1992 BiolOgical Field Study. The site does contain a small area of
degraded native riperiSn scrub vegetation along the unnamed intermittent channel,
and introduced grasSland specie. Except or the degraded ripariona scrub
vegetation, no signifiCant plant resources species have been identified on the site.
The proposed project will result in the substantial removal of most of this degraded
riparian scrub vegetation. The higher quality riparian scrub vegetation adjacent to
the detention basin will not be disturbed. Because of the low quality of the riparian
scrub and isolated nature of the site, the project is not expected to significantly
impact these resources. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
No, The project will not result in the introduction of new species of plants into
ares of native vegetation. Unvegetated portions of the site will be hydroseeded
with a mixture of native grass species to reduce erosion. No significant impacts are
anticipated from this project.
No~ The project site has not been identified as prime agricultural land in earlier
planning studies done 1by the County of Riverside. In addition, the site is currently
vacant and is not being used for agricultural production. No significant impacts are
anticipated from this project.
Yes. The construction! of this project will change the diversity of the animal species
and reduce the amount of wildlife habitat on the project site. Limited populations
of Common small rodents, reptiles, insects, and birds have been identified on the
site and wildlife from the adjacent hill and pond areas may also rely on this area for
either habitat, food, and/or water. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result
of this project.
No. The project will not result in the introduction of new species, result in a barrier
to migration, or reduce the number of any unique, rare, threatened, or endangered
species. The project site is located within the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat (SKR)
Habitat Conservation Area. A Biology Study was done for the project site in April,
1992. The survey did! not identify any SKR or any other unique, rare, threatened,
or endangered species on the project site. No significant impacts are anticipated
as a result of this project.
$%STAFFRFT'%I 1EA.IES 8
Noise
6.8.
Yea. Some increase in noise levels will occur as a result of this project. The
increases in short-term noise levels will result from the construction of the
Community Recreation Center. Because the short-term construction related noise
will be of limited duration during. daylight hours and will not require unusual or
special construction techniques, the short-term impacts are not expected to be
significant.
The long-term noise impacts could occur as · result of this project. The
amphitheater, community pool, and recreation center will generate additional noise.
Any additional noise would be most noticeable during the weekday evenings and
on weekends and could be loud enough to adversely impact adjacent residents.
Before the project design is finalized, an acoustical study will be completed and
changes will be made to the final project design to mitigate any adverse noise
impacts. Because of this mitigation measure, no significant impacts are expected
to occur as a result of this project.
6.b.
Maybe. Additional daytime and evening noise will occur as a result of this project.
The amphitheater, community pool, and recreation center have the potential to
generate noise levels sufficient to adversely impact adjacent residents. Before the
project design is finalized, an acoustical study will be completed and changes will
be made to the final project design to mitigate any adverse noise impacts. Because
of this mitigation measure, no significant impacts are expected to occur as a result
of this project.
6.c.
No. The project will not cause people to be exposed to severe vibrations. No
significant impact is anticipated as a result of this project.
Lic~ht and Glare
Yes. Additional light and glare will result from this project. The project is located
within the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District. The lighting
standards within this district require that only low pressure sodium street lights be
installed to reduce the glare in the night sky near the observatory. The impact of
the additional lights should be mitigated by compliance with the standards contained
in the Mount Palomar Observatory Special Lighting District (Ordinance No. 655).
Because of this mitigation measure, no significant impacts are anticipated as a
result of this project.
Land Use
6.8.
Yes. The project site is consists of vacant floodway and intermittent channel. The
project site will result in the construction of a Community Recreational Center. The
site is in a predominantly urbanized area of the City of Temecula in area planned for
community recreational facilities. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are
anticipated from this project.
S~,STAFFRPT%l 1EA.IE6 9
8.b.
No, The project is consistent with the previous County General Plan for this area
and there is a reasonable probability that the project will be consistent with the
City's future General Fqan. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this
project.
Natural Resources
9 .a,b.
Risk of Upset
Yet, Construction of a community recreational center will result in a minor
incremental increase in the use of natural and nonrenewable resources such as
construction aggregate and petroleum products. The project does not require the
development of new; sources for these materials, If this project were not
undertaken, the existing aggregate and petroleum resources would be used for other
development and construction activities, No significant impacts are anticipated as
a result of this project~
10.a,b,c.
No, The project will not result in a risk of explosion, the release of hazardous
sul~stance, or any interference with an emergency response plan. As a result, no
significant impacts are anticipated from this project.
Population
11.
Housing
No. The community recreational facility in this location will not alter the location,
distribution, or growth rats of population of this area. This project is a partial
response to the previously under-mitigated development in the area. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
12,
Maybe. The construction of the project in this location has the potential to
adversely affect existling housing in the area. In addition to noise, light and glare
from the project could also affect adjacent residences. The final design of the
Center will be modified to minimize the impacts on the adjacent residences. As a
result, no significant impacts are expected.
TransnortationlCirculation
13.a,b,c. Yes, The construction~ of this project will generate additional vehicular traffic and
additional demand for q new parking in this area. However, the current Level of
Service (LOS) for the critical intersections for this project are Ynez Road and Rancho
Vista Road and Margarita Road and Rancho Vista Road. The curant LOS's for these
intersections are B and C, respectively. The Southwest Area Community Plan
anticipated continued recreational facilities in this area and provided roadway
system capacity for these uses. It is anticipated that the City General Plan will do
the same, As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated as 8 result of this
project.
mSTA~,-~n ~ EA.ES 10
13.d,e,f.
No. The project will not alter rail or air traffic, alter the existing pattern of
circulation, or increase traffic hazards in the City of Temecula. No significant
impacts are anticipated as · result of this project.
Public Services
14.a,b,c.
No. The project will not create a need for, or result in any alterations to, fire,
police, or school services, as a result no significant impacts are anticipated.
14.d ,e.
Yes. This project will require the additional expenditure of future City funds to
cover the cost of providing additional recreational programs and for maintaining
public facilities. However the impact of these costs on the City's budget are not
expected to be significant. (Park and recreation services are a high priority for the
City of Temecula given the historic shortage of these facilities in the Temecula
Valley.)' As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated this project.
Enerav
15.a,b.
No. The construction of the project will not result in the use of substantial amounts
of fuel or energy, or result in a substantial increase in the demand for existing
sources of energy. No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Utilities
16.all.
No. The construction of the project will not result in a need for new utility delivery
systems, or require substantial alteration of the gas, electric, communication, water,
sewer, storm drain, or solid waste disposal utilities or; services. No significant
impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Human Health
17.a,b.
No. Construction of the project will not result in the creation of a health hazard, or
result in the additional exposure of people to any human health hazards. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Aesthetics
18.a,b,c.
No. A Community Recreation Center on this site will not result in the creation of
an aesthetically offensive view, the obstruction of any scenic view or vista, or have
a detrimental visual impact on the surrounding area. The view of the area will be
different than the current view, but it is not likely to be aesthetically offensive. No
significant impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.
Recreation
19.
Yes. Construction of the project will provide additional recreational opportunities
and amenities in this area. The recreational facilities included in the project area
expected to have a beneficial impact. No adverse significant impacts are
anticipated as a result of this project.
mSTA,,'~.'n~ ~ EA.ES 11
Cultural Resources
20.a,b,c,d.
No, The Master Environmental Assessment for the City General Plan did not
identify this area of High Sensitivity for Peleontological Resources. In addition, the
project site is not known to contain any prehistoric or historic structure, affect any
unique ethnic cultural Values, or effect any religious or sacred uses. As a result, no
significant impacts are anticipated from this project.
s~TAm,m; ~s~.es 12
IV 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?
Yes
Maybe
N~
X
Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental 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.)
X
e
Does the project have impacts which are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project's
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 substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
X
V DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME "DE MINIMUS'" FINDINGS
Does the project have the potential to cause any adverse effect,
either individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife resources?
Wildlife is defined as "all wild animals, birds, plants, fish,
amphibians, and related ecological communities, including the
habitat upon which the wildlife depends on for it's continued
viability" (Section 711.2, Fish and Game Code).
X
N/A _
S~STAFmm~ ~s~.Es 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 significant effect
on the environment, there WILL NO' be a significant effect in this case
· because the Mititilation Measures described on the attached sheets and
in the Conditions of Approval that have been added to the project will
mitigate any potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION wil be prepared,
I find the prop:n~d project MAY haVe a significant effect on the
environment, an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
Prepared by:
Sagnature
Gary Thornhill. Director of Plannine
Name and Title
May 11. 1992
Date
s;TN~wm~ ~.ss 14
LOCATION MAP
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT N0. 11
Community Recreation Center
R/xRc'~O ,~ CA! IFORI~UA
Project Site
//
//
II
//,,
ITEM
NO.
4
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/Board of Directors
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE:
May 26, 1992
SUBJECT:
Fiscal Year 1992-93 Annual Operating Budget
Prepared by: Grant M. Yates, Senior Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors adopt Resolution 92- to
adopt the Fiscal Year 1992-93 Annual Operating Budget for the Temecula Com'~'uunity
Service District (TCSD).
DISCUSSION/FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed TCSD operating budget for FY
1992-93 includes the operation of district-wide parks and recreation facilities, as well
as benefit assessment zones for street lighting and slope maintenance.
The TCSD includes full year funding for the Senior and Teen programs, including
funding for of the Senior Citizens Coordinator and the Senior Recreation Leader in the
Teen Center.
The operating budget for the TCSD totals $4,417,779 as follows:
City Wide Parks and Recreation
Service Level A (Arterial Street Lighting)
Service Level B (Residential Street Lights)
Service Level C' (Slope Maintenance)
Service Level D (Waste Hauling)
$2,338,574
154,776
192,650
481,414
1,250,365
Total
$4,417,779
Attachments:
Resolution 92-
Adopting Operating Budget for FY 1992-93.
