HomeMy WebLinkAbout060992 CC AgendaAGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER - 28816 PUJOL STREET
JUNE 9, 1992 - 7:00 PM
eel'
EXECUTIVE 'SESSION: 5:30 PM ;- Pursuant to Government Code Section 94956.9 {b)
and (c) ..
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
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 92-15
Resolution: No. 92-47
CALL TO ORDER:
Mayor Patricia H. Birdsall presiding
Invocation
Pastor Ted Lawler, Vineyard Christian Fellowship
Flag Salute
Councilmember Lindemans
ROLL CALL:
Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz, Parks, Birdsall
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Presentation of Bicycle Safety Essay Contest Winners
PUBLIC FORUM
This is a portion of the City Council meeting unique to the City of Temecula. At the
meeting held on the second Tuesday of each month, the City Council will devote a
period of time (not to exceed 30 minutes) for the purpose of providing the public with
an opportunity to discuss topics of intere. st with the Council. The members of the City
Council will respond to questions and may give direction to City staff. The Council is
prohibited, by the provisions of the Brown Act, from taking any official action on any
matter which is not on the agenda. If you desire to speak .on any matter which is not
listed on the agenda, a pink "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and filed with
the City Clerk.
2/~gendd060892
06/04/92
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.
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
2
3
4
Standar(~ Ordinance Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of May 26, 1992.
Resolution Aooroving 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
Combining Balance Sheet as of March 31,1992, Statement of Revenues and Changes
in Fund Balance
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of March 31,1992 and
the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
for the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1992.
2/eOendd060892 2 08/04/82
4.2
Appropriate $15,600 for City COuncil salaries related to Temecula
Community Services District (TCSD) and Redevelopment Agency (RDA)
meetings.
4.3
Appropriate $450,000 for Planning consulting fees. Of this total, it is
recommended that $20,000 be funded with an operating transfer in
from the Redevelopment Agency (RDA).
4.4
Appropriate $60,000 for Engineering development review.
5 City Manager's Contract
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1
Authorize the Mayor to execute the attached letter amending the City
Manager's Agreement to provide that the City will make a loan of up to
ninety percent (90%) of the purchase price for a home within the City,
not to exceed a loan amount of $150,000.00.
6 Annual Review of City Conflict of Interest Code
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1
Approve amendments to the City's Conflict of Interest Code and Direct
the City Clerk to forward the amended code to the Fair Political
Practices Commission.
6.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
Addition to the Airport Disclosure Condition of Approval for VestinQ Tentative Tract
Map No. 25004
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1
Receive and file the attached condition as amended.
2/agenda/060992 3 08/04/~2
8 ResolutiOn Establishing Gann Aoorooriation Limit for FY 1992-93
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FY 1992-93
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
9 Second Readinq of Ordinance 92-14 - Subdivision and Land Use
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1
Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-14
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 90-19 AND ESTABLISHING DECISION-MAKING
AUTHORITY FOR SUBDIVISION AND LAND USE APPLICATIONS
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.
10 Ordinance Amendine Fire Protection Reauirement~
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1
Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-12
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 VIII, FIRE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR
BUILDINGS, INSTALLATION, REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF FIRE SYSTEMS
AND APPLIANCES
21agendN080992 4 08/04/92
10.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH THE CONDITIONS UPON WHICH A
DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT
MODIFICATIONS TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 546 "FIRE
PROTECTION" ARE REASONABLY REQUIRED BY LOCAL CONDITIONS WITHIN
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
11
Ordinance Adootina and Amending Various Building Codes and Resolution Establishing
Building Valuation and Miscellaneous Fee Schedules
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1
Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-13
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, AND THE 1991 EDITION
OF THE UNIFORM SWIMMING POOLS, SPAS AND HOT TUB CODE
11.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH THE FEE BASIS FOR VARIOUS PERMITS NOT
SPECIFICALLY LISTED IN THE MOST CURRENT ADOPTED EDITION OF THE
UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND THE DETERMINATION OF BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION VALUATION
21egendeK)608ll2 6 06/04/fl2
12
13
11.3
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SETTING
FORTH THE LOCAL CONDITIONS UPON WHICH A DETERMINATION HAS
BEEN MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT MODIFICATIONS TO THE 1991
EDITION OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE
UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE AND. THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM
PLUMBING CODE AND THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, ARE REASONABLY REQUIRED BY LOCAL
CONDITIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF TEMECULA
Tentative Tract MaD 23209, Laverda Emond/Michael Lundin
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1
12.2
Re-Affirm the Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 23209;
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23209 TO SUBDIVIDE 80 ACRES
INTO A 220 UNIT SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION WITH A 2.9 ACRE PARK
LOCATED AT THE EASTERLY TERMINUS OF LA SERENA WAY AND KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 914-310-018 THROUGH 032
ADDeal NO. 25 for Variance No. 10, Denial of a Proposed 55 Foot HiQh Freeway Sign
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO, 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING
APPEAL NO. 25, VARIANCE NO, 10, TO INSTALL A 55 FOOT HIGH FREEWAY
SIGN AT AN APPROVED AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE FACILITY LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHERLY TERMINUS OF FRONT STREET AND HIGHWAY 79 SOUTH,
29115 FRONT STREET
2/~gend~/060992 el 08/04/82
14 ADoeal No. 23 for Parcel MaD No. 22515, Third Extension of Time
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA.
APPROVING APPEAL NO. 23, TO ELIMINATE CONDITION NO. 12 FOR THE
THIRD EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 22515
LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF THE SOUTHERLY TERMINUS 'OF
FRONT STREET
15 Change Of Zone No. 5361 and Vesting Tentative Tract MaD No. 25320
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1
Adopt the Negative Declaration for Change of Zone 5631 and Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25320.
15.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO, 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5631 CHANGING THE ZONE FROM |R-R) RURAL
RESIDENTIAL TO ONE-FAMILY DWELLING |R-1 ) ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON
THE NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD BETWEEN YNEZ AND MARGARITA
ROADS AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-040-004
15.3
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO, 25320 WHICH PROPOSED TO
SUBDIVIDE A 56,6 ACRE PARCEL INTO 102 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
LOTS AND 4 OPEN SPACE LOTS ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH
SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD BETWEEN YNEZ AND MARGARITA ROADS AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-040-004
2/agenda/080892 7 06/04/92
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
CITY COUNCIL :REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: June 23, 1992, 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center, 28816
Pujol Street, Temecula, California
21e~eftde/O60a92 8 06/04/g2
TEMECULA C~MMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MEETING - (To be held at 8:00)
CALL TO ORDER:
President Ronald J. Parks
ROLL CALL:
DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mur~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
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1
Approve the minutes of May 24, 1922.
2
Combinina Balance Sheet as of March 31. 1992 and the Statement of Revenues.
Expenditures and Chanc~es in Fund Balance for the Nine Months Ended March 31.1992
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
PUBLIC HEARING
Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of March 31,1992 and
the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
for the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1992.
3
Slope Ma~intenance Easement Vacation - Portions of Tract Nos. 20735-4. 20735-6.
21082-4 and 21082 in "The Villages"
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT VACATING THE SLOPE MAINTENANCE
EASEMENTS OVER PORTIONS OF TRACT NOS. 20735-4, 20735-6, 21082-4
AND 21082
2/ageride/060992 8 06/04/82
3.2 Approve agreement for maintenance of landscaping with the Villages
Homeowners Association.
GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Dixon
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT:
Next regular meeting June 23, 1992, 8:00 PM, Temecula Community
Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairperson J. Sal Mu~oz presiding
ROLL CALL:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks,
Mu~oz
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
1 Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1
Approve the minutes of May 26, 1992.
2
Combining Balance Sheet as of March 31. 1992 and the Statement of Revenues.
Exoendituires and Changes in Fund Balance for the Nine Months Ended March 31.1992
RECOMMENDATION:
2.2
Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of March 31,1992 and
the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
for the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1992.
21eOenda/OeOge2 10 06/04/92
3
Review Qf Redevelooment Ac)encv Conflict of Interest Code
RECOMMENDATION:
3.3 Approve amendments to the Redevelopment Agency's Conflict of
Interest Code and Direct the city Clerk/Agency Secretary to forward the
amended code to the Fair Political Practices Commission.
3.4 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'$ REPORT
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting: June 23, 1992, 8:00 PM, Temecula
Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
2/agendN060992 11 06/04/92
ITEM
1
ITEM
2
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
QF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
HELD MAY 26, 1992
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 5:30 P.M. in the
Ternecula Community Center, 28818 Pujol Street, Temecula, California. Mayor Patricia H.
Birdsall presiding.
PRESENT: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans, Moore, Parks,
' Birdsall
ABSENq': I
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mu~oz
Also present Were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko,
City Attorney Scott C. Field, and City Clerk June Greek.
EXECUTIVE SI~SSION
Mayor Birdsall ideclared a recess to an executive session at 5:37 PM pursuant to Government
Code Section 54956.9 (b) and (c) to discuss potential litigation and Government Code Section
54957.6 (a), (b) and (c) to discuss labor negotiations, salary and fringe benefits.
Mayor Birdsall reconvened the City Council Meeting at 7:05 P.M. with Councilmember Mu~oz
absent.
INVOCATION
The invocationl was given by Reverend Joan Rich Egea, Religious Science Church.
PLEDGE OF AISLEGlANCE
The audience was led in the pledge of allegiance was led by Councilmember Parks.
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Mayor Birdsall proclaimed June 3, 1992 as National Association of Women In Construction
Day.
PUBLIC FORUM
Kathleen Hamilton, 42626 DeLuz, Temecula, advised that the Department of Water Resources
with the Urban~ Streams Renewal has provided a grant of $50,000.
Bob Bennett, 8;23 W. 23rd Street, National City, representing Motivational Systems, Inc.,
advised that he and David Cowan, also of Motivational Systems, Inc., requested Item 19 be
removed from the consent calendar.
Minutes%052692 - 1 - 06/01192
City Council Minutes
May 26. 1992
Councilmember Parks suggested that Item No. 19 be removed from the consent calendar to
take comments from the two speakers.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Pro Tern Lindemans stated he would vote "No" on Items No. 17 'and 18.
Councilmember Moore stated she would abstain from voting on Item No. 2 due to her absence
at the meeting of May 12.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Moore to approve
Consent Calendar Items 1-20. The motion was' carried unanimously with Councilmember
Mu~oz absent.
Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure
1.1
Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
Minutes
Approve the minutes of May 12, 1992.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans, Parks, Birdsall
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSEN~F: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Mu~oz
ABSTAIN: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore
Resolul;ion Aoorovinc~ List of Demands
3.1
Adol~t a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-37
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
City Trfasurer's Reoort as of April 30, 1992
4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of April 30, 1992.
Minutes\O52692 -2- O6/Ollg2
City Council Minutes Mav 96. 1992
Consideration of an Aareement for Vector Control Services
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.
L-ShaDed ProDertv Adiacent to Sam Hicks Monument Park
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. 92-38
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
REG ULATI ONS (SECTION 1.103-18)
Update ~on County Fee Collection
7.1
Receive and file update of County Fee Collections for the
Redevelopment Agency (RDA), Temecula Community Services District
(TCSD), Development Impact Fees and case processing fees.
Solicitat, ion of Public Works Bids for Construction of Street Improvements on'Sixth
Street Between Mercedes and Front Street (Proiect No. PW 92-02)
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
9.1
of Auditors for the Fiscal Years 1992-94
Appoint Moreland and Associates as auditors for the Fiscal Years ended
June 30, 1992, 1993, and 1994.
Minutes%,OS2692
06/01192
City Council Minutes May 26, 1992
10.
11.
12.
13.
Resolution Authorizina Security Pacific Bank to Acceot Facsimile Sianatures for the
City
10.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-39
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
.REGARDING THE USE OF FACSIMILE SIGNATURES
First Amendment to National Pollutant Disqharoe Elimination System (NPDES)
Stormwater Discharge Permit Implementation Agreement, San Diego Reaion (Santa
Maraarita Drainaae Area)
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.
Resolution Reauesting County Registrar to Conduct General Municioal Election
12.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 9240
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.
Acceptance of Public Improvements in Tract No. 20154
13.1
Accept the Public Improvements in Tract No. 20154;
13.2
Authorize the reduction of street, sewer, and water faithful performance
security amounts;
13.3
Accept the warranty bonds in the reduced amounts.
13.4
Approve the subdivision agreement rider;
13.5
Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
Minutes%052692 -4. 06/01/92
City Council I~linutes May 26, 1992
14.
Chanqf Orders on Project No. PW 91-03 - Rancho California Road Benefit District
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.
15.
Professional Traffic Enaineering Services
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;
16.
AoDrooliation of Funds for Geotechnical Soils Testing Services (Law/Crandall,
IncorPorated) on the Street and Sidewalk Imorovements at Various Schools Project
(Proiecti No. PW 92-01 )
16.1
Approve the transfer of $4,400.00 from the Measure "A" Fund to the
Capitol Projects Funds and appropriate $4,400.00 to Capital Projects
Account No. 021-165-607-44-5804 from Unreserved Fund Balance.
Minutes%052692 -5- 06101192
City Council Minutes Mav 26. 1992
17.
18.
Revised Vesting Final Tract MaD No. 23267
17.1 Approve Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267, subject to the
Conditions of Approval.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore, Parks, Birdsall
NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Mur~oz
Revised Vestina Final Tract MaD No. 23267-3
18.1
18.2
Approve Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-3, subject to the
Conditions of Approval.
Approve the Memorandum of Understanding for recordation concurrently
with Revised Vesting Final Tract Map No. 23267-3
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore, Parks, Birdsall
NOES: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Mur~oz
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
20. Second ReadinQ of Ordinance 92-11 - Animal ReQulations
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 CRUELTY TREATED
ANIMALS
Minutes\052692 -6- 06101/92
City Council Minutes May 26, 1992
David Cowan, 823 W. 23rd Street, National City, representing Motivational Systems,
Inc., spoke to the Council in opposition to the staff recommendation based on the fact
the facr~ the recommended vendor is not a licensed contractor.
Mr. Cowan submitted copies of action taken by the City of Poway regarding Frazee's
Bill ABe800 and City of Cadsbad Ordinance dated May 5, 1992, acknowledging that
state legislation allows for off-site real estate advertising.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
refer thjis matter to staff, to address recent legislation on the subject and to address
the matter of fairly selecting qualified bidders.
City Attorney Scott Field advised that after investigating the matter with the State
ContraCtors License Board, a contractors license would not be required of the owner;
however, they would be required to have a licensed contractor perform the work.
The motion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Muftoz absent.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
21.
Mitiaatqd Neaative Declaration and Condemnati,on of ProPerty
Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko presented the staff report.
Mayor Birdsall opened the public hearing at 7:30 P.M.
Eion MCDowell, 432601 Pradera Way, Temecula, stated that the appraisal the City
wetlands was wrong. Mr, McDowell requested that the Council not
approve the action.
Councilmember Parks asked Mr. McDowell if he would be willing to provide staff with
complete appraisals.
Mr. McDowell stated that the complete appraisals would be available to staff.
Mayor Birdsall asked for clarification of the zoning.
Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko advised that the property was zoned R-2
3,000; however, it was appraised at R-2 4,000 by the City hired appraiser.
Minutes\052692 -7- 06/01/92
City Council Minutes May ~6.1992
It was moved by May~r Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
21.1
Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment
(EA) Number 8;
21.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 9241
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 MARGA.RITA ROAD, EAST
OF STONEWOOD ROAD, WITHIN THE CITY OF TEMECULA
The motion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Mur'toz absent.
Mayor Birdsall stated that although she personally is opposed to the principle of
eminent domain and condemnation, as an elected official she must put aside her
personal feelings and do what is best for the City. Councilmember Moore concurred.
Mayor Birdsall called a recess at 7:55 P.M. The meeting was reconvened following the
Community Services District Meeting and the Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 9:08 PM.
22. ADDrOval AuthOrity for Subdivision and Land Use ADOliCatiOn Ordinance
Gary Thornhill presented the staff report.
John Heagland, Chairman of the Planning Commission, stated that he was not aware
that there Were changes to the level of approval authority other than if the Planning
Director did not feel comfortable with a decision, he would have the discretion of
bringing that before the Planning Commission. Mr. Hoagland added that the
recommendations made to the City Council were based on the Commissions level
of comfort with projects of controversial nature and which may require precedent
setting decisions. Mr. Hoagland added that the Commission compared the approval
authority at the County, where the Planning Director and staff have a great deal more
approval authority, and took a hard look at what would ensure quality of development
in Temecula.
Councilmember Parks stated that what the City is promoting is the ability to fast-track
a project.
Councilmember Moore concurred saying that this ability to speed the process has been
conveyed to the public and the City will have to be able to perform.
Minutes%052692 -8- 06K)1192
City Council Minutes
May 26.1992
Larry Markham, Markl~am & Associates, 41750 Winchester Road, Temecula, spoke in
support of the original proposal including the proposed changes. Mr. Markham stated
that industrial development, surrounded by industrial, consistently receives no public
input and therefore should not require a public hearing.He also stated that tenant
improvements on an existing building should not require Planning Commission review,
further' streamlining the approval process.
Mayor iBirdsall closed the public hearing at 9:35 P.M.
It was moved by Councilmember Moore, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans to
approve the Approval Authority for Subdivision and Land-Use Application Ordinance
includir~g language which allows the Planning Director to submit any item which he
desires. additional input to the Planning Commission.
Councilmember Parks stated that he would like to see Public Use Permits Item No. 14
be molted to Planning Director approval with public hearing.
Councilmember Moore amended her motion to change Item No. 14, Public Use Permit
Under 10,000 Square Feet, Exempt from CEQA, to Planning Director approval with
public hearing, Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans concurred. The motion was carried
unanimously with Councilmember Mu~oz absent, as follows:
22.1
Adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-14
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REPEALITIVE ORDINANCE NO. 90-19 AND ESTABLISHING DECISION MAKING
AUTHORITY FOR SUBDIVISION AND LAND USE APPLICATIONS
23.
Vestinq! Tehtative Tract MaD 22761
Gary Thornhill presented the staff report.
Mayor Birdsall opened the public hearing at 9:40 P.M. Since there were no requests
to speak, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed at 9:40 P.M.
Minutes%052692 -9- 06/01192
City Council Minutes
May 26.1992
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
23.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 9242
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).
The motion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Mu~oz absent.
City Manager David Dixon stated that the condition requiring that the park site be
improved prior to July 1, 1993 or the 250th certificate of occupancy, should be
amended to include "or whichever comes first" as part of that condition.
The Council expressed unanimous concurrence with Councilmember Mu~oz absent.
24.
Tentative Tract No. 23103 - MaD Extension
Gary Thornhill presented the staff report.
Mayor Birdsall opened the public hearing at 9:40 P.M.
Craig Weaver, 32720 Rancho California Road, Temecula, advised that the Callaway
Vineyards are satisfied with the conditions regarding wind machines and asked if
acknowledgement of the placement of wind machines could be placed on the deed as
opposed to the White Report notice.
Mayor Birdsall closed the public hearing at 9:45 P.M.
Minutes%052692 - I O- 06/01/92
City Council Minutes Mav 26, 1992
It was ;moved by Mayor Pro Tom Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
24.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 9243
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
IAPPROVING 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
iNO. 199 AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 919-340-014, 016,
1018 AND 923-200-009, 010, 016, AND 923-210-001,014 AND 923-721-
021. (PORTIONS)
The motion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Mu~oz absent.
25. TentatNe TraCt MaD No. 27336, Reversion to Acreaqe
Gary Thornhill presented the staff report.
Mayor Birdsall opened the public hearing at 9:45 P.M. Since there were no requests
to speak, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed at 9:46 P.M.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tom Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
25.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-44
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 27335 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
The motion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Mu~oz absent.
Minutes%,052692 -11- 06/01192
City Council Minutes Mav 26.1992
COUNCIL BUS~NESS
26. Prooosed Fiscal Year 1992-93 Annual Ooeratino Budaet
City Manager David Dixon presented the staff report.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
extend the meeting to 10:30 P.M.
The motion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Mu~oz absent.
Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans stated that he would like to see One Million Dollars in
Redevelopment Agency funds used for lending purposes to local small business (such
as SBA Loans), and set aside the City's transfer tax to replenish those funds.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
approve, the annual Operating Budget for the Fiscal Year 1992-93 and approve staff
recommendation as follows:
26.2
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 9245
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
1!992-93 FOR THE CITY OF TEMECULA AND ESTABLISHING CONTROLS ON
CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENT BUDGETS
The motion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Mu~oz absent.
27.
Conditional Use Permit 2872, Revised No. I - AirStriP Community Properties
Gary Th0rnhill presented tl-m staff report.
Councilmember Moore stated that she did not feel comfortable with a five (5) year
extension and suggested the item come back before the Council in two (2) years.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans to
recommend to the County a three year extension of the Conditional Use Permit 2872,
Revised ;No. 1.
The motion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Mu~oz absent.
Minutes\052692 - 12- 06/01
City Council Minutes May ?6.1992
28. Temootarv Pavina of Parkina Lot at 6th Street and Front Street
Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko presented the staff report.
Councilmember Parks stated that he did agree with the paving without the
implementation of trees or parking stalls.
Jane Vernon, 30268 Mersey Court, Temecula, stated that the City should not waste
money kon anything that is being done as a temporary measure.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Moore to table
this matter. The motion was carried unanimously with Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans
abstain ng and Councilmember Mufioz absent.
29.
Consid( ration of an Ordinance Amendino Riverside County Ordinance No. 546 "Fire
Protect'on"
Tony Elmo presented the staff report.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tern Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore
approve staff recommendations as follows:
29.1
Introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 546, "FIRE
PROTECTION" ADOPTED BY REFERENCED 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.
The motion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Mufioz absent.
30.
Consideration of Adoption of Various Buildina Codes and Certain Amendments Thereto
Tony Elmo presented the staff report.
Minute*\052692 -I 3- 06/01192
City Council Minutes
May 26, 1992
It was moved by Cou;~cilmember Moore, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans to
approve staff recommendations as follows:
30.1
Introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 92-13
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE FOLLOWING CODES WITH
CERTAIN AMENDMENTS THERETO: THE 1992 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,
~PAS AND HOT TUB CODE
30.2
Set for Public Hearing on Tuesday, June 9, 1992, to hear any objections
to the adoption of this Ordinance.
The motion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Mu~oz absent.
31.
TemecVla/Murrieta Joint Transportation Committee
Doug Stewart presented the staff report.
Councilmember Parks volunteered to serve on the committee.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Moore to
appointi Councilmember Parks to serve on the Temecula/Murrieta Joint Transportation
Committee.
The metion was unanimously carried, with Councilmember Mu~oz absent.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
None given.
Minutes%052692 -14- 06101192
City Council Minutes May 26, 1992
CITY MANAGER REPORT
None given.
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
None given.
CITY COUNCIL REPORT
Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans confirmed that he has Council's concurrence to meet with the
citizens group to talk about a new advertising program.
Councilmember Parks advised of a June 18, 1992 Western Riverside COG Meeting, at
Murrieta Hot Springs.
Councilmember Parks also commended Ronald Knopp and Kathleen Hamilton, on the $50,000
grant which Was received for the River Greenbelt Environment.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved;by Mayor Pro Tem Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Parks to adjourn
at 9:40 P.M. to the meeting of June 9, 1992, 7:00 P.M. The motion was unanimously carried
with Councilmember Mur~oz absent.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek;, City Clerk
Minutes%052692 - 15- 06/01192
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
EXI-IIBIT 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 allowed in the mount of
$2,678,832.98.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shah certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOlvFFX}, this 9th day of June, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
260
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
06/01/92 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
$171,371.40
05/21/92 TOTAL PAYROLL:
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 6/09/92 COUNCIL MEETING:
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
CHECKS:
001 GENERAL
016 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUND (RDA)
019 TCSD
021 CAPITAL PROJECTS-CITY
029 CAPITAL PROJECT-TCSD
PAYROLL:
001 GENERAL (PAYROLL)
019 TCSD (PAYROLL)
$106,625.80
$677.79
$58,112.35
$6,300.00
$655.46
$76,042.32
$20,419.26
$171,371.40
$96,461.58
TOTAL BY FUND:
$267,832.98
PREPARED BY KARMA MCINTYRE
1, MARY JANE HEN~RII~NCE~FE
MARK OCHENDUSZKO, ASSISTANT CITYMANAGER
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
9=/0!/~2 City of iemecuia FaDe:
Fiscal Year: 1992 Check ~egister Station:
Check Date, Vendor
Invoice
Date
Name
P/O
Date Description
-- 00010247 05129192 JENNACO
041092
2410CR
JENNACO
04110192 0341
04/10/92 0341
02/10192 JANITORIAL SERVICES APRIL
02/10/92 CREDIT
00010248 05129192 IES-APA
051892
IES - APA
05/18/92
Check IotaIs:
05119M2 REBISTRATION PLANNING IN CA
00010249 05129R2 CPRS
051692
Check Totals:
CA PAR[ & RECREATION SOCIETY
05/IB!92 05/18/92 DAY C~P TRAIN6 FOR STAFF
Check Totals:
00010250 05127/92 COUNTYTR COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
052792 05/271t2 05127192 SEI!INARIJUNE 8-11/98
00010251 05129192 STATECON
3tKCL.74
318A.74 04109192
3110T.74 04109192
3MKCL.?5 04/16/92
3i[CL.76 04123192
518A.76 ' 04125192
51KOT.76 0412~/92
0~3192 04/51/92
Check Totals:
STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND
04109192 04109192 Normal P/R 4/09192
04~09~92 Normal PIR 4109192
04/09/92 Norma] P/R 4109/92
041!6192 Void/Nanual Check
04/2~/92 Normal P/R, 4123/92
04/25192 Normal P/R, 4/2~1~2
04123/92 Normal P/R, 4125192
04/51/~2 APRIL NORKERS CO~P
00010255 06101/t2 ABBOTOFF ABBOT OFFICE SYSTEHS
4589 04122192 11466 04101/92
Check IotaIs:
DES[ UNIT; BUILDING & SAFETY
Check Totals:
00010254 06/01/92 AGRICRED AORICREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORP.
0&0192 0&/01/92 0230 10/01191 LEASE JUNE 92
Check Totals:
00010255 06101192 ANERICFE AMERICAN FENCE CONPANY, INC.