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92,-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
ADOPTING THE ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET FOR
FISCAL YEAR, 1992--1993 FOR THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AND ESTABLISHING
.CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS AND
PERSONNEL POSITIONS
WHEREAS, the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) has reviewed the
proposed final Opera~.ng Budget for fiscal year 1992-93, and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Temecula Community Services
District as follows:
SECTION 1. That certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the
City of Temecula entitled "City of Temecula 1992-93 Annual Operating Budget," is hereby
adopted.
SECTIDN 2. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of
budget appropriations:
A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered
appropriation available to cover the expenditure.
B. The Department Head may prepare a transfer of appropriations within
departmental budget accounts up to $10,000 per transfer, with the approval of the TCSD General
Manager.
$10,000.
action.
C. The General Manager may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up to
Any expenditure of funds in excess of $10,000 requires TCSD Board of Directors
D. The Board of Directors must authorize transfers of funds from unreserved
Fund Balance and transfers within departmental budget accounts of $10,000 or more.
E. The Board of Directors must authorize any increase in regular personnel
positions above the level included in the final budget. The Executive Director may authorize
the hiring of temporary or part time staff as necessary within the limits imposed by the controls
listed above.
C5DR=,0,\256 05/20/92
F. The General Manager may approve change orders on TCSD contracts in
amounts up to $10,000, if sufficient unappropriated funds are available.
SECTION 3. Outstanding encumbrances shown on the TCSD books at June 30, 1992,
are hereby appropriated for such contracts or .obligations for 1992-93.
SECTION 4. The Board Secretary shall certify adoption of the resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOFrED at a regular meeting of the Temecula
Community Services District on the 261h day of May, 1992, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: DIRECTORS:
NOES: DIRECTORS:
ABSENT: DIRECTORS:
ATTEST:
Ronald J. Parks, President
June S. Greek
City Clerk/Board Secretary
[SEAL]
CSDP, eaoeX256 05r20/92
ITEM NO.
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ~~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER ~
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM:
DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER
DATE:
MAY 26,1992
SUBJECT:
FY 1992-93 TCSD ASSESSMENTS
PREPARED BY:
SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors:
Adopt Resolution #92-__ accepting the filing of a report on the proposed rates
and charges for Fiscal Year 1992-93 and setting the public hearing concerning
the proposed rates and charges for the FY 1992-93 TCSD Assessments for
June 23, 1992 at 8:00 p.m. at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol
Street, Temecula, California.
DISCUSSION: The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) operates
under the authority of Community Services District Law and provides parks and
recreation, median and slope maintenance, street lighting, and recycling and refuse
collection services in the City of Temecula. The boundaries of the TCSD are
contiguous with the City, and the City Council also serves as the Board of Directors
of the TCSD..
The five service levels of the TCSD include:
1. Community Services/Parks
2. Service Level A - Arterial Street Lights
3. Service Level B - Residential Street Lights
4. Service Level C - Slope Maintenance
5. Service Level D - Recycling and Refuse Collection
The TCSD is required to complete an annual assessment process which includes
adopting a resolution accepting the filing of a report on the proposed rates and
charges necessary to provide the aforementioned services; noticing every property
owner in the City; and conducting a public hearing to consider approving the proposed
rates and charges.
Staff recommends that the Board of Directors adopt a resolution to accept the filing
of a report on the proposed rates and charges for FY 1992-93 and schedule a public
hearing concerning this issue for June 23, 1992. Staff will then proceed with
noticing every property owner in the City concerning their proposed rates and charges
and the June 23 public hearing.
Attached is the resolution and the report on the proposed rates and charges of the
TCSD for FY 1992-93 for your review.
FISCAL IMPACT: The revenue generated from the TCSD FY 1992-93
Assessments will fund the parks and recreation; median and slope maintenance; street
lighting; and recycling and refuse collection services in the City of Temecula.
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-_.
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ON THE
FILING OF A REPORT ON THE PROPOSED RATES AND
CHARGES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 AND SETTING A
TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN
CONNECTION HEREWITH
WHEREAS, upon incorporation of the City of Temecula, California (the "City")
effective December 1, 1989, voters also approved the formation of the Temecula Community
Services District (the "TCSD"), which has the same area and boundaries as the City and whose
Board of Directors (the "Board") consists of the members of the City Council of the City; and
WHEREAS, the TCSD includes portions of three (3) county service areas which before
incorporation provided different levels of service to different areas now within the City; and
WHEREAS, the TCSD proposes to continue such rates and charges for park and
community services, street lighting, slope maintenance, and recycling and refuse program (the
"Services and/or Facilities") for those areas specifically benefitted thereby and charged by the
county service areas or the TCSD for such services in prior fiscal years; and
WHEREAS, the Board has requested the preparation of a report for Fiscal Year 1992-93
containing the proposed rates and charges, for filing with the Secretary of the TCSD pursuant
to the Community Services District Law being Division 3 of Title 6 of the Government Code
of the State of California, commencing with Section 61000 (the "Act");
NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT DOES HEREBY, RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND
ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 61621.2 of the Act, an Engineer's Report for
Collection for the Fiscal Year 1992-93 (the "Report") has been presented and filed with the
Secretary of the TCSD. The Report contains a description of the proposed Services and/or
Facilities to be provided and the proposed rates and charges for such Services and/or Facilities
(attached hereto as Exhibit A, entitled "Project Summary" and incorporated herein by reference),
and a description of the parcels subject to rates and charges. The Report is based upon a budget
adopted by the Board for the proposed Services and/or Facilities for specific areas where such
Services and/or Facilities are provided, including necessary staff and administrative expenses.
-1-
<-
The Report is on fie in the City Administrative Offrues and reference to said Report is
hereby made for all particulars.
SECTIONi 2. The TCSD proposes to collect such rates and charges at the same time,
in the same manner, by the same persons and together with and not separately from, the general
taxes of the TCSD. These rates and charges shall be delinquent at the same time and thereafter
be subject to the same delinquency penalties as such general taxes. All laws applicable to the
levy, collection and enforcement of general taxes of the TCSD, including, but not limited to,
those pertaining to the matters of delinquency, correction, cancellation, refund and redemption,
are applicable to such rates and charges. However, if for the first year the charge is levied, the
real property to which the charge relates has been transferred or conveyed to a bona fide
purchaser for value, or if a lien of a bona fide encumbrancer for value has been created and
attaches thereon, prior to the date on which the first installment of such taxes appear on the roll,
then the charge, or the delinquency in that charge, assessed pursuant to this section shall not
result in lien against the property, but instead shall be transferred to the unsecured roll for
collection.
SECTION 3. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS
MATTER WILL BE HELD BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT ON lune 23. 1992, AT 8:00 P.M., OR AS SOON
THEREAFTER AS FEASIBLE IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER AT THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY CENTER, 28816 PUJOL, TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA. The public hearing
will review and consider any protests received in writing by the Secretary prior to the scheduled
hearing. Public comment regarding the Report by all interested persons will be heard at the
public hearing.
SECTION 4. The Secretary is hereby directed to give notice of the public hearing and
the filing of the Report by publication in a newspaper of general circulation once a week for two
successive weeks and by first class mall to each person who owns a parcel which will be subject
to such rates and charges as such names and addresses are shown in the last equalized roll or
as known to the Secretary.
°2-
SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVP. r} AND ADOPTFx} this day of
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES
DISTRICT
ATrEST:
President
Secretary
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
CITY OF TEMECULA
SS
I, , Secretary of the Temecula Community Services District,
HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing CSD ResolUtion was duly adopted at a
regular meeting of the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District on the
__day of , 1992, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: DIRECTORS:
NOES: DIRECTORS:
ABSENT:
DIRECTORS:
Secretary
EXHIBIT A
PROJECT SUMMARY
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
Muni Financ'~l Services, Inc. was retained by the City of Temecula to prepare the Annual Levy
Report for the Temecula Community Services Distdct ("TCSD") for the Fiscal Year 1992/1993.
Pursuant to the Community Services District Law, Division 3 of Title 6 of the Government Code of the State
of California, commencing with Section 61000 et seq. ('Act'), the TCSD has the power to levy and collect
special assessments in order to carry on its operations and to provide the services and facilities fumished
by it.
The levy and collection of the special assessments is accomplished by the assignment of benefit
to each parcel within a specific benefit zone hereinafter referred to as "Service Level'. A Service Level is a
defined area that provides a specific service, operation and maintenance and/or program to only those
parcels contained within that zone.
Last fiscal year, public interest and convenience required the reorganization of the existing zones
of benefit by the establishment of five city-wide Service Levels. The Service Levels and their service
descriptions are as follows:
1. Community Services/Parks: Operation and maintenance, improvements and administration of the City
community park system, recreation facilities, services and programs.
2. Service Level A: Service, operation, maintenance, energy improvements and administration for all Arterial
street lighting and medians.
3. Service Level B: Service, operation, maintenance, energy improvements and administration for all local
street lighting within recorded subdivisions.
4. Service Level C: Service, operation, maintenance, improvements and administration for all perimeter
landscaping and slope maintenance within recorded subdivisions. This Service Area has four
specific rate areas.