3&05 05115/92 05/15/92 FENCE FOR STREET REPAIR
00010256 06101192 APA
051192
Check Totals:
ANERICAN PLANNING ASSOC
05111192 05/11/92 KE!~ERSHIP DUES
00010257 0&101/92 APPLEONE APPLE ONE
1434210 0511~192 11541
Check Totals:
04122192 TERP.SERV.4/27-5/22;FINANCE
00010258 06101192 ARTESIA
M0097~7C
Check Totals:
ARTESIA INPLENENT
04/50R2 11551 04/23192 SERV.CALL;REPL.PLUNGER;LINK
04/30/72 04/30/72 CREDIT PER STNT
00010259 06/01/42 ASSESSOR COUNTY ASSESSOR
050792 05/07/92
Check Totals:
05/07R2 PRINTOUTS
Chec~ Totals:
Gross
Discount
!,613.38
400.00-
1,215.38
115.00
115.00
77.00
77.00
95.00
95.00
274.99
2,994.05
863.58
6.44
284.75
2,691.96
774.79
161.81
8,052.57
104.95
104.95
846.02
846.02
213.00
213.00
260.00
260.00
358,92
358.92
514.96
16.52-
498,44
20.00
20.00
0.00
O.OO
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.O0
0.00
0.00
O.O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0 .O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
O,O0
0.00
Net
1,613.3S
400.00-
1,213.38
115.00
115.00
77.00
77.00
95.00
95.00
274.99
2,994.05
863.58
6.44
284.75
2,691.96
774.79
8~052.~7
104.95
!04.95
846.02
846.02
213.00
213.00
260.00
260.00
358.92
558.92
514.96
16.52-
498.44
20.00
20.00
06zO1/?2
Fxscal Year: 1992
City of ieucu!a
Check Register
Page:
Stat~on~
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date Description
Dross
Discount
Net
00010260 06/01192 SENEFII BENEFII AMERICA
051992 05/19/92 05119192 5115192 HEDICAL REIfBURSEHENT
2,665.55
0.00
2,66Z.L
00010261 0&101/92 CADET CADET UNIFORf
625550 05/15192 11602 05/15/92
655010 05/I~192 11602 0511~192
629174 05111192 11602 05/1)!92
621492 05/13192 ll&02 05115/V2
&,l&B19 05115/92 11602 05115192
Check Totals:
RUB RENTALS THRU JUNE 92'
RUB RENTALS THRU JUNE 92'
RUB RENTALS THRU JUNE 92'
RU6 RENTALS TfRU JUNE
RUG RENTAL8 THRU JUNE 92'
54.25
54.25
54.25
54.25
34.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,665.55
34.25
54.25
54.25
54.25
~1.25
00010262 06101/92 CALIFORN CALIFORNIAN
0500/11507 05111192 10626
02777 05119192 10626
04/01192
04101/92
Check Totals:
PURL,LBL NTC;PLAN.CONf;COUNCL
PUBL~LBL NTC;PLAN.CORf;COUNCL
171.25
72.79
115.59
0.00
0.00
0.00
171.25
72.79
115.59
00010263 06/01/92 CARLNARR CARL WARREN & CO.
93399 05112192 05112192
9:~28 04/50192 04/50/92
Check Totals:
IBB.iB
478.05
418.88
0.00
0.00
0.00
1BB.IB
478.0~
418.88
Check Totals:
00010264 06/01/92 CHESHIRE CHESHIRE EMBROIDERY
2445 05105/92 11551 04117192 EfBROIDERED CITY SEAL;IO"
896.91
BO.Bl
0.00
0,00
896.91
DO.B1
Check Totals:
00010265 06/01/92 CHEVRON CHEVRON U.S.A. INC.
7920772255 04~06~92 04106192 BILLIN6 PERIOD FOR flAY
920772255 05/50/92 05/30/92 flAY 50 8ILLINB
80.81
115.26
261.87
0,00
0.00
0.00
80.81
115.26
261.87
00010266 06/01/92 COHNPLUN COHN PLUMBING
18899 04101/92 11559
Check Totals:
04~01192 PLUfBINB SUPPLIES;CUNCESSIDN
375.13
655.46
0.00
-0.00
575.1~
655,46
'Check Totals:
00010267 06/01/92 COHHUNIT CORNUNITY NEWS NETWORK
011-920507 05107/92 11575 05/04/92 RDIARTS AND CRAFTS FAIR
655.46
96.00
0.00
0,00
655.46
95.00
Check Totals:
00010268 06101192 COPYLINE COPY LINE CORPORATION
88~91 04150/~2 11552 0Ai29192 SERV. CALL;PAR~S&REC,CDPIER
7842~ 04101/92 11604 04/01/92 FAX fACHINE SERVIDE CALL
95.00
19~.60
55.17
0.00
0.00
0,00
93.00
195.60
55.17
00010269 06/01/92 COSTCO
052892
COSTCO WHOLESALE
05~28~92
Check Totals:
05/2B/92 PURCHASE AQUATIC PROGRAM
248.77
200.00
0,00
0.00
248.77
200,00
00010270 06/01/92 CSMFO
0526S2
Check Totals:
CA SO OF MUNI FIN OFFICERS
05126192 05/29/92 SEHINAR/OULY 17/CS
200,00
90,00
0.00
0.00
200.00
90.00
00010271 06/01!92 DAVLIN
ER-2Z:I79
DAVLIN
05/15/92 11544
Check Totals:
04/20192 AUDIO PRODUCTIDNIPARKS & REC.
90,00
150.00
0.00
0.00
90.f,~-,
150.00
Check Totals:
150.00
0.00
150.00
00010272 06101/~2 DIXON DAVID F. DIXON
Fiscll Year: 1992 Check Register Statzon: 2~::
Check Date . Vendor
Invoice
052192
Date
05121/92
Nale
PIO
Date Description
Discount
05114192 EXPENSE REIHB. 5/9-5/14 DD
Net
00010273 06101192 ~C EDC LUNCHEON
0527~ 05127192
00010274 06101192 GElPAGED GET PAGED
- 09001L12-1N 85101192 11578
Check Totals:
05127192 CONFERENCEIG!IBI921K31~O
Check Totals:
0U30192 TCSD PAGER RENTAL
Check Totals:
00010275 06/01192 GLENMIEG GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
11~O&-O 05119192 11~42 03/03192 OPEN P.O. FOR KISC. ITE~
104951-0 04110192 11459 04101192 OFFICE SUPPLIESI PUBLIC WORG
110997-0 0510GI92 11561 04128192 FI)L)ERSIPENS;PU)LIC WORKS
&77.79 0.00 677.79
677,79 0.00 677.79
40.00 0.00 40.00
40.00 0,00 40.00
11.50 0.00 11.50
11.50 0.00 11.50
38.36 0.00 38.36
75.14 0.00 75,14
20.40 O.O0 20,40
00010276 06/01/92 BTEDILL 6TE
162-60433 05116192
162-5595~ 05116192
00010277 06101192 HAFELITH THOMAS HAFELI
051892 05118192
Check Totals:
0511&192 714-162-604;IMY ~6 BILLING
05116t92 714-162-5595 ~Y 16 BILLING
Check Totals:
05/18192 RE1N~ SOFTNARE/HARDMARE
133.90 0.00 133.90
355.40 0.00 355.40
36.89 O.OO 3&.89
392.29 0,00 392.29
207.61 0.00 207,61
P 00010278 06/01/92 HRNKSHAR HANKS NARDMARE
141072 04120192 11~79
04~092-2 04/~0/92 11606
043192 04/~1/92 11606
00010279 06101192 HENRY HENRY, HARY JANE
052992 05~29~92
Check Totals:
02/01/92 MAINTENANCE HTRLS; CITY HALL
04101/92 APRIL CNGS
04/01192 MRCH CHBS
Check Totals:
05129192 REINB. AIRLINE TICKETS
207.61 O.O0 207.61
10.34 0.00 10.34
167.90 0.00 167'.~1'
332.56 O.O0 332.56
510.80 0.00 510.80
192.00 O.O0 192.00
00010280 06101/92 HORIZON HORIZON MATER
042992 04129192
00010281 0&101/92 HURTUBIS LOUISE HURTUOISE
0506t2 05~06~92
00010282 06101192 ICRA ICI'Lq
051592 05115192
Check Totals:
04129/92 APRIL CHBS
Check Totals:
05/06/92 REFUND FOR ADULT CLASSES
Check Totals:
05/15/92 NEHRERSNIP RENENAL DUES
Check Totals:
00010283 06101192 INTOXI~E INTOXINETER, INC.
92004196 04121192 04121/92 CALIFORNIA LARGE DIGIT A/SIll
00010284 06101192 LEAGUE
052092
Check Totals:
LEAGUE OF CALIF. CITIES
05/20192 05/~192 CONFERENCE JUNE 25/TS
00010285 06101192 LONBSORU LONGS DRUGS
Check Totals:
192.00 0,00 192.00
94.82 0.00 94.82
94.82 O,O0 94.82
31.00 O.OO 31.00
31.00 0.00 31.00
779,03 0.00 779,03
779.0~ 0.00 779.03
527.73 0.00 527,7~
527.7~ 0.00 527.73
105.00 0.00 105,06
105.00 0,00 !05.00
06/01R2
Fiscal Year: 1992
City of Telecda
Check Register
F'aSe:
· Station:
Check
Date -Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O
5752 05/08/92 11488
Date Description
'04102/92 FILN PRINTING ACCDUNTITCSO
Gross
Discount
Net
1~.~ 0.00 ~
Check Totals:
00010286 06101192 LUNCH&ST LUNCH i STUFF CATERING
052892 05128192 05/28192 DINNER FOR CDUNCILISTAFF
12,55 0.00 12,55
90.00 0.00 90.00
Check Totals:
00010287 06/01192 RARILYNS RARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
21~7 05118/92 115~ 04/17/r2 COFFEE SERVICE;CITY HALL
21~0 05111192 115~ 041171t2 COFFEE SERVICEICITY HALL
90.00 0.00 90,00
91.53 0,00 91.5~
44.70 0.00 44.70
00010288 06/01192 MARTIN1
1718
Check Totals:
MARTIN 1 HOUR PHOTO
04101192 11616 04101192 FILN;FI~ PROCESSING
116.23 0.00 1~6.25
181.72 0.00 181.72
00010289 06/01/92 MELAD
042892
Check Totals:
GLAD & ASSOCIATES
04128192 04128/92 PLAN CHECKS FOR B&S APRIL
181.72 0.00 181.72
691.69 0.00 691.69
Check Totals:
00010290 06101192 MICROA6E HICRO A6E COMPUTER CENTER
46229 05/ILI92 11555 04/28192 EITERNAL DRIVE CHASSIS
691.69 0.00 691.&9
$79.29 0.00 179.29
00010291 06/01192 MOBIL MOBIL
8839305790 05~08~92
Check Totals:
05/08/92 88393057921MAY BILLING
379.29 0.00 379.29
818,59 0.00 83""~
Check Totals:
00010292 06/01/92 HT.SANOA HT. SAN JACINTO C0LLEGE
052292 05/22/92 05122192 DINNER & BENEFIT/SM
819.58 0.00 818.58
~5.00 0.00 $5.00
Check Totals:
0001029~ 06/01/92 NATIDNNO NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION
052792 05/27192 05/27/92 E~ERSHIP 92-93/JG,S0
35.00 0.00 ;5.00
52.00 O.Oq 52.00
00010294 06101/92 PERS
051592
Check Totals:
PERS (HEALTH INSUR. PREHIUN)
05115192 05115192 ADMIN CHARGE FOR MAR AND APR
52.00 0.00 52.00
50.00 0.00 50.00
Check Totals:
00010295 06/01192 PERSRETI PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT
2PERR.77 05107192 05107192 Norul P/R, 5107192
051292 05/12/92 05/12/92 RETIREHENT FOR 4/18-5/01
052992 05129192 05/29192 RETIREMENT PE 5121/92
2PERR.78 05/21192 05121192 Norsol P/R, 51211r2
50.00 0.00 50.00
253.17 0.00
1~,265.25 0.00
12,885.82 0.00
253.17 O.O0
29,17
15,265.25
12~SS5.82
25~.17
00010296 06101/92 PETROLAN PETROLANE
469485 05120192 10994
469482 05/20/92 10995
469484 05/20/92 10995
00010297 06/01/~2 POSTHAST POSTMASTER
0527~2 05/27/92
Check Totals:
10/21/91 FUEL (PROPANE) B&S TRUCK
10/21/91 FUEL (PROPANE) TCSD TRUCK
I0/~1/91 FUEL (PROPANE) TCSD TRUCK
Check Totals:
05/27/92 ASSESSMENT LEVY/SULK RAILIN6
26,657.41 0.00 26,657.41
137.58 0.00 1~7.58
102.64 0,00 102,64
28.81 0.00 2~1
269.0~ 0,00 269.01
4~025.20 0.00 4~025.20
Check Totals: 4~025.20 0.00 4~025.20
~IUi!~Z
Fiscal Year: 1~92
City of ]emecula
Check Register
Page:
Check Date Vendor Name
Invoice Date P/O Date ' Description
6ross
Discount
Net
00010298 06/01/92 PROLOCK PRO LOCK & KEY
2910 05/12R2 11461 04/01/92 COMNUNITY SERVICES;ACCOUNT
49.55
0.00
49.55
Check Totals:
00010299 06/01R2 RIICHWTR RANCHO WATER
0100010802 05106/92 05106R2 03110-04108
0107600092 05106192 05/06192 03/12-04/10
0107700732 0510&It2 05106/92 03112-04110
0111700092 05113192 05113192 03117-04116
0111702502 05113192 05113192 03/17-04116
1002450002 05104/~ 05106/92 03/09-04107
0104010692 05106192 0510&!92 03110-.04109
0124000202 04115192 001151f2 0212503125
0124009701 041151r2 04115/92 02125-03125
0124018971 04/15/92 04/15192 02/25-03125
0124000902 04/15192 00/15192 02125-03125
0116036431 04115192 04/15R2 02120-03/23
0124019181 04115192 04/15192 02125-03125
012402500 04115192 04115/92 02125-03125
011150111 04115192 00115192 02/25-03126
49.55
10.50
48.84
10.01
44.69
93.94
72.38-
10.01
27.02
27.02-
29.25
95.64
34.05
27.02
89,35
47.27
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0,00
49.55
10.50
48.84
10.01
46.69
93.94
72.38-
10.01
27.02
27.02-
29.25
95.64
34.05
27.02
89.35
47.27
00010300 06/01/92 RIGHTWAY RIGHTWAY
163447 05/04/92 11557
04/28/92
Check Totals:
PORTAB~ TOIt~T
472.19
57,39
0,00
0,00
472.19
57.39
00010301 06/01/92 S&SARTS S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
081592 04/01/92 11614 04/01/92
881588 04/01/92 11612 04/01/92
B81590 04/01/92 11613 04/01/92
Check Totals:
CREPE PAPER;NARKERS;CBLUE
EASELS & 8RUSHES;T~D
CONSTRUCTION PAPER;CRAFT PPR
57.39
30%48
144.45
455.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
57.39
309.48
146.45
455.40
00010302 06/01/92 SCCCA
052292
Check Totals:
SO CALIF CITY CLERKS ASSOC
05122192 05/22/92 SC~CA HEETINB/3BIOUNE 19
00010303 06/01192 SECURITY SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
050492 05104/92 05/04R2
08153 05104192 05104/92
08723 05104/92 05/04/92
0799J 05104/r2 05/04/92
Check Totals:
BAN
479802000001078114129-514 NO
4798020000010815/4/20-4/28/PB
4790020000010872/4/22-5/1/SN
4798020000010799/4/20-5/4/38
911.33
25,00
25.00
408.44
581,57
265.27
1~2.23
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
911,~
25,00
25,00
408.44
581,57
265.27
132,23
Check Totals:
00010304 06101/92 SO CAL-2 SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
3457425K 05/07/92 05/07192 7143457425 05107/92
345-74223 05/07/92 05107192 714-345-7422/~AY 7 BILLING
34560050 05/07R2 05107/92 714-345-60051517192 BILLING
1,387,51
54.31
27,05
215.66
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
1,387.51
54.31
27.05
215./~
00010306 06/01/92 SOCAEDST SOUTHERN CAL!F. EDISON
430771383k 05/01/92 05/01/92
Check Totals:
03/3!-04/30
430775157k 05/01/92 05101192 03/3!-04/30
430775158k 05/01/92 05/01/92 03/31-04/30
430775159k 05/01/92 05/01/92 03/31-04-30
430775160k 05/01/92 05/01/92 03/31-04/30
430775162k 05101R2 05101/92 03/Z!-04/30
430775185k 05101/92 05101R2 03/3!-04/30
297.02
26.02
27,65
29.17
29.49
27,99
28.33
2S.94
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
297.02
26,02
27.65
29.17
29.49
27.99
28.33
28.94
C, ,~ lr,
FXscal Year: 1992
Check
Date Vendor
Invoice Date
Naoe
P/C
Date
Check Re~Xster
Description
Gross
4507752&~k 05/01/92
q.$077&50Sk 05/01R2
430775270k 05101192
q.$077539.2k 05/0~/92
q.~0775547k 05/01/92
430T/5105k 05101192
G07714~&k 05101192
q.30771&67k 05101192
q.$0775161k 05101192
&307710,65k 05101R2
05101192
05101/92
05101R2
05101/92
05/01R2 05131-0~/30
0510t!92
051011rZ 031~1-0~1~0
05109192 0~1~1-0~1~0
05101R2 03151-09/30
0510~1~ 0~i$1-04130
Check lotals:
00010,.310 06101/92 S0tlTHCE1 SOUTHERN CALIF GISOg
69&781&~lk 0~1291~2 09.1291r2 0312~
6786~99.19.k 0~127192 0~i27R2 03120-0~120
519059001k 65104/92 05/0~192 0~I30...04128
519051802k 05109./92 05104R2 0~/50-HI28
558509301k 05106192 05106192 0~101-04129
599.160080k 05114192 05119.192 04108-Q5107
~81,',','53201k 0510~192 05106192 fil01-O~!~0
5&7551975k 05111/92 05111192 09106-05105
5~8001~01k 05/0&/92 0510&/92
5190557%k 05/09.192 05109/92 03/30-09.128
519050812k 05/HI92 051HI92
55800&&59k OS/0SR2 0510&/92
5q.828&303k 05/07/92 05107R2 04101-05101
5q.828&SOSk 05107R2 05107/92 04/01-05101
5~800&23,'Sk 0510&192 0510~R2
&%7G0107k 0~129/92 0~/29/92
575&SSB02k 05/12192 05/12192 0AIO6-0510&
575&&S$2q.k 05/12R2 05/12/92
57780~7~2k 05/12/92 05/12R2
575&S&7Olk 05/12/92 05112/92
&O411109q.k 05115/92 05/15192 0AI10-05/II
&0~llO235k 05115/92 05/15/92
5~'7995'503,k 05/lq.192 05119.R2 04108-05/08
5T/E087q.Ok 05112R2 05112/92 0~/O&-05/06
5778029.89k 05112R2 05112/92
&0q.l175q.gk 05115R2 05115192 04/10-05111
&0~IlOllk 05115R2 05/15/92' 04110-05/11
575&5095q.k 051~2192 051~2192 0410&-0510~
5~7992558k 0511~192 05/1~R2 0q.1OG-OS/08
59828&&04 05107/~ 05107192 Oq./Ol-05101
551260500k 05108192 05108/92 04/03-05/04
S0q.lllO93k 05115/92 051~5/92 0~110-051~1
&04117&TOk 05115/92 OSIlS/r'Z Oq.ll0-OS/ll
5581,.31120 05/0&/92 0510&R2
519050101k 05109./92 05/04192 03/30-04128
&~7~59913k 09.12A/~2 09./2~,/92 03/19-04/20
~58~0900k 0~12~t92 0~12~/92 03120-09.117
~7~.SG4&2k 0~124192 0412~t92 03/19-04/20
~6795&~VOk 04/2~/92 01/21/92
~6795~91i8k Oq.12~192 0¢/24192 03/23-04/20
657~58080k 04t24192 04/2¢192 03119-09.120
Discount
2&,7~
22.2&
25,4~
2&.58
91,11
21.40
14.34
2&.2~
25.~S
492,71
241.03
18L13
177.42
176,~7
303.71
8.78
8,7~
8,78
9.08
9,08
8.78
9,00
9.00
40.~5
9.00
9.00
9.30
9.67
9.00
9.00
9,00
9,~0
9.00
9.00
1q..70
9.38
9.~0
9,~0
92,02
258.0b
167,88
213.84
222.97
~4.0~
4b,qO
21.34
0,00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0 ,O0
0,00
O,O0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O ,00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0,00
O,OO
0.00
0,00
0.00
O,OO
0.0O
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O.OO
0,00
0.00
O .OO
0,00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
Net
2&.79
25.
2~.58
14.34
15.b2
26.24
25.~5
492.71
2&5,58
271,&1
241,0,%
177 ,a,2
176.47
,*55,29
505,71
G .7G
6.78
8,78
9,06
3
9
9
40 .:~5
9 ,O0
9.00
9.00
9 .O0
9
9 .,I0
9.00
lq. ,70
9.38
9 .:~O
t;2q.3..08
~$,6A
92,02
238.06
167
21LB4
-*'~rq7
., ,00
46,90
165.32
Fiscal Year: 19~2
Check Date VenOor
Invoice
Name
P/O
Date
Check: Register
Description
Discount
Station:
Net
551267543k 04/17/92
604111095k 04124192
667956986k 04/24/92
665848067j 04/24/92
04/17/92 03/05-04/0;
~4/24R2 03/11-04/I0
04/24192 03123-04/20
04/24/92 3/20-4/17
Check Totals:
00010311 06/01192 SPBNKCHG SECURITY PACIFIC NATL BANK
043092 04/30192 04130/92 APRIL B~NK CHBS
Check Totals:
00010312 06/01/92 STUARTFR FRANKLIN C. A. STUART
050492 04/30/92 0346 01/15192 APRIL CHBS
00010313 06/01/92 TARGET TARGET STORE
052892 05128192
Cl~ck Totals:
05/28192 PURCHASE AQUATIC SULLIES
Check Totals:
00010314 0&/01/92 TNORSBUR ALICIA THORSBORNE
051592 05115192 05/15192 MILEABE REI~JURSE~ENT
00010315 06/01/92 TIRITILL TIRITILLI, STEVE
060192 06/01/92
Check Totals:
06/01/92 JUNE RENl
00010316 06/01/92 UNITED
2UNIT.76
2UNIT.77
2UNIT.7B
Check Totals:
UNITED WAY OF THE INLAND
04123192 04123192 Normal P/R, 4/23/92
05/07/92 05/07/92 NormaX P/R~ 5/07/92
05/21/92 05121192 Normal P/R, 5121/92
00010317 06/01/92 USCH USCN
2PTRT,7B 05/21192
3PTRT,78 05/21/92
Check Totals:
05/21/~ Normal PIR~ 5/21192
05/21/92 Normal P/R, 5121/92
00010318 06/01/92 VALLEYN
100389
VALLEY NICRO
04116192 11497
Check Totals:
04106192 FLOPPY URIVE;SOFTNARE;POLICE
00010319 06/01/92 WILLIAMS KAY NILLIAMS
051892 05/18192
Check Totals:
05118192 80Z OF CONTRACT CLASS
00010520 06109/92 ALLCITY
1350
Check Totals:
ALL CITY NANABEHENT
04/22/92 0293 10/08/91 LIABILITY INSURANCE FOR HARt2
00010~21 06/09192 CALIFLAN CALIFORNIA LA~SCAPE
30851115 05/14/92 11603
30~51!125 05/t4/72 11603
30091nn~ 05/14/92 11605
308511230 05/14/92 11603
308520129 05/14/92 11603
508511129 05/14/92 11603
308511219 05/IA/92 11603
Check Totals:
05/lq/92 EXTRA WORK O~ERS;SLOPESjTC
05/14/92 EXTRA WORK ORDERS;SLOPES,ETC
05/14/92 EXTRA WORK DRDERS;SLOPES,ETC
05/14/92 EXTRA WORK ORDERS;SLOPES,ETC
05114/92 EXTRA WORK ORDERS~SLOPES~ETC
05/14192 EXTRA WORK ORDERS;SLOPES,ETC
05/14/92 EXTRA WORK ORDERS~SLOPESJTC
8.70
9,00
184.43
5,059.37
266.56
266.56
270.00
270.00
130.00
130.00
8.40
8.40
3,543.70
~,543.70
111.00
111.00
111.00
193.99
193.99
387,9B
608.79
608.79
240.00
240.00
1~614.2I
1,614.23
46,93
139.17
185.05
797.3!
65,95
176,71
278.50
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
8.70
9.00
184.45
3~.96
5,059J7
266.56
266.56
270.00
270.00
130,00
130.00
8.40
9.40
3,543.70
3,543.70
11L00
111.00
193.99
193.99
367.98
608.79
608,79
240,00
240.00
1~614,23
1,614.23
46.95
I85.05
797.31
65.95
176.71
27LS0
06/01/92
Fiscal Year: 1992
City of lemecula
Check Re~ister
Check .Date
Ventor Name
Invoice Date P/O
Date Description
508511226 05114192 11503
=085I$251 05114192 11605
)08511225 05114/92 11605
~085205 05~08~92 0252
05i14192 EXTRA WORK ORDERS;SLDPES,ETC
05114R2 EITRA WORK DRDERS;SLOPES,ETC
05114192 EXTRA WORK ORDERS;SLOPES,ETC
08/28191LND ~AINT.MAY 1992
Check lotalE:
00010~22 06/09/92 ES61LCDR ESBIL CORPORATION
2191192 04101192 04/01/92 1011-10151
1/119288 04/01R2 04/01192 aAN-APRIL 92 ADa BILLINGS
00010325 06109192 FORNA FDRNA
7588 H/28/92 0190
Check lotalE:
04/28192 PLt CHECKI~ SBV.PLANNIN6
Check Totals:
00010524 06109192 FRANKLIN FRANKLIN SEMINARS
70~5557 041241~2 11506 04114192 FILER;REFILLS;DAYTIMERS;PLG
00010S25 06109192 NATL~DL NATIONAL EMBLEN
0190164 05120192 11522
Check Totals:
04107192 PATCHES;CITY POLICE DEPT.
Check Totals:
00010526 05109192 OLSONIDO FINAL TOUCH ~ARKET
0584/24-92 05/28/~2 0519 02101192 3UNE FEE
0384/15-92 05/28/92 0~9 02101/92 aUNE SERVICES
0~54/q0-92 05/29192 0559 02101192 MAY FEE
Check Totals:
00010~27 05109/92 PLANNING THE PLANNING CENTER
16155 04150192 0575 03/26/~2 APRIL 1/APRIL 50
Check Totals:
00010328 06/09/92 ROBERTBE ROBERT BEIN, W~. FROST & ASSO
1-10028 04101192 0260 04101192 ENB.PLANS;I~PROVE 6TH ST.
1-10028CR 04101/92 0250 04101R2 ENG,PLANG;INPROVE 6TH ST.
1-12O21CR 04101192 0260 04101R2 CREDIT/REI~BURSABLES
1-12021 04/01/92 0250 04/01192 ENS,PLANG;INPROVE 5TH ST.
00010129 06/09/92 VOID
Check lotals:
Gross Discount Net
209.20 0.00 209 ."'~
1,000.50 0.00 l,O00.bv
92.50 O. O0 92.50
29,026.40 O. O0 29,026.40
$2:018.02 0.00 32,018.02
5,527.94 0.00 5,627.94
1 ,~85.26 O .00 1,385.26
7,01~.20 0.00 7,01;.20
5,992.50 0.00 ~,882.50
3,892.50 0.00 5,882.50
3.77 0.00 5.77
S.77 0.00 5.77
1,202.77 O. O0 1,202.77
1,202.77 0.00 1,202.77
15,474.74 0,00 15,474.76
1,750.00 O.O0 1,750 ~
1,742.70 0.00 19741
16,967.46 0.00 16,947.46
31,918.41 0.00 51,918.41
4,550 · 54 O · O0 4,530.54
30.54- 0.00 30.54'
52.55- 0. O0 52 · ~'
852.55 O. O0 852.55
5,500.00 0.00 5,~00.00
VOID
00010~30 06109192 SIRSPEED SIR SPEEDY
5109 05115192 11502
04109192 STATIONARY SUPPLIES
Check Totals:
Report lotals:
2,161.25 0.00 2,161.25
2,161.25 0.00 2,151.25
171,371 · 40
06/01792 Voucher Detail
Report Writer CHECK LISTING BY FUND
FUND CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION A~OUNT
r 001 00010247 05/29/92 JENNAC8 CREDIT 400.00-
'001 00010247 05129/92 JENNACO JANITORIAL SERVICES APRIL 1,61;.3S
001 00010248 05/2~/92 IES- APA REGISTRATION PLANNING IN CA 115,0{
001 000~0250 05127192 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE SEMINARRUNE 8-11/BB
001 00010251 0512f/92 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R, 4/25R2
001 00010251 05/29192 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R 4109192 1!~.4:
001 00010251 05129192 STATE COMP~SATION INS. FUND Normal P/R~ 412~192
001 00010251 05129192 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R 4109192 4.5~
001 00010231 05129192 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R~ 4/2~/92 1~.27
001 00010251 05/29192 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FU~ Normal P/R 4/09/92 25.30
001 00010251 05/29192 STATE CONPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R~ 4123/92 t4.85
001 00010251 051291V2 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R 4/091~
001 00010251 051~192 STATE CONPENSATION INS. FUND Norma1 P/R, 4/23/92 5~.71
001 00010251 05129/92 STATE CO~ENSATION INS. FUND Normal PIR 4109192
001 00010251 05129192 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R, 4/2~/92 114.20
001 00010251 05129R2 STATE CU~ENSATION INS. FUND NorM1P/R 4109192 I29.10
001 00010251 05/29192 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R, 4/23R2 419.~4
001 00010251 05129192 STATE COMPENSATI~ INS, FUND APRIL WORKERS COHP 100.84
001 00010231 05129/92 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R, 412~/92 415.22
001 00010251 05129/~ STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Voidl~anual Check b.44
001 00010251 05/29/~ STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R 4109192 %7.94
001 00010251 05/29/92 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal PIR~ 4125/92
001 0001025~ 05129/92 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R 4/09R2 565.95
001 00010251 05129192 STATE COMPENSATIDN INS. FUND Normal PIR, 4/2;/92 6.85
001 00010251 05/29/92 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND APRIL WORKMS COMP 60.97
/-- 001 00010251 05129192 STATE CD~ENSATZON INS. FUND Normal P/R 410~192
001 00010251 05129192 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Normal P/R, 4/25/92 220.28
001 00010251 05/29/92 STATE COMPENSATION INS. FUND Norma! P/R 41091~2 524.45
001 0001025~ 06/01/92 ABBOT OFFICE SYSTEMS DESK UNIT; BUILDING & SAFETY 104.95
001 00010255 06101/92 AMERICAN FENCE COMPANY, INC. FENCE FOR STREET REPAIR 21~.00
001 00010256 06101192 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC MEMBERSHIP DUES 2~.00
001 00010257 06101192 APPLE ONE TENP.SERV.4/27-5/22~FINANCE ~58.92
001 00010260 06101192 BENEFIT AMERICA 5/15/92 MEDICAL REIMBURSEMENT 1~912.70
001 00010261 06101192 CRUET UNIFORM RUG RENTALS THRU JUNE 92' 171.25
001 00010262 06101192 CALIFORNIAN PUBL~L6L NTC;PLAN.COMM~COUNCL 188.18
001 00010263 06/01/92 CARL WARREN & CO.
001 00010264 06/01/92 CHESHIRE EMBROIDERY EMBROIDERED CITY.SEAL;IO' 80.81
001 00010265 06101192 CHEVRON U.S.A. ]NC. MAY 30 DILLINB
001 00010265 06/01/92 CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. BILLIN6 PERIOD FOR MAY ~9.52
001 00010265 06/01192 CHEVRON U.S.A. ]NC. NAY ~0 BILLING 10.00
001 00010265 06101/92 CHEt/RON U.S.A. INC. BILLING PERIOD FOR MAY 75.74
001 00010268 0&101/92 COPY LINE CORPORATION SERV. CALL;PARKS&REC.COPIER 19;.60
001 00010268 06/01192 COPY LINE CORPORATION FAX MACHINE SERVICE CALL 55.17
001 00010270 06/01/92 CA SO OF MUNI FIN OFFICERS SEMINAR/JULY 17/CS .90.00
001 0001027~ 06/01/92 EDC LUNCHEON CONFERENCE/6/18/rZlNJ/NO 40.00
001 00010275 06/01/92 BLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS FOLDERS;PENS)PUBLIC WORKS 20.40
001 00010275 06/01/92 6LENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS OPEN P.D, FOR MISC. IT~S ~B.~6
001 00010275 06/01/~2 BLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES; PUBLIC WORKS 75.H
001 00010276 06101192 STE 714-162-55~5 MAY 16 BILLING ~6.89
001 00010276 06/01/92 GTE 71&-162-6045/MAY 16 BILLING ~55.40
001 00010277 06/0!/92 THOMAS HAFELI REIMB SOFTWARE/HARDWARE 207.61
""'001 00010278 06/01!92 HANKS HARDWARE ~ARCH CHBS ~2.56
001 0001027S 0~/01/92 HANKS HARDWARE MAINTENANCE MTRLS; CITY HALL 1D.34
00! 00010278 06/01i~2 HANKS HARDWARE APRIL CHGS 167.~0
001 00010279 06/0!/92 HENRY, MARY JANE RE!MB. AIRLINE TICKETS !~2.00
001 00010282 06/01/92 ICMA MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL DUES
001 00010283 0~/01/92 INTOX!METER, INC. CALIFORNIA LARGE DIGIT A/SIII 527.7;
001 00010284 06/01/92 LEAGUE OF CALIF. CITIES CONFERENCE JUNE 25/TS 105.00,
[~eport Writer
FUND CHECK NUNBER
001 000!02B6
001 0001028?
001 00010288
001 00010299
001 00010290
001 00010291
001 00010292
001 00010293
001 0001029¢
001 00010295
001 00010295
001 00010295
001 00010295
001 00010295
001 00010295
001 00010295
001 00010295
001 00010295
001 00010295
001 00010295
001 00010295
001 000102%
001 00010300
001 00010302
001 00010303
001 00010301
001 00010103
001 00010304
001 00010304
001 00010304
001 00010110
001 00010310
001 00010111
O01 00010112
001 00010114
001 OOOl011&
001 00010116
001 00010116
001 00010317
001 00010318
001 00010520
001 00010322
001 00010122
001 00010123
001 00010124
001 00010325
001
001 00010326
001 00010326
001 00010327
001 00010129
001 00010550
001
Of& 00010272
0!9 00010249
CHECK DATE
VENDOR NAHE
CHECK LISTIN~ BY FUND
DESCRIPTION
06/0!R2
0&/01/92
0&/01/92
0&101192
0M01/92
06/01/92
0&101/92
06/01/92
06101192
06101192
06101192
0b/01/92
06101192
06/01192
0&101192
06/01/92
06101192
06/01/92
06101192
06/01/92
06/01/92
0&/01/92
06/01/92
06/01192
0&/01/92
06/01/92
06/01/92
06/01R2
06101/92
0~I01/92
0&/01/92
0&/01/92
0~/01R2
05101/92
06101/92
0&/01/92
06109/92
06109192
06/09/92
06109192
0&!09192
06109192
06/09/92
06/09/92
06109192
06/09/~2
LUNCH & STUFF CATERING
RARILYN'_S COFFEE SERVICE
HARTIN 1 HOUR PHOTO
RELAD & ASSOCIATES
RICRO ABE CONPUTER CENTER
KOB1L
NT. SAN JACINTO COLLEGE
NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION
PEltS (HEALTH IN~R, PRENIUN)
PERS EHPLOYEES' RETIRERENT
PERS ENPLOYEES' RETIRERENT
PERS ERPLOYEES' RETIRERENT
PERS ~PLDYEES' RETIRERENT
PERS ERPLDYEES' RETIRERENT
PERS B~PLOYEES' RETIRERENT
PERS EHPLOYEES' RETIRENENT
PERS EPJ~LOYEEG' RETIRERENT
PERS E~LOYEES' RETIRERENT
PERS ENPLOYEES' RETIRERENT
PERS ENPLOIIEES' RETIRERENT
PERS ERPLOYEES' RETIRERENT
PETROLANE
RIGHTWAY
SO CALIF CITY CLERKS ASSOC
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO.
SO.CALIFORNIA TELEPHONE CO,
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SECURITY PACIFIC NAIL BANK
FRANKLIN C. A, STUART
ALICIA THORSBORNE
UNITED WAY OF THE INLAND
UNITEB WAY OF THE INLAND
UNITED WAY OF THE INLAND
USCR
VALLEY fiICR0
ALL CITY NANAGERENT
EGGIL CORPORATION
EGGIL CORPORATION
FORHA
FR/tKLIN SEHINARS
NATIONAL EftGLEN
FINAL TOUCH NARKET
FINAL TOUCH RARKET
FINAL TOUCH NARKET
THE PLANNING CENTER
VOID
SIR SPEEDY
DINNER FOR COUNCIL/STAFF
COFFEE SERVICE;CITY HALL
FILR;FILH PROCESING
PLAN CHECKS FOR B&S APRIL
EXTERNAL DRIVE CHASSIS
883~303792/RAY BILLINB
DINNER & BENEFITISN
~E~BERSHIP 92'931JG,S3
ADNIN CHARGE FOR lIAR AND APR
RETIRERENT PE 5121192
RETIRERENT FOR 4116-5/01
RETIRERENT PE 5121192
RETIREHERT FOR 4118-5/01
Normal P/R, 5121192
Normal P/R, 5/07192
RETIRERENT PE 5/21192
RETIRERENT FOR 4118-5101
RETIRERENT PE 5121/92
RETIRENENT FOR 4/18-5101
RETIREENT PE 5121/92
RETIRERENT FOR ¢118-5101
FUEl. (PROPANE) B&S TRUCK
PORTABLE TOILET
SCCCA REETINGIOGiJUNE 19
479802000001081514/20-4/28/PB
479802000001078114129-514 ~0
479802000001079914120-514136
714-345-7422/NAY 7 BILLING
7141457425 05/07/92
714445-b0051517192 OILLING
05/20-04/17
II20-4/17
APRIL BANK CHGS
APRIL CHGS
NILEAGE REINBURSENENT
Normal PIR, 5/07192
Normal P/R~ 5/21/92
Normal P/R, 4125192
Normal P/R~ 5/21R2
FLOPPY DRIVE;SOFTWARE;POLICE
LIABILITY INSURANCE FOR NAR92
10/1-101~1
JAN-APRIL 92 ADJ BILLINGG
PLAN CHECKING SERV.PLANNINB
FILER;REFILLS)DAYTIRERS)PLG
PAlCRES;CITY P0LICE DEPT.
JUNE FEE
JUNE GERVICES
NAY FEE
APRIL 1/APRIL I0
STATIONARY SUPPLIES
O&/O!R2
05/29192
DAVID F. DIXON
CA PARK & RECREATION SOCIETY
EXPENSE REIHB. 5/9-5/14 DD
DAY CARP TRAING FOR STAFF
r~G~,:
5tartan: ::::
AROUNT
o0 On
17~.2S
5BO.ZS
I5.00
52.00
50.00
718.01
1,501.59
1,191.56
1,992.78
253.17
251,17
4,&88.54
2,181.42
1,872.02
855.52
1,T&LB7
2,17~.37
137.58
57.39
25.00
581.57
408,44
112.23
'xv.O5
54.~1
215.66
92.02
270.00
8.40
97.00
97.00
97.00
240.20
601.79
1,&14.23
5,&27.94
1,385.26
5,B81.50
1.77
1,20~.77
13,474.76
1,750.00
1,742.7~
31,91E.~:
VOID
2,161.25
It ,625.
a77,7~
77.00
~e~or~ Mriter
FUND CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE
019 00010251 05/29192
/- 019 00010251 05129/92
019 00010251 05/29/92
019 00010251 05/29/92
019 00010254 06/01/92
019 00010258 06/01/92
...... 019-00010258 --06101192 -
019 00010259 06101/92
019 00010260 06101192
019 00010265 06101/92
019 00010267 06/01/92
019 00010269 06/01/92
.... 019 00010271 06101192
019 00010274 06/01192
019 00010280 06/01192
-019 00010281 06101/92
019 00010285 06101192
019 00010291 0610119'Z
019 00010295 06101192
019 00010295 06101192
019 00010296 06101192
019 00010297 06101192
019 00010298 06/01/92
019 00010299 06/01/92
019 00010299 06/01/92
019 00010299 06101192
019 00010299 06/01/92
t019 00010299 06/01/92
019'00010299 06101192
019 00010299 06/01/92
019 00010299 06101192
019 00010299 06101192
019 00010299 06/01192
019 00010299 06101192
019 00010299 06/01192
019' 00010299 06101192
019 00010299 06101192:
019 00010301 06/01192
019 00010301 06/01/92
019 00010301 06101192
019 00010303 06/01/92
019 0001.0306 06101/92
019 00010306 06/01/92
019 00010306 06/01192
019 00010310 06101192
019 00010310 06101192
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06101192
019 00010~10 0~/0!R2
019 00010310 0&/01/92
/--- 019 00010310 06101192
019 00010~10 06/01/92
019 00010~10 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010~10 0~101192
VENDOR NAME
CHECK LISTING BY FUH~
STATE COHPENSATION INS. FUND
STATE COfPENSATION INS, FUND
STATE COfPENSATION INS, FUND
STATE COMPENSATION INS, FUND
AGRICREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORP,
ARTESIA I~LBENT
ARTESIA IRPLEMENT
COUNTY ASSESSOR
BENEFIT AERICA
CHEVRON U,S,A, INC,.
COMMUNITY ItEMS NETNDRK
CDSTCO MHOLESALE
DAVLIN
GET PAGED
HORIZON MATER
LOUISE HORTUBISE
LONGS DRUGS
MOBIL
DESCRIPTION
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIRENEE
PETROLAE
POSTRASTER
PRO LOCK & KEY
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RAN~O MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANClIO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANClIO MATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCH0 MATER
RANCHO MATER
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL BAN
SOUTHERN CALIF, EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF, GO]SON
SOUTHERN CALIF, EDISON
Normal P/R~ 4/23/92
Normal P/R 4/09/92
Normal P/R~ 4/2~/92
Normal P/R 4/09R2
LEASE JUNE 92
SERV,CALL;REPL,PLUNGER;LZN[
CREDIT PER STfiT
PRINTOUTS
5115192 REDICAL REI~URSEENT
RAY $0 BILLING
ADiARTS AND CRAFTS FAIR
PURCHASE AQUATIC PROGRAft
AUDIO PRODUCTION|PARKS & REC,
TCSD PAGER RENTAL
APRIL CHSS
REFUND FOR ADULT CLASSES
FILM PRINTIN6 ACCQUNT~TCSD
68393037921RAy BILLING
RETIRENENT PE 5121/92
RETIREMENT FOR 4118-5/01
FUF. L (PROPANE) TCSD TRUCK
ASSESSMENT LEVY/BULK NAILING
CO~UNITY SERVICES~ACCOUNT
02/25-03/25
03109-04107
03/12-04/10
02/25-03/25
02/25-03/2&
03110-04/0G
02/25-03/25
03/10-04/08
03/17-04/16
0212503125
02125-03/25
03/17-04116
03/12-04/10
EASELS & BRUSRESITCSD
CREPE PAPER~RARKERS~CGLUE
CONSTRUCTION PAPERICRAFT PPR
479BO2000001067214122-5111SN
03131-04/30
03/~1-04-30
03/31-04130
04/0&-05/06
03119-04120
04/06-05105
04/06-05106
04/01-04/30
04/06-05/0&
03/05-04/03
04/01-04/30
05123-04t20
04/0&-05/06
04/08-05/07
04/08-05/09
04/10-05/11
03/19-04/17
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CAL!F EDISON
A~OUN1
3Z,29
G96.6c
846,0:
514.%
20.00
750,85
159,54
93,00
200.00
130.00
I1.50
94,82
31,00
12.53
238,20
2~649,02
2~5~5.57
131.45
4~025.20
49,55
O.O0
72.36-
48.84
95,64
47,27
10.01
89,35
10,50
46.69
36,05
27,02
29.25
9194
10,01
146,45
~09.4B
435.40
265.27
157.71
~05,51
9.00
21.~4
3~.29
9,00
18.00
6,70
8.7~
184.~S
40.35
177.42
9.00
9.30
213.84
06/01i72
Report Writer
Voucher Detail
PHrP)' LISTING BY FUND
FUND CHECK NUMBER CHECK DATE
VENDOR NAHE
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01191
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 0&/01/92
019 00010310 0&101192
019 00010310 06101/92
019 00010310 06101/92
019 00010310 06101192
019 00010310 06101192
019 00010310 06101/92
019 00010310 06101/92
019 00010310 06/01/r2
019 00010310 06101/92
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01192
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06101192
019 00010310 06101192
019 00010~I0 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010310 06/01192
019 00010~10 06101192
019 00010310 06/01/92
019 00010510 06/01/92
019 00010513 06101192
019 00010315 06/01/92
019 00010316 06/01/92
019 00010316 06/01/92
019 00010516 06/01/92
019 00010317 06/01/92
019 00010319 06/01/92
019 00010321 06/09/92
019 00010321 06109192
019 00010~21 06109192
019 00010Z21 06/09/92
019 00010321 06/09/92
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHER~ CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF ElISON
SOUTHERN CALIF ElISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTERN CALIF EDISON
~TERN C~IF EDISON
SOUTHERN C~IF EDISON
SOUTERN CALIF ElISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALZF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
TARGET STORE
TIRITILLI, STEVE
UNITED NAY OF THE INLAND
UNITED NAY DF THE INLAND
UNITED NAY OF THE INLAND
USCM
KAY NILLIAMS
CAI. IFORNIA LANDSCAPE
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
04/01-05/01 14.70
04/10-05/!I
03/23-04/20
03/20-04117 167.~8
04106-05/06 9.00
04103-05/04
04/01-05/01 9,0~
03123-04120 4&.90
0~!~0-0~/28 241.03
0~iI0-05111 18.~0
04/OD-05/OB
04101-04/29
04/01-04/30 185.25
04110-05/11 9.67
03110-04/28 B,7S
0410&-05106 9.00
03/19-04/20 64.00
03/24-04/23 9.00
04110-05/11 9.~C
04101-04/~0 1,2~1.0S
03130-04128 8.78
03119-04/20 258.06
03RO-O4/2B 65.64
04/01-05101 9.08
03/24-04/2~ 265.58
03111-04110 9.00
03130-04/2B _~9.11
03/19-04/17 ~.97
03120-04120 271,41
PURCHASE AQUATIC SUPPLIES 130.00
~UNE RENT ~,54~.70
Normal P/R~ 5/07/92 1~.00
Normal P/R, 4/2~192 11.00
Normal P/R, 5121192 1(.00
Normal P/R, 5121192 147.78
80I OF CONTRACT CLASS 240.00
LND ~AINT.NAY 1992 18,800.60
EXTRA WORK ORDERS;SLOPES,ETC 1,544.86
LND NAINT.NAY 1992 9,664.80
EXTRA WORK ORDERS;SLOPES,ETC 1,446.76
LND NAINT.RRY 1992 561.00
019 58,112.35
021 00010328 06109/92
021 00010328 06/09/92
ROBERT REIN, MN. FROST & ASSO
ROBERT DEIN, NN. FROST & ASSO
CREDITIREINDURSABLES
ENG.PLANS;IN~OVE 6TH ST.
52.5~-
5,352.53
021 5~00.00
029 00010266 0&!01/92 COHN PLUHBINB PLU~BINB SUPPLIES;CONCESSION 655.96
ITEM NO.
4-
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ~.~~r
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER '
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDATION:
1.
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
June 9, 1992
Combining Balance Sheet March 31, 1992 and the Statement of
Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Nine
Months Ended March 31, 1992
The City Council:
Receive and file the Combining Balance Sheet as of March 31, 1992 and the
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Nine
Months Ended March 31, 1992.
Appropriate $15,600 for City Council salaries related to Temecula Community
Services District (TCSD) and Redevelopment Agency (RDA) meetings.
Appropriate $450,000 for Planning consulting fees. Of this total, it is
recommended that $20,000 be funded with an operating transfer in from the
Redevelopment Agency (RDA).
4. Appropriate $60,000 for Engineering development review.
DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited
activity of the City for the nine months ended March 31, 1992.
Please see the attached financial statements for analytical review of financial activity.
ATTACHMENTS:
Combining Balance Sheet as of March 31, 1992
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes
Balance for the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1992
in Fund
C:
0 o co
CD~
0 X~
F- ?,, mmmr''
r-
E
~ 0
::::iLL
C
cD
·
CD
0
C
C)
I:= 0
c~
0
<
c~
._
,,r=
ITEM NO.
5
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
June 9, 1992
Amendment to Employee Agreement with the City Manager
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the attached letter amending the
City Manager's Agreement to provide that the City will make a loan of up to ninety
percent (90%) of the purchase price for a home within the City, not to exceed a loan
amount of $150,000.00.
DISCUSSION:
David F. Dixon was appointed City Manager on June 13, 1990. As part of the letter
agreement appointing Mr. Dixon, the City included a low-interest housing loan as an
incentive to enable him to relocate to the City of Temecula. The loan was to be up
to seventy percent (70%) of the purchase price of a home, with interest payments
based upon the interest earned by the City on its investment portfolio. There was no
limit on the amount of this loan.
Following his appointment, Mr. Dixon has been living in Temecula in rental housing.
He is now in a position to purchase a home within the City.
It is proposed that the loan provision be modified to provide that the City will loan up
to ninety percent (90%) of the purchase price of the home, but that the total loan
amount not exceed $150,000.00. City Staff will review comparable values of homes
within the area of the proposed purchase to insure that the loan provides for adequate
security.
etaffrpt/CM Contract
CITY OF TEMECULA
Agenda RepOrt
Page Two
Accordingly, it is recommended that the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute
the attached amendment to the City Manager Agreement authorizing a loan of up to
ninety percent (90%) of the purchase price, not to exceed $150,000.00.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Minimal, as the City will receive the same interest rate it otherwise receives on its
investments.
ATTACHMENTS:
· Amendment to City Manager Agreement dated July 2, 1991
· Proposed Second Amendment dated May 29, 1992
=taffrptlCM Contr~-"t
CI
TY
OF
TEMECIILA
May 29, 1992
Mr. David F. Dixon
City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
RE: CITY MANAGER/SECOND AMENDMENT TO APPOINTMENT AGREEMENT
Dear Mr. Dixon:
As you know, the City Council is desirous that the City Manager live within the City, and
included specific provisions in this regard in your original letter of appointment dated June 13,
1990, as further amended by the Amended Appointment Agreement dated July 2, 1991. In
order to further that goal, while at the same time limiting the City's total obligation, Section
11 (a) of the July 2, 1991 Agreement is amended to read as follows:
(A) Low Interest Loan. The City will make available to you a housing
loan. The loan, a first mortgage, will be up to 90% of the purchase price of a
hom~ within the City. The principle plus interest payments will be paid to the
City on a monthly basis at a rate equivalent of the interest earned by the City's
investment portfolio or some other mutually agreed upon index. The rate will
be an adjustable rate, calculated on an annual basis. There will be a cap rate
of three percentage points on the loan which means that the rate will not
increase by more than three percentage points during the life of the loan. The
loan will be due and payable within twelve (12) months of either your leaving
your employment with the City or when the home is no longer your primary
residence, whichever occurs first. You will obtain a life insurance policy in the
amount of the loan and the City will be named as the primary beneficiary in
order to pay off the loan in the event of your death. You will be responsible for
the cost of this policy and you will file a copy of the policy with the City.
45174 BUSINESS PAI~K DI~I~E · TEMECULA. CALIFOI~NIA 9~2590 · PHONE (714) 694-1989 · FAX (714) 694-19gg
David F. Dixon, City Manager
CITY OF TEMECULA
May 29, 1992
Page Two
This amendment to your Appointment Agreement is made with the approval and authorization
of the Temecula City Council.
Sincerely,
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
CITY OF TEMECULA
Accepted:
DATED:
,1992
David F. Dixon
City of Temecula
43172 BusineSs Park Drive ,Ternecula, California 92390
Ronald J. Parks
~/or July 2, 1991
Patricia H. Birdsall
Mayor Pro Tern
Karel E Undemans
CounolmemOe
Peg Moore
Councfimernber
David F. Dixon
11140 Pioneer Ridge Drive
Moreno Valley, CA 92388
J. Sal Mufioz
Councilmember
David R Dixon
City Manager
(714) 694-1989
FAX (714) 694-1999
Re: Cit3/Mnn~.ger/Amended ARpointment Agreement
Dear Mr. Dixon:
As you know, the Council is desirous that its City Manager live within the
City, and included specific provisions in your letter of appointment to accomplish
that goal. The Council also recognizes that the present real estate market has
frustrated that goal.
In addition, the Counc~ also recognizes that the City' s present health plan
differs from what was contemplated when you were appointed
The purpose of this letter addresses both of these issues by revising the
t~rms and conditions of employment for your position.
1. Appointment - If you decide to accept this position, your appointment
would become effective July 5, 1990. Your appointment will terminate' on July
5, 1995; however, the City and you anticipate that this Agreement may be
extended from time to time with the consent of the City and you, and according
to such terms as the City and you may agree on.
2. Salary - Your base salary will be set at $103,870.00 per year for the
remainder of the fiscal year 1989-1990, and all of the fiscal year 1990-1991.
Your annual base salary will be payable in installments at the same time as the
other employees of the City. Commencing on July 5, 1990, the City will
contribute to a deferred compensation program of your choice, a sum equal to
Seven and 22/100 percent (7.22%) of your base monthly salary.
3. Retirement - The City of Temecula will execute all necessary
agreements to participate in the State of California Public Employees Retirement
System (PERS) and you will be enrolled in that program at the earliest eligible
date. The employee's contribution to PEPS would be paid on your behalf by the
City of Temecula.
4. Vacation Leave and Sick Leave - Effective on your first day of
~mployment with the City you will be credited with fourteen (14) days of
combined vacation and sick leave. Thereafter you will me combined paid
vacation and sick leave at the rate of 2.334 days per month during the term of
your employment. You will also be eligible to receive any unused vacation leave
and sick leave in cash when leaving the employment of the City. All aspects of
the administration of sick leave and vacation leave will be in accordance with that
which is provided to all executive management employees of the City.
5. Administrative Leave - The City will provide you with ten (10) days
of administrative leave per fiscal year accumulating at a rate of 0.834 day per
month. Any unused leave may be paid out to you in cash semi-annually, at your
option.
6. Medical Benefits - The City will enroll you and all of your eligible
dependents in the major medical, health, sickness, accident, and disability
'cafeteria' plan the City provides or makes available to all employees of the City.
In addition, to the extent said cafeteria plan is insufficient to cover group medical,
vision, long term disability, group dental and group term life for you and your
eligible dependents, the City will purchase a long term disability insurance for
you in coverage mounts comparable to the City's cafeteria plan.
7. Life Insurance - The City will provide you with term life insurance
from a carrier of the City's choice in accordance with that which is provided to
all executive management employees of the City. In the event that no such plan
exists, the City will provide a similar plan for you substantially equal to that
which is provided to employees of similar cities in the area.