5. Service Levei D: Recycling program and refuse collection for all detached, single-family residential homes.
The Financial Analysis contained herein contains each Service Level Budget concluding with their
Totals for Fiscal Year 92/93 year to be as follows:
Commmunity Services/Parks:
Service Level A
Service Level B
Service Level C
ZONE BUDGET
$2,164,534
$ 154,776
$ 192,650
$ 481,414
Service Level D
TOTAL TCSD LEVY FY 91/92
$1,250,365
$4,243,739
RATE AREA BUDGET
Rate C1: $ 5,550
Rate C2: $143,871
Rate C3: $ 98,040
Rate C4: $233,953
$/SFR
$ 58.30
$ 4.18
$ 30.88
$ 50.00
$ 93.00
$120.00
$179.00
$159.12
The Levy and Collection amounts for all non-exempt parcels within the TCSD for the Fiscal Year 1992/1993
are as shown on the Assessment Roll, Exhibit "B" on file with the City Clerk.
ANNUAL LEVY REPORT
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
Rscal Year 1992/1993
June 1992
Prepared by
MUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.
42217 Rio Nedo, Second Floor
Temecula, CA 92590
(714) 699-3990
Fax: (714) 699-3460
3727 Buchanan, Suite 202
San Francisco, CA 94123
(415) 441-3550
Fax: (415) 441-1401
ANNUAL LEVY REPORT
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
Fiscal Year 1992/1993
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
RONALD J. PARKS
President
J. SAL MUfiOZ
Vice President
PEG MOORE
Director
PATRICIA H. BIRDSALL
Director
KAREL LINDEMANS
Director
DAVID F. DIXON
General Manager
SCO'I'F FIELD
General Counsel
SHAWN D. NELSON
Director of Community Services
JUNE S. GREEK
Secretary to the Board
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT SUMMARY .......................................... I
INTRODUCTION .............................................. 2
Purpose of Project ......................................... 2
History of Project .......................................... 2
Importance of the Project .................................... 3
Authority and Procedure ..................................... 3
Definition of Terms Used for this Project ......................... 4
PROJECT STRUCTURE .; ....................................... 9
Zone Definition ........................................... 9
Boundary Definition ........................................ 9
Community Services/Parks .................................. 9
SERVICE LEVEL A - Citywide Arterial Service ..................... 10
SERVICE LEVEL B - Local Street Lighting Service .................. 10
SERVICE LEVEL C - Perimeter Landscaping/Slope Maintenance ........ 12
SERVICE LEVEL D - SFR Recycling/Refuse Collection ............... 12
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS .......................................... 14
Budget Definition ................ .......................... 14
METHOD OF BENEFIT APPORTIONMENT AND FORMULA .............. 17
FORMULA I - Community Services/Parks and Service Level A ......... 17
FORMULA II- Service Level B and C ............................ 23
FORMULA III - Service Level D ................................ 25
ASSESSMENT ROLL ........................................... 26
AFFIDAVIT FOR ANNUAL LEVY REPORT ............................ 27
PROJECT SUMMARY
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
Muni Financial Services, Inc. was retained by the City of Temecula to prepare the Annual Levy
Report for the Temecula Community Services Distdct ('I'CSD") for the Fiscal Year 1992/1993.
Pursuant to the Community Services District Law, Division 3 of Tttle 6 of the Government Code of the State
of California, commencing with Section 61000 et seq. (~Act'), the TCSD has the power tO levy and collect
special assessments in order to carry on its operations and to provide the services and facilities furnished
by it.
The levy and cdlection of the special assessments is accomplished by the assignment of benefit
to each parcel within a specific benefit zone herelnafter referred to as 'SeNice Lever. A SeNice Level is a
defined area that provides a specific service, operation and maintenance and/or program to only those
parcels contained within that zone.
Last fiscal year, public interest and convenience required the reorganization of the existing zones
of benefit by the establishment of five city-wide Service Levels. The SeNice Levds and their service
descriptions are as follows:
1. Community Services/Parks: Operation and maintenance, improvements and administration of the City
community park system, recreation facilities, services and programs.
2. Service Level A: Service, operation, maintenance, energy improvements and administration for all Arterial
street lighting and medians.
3. Service Levd B: Service, operation, maintenance, energy improvements and administration for all local
street lighting within recorded subdivisions.
4. Service Level C: Service, operation, maintenance, improvements and administration for all perimeter
landscaping and slope maintenance within recorded subdivisions. This Service Area has four
specific rate areas.
5. Sewice Level D: Recycling program and refuse collection for all detached, single-family residential homes.
The Financial Analysis contained herein contains each Service Level Budget concluding with their
Totals for Fiscal Year 92/93 year to be as follows:
Commmunity Services/Parks:
Service Level A
Service Level B
Service Level C
Service Level D
TOTAL TCSD LEVY FY 91/92
ZONE BUDGET
$2,164,534
$ 154,776
$ 192,650
$ 481,414
$1,250,365
$4,243,739
RATE AREA BUDGET
Rate C1: $ 5,550
Rate C2: $143,871
Rate C3: $ 98,040
Rate C4: $233,953
$/SFR
$ 58.30
$ 4.18
$ 30.88
$ 50.00
$ 93.00
$120.00
$179.00
$159.12
The Levy and Collection amounts for all non-exempt parcels within the TCSD for the Fiscal Year 1992/1993
are as shown on the Assessment Roll, Exhibit "B" on file with the City Clerk.
1
INTRODUCTION
Purpose of Project
The Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District finds and declares
that it is the policy of responsible government to encourage orderly growth and
development which are essential to the social, fiscal :and economic well-being of the City.
The Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District recognize that the
logical formation and determination of special funding districts is an important factor in
promoting orderly development and proper application of benefit to constituents within
such a district.
The Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District acknowledge that
urban population densities and intensive residential, commercial, and ,industrial
development necessitate a broad spectrum and high level of community services and
programs.
When areas be~:ome urbanized to the extent that they need the full range of community
services, priorities are required to be established regarding the type and levels of services
that the residents of the City need and desire.
Community service priorities are established by weighing the total community service
needs against the total financial resources available for securing community services, and
those community service priorities are required to reflect local circumstances, conditions
and limited financial resources.
-Therefore, the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District find and
declare that the need and priorities of the growing City of Temecula necessitate the
continuance of the service and funding abilities provided within the mechanism of a
Community Services District.
The purpose of the existing Temecula Community Services District (hereinafter referred
to as TCSD) is to provide the financial resources necessary for securing and continuing
vital community services and augmenting limited financial resources for the growing City
of Temecula.
History of Project
Prior to the incorporation of the City of Temecula, the County of Riverside had formed
and maintained County Service Areas 75, 103 and 143. These County Service Areas
(CSA) provided necessary services to a rapidly developing area soon to be proposed for
city incorporation by a vote of the constituents currently receiving the benefit of the CSA
services.
2
The Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside, on May 2, 1989, approved and
ordered to the voters, the confirmation of the City of Temecula and the formation of a
Community Services District as a subsidiary district of the City.
On the effective date of incorporation, the boundary of the Temecula Community Services
District became coterminous with the city limit of the City of Temecula. The effective date
of the incorporation of the City of Temecula and the formation of the Temecula
Community Services District was December 3, 1989.
Importance of the Project
The services that are provided by the TCSD have been and will continue to be those
services required to serve the needs of a growing community. Though still in the post-
incorporation stage with many comprehensive city services yet to be finalized, the City of
Temecula is very fortunate to offer its citizens the diverse community services provided
by the TCSD. Without the revenue generated by this special district, the following
community services could be seriously without funds to function:
· Citywide Community Park Services
· Citywide Recreation Programs
· Citywide Street Lighting Operation and Maintenance
· Citywide Median Maintenance
· Local Street Lighting Systems
,. Local Perimeter Landscaping
· Local Slope Protection
Furthermore, vital programs to address our environment, such as citywide recycling and
refuse collection for the residents within the City, would not receive the necessary
consideration for implementation if funding vehicles and cost saving collection programs
for such an implementation were not available.
Authority and Procedure
Community Service Districts are authorized pursuant to the Community Services District
Law, Division 3 of Title 6 of the Government Code of the State of California, commencing
with Section 61000 et seq. (hereinafter referred to as the CSD Law).
The CSD Law has the power to levy and collect special taxes in order to carry on its
operations and provide the services and facilities furnished by it. A CSD has the power
to prescribe, revise and collect rates and charges. As the public interest and convenience
require, the existing zones of benefit within the TCSD may be reorganized.
Rates and charges, and any related delinquencies, may be collected on the tax roll in the
same manner and time as general taxes provided certain procedures are followed.
Each year the governing board of the CSD (the City Council of the City of Temecula
presides as the Board of the TCSD) must cause a "Report" to be prepared and filed with
its Secretary which contains the description of each parcel of real property within the CSD
and its related reorganizations, zone creation, and rates and charges for the upcoming
fiscal year.
A public hearing addressing the contents of the "Report" is necessary. Notice of the filing
of this "Report" and of the hearing must be given in a newspaper of general circulation
once a week for two successive weeks end by mail'to each person who owns a parcel
which will be subject to the CSD rates and charges.
The CSD then holds a public hearing in which the Board of the CSD considers all
objections or protests or revise any rate and charge subsequent to adopting the "Report"
as final.
On or before August 7th, the Secretary of the CSD files a copy of the "Report" with the
County of Riverside Auditor/Controller with a statement endorsed thereon by the
Secretary that the report has been finally adopted by the Board. The Auditor then places
the rates and charges on the tax roll; and the rates and charges become a lien against
the parcels.
The TCSD is updated, implemented and reviewed for collection every year by the above
procedure to ensure due process and disclosure of the annual service and funding
requirements as they relate to the property receiving benefit from the District.
Definition of Terms Used for this Project
Unless the provision or context otherwise requires, the definitions contained in this section
govern for the clarification of the intent and purpose of the project.
Acre (s)/Acreage:
The amount of total net area for a lot of record translated as
acreage amount (where one acre equals 43,560 square feet)
as found on the latest Assessor Parcel Maps of the County of
Riverside at the time of CSD update.
Arterial:
Within the Southwest Area Community Plan Circulation
Element of the County Of Riverside, those streets which are
classified to be Arterial Streets and their related appurtenant
amenities and facilities.
4
Assessor Parcel Map:
Assessor ParCel No.:
Assessor Parcel Tape:
Assessment:
Assessment Roll:
Assessment Levy:
Authority:
Benefit:
Benefit Zone:
Board of Directors:
Bounda~:
The latest County of RiverSide Assessor Parcel Maps as found
on file in the Office of the County Assessor.
The parcel identification number found on the latest assessor
parcel map of the County of Riverside.
The latest public information tape generated by the County of
Riverside Assessor Office which contains information
regarding assessor parcels.
Pursuant to the formula to assign benefit, the resulting dollar
amount to be collected: and placed as a lien upon a non-
exempt parcel within the. TCSD for the benefit received.
Official collection listing of all parcels within the boundary of
the TCSD which discloses every non-exempt parcel with its'
corresponding benefit assessment.
Same as Assessment.
Community Services DiStrict Law, Division 3 of Title 6 of the
Government Code of the State of California, commencing with
Section 61000 et seq. (hereinafter referred to as the CSD
Defined facility, program, service, maintenance, operation and
administration provided' by the TCSD which is perceived to
enhance the desirability and value of a non-exempt parcel if
it is received as opposed to the absence of such.
Refer to "Service Level" on page 8 of this Report.
The governing body charged with the duty to oversee and
direct the proceedings of the TCSD. The Board of Directors
of the Temecula Community Services District presides as the
Board for the TCSD.
For all benefit zones within the TCSD, their boundaries
(benefit areas) are defined to be coterminous with the City
Limit of the City of Temecula.
Budget:
The itemization of all costs for facilities, programs, services,
maintenance and operation, and administration of the TCSD.
5
City Clerk:
City Council:
City Umit:
Citywide:
Collection:
Community Service:
COURt'y:
County Assessor:
County Auditor:
County Controller:
County Recorder:
Developed Property:
District:
The City of Temecula.
The City Clerk of the City of Temecula.
The City Council of the City of Temecula.
The incorporated city limits of the City of Temecula as it exists
at the time of the TCSD fiscal year update.
Being applicable to all of the non-exempt parcels within the
incorporated city limits of the City of Temecula.
On or before August 10th, the Secretary of the CSD files a
copy of the "Report" with the County of Riverside
Auditor/Controller with a statement endorsed thereon by the
secretary that the report has been finally adopted by the
Board. The auditor then places the rates and charges on the
tax roll and the rates and charges become a lien against the
parcels.
Program defined and contained within the Budget of the
TCSD.
The County of Riverside, in the State of California
The County of Riverside Assessor.
The County of Riverside Auditor.
The County of Riverside Controller.
The County of Riverside County Recorder.
Non-exempt parcels which have been assigned per the
County of Riverside property status code, other than a vacant
or agricultural land use code, and have been conferred a
Certificate of Occupancy.
The Temecula Community Services District or TCSD.
Equivalent Dwelling Unit:
Defined benefit related to all single-family residential parcels
(1.0 EDU) which is equated to all other land use code
6
Exempt Parcel(s):
Fiscal Year:
Financial Analysis:
Land Use Code(s):
Local Street Light(s):
Maintenance:
Median:
Non-Exempt Parcel(s):
Notice of Public Hearing:
designations for assignment of an equitable benefit
assessment.
All parcels defined by government code and TCSD formula to
be contained in the following classifications:
- Parcels owned by federal, state, county and city
agencies,
- Parcels owned by regional municipalities,
- Parcels owned by public school districts,
- Parcels owned by private property homeowner
associations,
- Parcels owned by public utility companies,
- Parcels assigned the Land Use Code
C21: Cemetery.
The Fiscal Year 1992-1993.
The annual review of all the TCSD Zone Budgets --costs,
expenditures, surpluses and delinquencies--for the TCSD in
the Fiscal Year 1992-1993.
The County of Riverside property coding system used to
identify properties and to apply special assessments.
Street lights which are located on public, residential streets
within residential subdivisions.
Within a Zone; The re-occurring attention or activity to a
slope, park, median, or related public facility and applying the
receipts from the special collection for the continued
maintenance within the specific Zone.
Delineated divider areas within the Arterial street system.
Those parcels within the TCSD which are not classified as
Exempt Parcels.
Official mailing to each non-exempt parcel property owner, as
of the latest equalized assessor roll of the County of Riverside
at the time of the mailing, which discloses the time and place
of the TCSD Public Hearing as set by the Board.
Parcel:
The Assessor Parcel as found on the latest County of
7
Property Owner(s):
Recycling Program:
Refuse Collection:
Resolutions:
Service Level:
Single-Family Detached
Residential Parcel:
Vacant Property:
Weighing Factor:
Zone:
Riverside Assessor Parcel Map(s).
Landowner, assessor parcel owner as of the latest equalized
assessor roll of the County of Riverside at the time of the
TCSD update.
State of the art program for the reclamation of useable
materials collection of which will be newly established this year
by the TCSD.
Within the TCSD, refuse collection service provided only to
detached, single-family residences.
The official procedural documents for the update,
implementation and collection of the TCSD for the Fiscal Year
1992-1993.
A Zone; the furnishing of a specific service which is
specifically authorized to be provided, and apply the receipts
from the special collection within that Zone to the
continuance of a specific service.
An assessor parcel that The County of Riverside assigns the
Land Use Code designation R01.
An assessor parcel that The County of Riverside assigns the
Land Use Code designation "Y" after the primary classification
code.
That factor contained within the Method of Benefit Assignment
formula which equates 1.0 EDU per parcel to all land use
codes appearing within the data base for the TCSD.
Benefit Area; Service Level
8
PROJECT STRUCTURE
Zone Definition
Pursuant to CSD Law, Zones may be established within a district for levying special taxes
to provide the construction, maintenance and operation of improvements or the furnishing
of services where in the judgment of the Board, the improvements or services will not be
of district wide benefit.
The Temecula Community Services District has established zones of distinct benefit called
Service Levels. Each of the separate TCSD Service Levels provide a specific benef'rt and
are defined to provide this benefit to certain non-exempt parcels.
Boundary Definition
The boundary for each of the separate TCSD zones is defined to be coterminous with the
City Limit of the City of Temecula as it existed when the Fiscal Year 1992-1993 update
was made.
The following are the Service Levels of Benefit for the Temecula Community Services
District:
Community Services/Parks
This Zone will provide the operation and maintenance of the entire City community park
system, recreation facilities, services and programs.
List of City Parks and
Recreational Facilities:
1. Sports Park, Corner of Margarita/Rancho Vista
2. Sam Hicks Monument Park, Corner of Mercedes/Moreno
3. Veterans Park, Corner of La Serena/General Kearney
4. Park Site, Corner of Avenida De La Reina/Corte Talvera
5. Park Site, Corner of Avenida De La Reina/Corte Aragon
6. Teen Recreation Center, 28780 Front Street, Suite D-4
7. Senior Center, adjacent to Sam Hicks Monument Park
Description:
The Temecula Community Services District (TCSD) is
responsible for providing three functions: (a) recreation
services, (b) park planning and development, and (c)
landscape services. The TCSD is governed by the Board of
Directors (City Council), who set the programs, services and
capital development to be provided to the Citizens of
Temecula.
Goals:
Key Objectives:
Community Services/Parks will expand recreation
opportunities through the acquisition, improvement and
development of new park facilities, and the rehabilitation of
existing facilities.
Recruit, hire, and train recreation personnel that will provide
a wide variety of recreational opportunities and pursuits.
Develop a comprehensive financing package to include the
acquisition of park land and the development of recreation
facilities.
SERVICE LEVEL A - Citywide Arterial Service
This Service Level will provide servicing, operation, maintenance, energy and
administration for all Arterial street lighting and medians. For Service Level A Levy, refer
to Exhibit "B".
THIS SERVICE LEVEL CONSISTS OF ALL ARTERIAL STREETS WITHIN THE CITY
AS DEFINED BY SOUTHWEST AREA PLAN (SWAP) FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA.
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1992/1993, ALL NONEXEMPT PARCELS WITHIN THE CITY
LIMITS 13,871 PARCELS WILL BE INCLUDED WITHIN THIS SERVICE LEVEL.
SERVICE LEVEL B - Local Street Lighting Service
This Service Level will provide servicing, operation,
administration for all local street lighting.
maintenance, energy and
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1992/1993, THE TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL
PARCELS INCLUDED WITHIN THIS SERVICE LEVEL IS 6,239.