8. Physical Examination - You will submit to a complete physical
examination by a qualified physician selected by the City once a year. The City
will pay for the cost of this physical examination and the City will receive a copy
of all medical reports related to such examination.
9. Professional nevelopment - All normal business expenses, including
attendance at League of California Cities, Independent Cities Association,
California Redevelopment Association, and International City Managers
Association meetings and conferences, as well as local service club membership,
business lunches and dinners, etc., will be paid for by the City and provided for
separately in the operating budget of the City Manager's Office. All other job-
related seminars, training sessions, and professional dues and subscriptions will
be paid for by the City and provided for separately in the operating budget of the
City Manager's Office.
10. Vehicle - The City will provide you with a City vehicle for your
professional and personal use, not including vacations. The City will pay for all
insurance, gasoline, maintenance, and registration (exempt license plates) for this
vehicle. In addition, the City will provide for regular rephcement of the vehicle
consistent with the depreciation policies of the City.
11. Residency - The City and you have acknowledged the desirability of
your relocation to the City of Temecula. In order to secure your relocation, the
City will provide you with:
(A) Low Interest Lo~n. The City will make available to you a housing
loan. The loan, a first mortgage, will be up to ?0% of the purchase price of a
home within the City. The interest payments will be paid to the City on a
monthly basis at a rate equivalent to the interest earned by the City's investment
portfolio or some other mutually agreed upon index. The rate will be an
adjustable rate, calculated on an annual basis. There will be a cap rate of three
percentage points on the loan which means that the rate will not increase by more
than three percentage points during the life of the loan. The loan will be due and
payable within twelve (12) months of your leaving your employment with the City
or when the home is no longer your primary residence, whichever occurs first.
You will obtain a life insurance policy in the mount of the loan and the City will
be named as the primary beneficiary in order to pay off the loan in the event of
your death. You will be responsible for the cost of this policy and you will file
a copy of the policy with the City.
(B) Moving Expenses. The City will pay your expenses, in an mount
not to exceed $4,000, for packing, moving and transporting, storing, unpacking,
and insurance of your personal belongings and those of your family. Moving
expenses is defined to include temporary relocation to the City for a period not
to exceed ten (10) months.
12. Performance Evaluation - The Council will review and evaluate your
performance at least once annually in advance of the adoption of the City's
budget. This review and evaluation will be in accordance with specific criteria,
goals, and performance objectives developed jointly by you and the Council.
13. Outside Activities - You will not engage in any outside activities for
compensation without the prior approval of the Council.
14. Termination of Appointment: Severance - The City and you will have
the right to terminate this Agreement prior to ~IUly 1, 1995 or any extensions of
this Agreement, except that the City will not terminate this Agreement during the
first ninety (90) days following a regular or special municipal election in which
members of the Council are elected. The City may terminate this Agreement for
any reason; however, should you be involuntarily terminated by the City for any
reason other than conviction of an illegal act involving moral turpitude or
personal gain to you, you would be provided with a lump sum cash payment
equal to six (6) months' aggregate salary. Medical benefits and life insurance
will be extended six (6) months after termination, or when replaced by another
employer, whichever first occurs. You may terminate this Agreement for any
reason, provided you first furnish the City with at least thirty (30) days advance
notice.
15. Indemnification and Bond - The City will defend, save' h.annless, and
indemnify you against any wn, pwfessional liability claim or demand, or other
legal action, whether groundless or otherwise, arising out of an alleged act or
omission occurring in your performance of your duties as City Manager. This
provision will not apply with ,respect to any intentional ton or crime which you
may commit or to any punitive damages which may be assessed against you. The
City will bear the full cost of a fidelity bond in the amount of $100,000.00 or any
other bonds which may be required of you in the performance of your duties as
City Manager.
16. Miscellaneous - Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, you
will receive all benefits to which executive management employees of the City are
entitled. In addition, the City will not at any time during the term of this
Agreement reduce your salary, compensation, or other financial benefits, except
to the degree the City reduces such benefits, or any portion of such benefits, for
all employees of the City.
This offer of employment is made with the approval and authorization of
the Temecula City Council.
Ronald Parks,
Mayor of the City of Temecula.
ACCEPTED:
David F. Dixon
5
ITEM
NO. 6
APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM: City Clerk
DATE: June 9, 1992
SUBJECT:
Review of City Conflict of Interest Code
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE amendments to the City's Conflict of Interest Code and
DIRECT the City Clerk to forward the amended code to the Fair Political Practices
Commission.
BACKGROUND: Government Code Section 87306.5 requires that no later than July 1 of
each even-numbered year, the code reviewing body (FPPC) shall direct each local agency
which has adopted a Conflict of Interest Code to review its Conflict of Interest Code and, if
a change in its code is necessitated by changed circumstances, submit an amended Conflict
of Interest Code to the code reviewing body.
The City Attorney, and the Department Heads have reviewed the City's code and feel
the only changes necessary are the addition of several positions which have been added since
the code was adopted originally. It is recommended that the code be approved with the
additions of the following titles:
Chief Accountant
Director of Community Services
Deputy City Engineer
Senior Building Inspector
Senior Management Analyst/Purchasing Agent
Senior Planner
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A CONFLICT
OF INTEREST CODE
WHEREAS, The City of Temecula was incorporated on December 1, 1989; and,
WHEREAS, It is foreseeable the City officers, employees, and commission members
may make decisions which could have a material impact on their personal financial interest; and,
WHEREAS, The California State Fair Political Practices Commission has ruled that such
material interests should be disclosed and in appropriate circumstances the effected official
should abstain from voting or participating in such a decision; and,
WItF_REAS, the City of Temecula adpted a Conflict of Interest Code on May 1, 1990
as required by Government Code Section 87300; and,
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 87306.5 requires the "local agency" to review
its Conflict of Interest Code, no later than July 1 of each even-numbered year and to amend said
code if necessitated by changed circumstances,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the attached Conflict of Interest Code, is hereby adopted as
the Conflict of Interest Code for the City of Temecula.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSEl!, APPROVED AND ADOPTFT} this 9st day of June, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
1~,o,/261 G61G2/92
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
CITY OF TM~[ECULA )
SS
I ItEREBY 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 9th day of June, 1992
by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Re~os/261
06/04/92
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA
SECTION 1. Purpose. Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Sections 87300,
et seq., the City of Temecula (hereinafter referred to as "City") hereby adopts the following
Conflict of Interest Code. The provisions of this Code are in addition to those contained in Title
9, Chapter 7 of the Government Code (Section 87100 et sea_.). Except as otherwise indicated,
the definitions contained in Title 9, Chapter 2 of the Government Code (Section 8200 e_t seq.)
are incorporated herein and apply to this Code. It is the purpose of this Code to provide for the
disclosure of assets and income of designated employees which may be materially affected by
their official actions, and, in appropriate circumstances, to provide that designated employees
should be disqualified from acting in order that confficts of interest may be avoided.
SECTION 2. Designated Positions. The positions listed in Exhibit "A" are designated
positions. Officers and employees holding those positions are designated employees and are
deemed to make or participate in the making of decisions which may foreseably have a material
effect on a financial interest.
SECTION 3. Disclosure StatementS. Designated positions shall be assigned to one or
more of the disClosure categories set forth in Exhibit "B" . Each designated employee or official
shall file an annual statement disclosing that employee's or official's interest in investments,
business positions, interests in real property and source of income designated as reportable under
the category to which the employee's or official's position is assigned in Exhibit "B" .
SECTION 4. Place and Time of Filing.
A. All designated employees or officials required to submit a statement of
financial interests, (FPPC Form No. 730), shall file the original with the City Clerk's office.
B. The City Clerk's office shall make and retain a copy of the statement.
C. A designated employee or official required to submit an initial statement
of financial interest, (FPPC Form No. 730), shall submit the statement within 30 days after the
effective date of this Code, disclosing interests held including investments, business positions,
and interests in real property on the effective date of this Code, and income received during the
twelve (12) months prior to the effective date of this Code.
D. All persons appointed, promoted, or transferred to designated positions
shall file initial statements not more than 30 days after assuming office.
E. The first statement of financial interests filed by a designated employee
shall disclose the designated employee's reportable investments, business positions, and interests
in real property as those investments, positions, and interests in real property exist as of the
Conflict. Cod/City -1-
effective date of this Code or the date the designated employee assumed office, whichever is
later, and income received during the preceding twelve (12) months.
F. Annual statements shall be filed by April 1, of each year by all designated
employees. Such statements shall disclose reportable investments, business positions, interests
in real property, and income held or received at any time during the previous calendar year or
since the designated employee took office if during the calendar year.
G. A designated employee required to file a statement of financial interest with
any other agency which is within the same territorial jurisdiction and whose disclosure
requirements are comparable may comply with the provisions of this Code by filing a duplicate
copy of the statement filed with the other agency, in lieu of an entirely separate statement.
H. Every designated employee who leaves office shall file, within 30 days of
leaving office, a statement disclosing reportable investments, business positions, interests in real
property, and income held or received at any time during the period between the closing date
of the last statement required to be filed and the date of leaving office.
I. A designated employee who resigns his or her position within 30 days
following initial appointment is not deemed to assume or leave office, provided that during the
period between appointment and resignation the individual does not make, participate in making,
or use the position to influence any decision of the City or receive or become entitled to receive
any form of payment by virtue of being appointed to the position.
SECTION 5. Contents of Disclosure Statements. Disclosure statements shall be made
on forms supplied by the City Clerk's Office, (FPPC Form No. 730), and shall contain the
following information:
A. Contents of Investment and Real Property Reports. When an investment
or an interest in real property is required to be disclosed, the statement shall contain:
1. A statement of the nature of the investment or interest;
2. The name of the business entity in which each investment is held
and a general description of the business activity in which the business entity is engaged;
3. The address or other precise location of the real property;
4. A statement whether the fair market value of the investment or
interest in real property equals or exceeds one thousand dollars ($1,000) but does not exceed ten
thousand dollars ($10,000), whether it exceeds ten thousand ($10,000) but does not exceed one
hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), or whether it exceeds one hundred thousand dollars
($100,000). For purposes of this Code, "interest in real property" does not include the principle
residence of the designated employee or any other property which the designated employee
Conflict. Cod/City -2-
utilizes exclusiv.ely as the employee's personal residence.
B. Contents of Personal Income Reports: When personal income* is required
to be disclosed under this Code or pursuant to the Political Reform Act, the statement shall
contain:
1. The name and address of each source of income aggregating two
hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more in value, or fifty dollars ($50) or more in value if the
income was a gift, and a general description of the business activity, if any, of each source;
2. A statement whether the aggregated value of income from each
source, or, in the case of a loan, the highest amount owed to each source, was at least two
hundred fifty dollars ($250) but did not exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), whether it was
in excess of one thousand dollars ($1,000) but not greater than ten thousand dollars ($10,000),
or whether it was greater than ten thousand dollars ($10,000);
A description of the consideration, if any, for which the income was
received;
4. In the case of a gift, the name, address and business activity of the
donor and any intermediary through which the gift was made; a description of the gift; the
amount or value and the date on which the gift was received;
any, given for the loan.
In the case of a loan, the annual interest rate and the security, if
C. Contents of Business Entity ReportS. When the designated employee's pro
rata share of income to a business entity, including income to a sole proprietorship, is required
to be reported, the statement shall contain:
1. The name, address, and a general description of the business
activity of the business entity;
2. The name of every person from whom the business entity received
payments if the designated employee's pro rata share of gross receipts from such person was
equal to or greater than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) during a calendar year;
3. Income of a business entity is required to be reported only if the
direct, indirect, or beneficial interest of the designated employee and his or her spouse in the
business entity aggregates a 10 percent or greater interest. In addition, for purposes of
subparagraphs 2 and 3 of this subsection, the disclosure of persons who are clients or customers
of a business entity is required only if it is reasonably foreseeable that the client or customer
may be materially affected by the decisions of the designated employee.
D. Contents of Business Position Disclosure. When business positions are
Conflict. Cod/City
required to be reported, the designated employee shall list the name and address of each business
entity in which he or she is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or in which he or she
holds any position of management; a description of the business entity in which the business is
engaged, and the designated employee's position with the business entity.
E. Acquisition or Disposal During, a Calendar Year. If any otherwise
reportable investment or interest in real property was partially or wholly acquired or disposed
of during the period covered by the statement, the statement shall contain the date of acquisition
or disposal.
SECTION 6. Disqualification. Designated employees shall disqualify themselves from
making, participating in the making of, or in any way using their official position to influence
a governmental decision when it is reasonably foreseeable that the decision will have a material
financial affect distinguishable from its effect on the public generally, on the designated
employee, or a member of his or her immediate family, or on:
A. Any business entity in which the designated employee has a direct or
indirect investment worth one thousand dollars ($1,000) or more;
B. Any real property in which the designated employee has a direct or indirect
interest worth one thousand dollars ($1,000) or more;
C. Any soume of income, other than gifts and other than loans by a
commercial lending institution in the regular course of business on terms available to the public
without regard to official status, aggregating two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more in value
provided to, received by or promised to the designated employee within 12 months prior to the
time when the decision is made;
D. Any business entity in which the designated employee is a director, officer,
partner, trustee, employee, or holds any position of management; or
E. Any donor of, or any intermediary of agent for a donor of, a gift or gifts
aggregating two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more in value provided to, received by, or
promised to the designated employee within 12 months prior to the time when the decision is
made.
For purposes of this section, indirect investment or interest means any investment
or interest owned by the spouse or dependent child of a designated employee, by an agent on
behalf of a designated employee, or by a business entity or trust in which the designated
employee, the designated employee's agents, spouse, and dependent children own directly,
indirectly, or beneficially a 10 percent interest or greater.
No designated employee shall be required to disqualify himself or herself with
respect to any matter which could not legally be acted upon or decided without his or her
Conflict. Cod/City --4-
participation. A designated employee required to disqualify himself or herself shall notify the
City Manager and the City Clerk in writing, and the City Clerk shall record the person's
disqualification.
Violations. Pursuant to Government Code Section 87300, this Code "shall have the force
of law" and any violation of any provision of this Code shall be punishable in accordance with
Government Code Section 91000 to 91015 and include criminal and civil sanctions, as well as
discipline within the City's Personnel System.
Conflict. Cod/City -5-
SECTION 7. EXHIBIT "A"
Designated City of Temecula. Employees
and Disclosure Categories
The following positions entail the making or participation in the making of decisions
which may foreseeably have a material effect on financial interests:
Desit, nated PoSition Disclosure Categories
Assistant City Manager .......................................... 1
Building Official .............................................. 1
Chief of Police ............................................... 1
Chief Accountant ............................................. 1
City Clerk .................................................. 1
City Engineer/Director of Public Works ............................... 1
Deputy City Engineer ........................................... 1
Exempt Officials** ............................................ 0
Director of Community Services .................................... 1
Fire Chief ............................................... . .... 1
Planning Director ............................................. 1
Senior Building Inspector ........................................ 1
Purchasing Agent/Finance ........................................ 1
Senior Planner ............................................... 1
Members of all City Commissions,
Boards, and Committees Not
Otherwise ReqUired to File
Conflict of Interest Statements ..................................... 1
** The Mayor, City Council, Members of the Planning Commission, City Manager, City
Attorney, City Treasurer, and Director of Finance are all required to file disclosure statements
pursuant to state law and thus are not included herein.
Con~iet. Cod/(2ity 4- "'~'
SECTION 8. EXHIBIT "B"
Categories of Reportable Economic Interests
Designated Persons in Category "1" Must Report:
All investments, interests in real property, income, and any business entity in which the
person is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or holds any position of management.
These financial interests are reportable only if located within and subject to the jurisdiction of
the City, or if the business entity is doing business or planning to do business in an area subject
to the jurisdiction of the City, or has done business within an area subject to the jurisdiction of
the City at any time during the two years prior to the filing of the statement.
Designated Persons in Category "2" Must Report:
City.
All Investments in real property located within or subject to the jurisdiction of the
B. Investments in any business entity which within the last two years has contracted
or in the future foreably may contract with the City.
future
Income from any source which within the last two years has contracted or in the
foreseeably may contract with the City.
D. His or Her status as a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or holder of
a position of management in any business entity which within the last two years has
contracted or in the future foreseeably may contract with the City.
Designated persons in Category "3" must report:
A. Investments and business positions in, and income from business entities located
in, doing business in, or planning to do business in the re. development project area and all
interests in real property located within two miles of the redevelopment project area.
Conflict. Cod/City -7-
EXHIBIT "C"
82030. Income. A. "Income" means, except as provided in subdivision Co), a payment
received, including but not limited to any salary, wage, advance, dividend, interest, rent,
proceeds from any sale, gift, including any gift of food or beverage, loan, forgiveness or
payment of indebtedness received by the flier, reimbursement for expenses, per diem, or
contribution to an insurance or pension program paid by any person other than an employer, and
including any community property interest in the income of a spouse. Income also includes an
outstanding loan. Income of an individual also includes a pro rata share of any income of any
business entity or trust in which the individual or spouse owns, directly, indirectly or
bene~cially, a lO-percent interest or greater. "Income" other than a gift, does not include
income received from any source outside the jurisdiction and not doing business within the
jurisdiction, not planning to do business within the jurisdiction, or not having done business
within the jurisdiction during the two years prior to the rime any statement or other action is
required under this rifle.
B. "Income" also does not include:
1. Campaign contributions required to be reported under Chapter 4
(commending with Section 84100).
2. Salary and reimbursement for expenses or per diem received from a state,
local, or federal government agency and reimbursement for travel expenses and per diem
received from a bona fide educational, academic, or charitable organization.
3. Any devise or inheritance.
4. Interest, dividends, or premiums on a time or demand deposit in a financial
institution, shares in a credit union or any insurance policy, payments received under any
insurance policy, or any bond or other debt instrument issued by any government or government
agency.
5. Dividends, interest, or any other return on a security which is registered with
the Securities and Exchange Commission of the United States Government or a commodity
future registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission of the United States
Government, except proceeds from the sale of these securities and commodities futures.
6. Redemption of a mutual fund.
7. Alimony or child support payments.
8. Any loan or loans from a commercial lending institution which are made in
the lenders' regular course of business on terms available to members of the public without
regard to official status if:
Conflict.Cod/City -8- ~"
A. Used to purchase, retinanee the purchase of, or for improvements
to, the principal residence of flier; or
B. The balance owed does not exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
9. Any loan from an individual' s spouse, child, parent, grandparent, grandchild,
brother, sister, parent-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, nephew, niece, uncle, aunt, or first
cousin, or the spouse of any such person, provided that a loan from any such person shall be
considered income if the lender is acting as an agent or intermediary for any person not covered
by this paragraph.
10. Any indebtness created as part of a retail installment or credit card
transaction if made in the lender's regular course of business on terms available to members of
the public without regard to official status, so long as the balance owed to the creditor does not
exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
11. Payments received under a defined benefit pension plan qualified under
Internal Revenue Code Section 401(a).
12. Proceeds from the sale of securities registered with the securities and
Exchange Commission of the United States Government or from the sale of commodities futures
registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission of the United States Government
if the filer sells the securities or the commodities futures on a stock or commodities exchange
and does no lmow or have reason to know the identity of the purchaser.
Conflict. Cod/City -9-
ITEM NO. 7
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAl, _
CITY ATTORNEY ~_"',-~"/-.~--~ '
CITY OF TEME~
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
June 9, 1992
Addition to the Airport Disclosure Condition of Approval for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 25004.
RECO1VI1V~NDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council
RECEIVE AND FILE the attached condition as amended.
BACKGROUND
At the regular meeting of March 10, 1992 the City Council voted (5-0) to overrule the Airport
Land Use Commission (A.L.U.C.) denial of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004. An
additional condition presented at the hearing was a disclosure statement for future homebuyers
that would disclose the potential noise impact of the airport' s proximity to the project site. This
statement would be provided by the developer.
At that meeting, the City Council directed Staff to amend the disclosure statement condition to
provide a void clause that, in the event that A.L.U.C. land use plan (when adopted) did not
include the subject site, the disclosure condition would not be required. At a subsequent City
Council meeting in April, a project was appmved (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 26828) with
the same void clause language as the attached amended Condition of Approval.
The amended condition and the original verbiage approved on March 10, 1992 are included as
attachments 1 and 2, respectively.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments:
vgw
Amended Condition of Approval - page 2
Condition of Approval (March 10, 1992) - page 4
SXSTA~00~VTM.CC'2 I
ATTACHIVIk'NT NO. 1
AMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL
SXSTAFFRIq'~004VTM. CC2 2
ADDIT/ONAL CONDITION OF APPROVAL
(Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004)
PLANNING DEPARTIV~.-NT
The applicant, their assignees and successors shall provide and distribute an airport
disclosure statement to all potential home buyers of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 26828.
Said disclosure shah be distributed separately and in addition to the public report
prepaxed for the Depamnent of Real Estate. Said disclosure shall be presented to and
signed by the potential home buyer, prior to entering into any contract for purchase.
Said disclosure shall be approved by the Planning Director as to form, and shall advise
of poterltial airport impacts, and the potential requirement of an avigation easement.
However, if the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commition adopts an Airport
Land Use Plan that determines the subject site is not within the airport influence
area, this condition of approval shah be void (amended at City Counc~, June 9,
1992).
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
MARCH 10, 1992 CONDITION OF APPROVAL
~ s~s'r^!qqu, Tu~xwv-rM.cc2 4
ADDITIONAL CONDITION OF APPROVAL
(Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004)
Added at City Council on March 10, 1992
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
The applicant, their assignees and successors shah provide and distribute an airport
disclosure statement to all potential home buyers of Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25004.
Said disclosure shall be distributed separately and in addition to the public report
prepared for the Department of Real Estate. Said disclosure shall be presented to and
signed by the potential home buyer, prior to entering into any contract for purchase.
Said disclosure shall be ap. proved by the Planning Director as to form, and shall advise
of potential airport impacts, and the potential requirement of an avigation easement.
~"' 8~TAFFRPT~S004VTM.CC~ 5
ITEM NO.
8
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY~~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER'
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE: June 9, 1992
SUBJECT: Resolution Establishing City's Gann Appropriations Limit for the
Fiscal Year 1992-93
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution 92- establishing
the City's Gann Appropriations Limit for the Fiscal Year 1992-93 of $10,109,911.
DISCUSSION: In accordance with the Government Code, the City is
required to recompute the Gann limit since incorporation and place the limit on the
ballot at the first general election after incorporation which is November 10, 1992.
Using cost of living data provided by the State of California and population data
provided by the US Census and State Department of Finance, the City's
Appropriations Limit for FY 1992-93 has been computed to be $10,109,911. This
computation considers the effect of Proposition 111. Appropriations subject to the
limitation in the FY 1992-93 Budget total $7,675,216 which is $2,434,695 less than
the computed limit.
Additional appropriations to the budget funded by nontax sources such as services
charges, restricted revenues from other agencies, grants or beginning fund balances
would be unaffected by the Appropriations Limit. However, any supplemental
appropriations funded through increased tax sources would be subject to the
Appropriations Limit and could not exceed the $2,434,695 variance indicated above.
Further, any overall actual receipts from tax sources greater than $2,434,695 from
budget estimates will result in proceeds from taxes in excess of the City's
Appropriations Limits, requiring refunds of the excess within the next two fiscal years
or voter approval of an increase in the City's Appropriations Limit.
FISCAL IMPACT: As indicated in the attached schedule, the City's
appropriations subject to limitation as proposed in the FY 1992-93 Budget are
$2,434,695 less than the computed limit. Any supplemental appropriations funded
through nontax sources would be unaffected by the Appropriations Limit. However,
supplemental appropriations funded by tax revenues in excess of budget projections
would be subject to limitation and could not exceed the $2,434,695 margin indicated
above. Further, any overall increases in tax sources greater than $2,434,695 from
budget estimates will result in proceeds from taxes in excess if the City's Temporary
Appropriations Limit, requiring refunds of the excess within the next two fiscal years
of voter approval of an increase in the City's Temporary Appropriations Limit.
In implementing the provisions of SB 1352 as they relate to the Gann Initiative, it is
recommended the City Council adopt the attached Resolution establishing the City's
Temporary Appropriations Limit for FY 1992-93 of $10, 109,911.
ATTACHMENTS:
Schedule "1' - Classification of Revenue Sources and Calculation of Limit Margin
Schedule "2" - Classification of Revenue Sources and Calculation of Revised Limit
Resolution No. 92- Establishing City's Gann Appropriations Limit for FY 1992-93
Exhibit "A" Computation of Gann Appropriations Limit
Classification of Revenue Sources and
Calculation of Limit Margin '
FY 1992-93
Schedule 1
Property tax
Sales and use tax
Property transfer tax
Transient occupancy tax
Business license fee
Franchise fees
Licenses & permits
Fines & forfeitures
Motor vehicle in lieu
Gas tax
Overhead reimbursement - TCSD
Overhead reimbursement- RDA
Overhead reimbursement- Capital Projects.
Miscellaneous
Investment interest
Appropriations subject to limitation
before Prop. 111 exclusions
Prop. 111 exclusions:
Federal mandates (Medicare)
Qualified capital outlay
Appropriations subject to limitation
Gann limit
Margin
Non-tax
Proceeds
629,451
2,823,797
54,000
555,138
227,704
75,000
261,274
10,000
110,280
4,746,644
Tax
Proceeds
1,1 77,200
5,073,000
100,000
496,979
70,000
1,058,396
189,720
8,165,295
(38,988)
(451,091)
7,675,21 6
10,109,911 -
2,434,695
Classification of ReVenue Sources and
Calculation of ReviSed Limit
Schedule 2
FY 1990-91 RevenUes
Property tax
Sales and use tax
Cigarette tax :
Property transfer taX
Transient occupancy tax
Gas tax
Franchise fees
Licenses & permits
Fines & forfeitures
Motor vehicle in lieu
Gas tax
Overhead reimbursement - TCSD
Miscellaneous
Investment interest
Appropriations subject to limitation
Non-tax
Proceeds
481,532
481,273
5,639,325
71,571
83,565
165,628
$ 6,922,894
Tax
Proceeds
$ 907,405
4,552,891
46,070
82,454
411,706
96,321
1,073,785
175,874
$ 7,346,506
RESOLUTION NO. 9:2-
A RESOL~ON OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS
LIMIT FOR FY1992-93
WHEREAS, the voters approved the Gann Spending-Limitation Initiative (Proposition
4) on November 6, 1979, adding Article XIII B to the Constitution of the State of California to
establish and define annual appropriation limits on state and local governmental entities;
WHEREAS, SB 1352 provides for the implementation of Article XIII B by defining
various terms used in this article and prescribing procedures to be used in implementing specific
provisions of the article, including the establishment by resolution each year by the governing
body of each local jurisdiction of its appropriations limits;
WHEREAS, the required computations to determine the Appropriations Limit for
FY1992-93 have been performed by the Department of Finance and are on file with the Office
of the City Clerk, and available for public review;
WHEREAS, these computations are provided on the two pages of Schedule 1 and 2
which is herein incorporated by reference and attached hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Appropriations Limit for the City of Temecula for FY1992-93.
SECTION 2, The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall
cause a certified resolution to be filed in the Office of the City Clerk.
PASSED .AND ADOPTED this 9th day of June, 1992.