10
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
Service Level B / Local Street Lighting Service
BOOK/PAGE PRCLS/PG,BK BOOK/PAGE PRCLS/PG,BK BOOK/PAGE PRCLS/PG,BK
911 - 20 73 921 - 47 46
911 - 21 97 921 - 49 99
911 - 25 30 921 - 50 94
911 - 26 98 921 - 51 48
911 - 29 89 921 - 52 62
911 - 33 63 921 - 53 36
911 - 47 62 921 - 54 49
911 - 48 30 921 - 55 52
911 - 49 64 921 - 56 43
911 - 50 68 921 - 57 45
911 - 51 97 921 - 58 41
911 - 59 87, 858 921 - 59 43
914 - 58 29 921 - 60 58
914 - 59 71 921 - 61 71
914 - 61 67 921 - 62 39
914 - 62 50 921 - 63 26
914 - 63 67 921 - 64 32
914 - 64 44 921 - 65 23
914 - 66 43 921 - 66 44
914 - 67 65 921 - 67 16
914 - 68 577 493 921 - 69 14, 1,365
918 - 29 97 922 - 02 13
918 - 30 90 922 - 04 2
918 - 31 83 922 - 22 2
918 - 32 84 922 - 27 69
918 - 33 72 922 - 28 86
918 - 34 33 922 - 29 75
918 - 35 33, 492 922 - 31 79
919 - 36 37 922 - 32 68
919 - 37 48 922 - 33 60
919 - 38 96 922 - 34 97
919 - 39 28 922 - 35 32, 583
919 - 40 1 944 - 03 72
919 - 41 1 944 - 04 24
919 - 42 40, 251 944 - 05 29
92i - 09 1 944 - 23 43
921 - 37 1 944 - 24 42
921 - 38 52 944 - 25 40
921 - 39 29 944 - 26 35
921 - 41 46 944 - 27 35
921 - 42 44 944 - 28 29
921 - 43 61 944 - 30 38
921 - 44 22 944 - 32 3, 390
921 - 45 88 945 - 04 21
921 - 46 40 945 - 19 17
945 - 20 12
945 - 21 46
945 - 22 36
945 - 23 41
945 - 24 31
945 - 25 1
945 - 26 4
945 - 27 69, 278
953 - 07 72
953 - 08 57
953 - 09 29
953 - 10 59
953 - 11 41
953 - 12 49
953 - 13 26
953 - 14 28
953 - 15 39, 400
954 - 04 43
954 - 05 43
954 - 07 76
954 - 08 69
954 - 09 32
954 - 10 46
954 - I1 42
954 - 12 44
954 - 13 40
954 - 14 47
954 - 15 29
954 - 16 61
954 - 17 23
954 - 18 49
954 - 19 49
954 - 20 28
954 - 2! 32
954 - 22 31
954 - 23 49
954 - 24 54
954 - 25 43
954 - 26 42
954 - 29 19
954 - 30 1
954 - 31 58
954 - 32 45, 1,095
955 - 07 34, 34
TOTAL: 6,239
11
SERVICE LEVEL C - Perimeter Landscaping/Slope Maintenance
This Service Level will provide for the servicing, operation, maintenance and administration
for all perimeter landscaping and slope maintenance within recorded subdivisions. There
are four (4) service rate areas within Level C which consist of the following:
SUBDIVISION NOS.
18518 21674
20130 21675
20643 21764
20644 21765
20735 22203
20879 22204
20881 22208
20882 22593
21082 22715
21340 22716
21561 22915
21672 23128
21673
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1992/1993, THERE WILL BE 3,782 PARCELS WITHIN
THIS SERVICE LEVEL.
SERVICE LEVEL D - SFR Recyclt~g/Refuse Collection
This Service Level will provide for a Recycling Program and Refuse Collection for all
detached, single-family residential homes.
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1992/1993, THERE WILL BE 7,858 DETACHED
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES WITHIN THIS SERVICE LEVEL.
Exempt Parcels
ALL EXEMPT PARCELS ARE DESIGNATED WITHIN THE ASSESSMENT ROLL AS:
LAND USE CODE "999"
THIS DESIGNATION HAS BEEN ASSIGNED BY THE ENGINEER OF WORK DUE TO THE
FACT THAT THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DOES NOT RECOGNIZE OR DIFFERENTIATE
THE EXEMPT STATUS OF A SPECIFIC PARCEL IN CONSIDERATION OF THE VARIOUS
SPECIAL DISTRICTS ONGOING IN THE COUNTY.
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1992/1993, THERE ARE 325 EXEMPT PARCELS.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Budget Detinition
Each year the governing Board of the CSD (the City Council of the City of Temecula
presides as the Board of the TCSD) must cause a "Report" to be prepared and filed with
its secretary which contains the description of each parcel of real property within the CSD
and its related rates and charges for the upcoming fiscal year.
The Financial Analysis section of the "Report" itemizes the budgets for each of the Service
Levels. Within each of the following Service Level budgets will be the specific costs, fees,
expenditures, surpluses, deficits, delinquencies and appropriate City administration
judged by the Board of Directors for the TCSD to be applicable within the Fiscal
Collection Year 1992/1993.
The Service Level Budget Total, found at the end of each budget, is that dollar amount
to be apportioned to each of the non-exempt benefitting parcels within that particular
Service Level.
All budget information contained in the following Service Level Budgets were provided by
the City of Temecula by request of the Board of Directors for the TCSD. All amounts
listed are in 1992 dollars free of inflationary factors.
Any questions regarding the content or dollar amounts within the Budgets should be
directed to the Finance Department of the City of Temecula.
CITY OF TEMECULA
OPERATING BUDGET DEPARTMENT SUMMARY - TCSD
FOR THE YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1993
PROPOSED ADDITIONAL STAFFING LEVELS
Community Service District
Seniors
ACCOUNT#
196
T~erll
Total Level A Level B Level C Level D
City-Wide
FY 92-93 FY 92-~3 FY g2-93 FY 92-93
Request Request Request Request
PERSONNEL SERVICES
Number of Staff
13.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 15.00
Salaries &Wages 5100 376,102 19,003 25,938
Delerred Compensation 5101 0
P.E.R.S. Retirement 5102 53.564 2,706 3.694
State Unemployment 5103 5,642 285 389
Medicare- F.I.C.A. 5104 5,4,53 276 376
Auto Allowance 5106 0
Unemployment Training Tax 5109 376 19 26
Worker's Compensation 5112 22,962 891 1,217
Health Benefits 5113 70,566 5,880 5,880
Temporary Help 5118
Pad-Time (prolect) 5119 6,474 25,896
Part-Time Retirement 5120 0
534,665
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
43,443
421,043 11,583 17,383 43,498
0
59,964 1,650 2,476 6,195
6.316 174 261 652
6, 105 168 252 631
0
421 12 17 43
25,070 543 163 2,040
82.326 2,646 5,880 9,114
0
75,813
0
35,534 63,416 43,443 677,058 16,776 26,432 62,173
2,000
6,000
1,070
40,500
7,680
600
5,000
163,536
62,850 163,536
Telephone Service (Cellular) 5208 4,000 2,000
Messenger 5210
"""'=.pair & Maint-Facilities 5212 70.000 11,420
~fice Supplies 5220 10.000 1.070
Printing 5222 30,000
Legal Documents/Maps 5224 3,000
Dues & Memberships 5226 1,500
Publications 5228 1,000
Postage &Packaging 5230 6,000
Rent- Office 5234 2,000
Rent- Equipment 5238 10,000
Equipment Lease 5239 10,380
Utilities 5240 100,000 8,280
Small Tools/Equipment 5242 8,000
Uniforms 5243 5,000
Signs 5244 3.0(X)
Legal Services 5246 10,000
Consulting Services 5248 5.000
Other Outside Services 5250 170,000 600
Advertising 5254 5,000
Public Notices 5256 1,000
Conferences/Education 5258 8,000
Mileage 5262 2.500
Fuel expense 5263 3,000
Blueprints 5268 500
Recreation Supplies 5300 10,000 5,000
Arterial Street Lighting 5500
Landscape Maintenance 5510
Assessment Administration 5525 15,260
initial CSD Engineering 5530
Waste Hauling New
City Administration Charge 5540 227.704
721,844 28,370
8,000
87,420
12.140
30,000
3,000
1,500
1,000
6,000
42,500
10,000
10,380
115,960
8,000
5,000
3,000
10,000
5,000
171,200
5.000
1.000
8,000
2,500
3,000
500
183,536
15.260
10,000 87,047
118,000 166,218
10,000 319,786
227,704 12,408
976,600 138.000 166,218 419.241
1,250,365
1.250,365
CITY OF TEMECULA
OPERATING BUDGET DEPARTMENT SUMMARY - TCSD
FOR THE YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1993
PROPOSED ADDITIONAL STAFFING LEVELS
Community Service Dis~ct
Senio~
196
TNnl
Recrealion
197 198
Total Level A Level B Level C Level D
City-Wide
FY 92-93 Ft' 92-93 FY 92-93 FY 92-93
Request Request Request Request
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
Liability Insurance 29,442 29.442
Vehicles 31.840 31,840
Computers and Telephones 70, 108 70, 108
Copy Center 40,906 40.906
CAPITAL OUTLAY
$ 172,296
Office Furnishings 5600
Office Equipment 5602 1,000
Vehicles 5608
Equipment 5610 6,620
GIS Data Base 5626
Street Banners 5630
Land 5700
Band Proceeds 5901 505,000
512,620 0 0 0
172,296
505.000
512,620
0 0 0 0
RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCY
1,941,425 63,904 129,266 206,979
2,338,574
154,776 192.650 481,414 1,250,365
Recreation User Fees
Assesment Levy lot City-Wide
Total City-Wide
Total Assesment Levy
174,040
2.164.534
2.338.574
2,164,534
164,776 192,650 481.414 1.250.365
17
METHOD OF BENEFIT APPORTIONMENT AND ~FORMULA
The Service Level Budget Totals are the amounts to be apportioned to all non-
exempt parcels within the respective Zone.
This amount is apportioned by a method and formula which fairly distributes the
Service Level Budget Total among all non-exempt parcels in proportion to the estimated
benefits to be received by each of the non-exempt parcels from the described services,
programs, etc. provided within the respective Service Level.
For the Fiscal Year 1992/1993, there will be three basic formulas for the
apportionment of the Service Level Budget Totals. The formula usage by Service Level
is as follows:
FORMULA I - Community Services/Parks and Service Level A
Both of the above Service Levels will assess all non.exempt parcels within their boundary.
Therefore, being a citywide levy, all land use codes occurring within the above Service
Levels are equated by use of a' weighing factor.
The formula used to calculate the amount of spread to all parcels starts with the basic
Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU). The EDU is given a value of one (1.0) for a single-family
(Land Use Code R01) parcel. From this base, all other occurring non-exempt parcels
have been equated to the single-family residence using weighing factors to distinguish the
different levels of benefit. A minimum assignment of 1.0 EDU per parcel is assigned where
the EDU's are computed based on parcel acreage.
A = Service Level Budget Total
B = Total Single-Family Dwelling Units
(SF)
C = Number of Multi-Family Dwelling Units
(MF)
DR
= Acres of vacant Residential (Greater than one acre),
Non-residential Agricultural, Commercial
and Industrial (Improved) and Vacant Commercial,
Inclustrial, and Other
(AC)
E
= Weighing Factor for Multi-Family Residential
Parcels
= 0.75
F1
= Weighing Factor for Vacant Residential (YR)
(Greater than one acre)
= 2.00
18
F2
G
H
J
K
L
M1
M2
N
0
P
= Weighing Factor for Vacant Residential (YR)
(Less than one acre)
= Weighing Factor for Agricultural :
= Weighing Factor for Commercial and Industrial
(Developed)
= Weighing Factor for Vacant Commercial,
Industrial and Other
= Total Equivalent Single-Family Dwelling Units
-- Assessment per Single-Family
= Assessment per Multi-Family
= Assessment per Vacant Residential Parcel (YR)
(Greater than one acre)
= Assessment per Vacant Residential Parcel (YR)
(Less than one acre)
= AsSessment per Agricultural Acreage
-- Assessment per Commercial and Industrial
(Improved) Acreage
= Assessment per Vacant Commercial, Industrial
and Other Acreage
= 0.50
= 0.50
= 6.00
= 4.00
FORMULA
J
K
L
M1
M2
N
O
P
= B + (C x E) + (Dn x F) + (Dn x G) + (Dn x H) + (Dn x I)
=A/J
=KxE
= KxF1
=KxF2
=KxG
=KxH
=Kxl
20
COMMUNfTY SERVICE/PARKS - FISCAL YEAR 1992/1993
The assessments for non-exempt parcels within the Community Services/Parks are as
follows:
Single Family Residential
Multi-Family
(includes Apartments, Condominiums,
Mobile Homes)
Residential Vacant
Agriculture
Non Residential (improved)
Non Residential (Vacant)
58.30 per unit
43. 74 per unit
116.60 per acre
29.16 per acre
349.80 per acre
233.20 per acre
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
Community Services/Parks Levy Summerization
LUC PARCELS ACREAGE
999
A01
A02
A10
A12
Ai4
A19
A20
A60
C01
C02
C04
C05
C06
C07
C08
C09
C10
Cll
C12
Ci4
C18
C20
C22
C23
C24
C27
M01
M02
M03
M04
R01
R02
R04
R05
R07
Y01
Y04
324
7
1
1
5
1
6
9
1
140
25
8
54
9
32
126
2
1
18
5
10
2
1
42
10
534
2
29
11
27
2
7,748
316
45
10
4,224
6
77
13,871
1,620.98
481.96
9.61
4.92
46.57
2.50
109.95
232.70
83.29
317.44
33.13
44 79
97 12
27 73
54 23
226 10
50 63
0 76
13 13
5 01
23 85
2 86
2 21
81 23
61 86
2,441 49
7 07
126.10
28 54
100 38
44 68
1,792 42
0 46
85 24
101 77
3,996 53
80 92
536 27
12,976.43
-TOTAL LEVY
0 O0
14,095 88
280 04
143 36
1,357 02
72 86
3,222.32
6,936 48
2,427 06
111,557 60
11,617 52
15,664 48
34,037 96
9,696 64
18,963.16
79,226.98
17,704.28
265.74
4,653.12
1,806.64
8,339.86
1,000.06
772 80
28,656 16
21,678 98
572,305 06
2,472 26
1,690 12
480.82
1,180.16
13,875.30
451,514.14
13,812.34
1,966.98
437.12
566,266.22
18,864.08
125,492.40
$ 2,164,534.00
21-a
SERVICE LEVEL A - FISCAL YEAR 1992/1993
The assessments for non-exempt parcels within the Service Level A are as follows:
Single Family Residential
Multi-Family
(Includes Apartments, Condominiums,
Mobile Homes)
Residential Vacant
Agriculture
Non Residential (Improved)
Non Residential (Vacant)
4. 18 per unit
3. 14 per unit
8.36 per acre
2. 10 per acre
25.08 per acre
16.72 per acre
TEMECULA COPIMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
Service Level A / City Wide Arterial Service
LUC
999
A01
A02
A10
A12
A14
A19
A20
A60
C01
C02
C04
C05
C06
C07
C08
C09
C10
CII
C12
C14
C18
C20
C22
C23
C24
C27
M01
M02
M03
M04
R01
R02
R04
R05
R07
Y01
Y04
PARCELS EDU
324
7
1
1
5
1
6
9
1
140
25
8
54
9
32
126
2
1
18
5
10
2
1
42
10
534
2
29
11
27
2
7,748
316
45
10
4,224
6
77
13,871
0.00
241.86
4.80
2.46
23.28
1.25
55.29
119.02
41.64
1,914 16
199 34
268 78
584 04
166 38
325 38
1,359 42
303 78
4 56
79 84
31 00
143 10
17 16
13 26
491 70
371 98
9,819 92
42 42
29 00
8 25
20 25
238 08
7,747 00
237 00
33 75
7 50
9,715 50
323.68
2,153.16
37,139.01
TOTAL LEVY
0 00
1,011 02
20 08
10 24
97 10
5 20
231 12
495 12
174 08
7,964 50
829 30
1,122 48
2,429.88
692 48
1,353 90
5,655 40
1,263 72
18 96
332 14
128.96
596 00
71 40
55 16
2,045 50
1,551 18
40,879 02
176.86
120 68
34 32
84 24
995 18
32,284 16
986 52
140.50
31.22
40,567.74
1,346.50
8,974.14
$ 154,776.00
22-a
FORMULA II- Service Level B and C
Neither Service Level B nor Service Level C are citywide levy service levels.
Service Level B and Service Level C do not apportion their respective Service Level
Budget Totals upon all Single-Family Residential parcels.
Service Level B and Service Level C have separate, non-exempt parcel data bases
comprised of only those Single-Family parcels which are part of a recorded subdivision
which has, as required by conditions governing the subdivision development, installed
facilities to provide certain described amenities and .services.
For these two Service Levels, the data base will consist of only Single-Family Residential
parcels with a Land Use Code of R01 and, of those parcels, only those contained within
specific recorded subdivisions. There will not be a need to equate to other land use
codes for these two Service Levels due to the direct nature of the benefit received.
Therefore, the formula for apportionment within Service Level B is only recorded
subdivisions with street lighting services. Service Level C is only recorded subdivisions
with TCSD maintenanced slope areas. The formula for apportionment within Service Level
C is defined into four (4) rates:
Rate C-1: Tract 22593
Rate C-2: Tracts 20130, 21340, 20879, 21561, 22208, 20735, 20881, 21764, 21082
Rate Co3: Tracts 20643, 20644, 22203, 22204, 23128, 22715, 22716
Rate C-4: Tracts 18518, 20882, 21672, 21673, 21674, 21675, 21765
SERVICE LEVEL BUDGET TOTAL / TOTAL SFR PARCELS = $ PER SFR PARCEL
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1992/1993, THE LEVY FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY (R01)
PARCEL AS IT APPLIES TO THE ABOVE SERVICE LEVEL FORMULA IS AS
FOLLOWS:
SERVICE LEVEL B - FISCAL YEAR 1992/1993
Single Family Residential
$ 30.ss
SERVICE LEVEL C- FISCAL YEAR 1992/1993
Rate C1: Single Family Residential --
Rate C2: Single Family Residential --
Rate C3: Single Family Residential --
Rate C4: Single Family Residential =
$ 50.00
$ 93.00
$120.00
$179.00
"' 24
FORMULA III - Service Level D
Service Level D services will be provided only to detached Single-Family Residential
parcels. These parcels are identified by the County of Riverside Land Use Code RO1.
For purposes of this Service Level only, the use of detached is intended to exclude all
other single-family residential classifications such as condominiums, townhomes, patio
homes which could share a common wall and where the refuse collection process
resembles that provided to an apartment complex.
The intent of Service Level D is to levy a yearly recycling/refuse collection fee which is
easy to execute and administer for single-family residents. Other residential classifications
tend to require group refuse bins with various collection options which would dictate a
complicated administration.
With the uncomplicated service of one pick-up per detached single-family resident, it is
possible to calculate an annual fee. The ease of using the TCSD as the fee collection
vehicle results in a decrease in the service fee received by the property owner due to the
corresponding decrease of many administrative activities inherent with the old fee
collection process.
SERVICE LEVEL D - FISCAL YEAR 1992/1993
Single Family Residential $159.12
ASSESSMENT ROLL
The individual Fiscal Year 1992/1993 assessments, tabulated by Assessor Parcel
Number, as assigned by the County of Riverside Assessor's Office, are 'shown on an
Assessment Roll on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Temecula and are also
contained within this Annual Levy Report by reference to Exhibit" B"
26
AFFIDAVIT FOR ANNUAL LEVY REPORT
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
FOR THE
CITY OF TEMECULA
The undersigned respectively submits the enclosed Annual Levy Report and
Assessmere Roll herein referenced as Exhibit" B ", as directed by the Board of Directors
of the Temecula C~mmunity Services District.
Dated:
MUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.
By:
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed "Report", together with the Assessment Roll
thereto attached, was filed with me on the __ day of ,1992.
Secretary to the Board
Temecula Community Services Districts
Temecula, California
By:
June S. Greek
Secretary to the Board
27 ~
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed "Report", together with the Assessment Roll
thereto attached, was approved for levy by the Board of the TCSD, Temecula, California,
on the day of ,1992.