AT'rEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
Reso 26 1
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 9th day of June, 1992,
by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Reao261 ~
L
EXHIBIT "A"'
CITY OF TEMECULA
COMPUTATION OF GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
Base Appropriations Limit Based Upon Actual FY 1990-91 Revenues $7,346,506
FY 1990-91 Population Change ............................... N/A
FY 1990-91 California Consumer Price Index Change ............... 5.0%
Cumulative Compound (1.05 X 1.0) ........................... 5.0%
FY 1990-91 Appropriations Limit ........................ $7,713,831
FY 1991-92 Population Change .............................. 1.9%
FY 1991-92 California Consumer Price Index Change ............... 5.9%
Cumulative Compound (1.059 X 1.019) ........................ 7.9%
FY 1991-92 Appropriations Limit ................ ; ....... $8,324,157
FY 1992-93 Population Change ............................ 14.47%
FY 1992-93 California Consumer Price Index Change ............... 6.1%
Cumulative Compound (1.061 X 1.1447) ..................... 21.45%
FY 1992-93 Appropriations Limit ....................... $10,109,911
*Source:
* *Source:
State of California Department of Finance
State of California, Department of Industrial Relations.
ITEM NO. 9
ORDINANCE NO. 92-14
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 90-19 AND
'ESTABLISHING DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY FOR
SUBDIVISION AND LAND USE APPLICATIONS
WI~-RF~AS, on December 1, 1989, the City of Temecula was established as a duly
organized municipal corporation of the State of California;
WHEREAS, pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90-04, the City adopted certain portions
of the non-eodi~ed Riverside County Ordinances, including Ordinance No. 348 ("Land Use
Code") and Ordinance No. 460 ("Subdivision Use Code") for the City of Temecula;
WHEREAS, on October 9, 1990, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted
Ordinance No. 90-19 establishing decision-making authority for subdivision and land use
applications in order to provide for a smooth transition from the County of Riverside to the City
of Temecula involving such land use applications;
WHEREAS, in recognition of the fact that most land use applications are now originating
in the City of Temecula, it is the desire of the City Council to make more efficient and to
establish a line of authority for the review and approval process involving development
applications.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Ordinance No. 90-19, adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula
is hereby repealed;
Section 2. Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 and Ordinance No. 460, as adopted
by City Ordinance No. 90-04, are hereby amended to adopt the development appiication
procedures identified in Exhibit "A" , attached hereto.
Section 3. Where combined development applications are submitted for consideration,
to the extent any portion of the application would be considered for approval by the highest
reviewing body, as set forth in Section 2, then the entire combined application shall be
considered by the reviewing body.
Section 4. Any application for extension of an approved tentative map, parcel map,
or vesting tentative map considered in accordance with the procedures contained herein shall pay
the same fee as if the application were for the original map approval.
5/Ords92-14 -1-
Section 5. Any interested person may file an appeal to a final decision by the
Planning Commission to the City Council. Together with the applicable filing fee established
by Resolution of the City Council, such appeal must be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10)
days of the date the matter was decided by the PInning Commission. For purposes of this
Section, any City Council member may appeal a decision by the Planning Commission without
payment of any fee for the appeal.
Section 6. Except as otherwise provided therein, any other land division or
development application may be submitted to the City Planning Director for approval. If the
Planning Director determines that the proposed application is comparable to one of the approvals
described in Section 2, he shall direct that such application be submitted to either the Planning
Commission or City Council for consideration pursuant to the procedures set forth at Section 2.
Section 7. To the extent the provisions of Ordinance Nos. 348 and 460 are not
superseded by the provisions of this City Ordinance, including notice and hearing requirements,
said remaining: provisions shall remain effective.
Section 8. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause
copies of this Ordinance to be posted and published as required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOFrED this 261h day of May, 1992.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
5/Ords92-14 -2- "~
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. 92-14 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 261h day of May, 1992, and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 9th day of June,
1992, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Lindemans, Moore, Parks, Birdsall
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Munoz
June S. Greek, City Clerk
5/Ords92-14
-1-
APPROVAL AUTHORITY "EXHIBIT A"
ITEM
1. Cie of ~
I 2. Chartlie of Zone/Ordinance Amendment.
3. Conditional Use Permit (Existing Buildlg)
4. Conditional Use Permit (Not in Existing Bulldingl
5o Find Map
6. General Plan Amendment
7.. Parcel Merger
8. Lot Line Adjustment
9. Parking Adjustment
10. Plot letan for Antennae and Off-Site Advertising
S*TAFF *PLAN. DIRECTOR *PLAN.
** ** COMMISSION
x I
X
X
X
X
*CITY
COUNC~
X
X
X
11. Plot Plan Under l0,000Sq. Ft.
Exempt from CEQA
12. Plot Plan Under 10,000 Sq. Ft. Non Exempt from CEQA
13. Plot Plan Over 10,000 Sq.Ft.
14. Pubic Use Permit Unde 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Exempt from CEOA.
15. Pubic Use Permit Under 10,000 S4i. Ft.
Non Exempt from CEQA.
16. Public Use Permit Over 10,000 Sq. Ft.
17. Reversion to Acreage
18. Second Dwdling Unit Permit
19. Slacisi Care Facility
20. Specific Plan/Amedment
21. Substentisi Conformance
22. Tempore./Use Pemit (Under 6 Months)
23. Temporey Use Permit (Over 6 Months)
24. Tentative Parcel Map (Residential
Less that 5 Lots)
25. Tentative Parcel Map (Commerdsi/Industrid)
26. Tentative Tract Map (More then 5 Lots)
27. Time Extendon - City Approved Projects
28. Time Extension - County Approve Projects
29. Vedarice
"' "26192
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
I" X i
X
X
.~oticecl Public Hearing, 300 Ft. for Ptanning Director Approval, 600 Ft. for Planning Commission and City Council Approval.
· *The Planning Director may refer any matter assigned to the Director or Staff to the Planning Commission.
4
ITEM NO. 10
APPROVAL
CITY OF ~CULA
AGF_~]DA R~PORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Chief Building Official
June 9, 1992
Consideration of an Ordinance amending Riverside County Ordinance No. 546
"Fire Protection"
RECOMME~NDATION:
It is re, commended that the City Council hold a public hearing and appwve the second reading
of the attached Ordinance entitled:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMF_EULA, CALIFORNIA, AIVH:-NDING
RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 546, 'FIRE PROTECTION' ADOPTED BY
REFERENCE BY THE CITY OF TEMECULA, BY ANm~NDING DIVISION VIff,
FIRE PROTECTION REQUIREM~NTS FOR BUn-PINGS, INSTALL4,TION,
REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE OF FIRE SYSTEMS AND APPLIANCES"
It is also re.~commended that the City council adopt the attached resolution enti~ed:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CAI-n=ORNIA, SETtING FORTH THE CONDITIONS UPON WHICH A
DETERMINATION HAS BRF-N MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT
MODIFICATIONS TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 546 'FIRE
PROTECTION' ARE REASONABLY REQUIR;:-D BY LOCAL CONDITIONS
WITHIN THE CITY OF TEIVIECULA"
V :agenda. rep\cccm069. fre
DISCUSSION:
Staff preparation for the adoption of the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building Codes revealed
that certain provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 546 "Fire Protection," were contrary
to similar provisions in the Uniform Codes. An example of this is the special life safety
provisions required in cert~lin buildillgs. This includes provisions for ~l~rm and communication
systems, voice alarm system, and smoke control. Because of the inconsistent requirements,
Building and Fire Depaxtment staff felt the Uniform Building Code addressed these issues more
completely thus recommending Ordinance No. 546 be modified to read the same as the Uniform
Building Code.
One other item of significance is a restriction in the use of area separation walls for the purpose
of reducing building area to avoid the installation of an automatic fire sprinkler system. Area
separation walls will be required to be a minimum four (4) hour fire resistive construction to be
used for this purpose. Inspection history has shown that separation walls of lesser construction
axe generally breached for various reasons eliminating the fire protection they were designed to
afford. All other modifications are administrative in nature.
V:agenda.rep\cccm069.fre
ORDINANCE NO. 92-12
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 VIH, FIRE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS FOR
BUILDINGS, INSTALLATION, REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE
OF FIRE SYSTEMS AND APPLIANCES.
WHEREAS, THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Division III, "Fire Protection Requirements 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 shall designate the type and number of fn'e
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 amended 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
Orals 92-12 -1-
condominiums/townhouses, the designated location of an area
separation wall proposed in lieu of fire 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 fire flow shall be set by the County Fire Chief, before any
building may be constructed within the City. Each fire hydrant
currently 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 shall 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 shall 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 shall be occupied or used
until the fire flows required by Section 801.1,801.2 and 804of 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
shall 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 severable.
Section 3. City Clerk. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance
and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law.
Ords 92-12 -2- %
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of June, 1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia 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 261h day of May, 1992, and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 9th day of June,
1992.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Ords 92-1~ .~_
RESOLUTION NO. 92-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEIVIECULA,
CALrI~ORNIA, SETTING FORTH M CONDITIONS UPON WI-IICH A
DEFERRaNATION HAS B~RN MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT
MODIFICATIONS TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 546 "FIRE
PROTECTION" ARE REASONABLY REQUII~KD BY LOCAL CONDITIONS
WITtHN THE CITY OF TEMECUIA.
WHEREAS, the City has adopted Riverside County Ordinance No. 546 by reference
pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90-04; and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted the Uniform Building Code, 1991 edition, by reference
pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90-04; and
WFIEREAS, the respective design requirements are dissimilar; and
WBWR~.~, the City understands the need for consistent uniform code regulations.
NOW, TFrEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
that the following amendments and modifications to Riverside County Ordinance No. 546 "Fire
Protection" are hereby found to be reasonably necessary due to consideration of special local
climate, geological or topographical conditions as follows:
Section 1. Riverside County Ordinance No. 546 "Fire Protection."
A. Section 801 - modifications are administrative in nature only.
Section 801.1 - the Fire Department equipment level and the traffic and
circulation congestion which affect response times enhances the need for
on-site protection of property.
C,
Section 801. l(c) - the turnover rote of occupants and the investigation
history of fires shows breach of area separation walls used for reduction
of overall area in R occupancies is a major contributing factor to fire
spread.
D. Sections 804 and 805 - modifications are administrative in nature only.
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution.
PASSEB, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of
1992.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEIVIECULA,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RIVERSIDE COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 546,
"FIRE PROTECTION" ADOPTED BY I~nRENCE BY THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, BY A.MI~NDING DMSION VIH, FIRE PROTECTION
REQUIREM~NTS FOR BIjII-I~INGS, INSTALLATION, RI~-PAIR AND
MAINTENANCE OF FIRE SYSTEMS AND APPLIANCES.
WIIEREAS, THE CITY OF TEMECI.~.A DOES B'l~l:rRy ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Division rn, "Fire Protection Requirements 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 mended as follows:
A. Section 801 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 801. The County Fire Chief shall designate the type and number of fire
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 amended 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-HI-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
separation wall proposed in lieu of fire 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.
Section 804(a) is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 804.
(a.) The fire flow shall be set by the County Fire Chief, before any
bui/ding may be constructed within the City. Each fLre hydrant
currently existing or required to be installed on the parcel of land
to be developed shall be capable of providing the fLre 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 shall the County Fire Chief require a fh-e flow in excess
of that required by the "Guide for Determination of Required F/re
FlOW."
F. Section 805 is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 805. No building constructed within the City shall be occupied or used
until the Fu'e 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
shall 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 severable.
Section 3. City Clerk. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance
and shall cause the same to be posted as required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __ day of
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
ITEM
NO.
APPROVAL:
crrY MANAGER ~~{I,
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Anthony EJmo, Chief Building Official
June 9, 1992
Consideration of Adoption of Various Building
Amendments Thereto
Codes and Certain
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council hold a public hearing and approve the first reading of
the attached 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 AMF~NDMENTS TI-~RETO: THE
1991 RnITION OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, THE 1991 EDITION
OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARDS./HE 1991 EDITION
OF THE UNIFORM MEC~CAL 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 ABATEMF~NT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, THE 1991
~r}ITION OF THE UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, AND THE 1991 EDITION
OF THE UNIFORM SWIMMING POOLS. SPAS AND HOT TUB CODE."
v I~coda.cccmO69.cdc
A~en~ Report
June 9, 1992
Page 2
It is also recommended that the City Council adopt the attached two resolutions entitled:
"A RESOLUTION OF TI{E CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH THE FEE BASIS FOR VARIOUS PERMITS NOT
SPECIFICAII-Y LISTED IN THE MOST CURRENT ADOPTED EDITION OF THE
UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND THE DETERMINATION OF BUH-DING
CONSTRUCTION VALUATION."
"RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA SETTING FORTH THE LOCAL
CONDITIONS UPON WHICH A DETERMINATION HAS Bh'3~ MADE BY THE
CITY COUNCIL THAT MODIFICATIONS TO THE 1991 EDITION OF THE
UNIFORM BUTLDING CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM
MECHANICAL CODE AND THE '1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM PLUMBING
CODE AND THE 1991 ~DITION OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE,
ARE REASONABLY REQUIRRr3 BY LOCAL CONDITIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF
DISCUSSION:
In accordance with provisions of the State Health and Safety Code, the Building Department has
prepared the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building Codes, for adoption with certain amendments.
We feel these amendments are in the best interest of the City and support the City Council's
mission statement in terms of maintaining a safe, secure and healthy community.
Among the proposed amendments to the 1991 edition of the Uniform Codes is a requirement for
the installation of a moisture barrier under residential concrete slabs to prevent moisture
penetration into habitable living space. The City has two (2) faults running through it which
prompted staff to develop provisions for attaching existing and new foundation and slab
construction together. In an effort to minimize fire hazard exposure, the Council's previously
appmved roof material restrictions have been carried over to this Ordinance. Automatic fire
sprinkler requirements are now consistent with Riverside County Ordinance No. 546 "Fire
Protection" and installation standards for T-bar ceilings have been included due to the
inadvertent omission of these standards from the Uniform Building Code Standards. Provisions
for gas and/or propane piping installations under concrete slabs has also been included to assist
in the installation of kitchen or similar island appliances.
The Building and Safety Department utilizes building valuation data as published in Building
vJmlcacla.cccmO69.cd=
Agenda Report
June 9, 1992
Page 3
Standards Magazine, a publication of the International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO).
The I.C.B.O. published square foot costs are compiled by the company of Marshall-Swift of Los
Angeles. This cost data is collected from over 726 cities throughout the United States and 48
cities in Canada. The cost data, which is collected, is used by Marshall-Swift in their monthly
and quarterly construction estimating publications and is also adjusted by regional modifiers to
more accurately represent building costs in respective regions of the country. I.C.B.O. compiles
and publishes this data for use by its member jurisdictions.
The use of this data is more the rule than the exception for jurisdictions throughout the state.
Due to the fmancial burden such a construction cost study would impose on a jurisdiction and
the ongoing fmancial burden it would create to keep updated, the decision to rely on the
expertise of Marshall-Swift and the I.C.B.O. for this information was made.
Attached is a copy of the most current building valuation data from Building Standards
Magazine. Please note that for dwellings and a few other uses, the costs are listed for avenge
and good construction. Department policy is to use the avenge square footage cost plus a 6 %
deduction by using a regional modifier of .94 when calculating new building construction costs.
Attached is a comparison of valuation costs per square foot currently being charged by other
jurisdictions in our area.
The Building and Safety Department also issues permits for which valuation data is not provided
such as block walls, patios, etc. Staff conducted a survey of similar fees from surrounding cities
and studied current construction cost data. From this data, a fee schedule was developed to
address these miscellaneous permits.
All of this information has been circulated to the Building Industry Association and the local
Coordinating Committee members. To date, no opposing responses have been received.
This is an offering for first reading because modifications have been made to the body of the
Ordinance entitled as described on page 1 of this staff report.
v
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH THE FEE BASIS FOR VARIOUS PERMITS
NOT SPECIFICALLY LISTED IN THE MOST CURRENT ADOPTED EDITION
OF THE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND THE DETERMINATION
OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTION VALUATION."
WHEREAS, the City of Temecula has adopted the Riverside County Ordinance
No. 348 by reference pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90-04; and
WHEREAS, Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 was adopted by reference per
City Ordinance No. 92-_, the City has adopted the Uniform Administrative Code; and
WHEREAS, the Uniform Administrative code provides a fee schedule for all
building, electrical, plumbing, etc., permits; and
WHEREAS, Section 304(b) provides that for the fee basis for various permits
not specifically listed in the Uniform Administrative Code, the City may adopt its own
fee schedule.
Section 1. Pursuant to Section 304(b) of the Uniform Administrative Code, the
City adopts the following permit fees:
MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE
TYPE OF PERMIT
FIREPLACE
Masonry
Metal
REFOOF
Aluminum Shingles
Clay Tile (engineering required)
Concrete Tile (engineering required)
Wood Shake
Wood Shingle
Built up
Composition Shingles
Fiberglass
Roof Structure Replacement
FEE
92500.00 each
91750.00 each
331.00 per sq.
277.00 per sq.
235.00 per sq.
219.00 per sq.
219.00 per sq.
100.00 per sq.
92.00 per sq.
92.00 per sq. *
10.75 sq. ft.
SIGNS
Pole/Monument Illuminated
Pole/Monument' Non-illuminated
Projecting, Illuminated -
Projecting, Non-illuminated
Wall Illuminated
Wall Non-illuminated
ANTENNAS
Dish
Radio over 30'
FENCES/WALLS
Fences - Wire over 6 feet
Fences - Wood over 6 feet
Masonry Walls 3 to 5 feet
Masonry Walls 5 to 6 feet
Masonry Walls over 6 feet
Pilasters
Retaining Walls 2 to 5 feet
Retaining Walls 5 to 6 feet
Retaining Walls over 6 feet
Stone and Brick Veneer
SWIMMING POOLS
Gunite
Fiberglass
Vinyl
SPAS
Gunire
Fiberglass
Portable
DECKS/PATIO COVERS
Deck/Balcony Up to 30 inches
Patio Cover, Aluminum
Patio Cover, Lattice
Patio Enclosure
Awning, Canvas
Awning, Aluminum
$ 38.00 sq. ft.
$ 23.25 sq. ft
$ 32.75 sq. ft
$ 31.50 sq. ft
$ 20.13 sq. ft.
$ 20.13 sq. ft
~3175.00 each
92600.00 each
30.00 per lot
30.00 per lot
10.00 linear foot
15.00 linear foot
20.00 linear foot
00.00 each
14.00 linear foot
20.00 linear foot
25.00 linear feet
6.50 sq. ft.
25.00 sq. ft.
75.00
75.00
25.00 sq. ft.
75.00
3,000.00 each
5.60 sq. ft.
8.25 sq. ft.
9.00 sq. ft.
10.75 sq. ft.
6.50 sq. ft.
15.55 sq. ft.
MISCELLANEOUS
Agriculture Building/Barn/Stable
Aluminum Siding
Demolition -
Garage Conversion
Green House
14.25 sq. ft.
4.25 sq. ft.
60.00/@ $30./hr.
2.hr. minimum
24.21 sq. ft.
4.25 sq. ft.
MISCELLANEOUS (CON'T)
Install Windows/Sliding Door
Interior Partition
Plastering inside or out
Room Addition
Stairs
Tenant Improvement
Sun Room (manufactured)
11.25 sq. ft.
36.25 linear foot
2.00 sq. ft.
49.16 sq. ft.
10.75 sq. ft.
19.00 sq. ft.
7.80 sq. ft.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS/INSPECTIONS
Certificate of Occupancy
Fire Damage
Work Without Permits
Pre-Submittal Review
Final Inspection only
COPIES
Photocopying
30.00
30.00 hr. 2 Hr. Min.
30.00 hr. 2 Hr. Min.
30.00 hr. 1 Hr. Min.
30.00 hr. 2 Hr. Min.
$ .25 per copy
DOUBLEWIDE TRAILERS - STATE HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEV.
SOLAR
Building permits
remainder
Additional Buildings
Building Permits per gross sq. ft. of collector
sq.ft.
Plan Check
.06 sq. ft. for
11.75 each
.47 sq. ft. first 100
29.50 each
* I sq. = 100 sq. ft.
COMPARISONS J:OR A TYPICAL SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
Use Use
Per Sq. Air Regional Building
Foot Conditioning Modifier Standards
Moreno Valley
Corona
Escondido
Hemet
Riverside
Lake Elsinore
Vista
Chino
San Jacinto
Perris
Temecula
$51.50* $2.85 No
$62.20 UMC No
$73.00 $2.85 No
$50.70* $2.85 No
$67.30 UMC No
$72.90 UMC No
$73.00 UMC Yes
$50.70* UMC No
$51.50 $2.85 Yes
$51.50 $2.85 Yes
$52.30** $2.85 Yes
City's calculation example with modifier used:
$52.30 + $2.85 = $55.15 x .94 (modifier)
= $51.84 per square foot
* Old figure published prior to April, 1992.
**Revised figure published April, 1992.
UMC - Uniform Mechanical Code
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
agenda.rep\cccm05,26
Cost Per
Square Foot
Average
Occupancy & Type
1. APARTMENT HOUSES:
Type I or II F.R. $ 67,21
(Good) $81.78
Type V-Masonry
(or Type III) 53.39
(Good) $66.55
Type V-Wood
Frame 47.56
{Good) 859.22
Type I-Basement
Garage 28.11
2. AUDITORIUMS:
Type I or II F.R. 78.77
Type I1-1 Hour 55.93
Type II-N 53.11
Type II1-1 Hour 59.78
Type III-N 57.06
Type V-1 Hour 54.90
Type V-N 82, 17
3. BANKS:
Type I or II F.R. 112.00
Type I1-1 Hour 81.03
Type II-N 77.17
Type II1-1 Hour 91.84
Type III-N 87.70
Type V-1 Hour 81.03
Type V-N 77.08
4. BOWLING ALLEYS:
Type I1-1 Hour 37.69
Type II-N 36.00
Type II1-1 Hour 41.36
Type III-N 39.39
Type V-1 Hour 35.25
5. CHURCHES:
Type I or II F.R. 74.45
Type I1-1 Hour 55.65
Type II-N 52.83
Type II1-1 Hour 59.69
Type III-N 56.87
Type V-1 Hour 54.33
Type V-N 61.70
6. CONVALESCENT
HOSPITALS:
Type I or II F.R. 105.56
Type I1-1 Hour 88.55
Type II1-1 Hour 75.29
Type V-1 Hour 67.77
BUILDING VALUATION DATA
Coat Per
Square Foot
Average
Occupancy_ & Type
7. DWELLINGS:
Type V-Masonry $ 57.16
(Good) 173.32
Type V-Wood
Frame 48.16
(Good) $68.56
Baeemente.
Semi-finished 15.23
(Good) $17.11
Unfinished 11.47
(Good) $13.25
8. FIRE STATIONS
Type I or II F.R. $ 86.29
Type I1-1 Hour 55.93
Type II-N 53.11
Type II1-1 Hour 62.23
Type III-N 69.03
Type V-1 Hour 56.65
Type V-N 62.83
8. HOMES FOR THE
ELDERLy:
Type I or II F.R. 77.83
Type I1-1 Hour 62.42
Type II-N 59.41
Type II1-1 Hour 65.05
Type III-N 62.23
Type V-1 Hour 62.04
Type V-N 58.94
10. HOSPITALS
Type I or II F.R. 123.61
Type II1-1 Hour 102.84
Type V- 1 Hour 95.41
11. HOTELS AND
MOTELS:
Type I or II F.R. 77.27
Type II1-1 Hour 66.74
Type III-N 63.54
Type V-1 Hour 68.19
· Type V-N 55.55
12. INDUSTRIAL PLANTS:
Type I or II F.R. 42.86
Type I1-1 Hour 28.23
Type III (flock) 27.64
Type II1-1 Hour 32.24
Type III-N 30.83
Tilt-up 21.71
Type V-1 Hour 29.14
Type V-N 27.45
Coat Per
Square Foot
Average
Occupancy & Type
13. JAILS:
Type I or II F.R. 120.88
Type II1-1 Hour 109.89
Type V-1 Hour 78.96
14. LIBRARIES:
Type I or II F.R. 88.56
Type I1-1 Hour 61.95
Type II-N 68.76
Type II1-1 Hour 67.40
Type III-N 64.11
Type V-1 Hour 60.35
Type V-N 57.53
15. MEDICAL OFFICES:
Type I or II F.R. 90.43
Type I1-1 Hour 67.30
Type II-N 64.11
Type II1-1 Hour 73.60
Type III-N 70.22
Type V-1 Hour 68.53
Type V-N 64.77
16. OFFICES:
Type I or II F.R, S 81.03
Type I1-1 Hour 52,45
Type II-N 50.01
Type II1-1 Hour 57.72
Type III-N 55.08
Type V-1 Hour 53.39
Type V-N 50.95
17. PRIVATE GARAGES:
Wood Frame 17.48
Masonry 20.68
Open Carports 12.50
18. PUBLIC BUILDINGS:
Type I or II F.R. 94.38
Type I1-1 Hour 70.41
Type II-N 67.30
Type II1-1 Hour 78.85
Type III-N 75.29
Type V-1 Hour 69.65
Type V-N 66.83
15. PUBLIC GARAGES:
Type I or II F.R. 37.22
Type I or II
Open Parking 29.14
Type II-N 21,81
Type II1-1 Hour 26.23
Type III-N 26,10
Type V-1 Hour 21,71'
Cost Per
Square Foot
Average
Occupancy & Type
20. RESTAURANT:
Type II1-1 Hour 70.31
Type III-N 66.93
· Type V-1 Hour 62.32
Type V-N 59;31
21 SCHOOLS:
Type I or II F.R. 84.60
Type I1-1 Hour 60.35
Type II1-1 Hour 60.82
Type III-N 57,62
Type V-1 Hour 55.65
Type V-N 52.64
22. SERVICE STATIONS:
Type II-N 50.20
Type ill-1 Hour 50.38
Type V-1 Hour 44.27
Canopies 19.36
23. STORES:
Type I or II F.R. 63.36
Type I1-1 Hour 38.16
Type II-N 37.41
Type II1-1 Hour 46.62
Type III-N 43.99
Type V-1 Hour 37.22
Type V-N 34.87
24. THEATERS:
Type I or II F.R. 82.53
Type II1-1 Hour 59.78
Type III-N 56.96
Type V-1 Hour 53.96
Type V-N 51.51
25 .WAREHOUSES:
Type I or II F.R, 37,51
Type II or V-1 Hour 22.18
Type II or V-N 20:87
Type II1-1 Hour 25.47
Type III-N 24.35
EQUIPMENT
AIR CONDITIONING:
Commercial 3.24
Residential 2,68
SPrinkler System 1.55
Section 2. Findings. The foregoing fees do not exceed the cost of providing
the associated services.
Section 3. Severability. If any provision, clause sentence or paragraph of this
Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be 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.