Secretary to the Board
Temecula Community Services Districts
Temecula, California
By:
June S. Greek
Secretary to the Board
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed "Report", together with the Assessment Roll
thereto attached, was filed with the County Auditor/Controller of the County of Riverside
on the day of ,1992.
Secretary to the Board
Temecula Community Services Districts
Temecula, California
By:
June S. Greek
Secretary to the Board
28
ITEM NO.
6
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM:
DAVID F. DIXON
DATE:
MAY 26, 1992
SUBJECT:
INITIAL BIKEWAY PROJECT
PREPARED BY:
SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors:
Approve the Initial Bikeway Project which includes painting bike lanes on
appropriate streets, sand blasting and readjusting center lane lines, and
installing bikeway and no parking signs.
Award contract to Work Striping & Marking Service, Inc. for $25,993 to
provide bike lane striping, bike legends, and adjustment to center lane lines, and
appropriate $25,993 for this project to account #029-190-133-44-5804.
Transfer $17,530 from account#001-164-999-42-5402 to #029-190-133-44-
5804 to purchase no parking, bike lane, and directional signs, which will be
installed by city staff.
DISCUSSION: The City of Temecula received a grant of $18,400 from
SB 821 funds, which are administered by the Riverside County Traffic Commission
(RCTC), to assist in the development of an initial bikeway for the community. The
purpose of this initial bikeway is to provide alternate transportation and recreation
opportunities to community residents until the overall recreation trails system is
designed and installed. This bikeway will include painted bike lanes and signs on
appropriate streets.
A Request For Proposal was released to four construction companies to provide for
the painting of bike lanes and adjusting some center street lines on appropriate
streets. The following bids were submitted to the City:
1 \rnelsons\egenbkwl.sdn
1. Work Striping and Marking Service $25,993
2. Interstate Striping
$30,465
3. Orange County Striping
$40,179
It is recommended that the low bid, Work Striping and Marking Service, Inc., be
awarded this contract.
It will also be required that no parking areas be designated along sections of Ynez
Road; De Portola Road; Margarita Road; Rancho Vista Road; Rancho California Road;
Yukon Road; and Moraga Road. The signs to depict the bikeway and the no parking
areas will be installed by City staff.
Two Parks and Recreation Master Plan workshops were held concerning the design
of the city-wide recreation trails system. This input has been used in developing the
proposed route of the initial bikeway, which will integrate with the future city-wide
recreation trails plan for the City. This initial bikeway plan has also been reviewed and
approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Traffic and Transportation
Commission.
Attached are copies of the proposed initial bikeway and cost proposal for your review.
If approved, the project is scheduled to be completed by July 31, 1992.
FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated cost of this project is $43,523. A budget transfer
of $17,530 from account//001-164-999-42-5402 to//029-190-133-44-5804 is
required. It is also necessary to appropriate $25,993 for construction costs to
account ,f029-190-133-44-5804 from TCSD Fund Balance, of which $18,400 will be
reimbursed with SB 821 Funds.
1 Vr~lzor~agenbkwa.~ln ~
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
INTERIM BIKEWA Y
,~11I
~ RD~,
MORAGA RD \ ..~
~ ' RANCHO CA RD
DE f
BIKEWAY (CLASS
B IKEWA Y rCLASS Z2') ....
.JIll
II
II
II
If
PAUBA
II,
II
II
II
It
PAUBA
LEes
mm- BI~E ~DUTE
z.,.~,,- Z.,AiqE LIAJE~'
DE~L- I)t~UBL. E VELI..Z)LaJ
12BL.- P~L.- P~DIJZ.~- ~OUBI,.E
YEL, z~ ~
P.M.- PAVEMENT M~E~INb
P~oFOSED ~IKE R'OUTE
Works Striping & Marking Service, Inc.
DESIGN & INSTALLATION
4270 Elton St. , Baldwin Park, CA 91706
(818) 962-5074 · FAX (818)814-2805
Date ~.'~/! ~
LLu;'/" Amoum
o./o /o, Z~o.
.,i'A. oo
O. ,$0 c)7/,::DO. OO
29 .~'o IIP,.
o. ao
o:c~ LnnR.oo
.,i
ESTIMATE
CITY OF TEHECULA
AGREEM'FNT
THIS AGR~IWIENT, made this _ day of ' .19 , by and be~veen
the CITY OF TEMECULA, a Municipal Corporation.duly organized and existing under and
by virtue of the laws of the State of California, hm:einsiter called the 'City' and/.do-/<-:
S'i'r;p;.~_~ ~ m,~r't<;.~.1 S ervlc. e.a 'XL.,c. , hereinafier called the 'Principal".
WIllN'F~SETH
PIEST:
That the Principal, in consideration of the pm~ of the City heroinafter set
forth, hereby agrees to furnish all tools, equipment, labor and materials necessary.
to perform and complete in a workrna~lilce manner, all of the work required for
the construction of the imprOvem~t described in Bxl,.ibit A attached hereto.
Where Exhibit A describes portions of the work in general terms, but not in
complete detail, the latest version of the Rtmndmrd Specifications for Public Wprki
c, orlstrucfion. including all supplements as written and pwmulgated by the Joint
Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American
Associated General Contractors of California (heroinafter, "Standard
Specifications") shall control. 'Copies of these Standard Specifications are
available from the publisher:
Building News, Incorporated
3055 0~erland Avenue
Los Angcles, California 90034
(213) 202-7T75
Where Exhibit A or the Standard Specifications only describe portions of the
work in general terms, but not in complete detail, it is understood t-hat the item
is to be furnished and installed completed and in place and that only the best
general pnctice is to be used.
SBCOND:
The City, in considentlon of the performance of this Contract, a2rees to pay the
Principal and the Principal aztecs to accept in full satisfaction for the work done
hereunder the sum of Dollars
( ), in accordance with the bid of the Principal which sum shall be paid
to the Principal within the time and in the
manner set forth in the Contract documents, final payment to be made within
thirty-five (35) days after filing Notice of Completion of said work and
improvement with the Riverside County Recorder,
AGR-OI
'~vl~[ 1/2~J92
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGREEMY_.NT
Page 2.
FOURTH:
FIFTH:
SEVENTH:
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor code of the State of
California, the City Council hu obtained ithe general prewiling rat of per diem
wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each
craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract from the
Director of the Department of Industrial Relations..These rates are on ffie in the
office of the City Clerk. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's
office in Temccula. Principal shall post a copy of such wa2e rates at the job site
and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Principal shall
comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775, 1775, I777.13, I777.6, ad
1813 of the Labor Code.
Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, Principal shall forfeit to
the City, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion
thereof, for each laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the
stipulated prevailing _rates for any work done under this conWact, by him or by
any subcontractor under him, in violation of the ln'ovisions of the Contract.
Principal agrees to complete the work in a period not to exc~ calendar
days, commencing with the deliver~ of Notice to Be2in Work by City.
Principal, by executin2 the Agreement, hereby certifies:
"I am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code
which requkes ever,/employer be insured a2ainst liability for
Workrnan's compensation or undertake serf-insurance in
accordance with the pwvisions of that Code, and I will comply
with such provisions bdo~ commencing the performance of the
work of this Contnct."
All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or in preparing
or delivering materials to the sire, shall be at the risk of Principal sdone.
Pnncipal agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend City, its officers,
employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons
(Principal's employees included) and damage to property, arising dh-ectly or
indirectly out of the obli2a~ions hcrcin undertaken or out of the operations
conducted by Principal, save and except claims or litigations arising through the
sole active ne21igence or sole willful misconduct of the City.
Contnctor and subcontractor shall obtain all necessary licenses, including but not
limited to City business license.
CiTY OF TEM~CULA
AGREF.~r~NT
Page 3,
IN W1TNF_,SS WHEREOF, the City has caused its corporate name'and seal to be
hereunto subscribed and affixed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk, both
thereunto duly authorized, and the Principal has hereunW subscribed this Contnct the
day, month and year hereinabovc writtrn.
CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
Name:
Title:
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
(Date)
APPROVBD AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
AOR~I
1/22/92
BID RESULTS
BIKE ROUTE
CITY OF TEMECULA
DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANT, UNIT PRICE
BiKe Lane 8~ing LF. 108200 O.Oe,
Paint Bike Legend E.A 72 50
Sandblest ejfdng =taipin~ LF. 10200 0.8
Sandblast EJdet. Legend E,A. 5 30
Paint Double Yellow or 8MpI LF. 8200
Paint Lane Line LF. 12600 0.0l
TOTAL
WORKS
ENGR. EST. STRIPING
AMOUNT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT UNIT PRICE
18,65e.00 0.1 $tO,820.00 0.205
$t5,360.00 0.5 te,600.00 0.64
Sl,50.00 22.5 S112.50 1o0
14~6.00 0.3 $1,860.00 0.19
I1,008.00 0.(38 $1,008.00 0.16
INTERSTATE STRIPING
AMOUNT UNIT PRICE
$11,902.00 0.11
~2,480.00 0.4
ORANGE C~''~'~,,
STRIPINg.
AMOUNT
$22.181.00
$2,016.00
$12,288.00
$1,178.00
$2,016.00
pwo4.bike2way 051
TEMECULA REDVELOPMENT
AGENCY AGENDA
ITEM
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HELD MAY 12, 1992
A regular meeting of the Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order at 9:00 PM.
PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans Parks,
Mu~oz
ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBERS: Moore
Also present were Executive Director David F. Dixon, General Counsel Scott F. Field and
Agency Secretary June S. Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None given.
AGENCY BUSINESS
1. Minutes
It was moved by Member Lindemans, seconded by Member Parks to approve the
minutes of April 28, 1992.
The motion was unanimously carried with Member Moore absent.
2. Old Town Redevelopmerit Advisory Committee By-laws
City Attorney Scott Field presented the staff report.
Member Parks asked if ballots are to be counted on January 1 st and asked when
elected Committee Members will take office. City Attorney Field explained that ballots
must be post marked by January I st.
City Clerk June Greek suggested that since there will only be one meeting per month,
elected Committee Members will take office the first meeting in February.
Member Parks asked if eligible voters must be a registered voter and a citizen of the
United States. City Attorney Field stated the Stipulated Judgment states that any
natural person residing within the boundaries of the subzone, or who owns, operates
or leases a business within the area is eligible to vote. He explained it does not require
citizenship or voter registration.
4~RDAIVH N\051292 - 1 - 05115192
Temecula RedevelOpment Agency MinUtes May 12. 1992
It was moved by Member Lindemans, seconded by Member Birdsall to approve staff
recommendation with the modification at the end of Paragraph B, Page 6, secretary
will complete the ballot count by January 15 and new members will be sworn in at the
first meeting in February.
2.2 Adopt the By-laws of the Old Town Redevelopment Advisory
Committee.
The motion was unanimously carried with Member Moore absent.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'$ REPORT
None given.
GENERAL COUNSEL'S REPORT
None given.
AGENCY MEMBERS REPORTS
None given.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Member Lindemans, seconded by Member Birdsall to adjourn at 9:08 PM.
The motion was unanimously carried with Member Moore absent.
J. Sal Mu~oz, Chairperson
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City.Clerk/Agency Secretary
4\RDAMIN\051292 -2- 05/15/92
ITEM
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM:
Scott Field, City Attorney
DATE:
May 26, 1992
SUBJECT:
License Agreement with Temecula Town Association for Use of
City Property Located West of Diaz Road and South of Cherry
Street
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the License Agreement between
the City and the Temecula Town Association, for use of City property located at west
of Diaz and south of Cherry Street.
DISCUSSION: The City recently purchased from Bill Dendy a 40-acre site located
west of Diaz Road and south of Cherry Street. In previous years, Mr. Dendy has
permitted the Temecula Town Association to use this site for its Golden Harvest
Month activities (The Great Temecula Tractor Race, Temecula PRCA Rodeo and Bruce
Brill Memorial Cook-Off). The Association has requested a similar license agreement
with the City to cover this year's Golden Harvest activities for the period from July
1, 1992 through November 4, 1992. The City Manager may extend the License for
up to one year. As consideration for use of the property, the Association will install
to the site temporary electrical utility hookups, including the necessary transformers.
It is recommended that the City Council approve the License Agreement with the
Temecula Town Association.
ATTACHMENTS: License Agreement
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
LICENSE AGREEMENT
THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT is entered into this day of
, 1992, by and between the CITY OF TEMECULA, a
municipal corporation ("OWNER"), and TEMECULATOWNASSOCIATION, a
California Non-Profit Corporation ("USER").
The parties agree as follows:
1. Grant of License. For valuable consideration, receipt
of which is hereby acknowledged, OWNER grants to USER a license
to enter upon the real property described in Exhibit "A" (the
property) for the purpose of organizing and contracting Golden
Harvest Month, Temecula 1992, which includes but not limited to
The Great Temecula Tractor Race, Temecula PRCA Rodeo, Bruce Brill
Memorial Chili Cook-Off and related activities.
2. Use Permits. This License is not in lieu of obtaining
a Special Event Permit. USER agrees to procure all permits and
licenses requested by the City of Temecula to conduct special
events and to comply with governmental rules, regulations,
statutes and ordinances. USER may obtain a temporary Alcoholic
Beverage Control License for use of the property, subject to any
conditions imposed in the Special Events Permit.
2. Term. This license shall commence July 1, 1992 and
terminate on November 4, 1992 and may be extended by mutual
agreement between both parties for up to one (1) year, with the
City Manager acting on behalf of OWNER. This License may be
terminated by thirty (30) days written notice.
3. Use- USER agrees to maintain the property free and
clear of garbage and debris and to permit only legal activities
consistent with the staging of Golden Harvest Month, Temecula
1992. No dumping, storage of hazardous or toxic waste, nor the
maintenance of any nuisance, public or private shall be permitted
at anytime. OWNER does not represent that USER shall have access
rights across any contiguous parcels and USER agrees to secure
all such required access at its sole cost and expense.
4. Storage. USER may store on the property equipment and
materials necessary and appropriate to the staging of Golden
Harvest Month activities.
5. Utilities. Prior to October 1, 1992, USER shall
install temporary electrical utilities to the property and
dedicate such facilities to OWNER. OWNER shall obtain the
approval of the City Engineer for the design and location of such
facilities prior to their installation.
6. Fencing.
property.
USER may install temporary fencing on the
7. Insurance. USER will provide OWNER with evidence of
comprehensive general liability insurance with combined single
limit coverage in an amount not less than $1,000,000.00, and
shall name OWNER as an additional insured under such a policy or
policies an~ shall provide OWNER of such coverage as a condition
precedent to USER's right to enter onto to the subject property.
8. Indemnity. USER agrees to indemnify, defend and
hold OWNER free and harmless from any and all liability from
USER's activities on the subject property or from activities of a
third party participating in or in any way related to USER's
activity.
9. N(}tice. All notices under this Agreement shall be
made via United States First Class mail to the following:
OWNER:
CITY OF TEMECULA
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Attn: City Clerk
USER:
THE TEMECULA TOWN ASSOCIATION
P.O. Box 435
Temecula, CA 92593
Attn: Evelyn Marker
8. Attorney's Fees. In the event of any controversy
related to the enforcement or interpretation of any term or
condition of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be
entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs.
TEM/1107223 .AGR
Executed on the date first above written:
THE TEMECULA TOWN ASSOCIATION
By
Name
Title
ATTEST:
By
June S. Greek, City Clerk
By
CITY OF TEMECULA
Patricia H. Birdsall
MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM
By
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
· "' TEM/i 107223 .AGR -- 3 -
05/86/92 10:10 ~ ?147555648 BWS UC 84
S 41° 42'22' [_~ S 4B° 1B'52'
19.08' A =
P. O. B o f n=4ooo. oo'
Pc 1 A and
P.O.C of
Pc]. B
I
P~RCEL
TIll I~'. P
SCALE: 1 "=388'
1. 742. 400 S.F. ~:e ~
,,~ --o
40.00 ACRES ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
PORTION PCL ~. P.H. N0.4~46 ~
'----.~ ~ ,, ~ ~ R=850.00'
""---, '~ ~ , L= 8~.
4~"50'2~' W JO0~.53' ""'~~---~"/' ~ =~"~9'54'
'--,~~
EXHIBIT "A" __.,,
ITEM NO. 3
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/Board of Directors
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
May 26, 1992
Fiscal Year 1992-93 Annual Operating Budget
Prepared by:
Grant M. Yates, Senior Management Analyst
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors Adopt Resolution 92- to
adopt the FY 1992-93 Annual Operating Budget for the Temecula Redevelopment
Agency (RDA).
DISCUSSION/FISCAL IMPACT: The anticipated tax increment revenue from the
Redevelopment project area totals $2,900,708 in Fiscal Year 1992-93, Expenditures
proposed in the FY 1992-93 operating budget include $1,600,000 for debt service,
$545,566 for projects, $100,000 for economic development, $75,000 for
administration and $580,142 targeted for low/moderate income housing.
Attachment:
Resolution 92- Adopting Operating Budget for FY 1992-93
RESOLIYFION NO. RDA 92--
A RF_~OLUTION OF THE TEMECULA IrEDEVELOPMENT.
AGENCY ADOPTING THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR
THE FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 FOR THE TEMECULA
I~Er}EVELOPMENT AGENCY AND ESTABLISHING
CONTROLS ON CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS.
WHEREAS, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency has reviewed the proposed final
Operating Budget for fiscal year 1992-93.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Temecula Redevelopment Agency as
follows:
SECTION 1. That certain document now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the
City of Temecula entitled "City of Temecula 1992-93 Annual Budget," is hereby adopted.
SECTION 2. That the following controls are hereby placed on the use and transfers of
budget appropriations:
A. No expenditure of funds shall be made unless there is an unencumbered
appropriation available to cover the expenditure.
B. The Department Head may prepare a transfer of appropriations within
departmental budget accounts up to $10,000 per transfer, with the approval of the Executive
Director.
to $10,000.
action.
C. The Executive Director may authorize expenditures of funds in amounts up
Any expenditure of funds in excess of $10,000 requires Redevelopment Agency
D. The Redevelopment Agency must authorize transfers of funds from unreserved
Fund Balance and transfers within departmental budget accounts of $10,000 or more.
E. The Redevelopment Agency must authorize any increase in regular
personnel positions above the level included in the final budget. The Executive Director may
authorize the hiring of temporary or part time staff as necessary within the limits imposed by
the controls listed above.
F. The Executive Director may approve change orders on Redevelopment Agency
contracts in amounts up to $10,000, if sufficient appropriated funds are available.
4\Resos\RDA001 05/20192
SECTION 3. Outstanding. encumbrances shown on the Redevelopment books at June
30, 1993, are hereby appropriated for such contracts or obligations for 1992-93.
SECTION 4. The Agency S~reta~ shall certify adoption of the resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Temecula
Redevelopment Agency on the 261h day of May, 1992, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
AGENCYMEMBERS:
NOES:
ABSENT:
AGENCYMEMBERS:
A G ENC YMEMBERS:
ATTEST:
J. Sat Mu~oz, Chairperson
June S. Greek, Secretary
Temecula Redevelopment Agency
[SEAL]
4\Rtss~s~RDA001 05/20/92