NOW, THEREFORE, be is resolved by the City Council of the City of Temecula
that the following fee schedule is hereby adopted pursuant to Section 304(b) to serve
as the fees of the City of Temecula for various permits not specifically listed in the
most current adopted edition of the Uniform Administrative Code and for the
determination of building construction valuation:
APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this __ day of
,1992.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
RESOLU'HON NO 92-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF 1/KMF_EULA SETTING FORTH THE
LOCAL CONDITIONS UPON WHICH A DETERMINATION HAS Bgg-N
MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT MODI~CATIONS TO THE 1991
EDITION OF THE UNIFORM BUrr.PING CODE, THE 1991 EDITION OF
THE UNIFORM MFEHANICAL CODE AND THE 1991 I=-DITION OF THE
UNIFORM PLUIVIBING CODE AND THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, ARE REASONABLY REQUII~D BY LOCAL
CONDITIONS WTI/tIN THE CITY OF TEMECULA.
WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code Section 17958.5 provides for the City Council to
make changes or modifications in the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building Code, the 1991
edition of the Uniform Mechanical Code and the 1991 edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code,
as may be reasonably necessary because of certain local conditions; and
W!~-REAS, the Building Official of the City of Temecula has determined and
recommended that based upon certain location conditions within the City of Temecula the
modifications to the 1991 edition oft he Uniform Building Code, the 1991 edition of the Uniform
Mechanical Code and the 1991 edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code contained in Ordinance
No. 92-__ are reasonably required to be adopted by the City of Temecula; and
WF[ERF,&S, Health and Safety Code Section 17958.7 requires the City Council to make
express findings of the necessity for modifications in the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building
Code, the 1991 edition of the Uniform Mechanical Code and the 1991 edition of the Uniform
Plumbing Code.
NOW, TB'EREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
that the following amendments and modifications to the 1991 edition of the Uniform Building
Code, the 1991 edition of the Uniform Mechanical Code and the 1991 edition of the Uniform
Plumbing Code contained in Ordinance No. 92-_ are hereby found to be reasonably necessary
due to consideration of specific local climate, geological or topographical conditions as follows:
SECTION l. Uniform Building Code, 1991 edition.
Section 301(a). 301(b)5. 301(d), 304. Table 3-A. and 417 are administrative in
nature only.
Section 2623 - A moisture barrier is to be required where habitable area is
developed and a soils report is not normally required. This is due to the normal
absorption of the moisture by concrete slabs on grade.
Section 2910(f) - The City contains two earthquake faults and is subject to
periodic seismic activity.
D. Section 3203 - The City has a combination of densely populated areas adjacent
to natural undeveloped or maintained areas and is subject to strong wind
conditions all of_which contribute to the potential fwe hazard.
E. Section 4704 (el - This section is added due to the inadvertent omission from the
1991 edition of the Uniform Building Code Standards.
Section 2. Uniform Mechanical Code, 1991 edition.
A. Section 510(a) - Modification is administrative in nature only.
B. Section 1104 - Horizontal installation of exhaust ducts from steam producing
rooms causes corrosion of duct material.
Section 3. Uniform Plumbing Code, 1991 edition.
A. Section 110(a) - Modification is administrative in nature.
B. Section 1213(c) - The City has several developments curren~y using propane gas
appliances. This modification establishes criteria for under slab piping
installations not specifically provided for in the current code.
Section 4. Uniform Administrative Code, 1991 edition.
A. Section 205 and 304(c) - modifications are administrative in nature only.
Section 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of ,1992.
ATTEST:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
v%wp~,rdi~u~c%z'csolu~x3.codc ~
ORDINANCE NO 92-13
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE
FOLLOWING CODES WITH CERTAIN AMF~NDMENTS THERETO:
THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, THE 1991
EDITION OF THEUNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARDS. THE 1991
EDITION OF THE UN~ORM 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 FOOLS. SPAS AND HOT TUB CODE.
WHEREAS, 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;
Uniform Plumbing Code, 1991 edition with appendices and California
State amendments;
(E) Uniform Administrative Code, 1991 edition;
(F)
(G)
(H)
Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Building, 1991 edition;
Uniform Housing Code, 1991 edition;
Uniform Swimming Pools. Spas and Hot Tub Code, 1991 edition.
Ords 92-13 -1-
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
Building Code, 1991 edition adopted by this Ordinance:
1. Section 301(a) is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 301 (a) Permits Required. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm
or corporation W erect, construct enlarge, 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 mended to read as follows:
Section 301(b) 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 ~ammable 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.
Ords 92-13
All contractors and their sub-contractors must have current and
valid city business licenses.
4. 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 wails 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 amended to read as follows:
Section 2623. The minimum thickness of concrete floor slabs supported
directly on the ground shall not be less than three and one-half (3 1/2) inches All group R
occupancies shall have a minimum six (6) rail moisture barrier with minimum two (2) inch sand
cover.
Exception: 1. A moisture barrier shall not be required under slabs on grade
of open or enclosed patios as defined in Section 417.
as follows:
Section 2910 is hereby amended by adding thereto a new paragraph to read
Section 2910(f) Slab 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.
E~cception:
1. The roof covering on any structure regulated by this code
within the Historical District Overlay, generally known as the Old
Town Temecula Historical Preservation District, shall not be less
than a Class C roofing assembly.
Orals 92-13 -3-
2. The roof covering of any structure located on a parcel with a
minimum of one-half 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.
1:1. 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 fixtures, 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 plaster 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.
Ords 92-13 -4-
(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 shall 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 I0 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.
ln_eta!lation
(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 calculations
'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.
Ords 92-13 -5-
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 splayed 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 place~ 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 horizontal 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.
(1) Perimeter Members. Unless perimeter members are a-structural part
of the approved system, wall angles or channels shall be considered as aesthetic closer 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.
Orda 92-13 -6-
1. All lighting fixtures shall be positively attached to the suspended ceiling
system. The attachment device shall have a capacity of 100 percent of the lighting fixture
weight acting in any directions.
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 utilize 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 fuctures, 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
directly from the structure above by approved hangers.
6. Pendant-hung lighting fixtures 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 stipported direc~y from the structure above by approved hangers.
Partition
(p) Where the suspended ceiling system is required to provide 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 lateral 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.
Orda 92-13 -7-
Drawings and Specifications
(c0 The drawings shall clearly identify all systems and shall define or show
all supporting details, lighting fLxture attachment, lateral force bracing, partition bracing, etc.
Such definition may be by reference to this standard, or approved system, in whole or in part.
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:
1. 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 part of an 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 wallboard
subject to the limitations of Section 1002(a). Aluminum flex ducts are not permitted to be
installed horizontally in rooms that produce steam. An angle greater than forty-five (45) degrees
from the vertical is considered a horizontal run.
On:Is 92-13 -8- ""
The following amendments, additions and deletions are made to the Uniform
Plumbing Code, 1991 edition adopted by this Ordinance:
1. Section 110(a) is hereby amended to read as follows:
(a) Indirect Waste Pipe. An indirect waste pipe is a pipe that does not
connect direcfiy with the drainage system but conveys liquid wastes by discharging thwugh an
approved air gap inw a plumbing fixture, interceptor or receptacle which is direc~y 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 slab 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 installation 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 later 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 from 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 amended to read as follows:
Section 205. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm 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, firm, or corporation violating any provisions of this code shall be deemed guilty
of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof, shall be punishable by a fine of not more than
Orals 92-13 -9-
one thousand dollars ($1000.00), or by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, or by
both such fine and imprisonment.
2. Section 304(1>) is hereby mended to read as follows:
Section 304C0) The permit fee for each permit shall be set forth in Tables
Nos. 3-A through 3-H, except that the minimum permit fee for any building permit will $30.00.
Where a technical code as been adopted by the jurisdiction for which no fee schedule is shown
in this code, the fee required shall be in accordance with the schedule established by the
legislative body.
The determination of value or valuation under any of the provisions of
these codes shall be made by the building official. The value to be used in computing the
building permit building plan review fees shall be the total value of all construction work for
which the permit is issued as well as all finish work, painting, roofing, electrical, plumbing,
hearing, air-conditioning, elevators, re-extinguishing systems and any other permanent
equipment.
3. Section 304(c) is hereby mended to read as follows:
Section 304(c) Plan Review Fees. When a plan or other data are required
to be submitted by Subsection (c) of Section 302, a plan review fee shall be paid at the time of
submitting plans and specifications for review. Said plan review fee for buildings or structures
shall be 75 pereent of the building permit fee as shown in Table NO. 3-A.
The plan review fees for electrical, mechanical and plumbing work shall
be equal to 25 percent of the total permit fee as set forth in Tables Nos. 3-B, 3-C and 3-D.
The plan review fee for grading work shall be as set forth in Table No.
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 be charged at the rate shown in Tables Nos. 3-A
through 3-G.
SECTION 3. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this
Ordinance of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be 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.
Ords 92-13 -10-
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 law.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this __ day of
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATFEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF tUVEP, SmE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June $. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 92-13 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the 9th day of June, 1992, and that thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 23rd day
of June, 1992.
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
O~a 92-13 -11-
ITEM NO. 12
CITY OF Tf2VlECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council/City Manager
FROM: planning Department
DATE: JUne 9, 1992
SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Map No. 23209, Laverda Emond/Michael Lundin
RECOMM]~NDATION: The Planning Staff recommends that the City Council:
RE-AFFIRM the Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map
No. 23209, and;
ADOPT Resolution No. 92-_ approving Tentative Tract Map No.
23209 based on the Analysis and Findings cont3ined in the Staff
Report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
BACKGROUND
The proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 23209 was originally submitted to the County of
Riverside on October Lg, 1988 with 304 proposed single family residential lots. The project was
approved by the Riverside County Planning Commission on February 7, 1990 with 257 lots.
The project was transferred to the City of Temecula in April of 1990. On July 24, 1990, the
City Council set the :project for Planning Commission hearing. At the Planning Commission
meeting of August 6, 1990, the project was continued off-calendar in order to be redesigned
relative to issues expressed by Staff. Those issues included: the quantity of proposed
earthwork, the need for a traffic study, density and the presence of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat.
The current Tentative Map configuration has been completely redesigned relative to the concerns
of Staff and the Planning Commission. The current project submittal is for a 220 unit single
family subdivision with a 2.9 acre park site. The minimum proposed lot size for the project is
7,200 square feet. The project has been reconfigured to substantially reduce the amount of
grading that would be required. The proposed density has been reduced from 3.80 to 2.75 units
per acre, and the lots adjacent to the vineyards and lower density residential to the east have
been enlarged to provide a buffer for this projects density. In addition, the vertical alignment
of Butterfield Stage Road has been re. designed to allow greater air current circulation for the
vineyards to the east to prevent crop damage.
s~rm2ogrm.cc 1
The project was again reviewed by the Planning Commission on March 16, 1992. At that
between the
and the proposed park site.
Commissioners Fahey and ttoagland expressed concern relative to inadequate buffering of the
lots on the eastern portion of the project, adjacent to the vineyards. In addition, there is a
possibility of noise impacts for those lots if the vineyard resorts to the implementation of wind
machines. Wind machines could be necessary if future development blocks or hampers the air
current movement over the vineyards. The Commission added a condition of approval to the
project which requires the disclosure of potential noise impacts from wind machines to future
homebuyers.
Several area homeowners expressed concerns relative to traffic and access. The concern relative
to traffic and aCcess was the potential for impacts to Calle Medusa. Staff has conditioned the
applicant to improve La Serena Way, Ahem Lane and Butterfield Stage Road which will provide
alternative traf~c circuhtion routes.
The proposed 2.9 acre parksite was a product of the project rolesign. The parksite will be
offered for dedication to the City after it is fully improved by the developer. The site is located
such that it is easily accessible to the proposed project and the existing neighborhood to the west.
The proposed project has been adequately re-designed to mitigate the concerns originally
expressed by Staff. The right-of-way elevations of the future extension of Butterfield Stage Road
and the elevations of the areas west are acceptable to the vineyard operators to the east.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
vgw
Resolution - page 3
ConditiOns of Approval - page 9
Minutes; of Planning Commission meeting (March 16, 1992) - page 10
Staff Ret3ort of Planning Commission meeting (March 16, 1992) - page 11
Fee Che~klist - page 12
Initial Study - page 14
3'xSTAFFRF~23209TTM. CC 2
ATTACItlV!]r, NT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
-~rAFFItPT~I2{}~fTM.C-C 3
ATrA~ NO, 1
RESOLIYrION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEIVIECUIA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
NO, 23209 TO SUBDIVIDE 80 ACRES INTO A 220 UNIT
SINGLE FAM~ .Y SUBDIVISION WITH A 2,9 ACRE PARK
LOCATED AT ~ EASTERLY TERMINUS OF LA
SERENA WAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NO, 914-310-018 THROUGH 032,
WttEREAS, Michael Lun. din/Laverda F..mond filed Tentative Tract Map No. 23209 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Tract Map application was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local hw;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tract Map on March 16, 1992,
at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WHERFsAS, at the conclusion of. the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Tract;
WttEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Tract Map
on June 9, 1992, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or
opposition to said Tract Map; and
~, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff
Report regarding the Tract Map;
NOW, I'FI'EREFORE, TH'E CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERNIINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section I. Findings.
findings:
That the Temecula 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\$TAFFRFr~209TTM.(~X~ 4
1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
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 pwbability that the land use or action
proposed will b~ consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which
will be studied ~vithin 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 oi~ state hw 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 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
C. The proposed 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 Planning Commission finds, in approving projects and taking other
actions, including the issuance of building penits, pursuant to this title, each of the following:
a. There is reasonable probability that Tract Map No. 23209 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 Ordinance Nos. 348,
460, and SWAP which has been adopted as a guideline.
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 pwject is consistent with existing and appwved pwjects
to the south and west.
c. The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state hw and local ordinances.
SXSTAFF~209TTM~CC 5
D. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be
approved unless the following _f'mdings are made:
specific plans.
That the proposed 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 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 conflicI 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.
8. . The City Council in approving the proposed Tentative Tract Map, makes
the following f'mdings, to wit:
a. The proposed Tract Map will not have significant negative impact
on the environment, as determined in the Initial Environmental Assessment prepared for
Tentative Tract Map No. 23209. A Negative Declaration is recommended to be reaffirmed.
b. There is a reasonable probability that this proposal will be
consistent with the General Plan being prepared at this time. The map is consistent with
applicable subdivision and land use ordinances, and conforms with the City's Southwest Area
Plan (SWAP) gUidelines affecting the subject property.
c. There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or
interference with, the future adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan. The project is consistent with surrounding development, and does not logically
have the potential to generate significant adverse environmental impacts.
S~STAFlq. lq'~2320~rTM.CC 6
~ d. The proposed use or action complies with City and State planning
and zoning lawS.' Reference local Ordimmces No. 348, 460, California Governmental Code
Sections 65000-66009 (Planning Zoning Law), and Government Code Title 7, Division 2.
e. The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms
of the size and Shape of parcel configurations, access, and density. The project has access to
public fights-of-way, and is designed with sufficient pad areas allowing appropriate building pad
sites.
i f. The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect
the built or natUral environment as determined in the initial study prepared for this project.
Reference the attached Initial Environmental Study and Conditions of Appwval for Tentative
Tract Map No. ~Z3209.
g. 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 project as conditioned.
h. The site for the proposed use is pwvided legal access via La Serena
and Butterfield Stage Road public rights-of-way. Development of these wads shall comply with
City Public Works Conditions of Approval contained herein.
i. The proposed pwject will not inhibit or restrict future ability to use
active or passive solar energy systems. Adequate lot areas and exposures are pwvided for these
alternatives.
j. The proposed use will not have a substantial adverse affect on
abutting properties or the permitted use thereof. The proposed map pwvides for residential
development similar in character and densities evident on vicinity properties. Land use
incongruities and associated adverse affects arising from implementation of this proposal are
unlikely.
Section II. Environmental Compliance. The Initial Study prepared for ihis pwject
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 Environmental Assessment No.
33254 was previously considered by the County of Riverside. Therefore, the Negative
Declaration is re-affirmed.
Section 13I. Conditions. The City of Temecula City Council hereby appwves
Tentative Tract !Map No. 23209 for the subdivision of 80 acres into 220 residential lots and a
2.9 acre park site in the R-T zone located at the castefly terminus of La Serena Way and known
as Assessor's Tract No. 914-310-016, 914-310-018 through 032 subject to the following
conditions:
1. Attachment 2, attached hereto.
S~STAF~209TTM,C'C 7
Section ilV. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, DENIED AND AD~PTED this 9th day of June, 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDSAxJ,
MAYOR
I HF-nERY CERTWY that the foregoing Resohtion was duly adopted by the City
Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th of June, 1992 by
the following vote of the Council:
COUNCrL~,n:~IBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCH~MHMBERS:
~ S. GRL"RK
CITY CY~P,K
sxs'r^mu,r~2ogTm. Cc 8
ATTACtIM~NT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
3~$TAFFRFI"~2320~TrM.CC 9
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Tract Map No: 23209
Project Description: 221 Lot residential subdivision
on 80 acres, R-T zone.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 914-310-018 through 032
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act
and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule A, unless modified by the
conditions listed below. 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.
e
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the approval date,
unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The expiration date is March 16,
1994.
3. Any deli!nquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final map.
e
e
Legal palved access as required by Ordinance 460 and the Department of Public Works
shall be ~provided from the tract map boundary to a City maintained road.
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 access to all lots in each phase, and shall
substantially conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval.
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 environmental health recommendations outlined
in the COunty Health Department's transmittal dated January 7, 1992 a copy of which
is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined in the
County Fire Department's letter dated October 9, 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.
S~STAFFRPT~23209.TTM 15
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Rancho California
Water District transmittal dated December 19, 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-T 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 Department of Public Works.
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 Dirootor. Temecula
CommUnity Services District.(Changed per the Planning Commission meeting on March
16, 1992).
Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints 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.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied:
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.
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.
s~TA~e-r~os.rr~ 16
d~
f,;
k.i
Parkways shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition
into the primary use area of the site. Landscape elements shall include
earth beFming, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees. Front yards
shall be landscaped and street trees planted.
Wall plans shall be submitted for the project perimeter and along La
Serena Way. Wooden fencing shall not be allowed on the perimeter of
the project. All lots with slopes leading down from the lot shall be
provided with gates in the wall for maintenance access.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at
key visual focal points 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 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.
All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow growing
trees shall be steel staked.
Any oak trees removed with four (4) inches or larger trunk diameters
shall be replaced on a ten (10) to one (1) basis as approved by the
Planning Director· Replacement tress shall be noted on approved
landscaping plans.
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 ~luring the higher probability rain months
of January through March.
3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
S%,STA~3209.TTM 17
15.
16.
All cut slopes located adjacent to ungraded natural terrain and exceeding
ten (10) feet in vertical height shali be contour-graded incorporating the
foliowind grading techniques:
The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually a~ljusted to the
angle of the natural terrain.
Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall
reflect the natural rounded terrain.
The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves with
radii designed in proportion to the total height of the slopes
where drainage and stability permit such rounding.
Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, the
horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous,
undulating fashion.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall provide
evidence to the Department of Public Works that all adjacent off-site
manufactured slopes have recorded slope easements and that slope
maintenance responsibilities have been assigned as approved by the
Dcportmont of Publio Works. Temecula Community Services District.
(Changed at the Planning Commission meeting on March 16, 1992).
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 ithe 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, redirect
or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils.
Prior to
A.
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.
S\STAFFRPT~a209.TrM 18
17.
prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building and Safety
an acoustical study shall be performed by an acoustical engineer to establish
appropriate mitidation measures that shall be applied to individual dwelling units
Within the subdivision to reduce ambient interior noise levels to 45 Ldn.
All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate, all required elements
firam the subdivision's approved fire protection plan as approved by the County
Fire Marshal.
All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed and
c~onstructed with fire retardant (Class A) roofs as approved by the Fire Marshal.
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the
Subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices shall
be permitted with Planning Department approval.
F. Roof-mounted eqdipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding property.
Building separation between all buildings including fireplaces shall not be less
than ten (10) feet.
H. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet.
I. All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic irrigation.
Prior to ithe issuance of first OCCUPANCY PERMITS or model home the following
conditions shall be satisfied: (Revised at the Planning Commission meeting on March
16, 19912).
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
u~ilized as approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Building and
Safety.
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 issu3noc of an oeeupancy permit, thc applioant 3hall enter into an
agrccment with Inl3nd Dispoc31, Inc., for the rofu~c sorvioc to inoludc thc
utilization of a small piok up truck equipped with a lift meehani3m in ordcr to
movc thc oontainers out and back into thc projcct; thus, prohibiting thc cntcring
of I,~rgc rcfusc trucks into thc projcct. S3id agrocmont shall bc submitted to
thc I'~anning Director for approval. (Struck at the Planning Commission meeting
on March 16, 1992).
S\STAFFRPT~3209,TTM 19
18.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, or any use allowed by this entitlement, the
developer shall submit to the Planning Department for review a biology study focusing
on the Stephens Kangaroo Rat, a Federally listed endangered species. Said report shall
be prepared by one of the state certified biologists licensed to handle the SKR. Said
report shall contain but not be limited to information relative to quality, density, and
extent Of occupied habitat. In addition, the developer shall comply with any processes
in effect to mitigate the potential disturbance of SKR habitat.
19.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Temecula, its
agents, iofficer, 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
approvall of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative
body concerning Tentative Tract Map No. 23209, which action is brought within the
time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The City
of Temecula will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or
proceedling against the City of Temecula and will cooperate fully in the 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.
20.
The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property
interestS, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall 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 66462 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.
21.
All utility systems including gas, electric, telephone, water, sewer, and cable TV shall
be proviided 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.
22. All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed underground.
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions/Reciprocal Access Easements:
23.
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be reviewed and approved
by the Planning Department prior to final approval of the tract maps. The CC&R's shall
include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the open space, recreation areas,
parking !areas, private roads, and exterior of all buildings.
S%STAFFRPl'~3209.TTM 20
24.
25.
26,
27.
28.
2O.
30.
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 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 to 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
required by the City as Conditions of Approval. The developer shall submit
evidence 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 to the City for public purposes.
Maintenance for all landscaped and open areas, including parkways, shall be provided
for in the CC&R's.
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 and facilities, or (2) as
share in the corporation, or voting membership in an association, owning the common
areas and facilities.
All existing specimen trees on the subject property shall be preserved wherever
feasible.= Where they cannot be preserved they shall be relocated or replaced with
specimen trees as approved by the Planning Director.
Any oak trees removed with four (4) inch or larger trunk diameters shall be replaced
on a ten;(10) to one (1) basis as approved by the Planning Director.
Within forty eight (48) houro of thc approval of thi3 project, thc applioant/dcvcloper
-.,hall deliver to thc Ranning Dcpartment a oashiors ohook or money order payablc to
thc County Clerk in thc amount of Eight I lundrod, Seventy Five Dollarc (9875.00)
which includcs thc Eight I lundrod, Fifty Dollar (9850.00) foc, in oomplianec with AD
3158, r0quirod by Fish and Gamc Coda Sootion 711.4{d)(3) plu¢ the Twenty Fivc
Dollar (9!215.00) County administrative foe, to enable the City to file thc Notiec of
Dctcrmination rcquircd undcr Public Rcsourocc Codc Scction 21152 and 14 Cal. Codc
of Regulations 15004. If within suoh forty eight (48) hour period thc
applioant/dcvclopor h~r. not delivered to the Ranning Department thc ohook roquirc, d
abovc, thc approval for the project granted heroin shall bc void by reason of failurc of
condition, Fish and Gamc Codc Section 711.4 (o). (Struck at the Planning Commission
meeting on March 16, 1992).
Within fOrty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the 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 One Thousand, Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars
($1,275.00), which includes the One Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars
(91,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game Code
Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Twenty-Five Dollar (925.00) County administrative fee
to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources
S~STAFFRPT~.3209.TTM 21
Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-
eight (48) hour period the applicant/developer has not delivered to the Planning
Department the check Eequired above, the approval for the project granted herein shall
be void iby reason of failure of condition, Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(c).
31.
32.
Prior to ithe issuance of the 75th certificate of occupancy for the entire project area,
the applicant shall have completed to the satisfaction of the Community Sorviocs
Dirooto~ Temecula Community Services District all park site improvements relevant to
Lot No. i221 of Tentative Tract Map No. 23209. (Revised at the Planning Commission
meeting on March 16, 1992).
Prior to +the issuance of any occupancy permits the developer shall submit to the City
a disclosure statement for the tract area which identifies the potential future impact
of noise associated with the potential placement of wind machines at the adjacent
vineyard. Said disclosure shall inform buyers that rights to protest have been waived
by the developer. Said document shall be subject to the approval of the Planning
Director and the City Attorney. Said approval shall be obtained prior. to the issuance
of occupancy permits. The City will require that said document will be submitted to
and signed in agreement by future residential occupants. (Added at the Planning
CommiSsion meeting on March 16, 1992).
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
The following are the Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval for this project, and
shall be completed at no cost to any Government Agency. All questions regarding the true
meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the appropriate staff person of the Department
of Public Works.
It is understood that the 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.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
33.
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; and
Metropolitan Water District.
34.
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act, any subdivision which is part
of an ex~isting Assessment District Must comply with the requirements of said section.
S\STAFF~a209.TTI4 22
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
All road !easements and/or street dedications shell be offered for dedication to the
public and' shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All
dedications shall be fr~e from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of
Public Works.
The existing Walcott Lane alignment shall be vacated as a public street and rededicated
to TCSDi as a public park site as directed by the Department of Public Works. Said
vacation and rededication shall be applied for by the applicant and approved by the
City Council prior to recordation of the final map. Provision shall also be made for
right-of-way dedication to provide for the remainder of the cul-de-sac bulb for Leigh
Lane.
Streets "A", "B", "C", "D", "E", "G", "H", "J", "K", "L", "M", "N" and "O" shall be
improved with 40 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds for the street
improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with
City Standard No. 104, Section A (60'/40').
Streets "!F" and "1" shall be improved with 36 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or
bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way
in accordance with City Standard No. 105, Section A (60'/36').
Ahern Lane and Walcott lane shall be improved with 44 feet of asphalt concrete
pavement, or bonds for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated
right-of-way in accordance with City Standard No. 103, Section A (66'/44').
La Serene Way shall be improved with 64 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds
for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in
accordance with City Standard No. 102, (88'/64'). Full width improvements shall
extend westerly to connect to existing roadway improvements.
Butterfield Stage Road shall be improved with 43 feet of half street improvement plus
a raised median and one 12' lane, or bonds for the street improvements may be
posted, within a 110' dedicated right-of-way in accordance with City Standard No.
100, (110'/86'). The design shall conform to the vertical alignment approved by City
Council On November 12, 1991.
Standard cul-de-sacs and knuckles and offset cul-de-sacs shall be constructed
throughout the land division.
The subdivider shall provide/acquire sufficient public offsite rights-of-way to provide
for primary and secondary access road(s) to a paved and maintained road. Said access
road(s) shall be constructed in accordance with City Standard No. 106, Section B.
(32'/60'): at a grade and alignment approved by the Department of Public Works. Said
offsite access roads shall include, but not be limited to, the southerly and easterly
extensions of Butterfield Stage Road to Rancho California Road or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
East and~ west bound left turn lanes shall be provided on La Serena Way at the
intersections with Walcott Lane, Street "B" and Butterfield Stage Road as approved
by the Department of Public Works.
S%STAFFRPT'~3209.TTM 23
45.
46,
47.
48.
49.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Butterfield Stage Road and La Serena Way and
so noted on the final map with the exception of street intersections and driveways as
approved by the Department of Public Works.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No. 805.
Minimum lot frontages along the cul-de-sacs and knuckles shall be 35 feet.
Easements, when required 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 Department of Public Works.
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
approvad by the City and recorded. The CC&R's shall be subject to the following
Engineering conditions:
A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
The CC&R's 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 CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association
are subject to the approval of Planning, Department of Public Works, and the
City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A
recorded copy shall be provided to the City.
The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas, drainage and
related facilities.
The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and
maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition
required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving
reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole
expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&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.
The declaration shall contain language prohibiting further subdivision of
any lots, whether they are lettered lots or numbered lots.
S~S~FFm~2a2OS.n~a 24
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently
maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City.
Such pro'of of this maintenance shall be submitted to Planning and the
Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permits.
Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring
access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking
areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded
concurrent with the map, or prior to the issuance of building permit
where no map is involved.
The sui~divider 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,
medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, and other
traffic control devices as appropriate.
B. Storm drain facilities.
Landscaping (street and parks).
Sewer and domestic water systems.
E. All trails, as required by the City's Master Plans.
F. Undergrounding of 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 requirements of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of
Public Works.
Prior to recordat,on of the final map, the developer shall deposit with tl~e 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.
Street names shall be subject to the approval of the Building and Safety Department.
55.
56.
The minimum centerline radii shall be 300 feet or as approved by the Department of
Public Works.
All street and driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved
by the Department of Public Works.
S%STAFFRPI~a,209.TTIVi 25
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
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
Department of Public Works.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula standards and shall be
shown !on the street improvement plans in accordance with City Standard 207 and
401 (cUrb sidewalk).
All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the side property line.
A minimum of 4 feet of full height curb shall be constructed between driveways.
The minimum garage setback shall be 30 feet measured from the face of curb.
The subdivider shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the
Department of Public Works. The plan shall 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. Letters of
permission from adjacent owners shall be provided for all offsite grading work.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted
as directed by the Department of Public Works at the time of application for grading
plan check. All work shall be in conformance with the County Geologist's letter dated
April 28, 1989, and any subsequent amendments.
The subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Department of Public
Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public
Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public
Works.
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 drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the
release=of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy
of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for review prior to
the recordation of the final map.
A copy ~of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with supporting
hydrolQgic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the Riverside County
Flood Control District for review.
S%STAFFRPT~3209.TTM 26
69.
70.
71.
72.
PRIOR
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto
;~hert~u~gohr the site. In the event the Department of Public Works permits the use of
r drainage purposes, the provisions of Article XI of Ordinance No. 460 will
apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity, or use of streets be prohibited
for drainage purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate facilities aS approved by
the Department of Public Works.
The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration
of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be
provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities, including enlarging existing
facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
The developer shall record an Environmental Constraint Sheet delineating areas of
identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the Department
of Public Works.
Prior to final map, the subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent
to Develop. Conduit shall be installed to CA'IV Standards at time of street
improvements.
TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
Prior to= issuance of a grading permit, developer must obtain a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the State Water Resources Control
Board. No grading shall be permitted until a NPDES permit is granted or the project is
shown to be exempt.
Prior to ~any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an
encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works.
Prior to any Work being performed on the private streets or drives, fees shall be paid
and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way.
No grading shall take place prior to the improvement plans being substantially
complete, appropriate clearance letters have been obtained, and approval of the
grading plan has been granted by the Department of Public works.
If grading is to take place between the months of October and April inclusive, erosion
control and runoff mitigation plans will be required. 'All plans shall be submitted with
appropriate notes as directed and approved by the Department of Public Works.
All lot drainage shall be to the street by side yard drainage swales independent of any
other Io1:.
S~STAFFRPT'~3209,TTM 27
80.
81.
PRIOR
82.
83.
84.
PRIOR
85.
86.
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area
t 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 from the County Flood Control District is required for work within their right-
of-way~
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 Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing
compaCt{on and site conditions.
final grading plan shall
be in substantial conformance with the approved rough grading plan.
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. 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 Agreement for payment of Public Facility fee, a copy of
which has been provided to developer.. Concurrently, with executing this Agreement,
develol~er shall post security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount
of the security shall be 92.00 per square foot, not to exceed 910,000. 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 iCondition, 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.
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.
Existin{I city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with
adequate detours during construction. Traffic control plans shall be provided as
directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required to be prepared by
a registered Civil Engineer.
S~STAFFRPT~a209.TTM 28
87. AsphaltiC emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asph_alt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per
square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the
State Standard Specifications.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
PRIOR
88.
TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for Butterfield Stage Road and La Serena
Way and shall be included in the street improvement plans.
89.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the
design requirements.
PRIOR TO THE iSSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
90.
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 Department of Public Works.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
91. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan.
92.
The subdivider shall provide "stop" controls at the intersection of local streets with
arterial streets as directed by the Department of Public Works.
93.
Provide limited landscaping in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent
to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
94.
Tract No. 23209 consists of 220 proposed residential dwellings. The required Park
Land dedication as per City Ordinance No. 460.93 (Quimby) is 2.9 acres of IMPROVED
park land. Prior to recordation of the final map, the applicant or his assignee, shall
offer for dedication 2.9 acres of land and execute and agreement with the Community
Services Department, stating that the applicant agrees to improve the proposed 2.9
acre property in accordance with Community Services Department standards at the
time of execution, for park purposes.
95.
The proposed park site shall be identified on the final map by lot number, and indexed
to identify said lot number as the proposed park land site. All park site plans shall be
reviewed and approved by the Temecula Community Services District prior to
recordation. (Added at the Planning Commission meeting on March 16, 1992).
S%STAFFRPT~3209.TTM 29
96.
A Square foot breakdown of all proposed "Arterial" slopes shall be submitted to the
conditioning the arterial slopes for required maintenance (Homeowners
Association (HOA) vs. Community Services Department). Prior to recordation of the
final map, the applicant or his assignee, shall offer for dedication all arterial slopes to
the Ternecula Community Services District for maintenance purposes following
compliance to existing City standards and completion of an application process. All
other slopes shall be maintained by an established Home Owners Association (HOA).
(Added at the Planning Commission meeting on March 16, 1992).
S%STAFFRI~3209.TTM 30
County of Riverside
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
-- TO: C I TY OF TEMECULA
RE:
DATE:
Health Specialist IV
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0, Z3Z09, AMENDED NO. 6
01-07-92
Environmental Health Services has reviewed Tentative Tract
Map No. Z3209. Amended No. 6. dated 12-12-91. Our current
comment$iwill rem&in as stated in our letter dated 10-01-91.
SH:dr
attachment
DOH-GA-~CI2 {4.9~)
...,,,.....'.COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
CIRCLE: DR. RIVE:RSIDJr. CA. 92503 eMillieI Aidfee. - P.O. Be,, 7600 9251:3-'~600):
IAX. (1'141 314-4Jll
October 1, 1991
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLAJ~NING DEPARTMENT
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23209, AMENDED N0. 5: ALL THAT
PARCELS 1.2, 6, 19, 20, 31 AND 50 AS SHOWN IN DOCUMENT
RECORDED JUNE 27, 1986 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 15005 OF RIVERSIDE
COUNTY RECORDS, ALL IN THE MURRIETA PORTION 0FTHETEMECULA
RANCHO, AS SHOWN BY MAP OF THETEMECULA LAND ANDWATER
COMPANY, ON FILE IN BOOK 8. PAGE 359 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAN
DIES0 COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
(224 lots)
Dear Gentlemen:
The Department of Public Health has reviewed Tentative Tract
Map No. 23209. Amended No. 5 and recommends:
A water system shall be installed according to plans and
specifications as approved by the water company and the
Health Department. Fermanent prints of the plans of the
water system shall be submitted in triplicate, with a
mlnimum scale not less than one inch equals 200 feet. along
with the original drawing to the City of Temecula. The
prlnts shall show the internal pipe diameter, location of
valves &nd fire hydrants; plpe and joint specifications, and
the Size of the main at the junction. of the new system to
the existing system. The plans shall comply in all respects
with Div. 5. Part 1, Chapter 7 of the California Health and
Safety Code, California Administrative Code. Title 11.
Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public
Utilities Commission of the State of California, when
applicable. The plans shall be signed by a registered
engineer and water company with the following certification:
"I certify that the design of the water system in Tract Map
2320e, is in accordance with the water system expansion
plans of the Rancho California Water District and that the
water services. storage, and distribution system will be
adequate to provide water service to such Tract Map."
City 0f Temecula
Page Two
Attn:
October 1, 1991_
This lertification does not constitute a guarantee that it
will upply water to such Tract Map at any specific
quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection or any
other purpose". This certification shall be signed by a
responsible official of the water company. The plans must
be submitted to The City of Temecula Office to review at
least two weeks prior to the request for the recordatXon of
the final map.
This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California
Water Distrlct agreeing to serve domestic water to each and
every lot in the subdivision on demand providing
satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the
subdivider. It will be necessary for fin&nclal arrangements
to be made prior to the recordation of the final map.
This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water
District and shall be connected to the sewers of the
District. The sewer system shall be installed according to
plans and specifications as approved by the District, the
Clty of Temecula and the Health Department. Permanent
prints of the plans of the sewer system shall be submitted
in triplicate, along with the original drawing. to the City
of Temecula. The prints shall show the lnternal pipe
diameter. location of manholes. complete profiles. pipe and
aolnt speclfications and the size of the sewers at the
3unction of the new system to the existing system. A single
plat xndlcatxng location of sewer lines and water lines
shall be a portion of the sewage plans and profiles. The
plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the 'sewer
dletrict wlth the following certification: "I certify that
the design of the sewer system in Tract Map No. 23209 is in
accordance with the ~ewer system expansion plans of the
Eastern Munzcipal Water DXstrict and that the waste disposal
system is adequate at thxs time to treat the anticipated
wastes from the proposed Tract Map."
City of Temecula
Page Three
Attn:
October 1. 1991
The ulyns m,,st be submitted to the City of Temeculm Office
to revjev -t Is*st two veers prior to the request for the
recor~atxon of the final msp.
It wil!l be necessary for financialarrangements to be
comple!~ely £inalized prior to rscorda~ion of the finaA map.
Sincerely.
SM:dr
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
TO: CITY OF TEMECULA
ATTN: PLANNING DEPT
RE: TRACT 23209
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE * PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370
(714) 657-3183
October 9, lggI
With respect tO the conditions of approval 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 protection standards:
Schedule "A" fire protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2½")
located one at each street intersection and spaced no more =hen 330 fee=
apart in any direction, with no pore!on of any lot frontage more than 165
feet from a hydrant. Minimum 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 Fire Department for review. Plans shall be signed by a registered
civil engineer, containing 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 siSnature..
The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed
and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible
building material being placed on an individual lot.
MITIGATION
Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with
the City of Temecula, a cash sum of $400.00 per lot/unit as mitigation for
fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of
payment, he/she may enter into a written agreement with the County deferring
said payment to the time of issuance of the first building permit.
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to
the Planning and Engineering staff.
~] tNDIO OFFICE
79-733 Country Club Drive. Suite F. lndio. CA 92201
(619) 342-8886 · FAX (619) 775-2072
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist
PLANNING DIVISION
[:3 RIVERSIDE OFFICE
3760 12th Sm~. Ri,,enide. CA 92.501
["1 TEME_CULA OFFICE
41002 Cuu,,~ C~.,. Drive. Sui,e 225, Temetub. CA 92390
(714) 694.5070 · FAX (714) 694.5076
December 19, 1991
Off.
· John [' HennaEar
Thorn,, H %TcA|ar~lrr
/- rrtee. hr,.n,
Mr. Mark Rhoades
City of Tcmccula
Planning Department
43]80 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
Water Availability
Tract Map 23209, Amended No. 6
Dear Mr. Rhoades:
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 upon completion of financial arrangements
between RCWD and the property owner.
Water availability would be contingent upon the property owner signing an
Agency Agreement which assigns water management fights, if any, to RCWD.
If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Senga Doherty.
Sincerely,
RANCHO CALIFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Steve Brannon, P. E.
Manager of Development Engineering
S8:Sl):mjth3Z9
co: Senga Doherry, Engineering Technician
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION 1V!'~RTING
MARCH 16, 1992
s~^mu, m3~ogrm.cc 10
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 16.199:~
No. 21 and No. 26 be deleted.
advised that staff does not recommend del
iary Capp, requested that and No. 59
once the M~ os bonds sell.
ames Marpie, 19210 St. n Way, Mu~ representing Citizens
~eSponsible Watershed Maria this project is upstream fror
drinking water, which could from pollution at a minimal
Marpie explained the percolatio ~dure for capturing rainfall run-off.
;obert Righetti advised that
Riverside County FIo(
and is currentl'
is
District, on
for State guidelines
in conjunction
ional PO!lutant
Was moved b ~ner Faheyo seconded by ner Chiniaeff
:lose the hearing at 8:40 P.M. and Adoot the Neg~
>repare( Plan No. 241 and Adoot Resolution No. 92-__
~10t 241 based on the Analysis and Findings contained
~ and subject to the Conditions of Approval. The motion
9. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 23209
9.1
Pr~o0sal for a residential subdivision of 80 acres into 220 sinc)le family lots.
LoCated at the easterIv terminus of La Serqna Way.
Planner Mark Rhoades summarized the staff report.
Chairman Chiniaeff opened the public hearing at 8:45 P.M.
Bo! Kemble, Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates, 28765 Single Oak Drive,
Temecula, representing the applicant, provided a brief summary of the project's
history. Mr. Kemble requested that Condition No. 6 and Condition No. 14A be
amended to read "Prior to issuance of building permits..."; and Condition No.
3Q be deleted.
M rk Rhoades that Condition No. 29 could be deleted.
a clarified
COmmissioner Ford stated that he would suggest that Condition No. 6 and
COndition No. 14A be amended to read "Prior to issuance of first occupancy
pelrmit".
' PCMI N.3/16/92 -8- 3/20/92
PLANNINffi qOJVIMISSION MINUTES MARCH 16.199~
The following'individuals offered their ~uoDOrt Of the proposed project:
Nelson Betancourt, 40835 Calle Medusa, Temecula, stated that he would
support the project if the applicant was conditioned to complete Butterfield
Stage Road to Calla Chapos.
Paul Sorrel, 31675 Leigh Lane, Temecula, stated that he supported the project;
however, would request the mobile home zoning be deleted.
Ruperto Jordan, 31944 Leigh Lane, Temecula, expressed his support of the
project; however, requested that the applicant be required to build a block wall
along Walcott Lane to screen the noise from the park area. Additionally, Mr.
Jordan expressed concern for the increase in traffic on Le Serene Way.
Gabriel Serrano, 31943 Leigh Lane, Temecula, indicated his support of the
project; however, expressed the same concerns regarding the noise and the
traffic along La Serene Way.
The following individuals expressed their oOOositiOn tO the project:
Ruth Ann Weathersby, 40517 and 40541 Calla Katerine, Temecula, indicated
that she would oppose the mobile home park zoning. Ms. Weathersby
indicated that she did not have any other problem with the project.
Tony Bartys, 40529 Calle Katerine, Temecula, concurred with Ms.
Weathersby's comments.
David Raya, 31824 Dane Court, Temecula, expressed his opposition due to the
impact the project would have on schools and traffic, the inadequate response
time for emergency services end fire rescue on this side of the city, the
project's inconsistency with the future.general plan and the transition from the
vineyards to tract homes.
John Moramarco, 32740 I~ancho California Road, Temecula, representing
Callaway Vineyard and Winery, stated that he has reservations that the project
place no restrictions on the air flow. Mr. Moramarco added that 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.
Owen Leverson, 31944 Dane Court, Temecula, opposed the project based on
it's impact on schools and traffic. Mr. Leverson added that he lives behind the
area designated for a park and was concerned with noise.
Karen Nelson, 31858 Valone Court, Temecula, opposed the project based on
the fact that the development was originally to be built as luxury executive
homes. Ms. Nelson also expressed a concern for the project's impact on the
PCMIN3/16~92 -9- 3/20~92
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 16. 199~
schools.
Mary Jones, 32085 Vista Del Monte, Temecula, expressed concern with the
potential for flooding from drainage run-off and expressed a concern that
previous issues recommending denial were not being adequately addressed.
Greg Tortoretti, 31984 Dane Court, Temecula, reiterated concerns regarding
impacts on schools, traffic and emergency service responses.
Terry Kavicki, 31951 Valone Court, Temecula, expressed concerns with
pollution, the impact the project will have on the vineyards, wildlife preservation
and schools.
James Marpie, 19210 St. Gallen Way, Murrieta, representing Citizens For
Responsible Watershed Management, advised that this project is upstream from
the drinking water, which could be protected from pollution at a minimal cost.
Mr. Marpie explained the percolation procedure for capturing the rainfall run-off.
BO Kemble addressed some of the concerns expressed by the area residents,
advising that the project is conditioned to improve Butterfield Stage Road along
the project frontage as well as providing improvements to Butterfield Stage
Road out to Rancho California Road; park plans have been left open to the
Parks Department for design; most of the drainage will flow to the west and tie
into the storm drain system in that area; and, Temecula Unified School District
Was present at all DRC meetings and have offered no comments.
Mary Jones, 32085 vista Del Monte, Temecula, reiterated her concerns for the
potential flooding to Walcott Lane, a decrease to the park si.te due to
improvements, and she advised that the developer had not discussed the
proposed project with her and she is an adjacent property owner.
B0 Kemble advised that the developer had a letter to grade from Marlborough
and a verbal authorization from an adjacent property owner off La Serena Way.
Mike Gray, representing the County Fire Department, stated that the County
currently acknowledges a deficiency in the eastern portion of the City;
however, the Fire Stations that will be built in that area rely on the development
of homes first. Mr. Gray advised the next fire station that is scheduled to built
will be located at Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79.
COmmissioner Fahey and Chairman Hoagland stated that they did not feel the
project offered adequate transition from agriculture to residential.
Mark Rhoades suggested that a condition be added requiring the developer to
advise potential property owners of the possibility of future implementation of
Wind machines at the vineyards.
PCMIN3/16/92
- 1 O- 3/20/92
pl ANNINP- COMMISSION MINUTFS MAFI.C:H 16.1992
Commissioner Chiniaeff moved to close the public hearing at 9:55 P.M. and Re-
affirm the Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 23209 and Adoot
Resolution No. 92-(next) approving Tentative Tract Map No. 23209 based on
the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report and subject to the
Conditions of Approval, deleting Condition No. 29 and Condition 17(d); and
addition of a condition requiring the applicant to advise property owners of the
possible future implementation of wind machines at the vineyards, seconded
by Commissioner Ford for the purpose of discussion.
Commissioner Ford recommended Condition 17 be amended to read 'Prior to
the issuance of the first occupancy permit or Model Complex Permit the
following Conditions shall be satisfied.'
AYES: 3
NOES: 2
COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford
COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Hoagla~d
Chairman Hoagland opposed the motion based on inadequate buffering on the
southwest portion of the tract.
Commissioner Fahey opposed the motion based on inadequate buffering of the
lots next to the vineyards.
IIII
.................. I II I ......
the east side of the southerly terminus of Front Street.
~:,-. Mark Rhoades summarized the staff report.
:t~IILi, ~F"B~'~th:,. Markham & Associates, 41750
53o~--~:~:~:I_, the ~b.':~ant, requested that Condition
~,~ 26 :~.is~ih~ , ~nty Flood Control re,
Temecuh
CC&R's,
removed.
~.'F/i: Righetti advised that ,.-,e
G]~IITTT;i4'I.], with this property
hh:1~T-- Marpie. 19210
L~.x.]l~llQ[~ Watershed .v -
drinking water/
Marpie
drain plan being done
}erty across the street.
-ta, representing Citizens F
' ;~ project is upstream
:qn at · minimal
· ,- rainfall run-of
PCMIN3/16/92
-11o
3/20/9 :~'
ATTACHN4F~NT NO. 4
STAFF REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MARCH 16, 1992
SXSTAFFRPT~209TTM.CC
11
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
March 16, 1992
Case No.: Tentative Tract Map No. 23209
Prepared By: Mark A. Rhoades
RECOMMEND/~TION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
RE-AFFIRM the Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No.
23209, and;
ADOPT Resolution No. 92-. recommending that the Planning
Commission approve Tentative Tract Map No. 23209 based on
the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATION iNFORMATION
APPLICANT: Michael Lundin/Laverda Edmond
REPRESENTATIVE:
Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates
PROPOSAL:
A 221 lot single family residential subdivision on 80 acres
LOCATION:
Easterly terminus of La Serena Way, west of Butterfield Stage
Road.
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
R-T (Mobile Home Subdivision, Mobile Home Park)
North:
South:
East:
West:
R-A-5 (Residential Agricultural, 5 acre minimum)
S.P. 199 (Margarita Village Specific Plan)
A-1-10-/R-R (Light Agricultural, 10 acre
minimum/Rural Residential)
R-T (Mobile Home Park, Mobile Home Subdivision)
N/A
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDIN
LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Low Density Residential
Vacant
Vineyard/Low Density Residential
Single Family Residential
S%STAFFRPT'~2320,9.TN
PROJECT STATISTICS
Gross Area
Total Proposed Lots
Total Density
Minimum Lot Size
Park Site Area
'80 acres
221 (220 single family residential lots, and I park site)
2.75 units/acre
7,200 square feet
2.9 acres
BACKGROUND
The proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 23209 was originally submitted to the County of
Riverside on October 19, 1988 with 304 residential ~lots. The project was approved by the
Riverside County Planning Commission on February 7, 1990 with 257 lots. The project was
transferred to the City of TemeCula in April of 1990.. On July 24, 1990, the City Council set
the project for Planning Commission hearing. At the Planning Commission meeting of August
6, 1990 the project was continued off-calendar in order to be redesigned relative to the issues
expressed by Staff. Those iss~jes included: the quantity of proposed earthwork, the need for
a traffic study, land use intensity, and the presence of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposal is to subdivide an 80 acre site into 220 single family residential lots and a 2.9
acre park site. The minimum lot size is 7,200 square feet. Lot sizes range from 7,200 square
feet to 16,000 square feet.
The project is located west of Butterfield Stage Road and east of the existing westerly
terminus of La Serena Way. A 2.9 acre public park is also proposed on the west side of the
project, north of La Serena Way.
ANALYSIS
Area Settinq
The 80 acre site lies in hilly terrain containing steep slopes in several areas and is traversed
by several well-defined washes. There is an existing single family residential development
west of the site. There are vineyards east of the site south of La Serena Way. Seven of the -
proposed lots adjacent to the future alignment of Butterfield Stage Road are directly across
from the vineyards. The rest of the site south of La Serena is separated from the vineyards
by a wedge shaped portion of Tentative Tract 23103. The area east of the site and north of
La Serena Way is vacant land zoned Rural Residential. There are scattered residences on large
lots north of the site, and the Margarita Village Specific Plan is south of the site.
Land Use/Area Comoatibilitv
The project site is currently vacant. Surrounding land uses include vineyards and low density
residential to the east, low density residential to the north, existing medium density (7,200
square feet) to the west and proposed low density residential to the south. The area to the
south is a portion of the Margarita Village Specific Plan.
S~.STAFFRFt%2320~.TTM 2
The proposed project is zoned R-T which allows for mobile home perks and single family
subdivisions. The proposed subdivision proposes lots which are a minimum of 7,200 square
feet, at an overall density Which is lower than the adjacent tract to the west.
The project is dompatible with area development. The proposal is a logical extension of the
tracts to the west, with large lots of approximately % acre on the eastern side to buffer the
vineyards and low density residential. Low density residential to the north will be buffered
by substantial Slope and drainage easements.
Vineyard ImDa~ts
Existing vineyards lie to the east of the project site and south of the future alignment of La
Serena Way. When this project was initially presented to the Commission, the adjacent
vintners opposed the projects approval. Representatives of the Callaway and Cilurzo wineries
indicated that proposed grading and lot elevations would disrupt air flow and drainage. This
air circulation iS necessary for the successful cultivation of existing crop.
Since the initial Planning Commissi~>n meeting, the project has been redesigned to allow for
the air flow required by the vineyards. The Callaway winery has submitted a letter to the City
accepting the proposed subdivision design.
Park Site ,
The proposed park site includes the vacation of the existing Waicott Lane right of way.
Walcott Lane has been realigned to the east of the park site.
The 2.9 acre park site will be fully improved by the developer with active park site amenities.
Staff has included a condition of approval which will require the park to be completed prior
to the issuance of the 75th occupancy permit of the proposed development.
The park will be improved.
Steohens Kanoaroo Rat (SKR)
A biology study was conducted for the site in 1989. At that time SKR habitat was identified
throughout the Site. Based on conversations with Brian Loew of the Riverside County Habitat
Conservation Agency, an SKR study is only valid for one year. The applicant stated that they
did not wish to ,complete a new study at this time because that study would probably expire
before grading commenced. Staff has included a Condition of Approval which will require a
new SKR study prior to the issuance of any grading permits. As a part of that condition, the
developer will be required to take whatever action is necessary to secure an allocation of take
for the endangered species.
S~STAFFRFT~3209.TTM 3
nmdina/Slooes
The original County approval for the proposed map would have required approximately
2, 150,000 cubic yards of earth movement. Of that total quantity, approximately 120,000
cubic yards would have been hauled off site. As a result of the total reconfiguration of the
map, the total earthwork has been reduced to approximately 980,000 cubic yards. The
reason for the reduction is that the proposed product more closely resembles the existing
natural topography. The street alignments and lot configurations have .been redesigned to
more closely approximate the natural drainage courses and hill sides located on site.
As mentioned previously, approximately 980,000 cubic yards of earth will be moved on site.
Some substantial 2:1 slopes will be created, especially along the proposed Butterfield Stage
Road alignment. The majority of the highest slopes will eventually be maintained by the
Temecula Community Services District. These areas include the slopes adjacent to La Serena
Way and Butterfield Stage Road. The balance of on site 2:1 slopes will be maintained by a
homeowners association.
Drainaae
Several drainage courses traverse the property, and the site is subject to storm run-off from
several small watersheds. The developer .proposes to intercept off-site runoff and convey it
through the site in a storm drain system. The tract is located within the Murrieta Creek/Santa
Gertrudis Valley and Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan. Drainage fees must be paid at the
time of recordation of the final map. Drainage easements must be obtained from affected
property owners for off-site drainage facilities. Said easements must be recorded prior to
recordation of the final map.
Traffic/Circulation
After the project was continued for redesign staff requested that the applicant conduct a
traffic study. The traffic study was subsequently submitted and found to be acceptable by
the City's Department of Public Works. The proposed site improvements will mitigate project
traffic impacts.
The circulation pattern of the proposed subdivision trends north/south and east/west. The
major north/south pattern includes Walcott Lane, the proposed Street "O" and the proposed
Street "B". The major east/west corridor will be provided through the improvement and
extension of La Serena Way. La Serena Way will extend to Butterfield Stage Road, a portion
of which will be improved by this development.
ZONING. SWAP, AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed project is zoned R-T which allows mobile home subdivisions and mobile. home
parks as well as single family residential development. Zoning to the west of the proposed
project is also R-T, and includes an existing single family subdivision. The northern boundary
and the northwest corner of the proposed project are bounded by land zoned R-A-5 and R-A-2
1/2. The design criteria of the R-T zone calls for a 15 feet common area buffer along
adjoining boundaries with land zoned R-A and a 20 foot common area buffer along streets
which are adjacent to land zoned R-A.
S%STAFFIqPT'~320~.TrM 4
Specific Plan No. 199 (Margarita Village) lies adjacent to the proposed project to the south,
southwest and Southeast. Portions of this Specific Plan are adjacent to the vineyards to the
east. These areas have density designations of 1 dwelling unit per acre and .7 dwelling unit
per acre. i
The SWAP designation for the project site is 2-4 dwelling units per acre, as is the designation
for the area weSt of the site. South of the project site is Specific Plan designation, and east
of the site is 2 1 t2 acre minimum and citrus/vineyard/rural policy area. The SWAP designation
north of the site is 1-2 dwelling units per acre.
The proposed density of Tentative Tract Map No. 23209 is consistent with the current SWAP
designation. In addition, the project is likely to be consistent with the future adopted General
Plan. The lot sizes on the western portion of the site are consistent with or greater than the
existing home sites adjacent. Further, the lots which would be adjacent to the vineyards are
a minimum of 32,000 square feet. These lots are to act as a buffer for the vineyards.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The environmental concerns posed by staff in August of 1990 included the proposed grading,
traffic, the existence of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, a Federally listed endangered species,
and land use intensity.
Since that meeting the proposed grading has been substantially reduced through the redesign
of the project. The overall earthwork quantities have been reduced from 2,150,000 cubic
yards to 980,000 (balanced cut/fill) cubic yards. Traffic impacts have been identified and
mitigated. The iDepartment of Public Works has found the traffic study submitted by the
applicant to be acceptable. The recommendations from that report have been incorporated
into the appropriate Conditions of Approval. Questions and mitigation relative to the
Stephen's Kangaroo Rat have also been addressed. Conditions of Approval mandate that a
new SKR Study and appropriate mitigation will be completed prior to the issuance of any
grading permits, Finally the land use intensity of the overall site has been significantly
reduced. Total lot count has decreased from the original 304 to the County approved 257,
and further, down to 220 with the current proposal.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
The proposed project has been adequately re-designed to mitigate the concerns originally
expressed by Staff. The right-of-way elevations of the future extension of Butterfield Stage
Road and the elevations of the areas west are acceptable to the vineyard operators to the
east.
The project as designed is consistent with the current zoning and SWAP designations on site.
In addition, the, project will likely be consistent with the City's future General Plan. All
potential environmental impacts have been or will be mitigated to a level of non-significance
through the Conditions of Approval. Staff therefore recommends that the negative declaration
be re-affirmed and that the Planning Commission recommend al~proval of Tentative Tract Map
No. 23209.
S%STAFFRFT~3209.TTM 5
RNDINGS
The proposed Tract Map.will not have significant negative impact on the environment,
as determined in the Initial Environmental Assessment prepared for Tentative Tract
Map No. 23209. A Negative Declaration is recommended to be reaffirmed.
There is a reasonable probability that this proposal will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepare at this time. The map is consistent with applicable subdivision and
land use ordinances, and conforms with the City's Southwest Area Plan (SWAP)
guidelines affecting the subject property.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with, the
future adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan. The project is consistent with surrounding development, and does not logically
have the potential to generate significant adverse environmental impacts.
The proposed use or action complies with City and State' planning and zoning laws.
Reference local Ordinances No. 348, 460, California Governmental Code Sections
65000-66009 (Planning Zoning Law), and Government Code Title 7, Division 2.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of parcel configurations, access, and density. The project has access to public
rights-of-way, and is designed with sufficient pad areas allowing appropriate building
pad sites.
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the initial study prepared for this project. Reference the
attached Initial Environmental Study and Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract
Map No. 23209.
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 project as conditioned.
e
The site for the proposed use is provided legal access via La Serena and Butterfield
Stage Road public rights-of-way. Development of these roads shall comply with City
Department of Public Works Conditions of Approval contained herein.
The proposed project will not inhibit or restrict future ability to use active or passive
solar energy systems. Adequate lot areas and exposures are provided for these
alternatives.
10.
The proposed use will not have a substantial adverse affect on abutting properties or
the permitted use thereof. The proposed map provides for residential development
similar in character and densities evident on vicinity properties. Land use incongruities
and associated adverse affects arising from implementation of this proposal are
unlikely.
S%STAFF'FFrr~23209.TTM 6
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
S%STAFFRPT%23209.TTM
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 23209 TO SUBDIVIDE 80 ACRES INTO 220
SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND a 2.9 ACRE PARK SITE IN THE R-T
ZONE LOCATED AT THE EASTERN TERMINUS OF LA SERENA
WAY AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S TRACT NO. 914-310-018
THROUGH 032.
WHEREAS, Michael LundinlLaverda Edmond filed Tentative Tract Map No.
23209 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 Tentative Tract Map on
March 16, 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 Tract Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OFTHE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Findings.
That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings:
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt
a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a generaj plan be adopted
or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan,
if all of the following requirements are met:
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
plan.
The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that the 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.
S~.STAFFIIwT%23201.TTM 9
e
(3)
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.
The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area Community
Plan, {heireinafter "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 proi)osed Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the SWAP and meets the
requirements set forth in Section 65360 of the Government Code, to wit:
A. The city is proceeding' in a timely fashion with a preparation of the general plan.
B. The Planning Commission finds, in recommending approval of projects and
taking other actions, including the issuance of building permits, pursuant to this
tide, each of the following:
(1} There is reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map No.
23209 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 current
SWAP and zoning designations.
(2)
(3)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or
interference with the future adopted general plan if theproposed
use or action is ultimately inconsistent with the plan, because it
is adjacent to uses which are similar in intensity.
The proposed use or action complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances, because the
project conforms with Ordinance No. 348 which conforms with
State Laws.
Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision
approved unless the followin9 findings are made:
may be
That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and
specific plans.
That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of
development.
S%STAFFRPl'~3209.TTM
10
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 proposed Tentative Tract
Map, makes the following findings, to wit:
The proposed Tract Map will not have significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Environmental Assessment prepared
for Tentative Tract Map No. 23209. A Negative Declaration is recommended
to be reaffirmed.
There is a reasonable probability that this proposal will be consistent with the
General Plan being prepared at this time. The map is consistent with applicable
subdivision and land use ordinances, and conforms with the City's Southwest
Area Plan (SWAP) guidelines affecting the subject property.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with,
the future adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan. The project is consistent with surrounding development, and
does not logically have the potential to generate significant adverse
environmental impacts.
The proposed use or action complies with City and State planning and zoning
laws. Reference local Ordinances No. 348,460, California Governmental Code
Sections 65000-66009 (Planning Zoning Law), and Government Code Title 7,
Division 2.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size
and shape of parcel configurations, access, and density. The project has
access to public rights-of-way, and is designed with sufficient pad areas
allowing appropriate building pad sites.
t
$'~STAFFRPT~320~.TTM I 1
The project as designed and conditioned will not adversely affect the built or
natural environment as determined in the initial study prepared for this project,
Reference the-attached Initial Environmental Study and Conditions of Approval
for Tentative Tract Map No. 23209,
The design of the subdivision, the type of improvements and the resulting
sl~reet layout are such that they are not in conflict with easements for access
through or use of the property within the proposed project as conditioned.
The site for the proposed use is provided legal access via La Serena and
BUtterfield Stage Road public rights-of-way. Development of these roads shall
c{~mply with City Engineering Conditions of Approval contained herein.
The proposed project will not inhibit or restrict future ability to use active or
passive solar energy systems. Adequate lot areas and exposures are provided
for these alternatives.
The proposed use 'will not have a substantial adverse affect on abutting
properties or the permitted use thereof. The proposed map provides for
residential development similar in character and densities evident on vicinity
properties. Land use incongruities and associated adverse affects arising from
implementation of this proposal are unlikely.
As conditioned pursuant to SECTION III, the Tentative Tract Map is compatible with
the health, safety and welfare of the community.
SECTION II. 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 a Negative Declaration, therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTION III. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Tentative T~act Map No.
23209 for the subdivision of 80 acres into 220 residential lots and a 2.9 acre park site in the
R-T zone located at the easterly terminus of La Serena Way and known as Assessor's Tract
No. 914-310-016, 914-310-018 through 032 subject to the following conditions:
1. Attachment 2, attached hereto.
S~STAFFRPT~23209.TTM 12
SECTION N.
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:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
S%STAFFtFT~3.209.TTM 13
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
S~TAFF!~eT~3209.TTM
14
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
CITY STAFF REPORT
S%STAFFF~:~23209,TTM
3O
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
August 6, 1990
Case No.: Tentative Tract No. 23209
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council DENY Tentative Tract No. 23209, based on
the analysis and findings contained in this staff report.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Owner:
Applicant:
Engineer:
Proposal:
Location:
Area Plan:
Zoning:
Surrounding
Zoning:
Laverda Edmond
Alba Engineering, Inc.
Alba Engineering, Inc.
To subdivide an 80 acre site into 257 parcels with a minimum lot
size of 8,000 square feet.
West of Butterfield Stage Road, east of Walcott Lane, and
approximately 1.25 miles north of Rancho California Road.
2-4 dwelling units per acre
RToMobile Home Subdivision (also permits conventional dwelling
units)
North:
South:
RA-5 and RA-2 1/2, Residential Agricultural
S-P, Specific Plan (Margarita Village)
Surrounding
Land Uses:
East:
West:
North:
South:
East:
West:
A-1-10, Light Agriculture and R-R, Rural Residential
R-T, Mobile Home Subdivisions and Mobile
Home Parts
Scattered single family residential
Vacant - Masterplan undergoing grading
Vineyards and vacant land
Single family residential, undergoing grading
with some construction underway.
Project
Information: Density: 3.21 dwelling units per acre
Acreage: 80 acres
No. of Units: 257
STAFFRP'I%TT2:3209
ANALYSIS
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Tentative Tract Map No. 23209 was continued from the County Planning Commission
Hearing of December 20, 1989, at the request of the applicant and the City of
Temecula. The; County Planning staff was concerned that the proposed subdivision
was incompatible with the vineyards east of the site and was not consistent with the
Southwest Area Community Plan design policy,'requiring buffers to minimize land use
conflicts between agricultural land uses and other land uses.
County staff pointed out that the Margarita Village Specific Plan south of the site
stipulates densities of one (1) dwelling unit per acre and 0.7 dwelling units per acre
adjacent to the vineyards. County staff also requested that the applicant redesign the
project with Iot~s of at least 10,000 square feet, gradually transitioning to 20,000
square feet adjjacent to the vineyards east of the site. The applicant refused to
redesign the project, and County staff prepared a recommendation of denial.
Subsequent to ~he continuance from the hearing of December 20, 1989, the applicant
met with County planning staff. The applicant agreed to incorporate sloped
landscaped buffers 20 to 40 feet wide along Butteffield Road and 20 to 50 feet wide
along the portion of La Serena way which is visible from Butterfield Stage Road.
Block walls are included at the tops of the landscaped slopes. These provisions
satisfied the County staff, and a recommendation was made at the Planning
2
Commission hearing of FebrUary 7, 1990, to adopt the Negative Declaration, to
approve a waiver of the required lot length to width ratio for Lots 76, 102, 103, 136,
137, and 14,1, and to approve Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amendment No. 4. The
County Planning Commission recommended that the City of Temecula adopt the
Negative Declaration, approve the waiver of lot length to width ratio, and approve the
Tentative Tract.
AREA SETTING
The 80 acre site lies in hilly terrain containing steep slopes in several areas and is
traversed by several well-defined washes. There is an existing single family residential
development and another development under construction west of the site. There are
vineyards east of the site south of La Serena Way. Seven of the proposed lots are
directly across the future alignment of Butterfield Stage Road from the vineyards. The
rest of the site south of La Serena is separated from the vineyards by a wedge shaped
portion of Tentative Tract 23103. The area east of the site and north of La Serena
Way is vacant land zoned Rural Residential. There are scattered residences on large
lots north of the site, and the Margarita Village Specific Plan is south of the site. The
site is near a designated Stephen's Kangaroo Rat habitat and areas of sensitivity for
archaeological and paleontological resources.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposal is to subdivide an 80 acre site into 257 single family residential lots.
The minimum lot size is 8,000 square feet. Lot sizes range from 8,000 square feet
to 16,000 square feet.
As a buffer between the proposed project and the vineyards east of the project site,
the proposed map shows landscaped slopes 20 to 40 feet wide along Butterfield
Stage Road and 20 to 50 feet wide on both sides of La Serena Way. The map
indicates a six foot block wall at the top of the landscaped slopes. Portions of 43 of
the proposed lots are contained in the landscaped slopes which are to become a
landscape easement maintained by a homeowner's association.
A waiver from the subdivision design standard that lot depth shall not exceed 2 1/2
times the lot width for lots of 18,000 square feet or less is requested for six 'of the
proposed lots. One of the six lots is located on a cul-de-sac. The others abut straight
or slightly curved streets.
SITE AND A~REA CONDITIONS
ACCESS
3
Access to the isite from paved and maintained' streets is taken from La Serena Way
on the westerly side of the site, and from Butterfield Stage Road on the easterly side
of the site. The nearest major arterial street with freeway access is Rancho California
Road. '
TRAFFIC IMPACT
A traffic studly was not submitted to the County for the project in question.
Therefore, information is not available regarding estimates of project generated traffic
and traffic impacts on the levels of service of streets in the vicinity. The Southwest
Area Community Plan suggests a target Level of Service C and a target peak level of
Service D. The project could be inconsistent with the Area Community Plan on the
basis of project generated peak hour traffic impacts on Rancho California Road at
Highway 15. The County Road Department specified a fee of $150 per lot for traffic
signal improvements. A traffic study is still needed in order to determine the
distribution and volumes of existing traffic, projected future traffic, and traffic
generated by the proposed subdivision.
GRADING
Tentative Tract Map No. 23209, Amendment No. 4, indicates that the project as
designed would require over two million cubic yards of excavation on the site. There
would be 2, 158,759 cubic yards of cut, 2,037,969 cubic yards of fill, and 120,790
cubic yards of earth exported from the site. An average of approximately 7,900 cubic
yards of earth per lot would be moved on the site, and an average of approximately
470 cubic yards of earth per lot would be exported from the site. This amount of
excavation constitutes a substantial alteration of the existing terrain. Staff suggests
that topographic alteration to this extent substantially alters the character of the site
and diminishes the character and flavor of the communiW as a whole.
It should be noted that a substantial amount of grading will occur in conjunction with
the construction of Butterfield Stage Road regardless of how the subject property is
developed.
DRAINAGE
Several drainage courses traverse the property, and the site is subject to storm run-off
from several small watersheds. The developer proposes to intercept off-site runoff
and convey it through the site in a storm drain system. The tract is located within the
Murrieta Creek/Santa Gertrudis Valley and Temecula Valley Area Drainage Plan.
Drainage fees! must be paid to the Coun~ Road Commissioner at the time of
recordation of;the final map. Drainage easements must be obtained from affected
property owners for off-site drainage facilities. Said easements must be recorded prior
to recordation of the final map.
Proposed parcels 160 through 1 71 are shown on the map as being located downslope
from several .parcels of Tract No. 22148. The slopes shown do not reflect the
existing grading of the p~rcels in Tract 22148 or the proposed pad elevations of
Parcels 160 through 171 on the subject Tentative Tract Map. The non-existent slopes
shown on the map in Tract 22148 should be deleted in order to avoid raising
unnecessary concerns regarding drainage.
KANGAROO RAT HABITAT
A biological'! survey revealed that the Stephens Kangaroo Rat occupies parts of the
site. Prior to issuance of grading or building permits for the site, the secretary of the
interior must have approved the Stephens Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan and
issued a Section 10 (a) permit for incidental taking of Stephens Kangaroo rats. A
report documenting the amount and quality of the species habitat subject to
disturbance or destruction by the proposed tract must be submitted and approved by
the Planning Director. Any disturbance to the site requires appropriate federal permits,
including grading, disking, clearing, and construction.
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT
The proposed density of 3.2= units per acre is consistent with the Southwest Area
Community Plan (S.W.A.P.) designation of 2-4 residential units per acre. All of the
proposed lots contain at least 8,000 square feet of total area and conform to the
minimum lot width and depth requirements of the RT zone. However, the usable area
of 43 of the proposed lots is reduced by the landscaped slope easement and the block
wall. Fifteen of the lots have less than 7,200 square feet of usable area. Some
parcels have as little as 6,000 square feet Of usable area. Eight of the proposed lots
do not have 100 feet of usable lot depth. Lots with less than 7,200 square feet of
usable lot area are not consistent with the intent of the SWACP designation of 2-4
units per acre. This intensity of development may not be consistent with the Future
General Plan given the natural topography and adjacent vineyard.
PROJECT NOT CONSISTENT WITH SWACP POLICIES
SWACP General Design Policy states that adequate buffers shall be encouraged in
order to minimize land use conflicts between agricultural operations and other land
uses. The vineyards east of the site are part of the citrus/vineyard/rural policy area.
One of SWACP goals for this policy area is to preserve the rural lifestyle and wine
making atmosphere of the area. A landscaped slope 20 to 40 feet wide and a block
wall are inadequate as a buffer between a rural vineyard area and the proposed 257
lot subdivision. A development of lesser intensity would be more compatible for a site
in proximity to a vineyard and adjacent to areas zoned for 1/2 acre lots and the
portion of the Margarita Specffic Plan containing one acre lots abutting
southeasterly Side of the subject property.
PROJECT NOT COMPATIBLE WITH MARGARITA VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN
the
The proposed tract is not compatible with the Margarita Village Specific Plan south
of the site. The Margarita Village Specffic Plan stipulates densities of 0.7 to 1.0 unit
per acre adjacent to the vineyards.
LAND USE
The proposed intensity of residential development is inappropriate for the property in
question. The hilly terrain of the site and the proposed amount of excavation in
excess of two million cubic yards of cut and fill indicate that residential development
of a substantially lower density than that proposed would be more appropriate. The
location of the site adjacent to a vineyard also suggests a lower intensity of
development pursuant to SWACP policies encouraging buffers between agricultural
operations andi other land uses and preservation of the rural life style and wine making
atmosphere of the vineyard areas.
FINDINGS
Due to its hilly terrain and the adjacent agricultural use, the site is not
physicaly suitable for the proposed density of development.
e
The proposed intensity of development is inconsistent with Southwest Area
Community Plan (SWACP) policies encouraging adequate buffers between
agricultural uses and other land uses and preservation of the rural lifestyle and
wine making atmosphere of the adjacent vineyard area.
The proposed tract is not compatible with the Margarita Village Specific Plan
south of the site in that the specific plan stipulates densities of 0.7 to 1.0
dwelling unit per acre adjacent to the vineyards.
The proposed subdivision is technically consistent with the requirements of the
R-T zone regarding lot area and dimensions and conforms to the density of 2-4
units per acre as designated in the SWACP. However, the landscape easement
along Butterfield Stage Road and La Serena Way reduces the usable lot area of
fifteen lots to less than 7,200 square feet of lot area and the usable depth of
eight lots to less than 100 feet. A total of 18 lots do not have adequate usable
lot area and/or usable lot depth to satisfy the minimum requirements for lot area
and dimensions in the R-T zone. Said 18 lots are not in conformance with the
intent' of the SWACP land use designation of 2-4 units per acre.
Six of the proposedlots do not conform to subdivision design standard that lot
depth: shall not exceed ,2 1/2 times lot width.
There is a possibility that the proposed subdivision will be inconsistent with the
policies and land use designations of the City's General Plan when it is adopted.
The City has 30 months from the date of incorporation to adopt a General Plan.
There is a possibility that the proposed subdivision could constitute a
substantial detriment to or interfere with the City's General Plan.
Since no traffic study was conducted for the project, the volumes, distribution,
and impacts of project generated traffic on the streets in the vicinity are
undetermined. It is possible that cumulative traffic impacts could result in
levels of service inconsistent with the requirements of the Southwest Area
Community Plan and/or the new City General Plan when it is adopted. It would
be inappropriate to adopt a Negative Declaration and approve Tentative Tract
No. 23209 in the absence of a traffic study.
Tentative Tract No. 23209 is consistent with the State Subdivision Map Act
regarding passive use of solar energy that the proposed lots have significant
southern exposure which allows for passive heating opportunities.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council DENY Tentative Tract No. 23209 based on
the analysis and findings contained in this staff report.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23209
RECOMMENDATION
That the City COuncil SET FOR HEARING Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amendment No.
4 on July 24, 1990.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Request Filed:
Case No.:
Representative:
Proposal:
Location:
Zoning:
Surrounding
Zoning:
Surrounding
Land Uses:
Project
Statistics:
County Planning, April 6, 1990
Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amendment No. 4
Alba Engineering, Inc.
To subdivide an 80 acre site into 257 single family residential lots
with a minimum area of 8,000 square feet per lot.
West of Butterfield Stage Road, east of Walcott Lane,
approximately 1.25 miles north of Rancho California Road.
RT
North: RA-5 and RA-2 1/2
South: S-P
East: A-1-10 and R-R
West: RT
North:
South:
East:
West:
Scattered single family residential
Vacant
Vineyards
Single family residential existing and under
construction.
Tentative Tract Map for 257 lots on 80 acres. The minimum
proposed lot size is 8,000 square feet.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
Tentative Tract: No. 23209, Amendment No. 4 was tentatively approved by the
Riverside County Planning Commission on February 7, 1990. The case was
transferred to the City of Temecula with a RECEIVE and FILE recommendation.
AREA SETTING:
The site which is currently vacant is located in hilly terrain primarily characterized by
steep slopes. The site is traversed by several westerly trending washes. A biological
field survey has identified Stephen's Kangaroo Rat habitat on the site. There are
scattered single family residences on large lots north of the site. The land east of the
site is a vineyard. There ~re single family residences west of the site, both existing
and under construction. The currently vacant land south of the site is part of the
Margarita Village Specific Plan.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO 23209
STAFF CONCERNS
Staff recommends that the project be set for public hearing because of concerns
which include the following issues:
The intensity of the proposed grading over two million cubic yards of cut and
fill on 80 acres is severe· Staff requests policy direction on earth movement
of this intensity.
A traffic study was not conducted for this project. There is no information
available regarding traffic impacts and projected levels of service of streets in
the vicinity.
e
There is a possible land use intensity conflict with the future General Plan
regarding appropriate development in this hilly area adjacent to the
citrus/vineyard agricultural area. Appropriate buffer densities are in question.
The apparent presence of the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat raises questions not yet
addressed by the City.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council SET FOR HEARING Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amendment No.
4 on July 24, 1990.
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
COUNTY STAFF REPORT
S%STAFFRPT'~32Og. TTM 3 1
SUBMITTAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF TEHECULA
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FROH: R~verside County Planning Department SUBMITTAL DATE: Apzil 6,
SUBJECT: ~ENTATZ~E TRACT NO.~'23209, AHENDED NO. '4 - ~l~a C~n~tin= -
First Supervisorial District - Skinner Lake Area - ~0 Ac~es -
257 Lots -Schedule A - R-T Zoning.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
REC~IVF AND FILP the above referenced case acted on ~y the
COmmiSSqOn on February 7, 1990.
THE PLANNING CONMISSION
ADOPTFD the Negative Declaration for Environ~enta
33254 base~ on the findings incorporated ~n the en~iro~me~ta1
assessment anO the c~nclusion that the proposeO project w~ll not
have a s,gn~ficant'ef{ect on the environment; and
APPROVPD TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23209, AMENDED NO. 4 su~3e~t t.o the
attache~ conditions and based on the f':nd'ngs an~ conclus~o,~s
~-corpcrated in the Planning Commission mindtee dated ~ebruary 7,
~99C.
J~seph'~A. R~char.-s, P~ann~ng
PROJECT LOCATION:
The project is locate~ we~t o~ Butterfield Sta~e
Road and north of Rancho Cali~ornna road in the
of Temecula.
BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amended No. 4. q-s a propcsal ~c
subdqviOe 80 acres into 257 lots. The property in Question is zoned P-
T. Surrounding zoning is A-1-10, R-R, R-A-5, R-A-2 1/2, R-T. and
Specific Plan No. 194 (Margarita Village). The property in question is
currently vacant. Surrounding land uses include vineyards, scattered
large lot residential, residential under construction, and Specific Plan
No. 194. The proposed project design is compatible with the existing
vineyards adjacent to the east, and the project design is consistent
with the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan Land Use Polqc~es
and the General Design Considerations of the Southwest Area Community
Plan which call for adequate buffering between agricultural land uses
and resqdential land uses. All environmental concerns outlined in the
environmental assessment can be m~tigated through the conditions of
approval.
RIVERSZDE COUNTY PLNINZNG COffiqTSSZON F!ZNUTES FEBRUARY 7, 1990
· ,seN:[N.G_plRECTOR'S R!~PORT
lit. RtchardS 9aft a brtef report on various matters ~h~ch he felt would be of
Interest to ithe C~_las4eners. He announced that Ketth Downs had been chosen
Assistant P11nntng DIrector, Me Jotted down smee 1dais and isked for tnput on
free the Celtsstoners regarding Uly/mtng calendars. He noted that the
Planntng Cammission and Recording Seereta, t e111 be alterMttng in order to
(AGENDA ITDI 1 - Tape No. 1A)
TRACT HAP NO. 23209, AHENDED NO. 3 - EA 33254 - Alba Consulting - Skinner Lake
Area - First Supervisortel* District - west of Butterfield Stage Rd and Le
Serene klay, lnorth of Rancho California Rd - 257 lots - 80: acres - R-T Zone -
Schedule A (Cont. from 12/20/89)
Hearing waslopened at 9:16 a.m..and was closed at 9:26 a.m.
STAFF RECOI~ENDATION: Adoption of the Negative Declaration for EA 33254 and
approval of Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amended No. 4, based on the findings and
conclusions listed tn the staff report. The applicant proposed to subdivide 80
acres into 256 lots on property located west of Butterfield Stage Road and
northerly of Rancho California Road. The stte is presently zoned R-T.
Surr~undingl zoning is R-A-5, R-A-2~, R-R, A-1-10, and R-T. The site is h~l]y,
vacant land~ traversed b:y several washes. Surrounding land uses are vineyards,
Spectflc Plan. No. 194
an approved; tract under construction, and vacant land.
(Nargartta ¥111a ) is located to the south, southeast and southwest.of the
site. The istte ~es ~thin the new~y Incorporated Ctty of Tmnecula and within
the approved Soutl~est Area Com~jntty Plan. The pro;Ject's proposed density of
3.8 dwelltrig units per acre ts consistent ~lth the Z to 4 dwelltm3 units per
acre of the! SklAP. Stiff ortgtnalqy had concerns about the sqte's compatibility
w~th tHe vtjneyards to the elst. After discussions ~th the applicant, the
pro:Ject's destgn wtll ~nclude a landscaped, buffer zone and I block vaT1 along
Butterfield Stage Road. Staff added the following three additional findings:
11. There ts a reasonable probability that the pro;~ect w~11 be consistent
~th the General Plan proposal betrig considered or studied by the Ctty
of 'Tmmecula, or ~htch ~111 be studted ~dthtn I relsonible time by the
Ct of Tmecula.
1Z. ~Yre ts little or no probability of substantial detriment to or
taterferonce ,lth the Ct~y of Tmmecull's future adopted kneraq Plan if
13. The IroJect all other Upl~c~ble requ~rments of State
law aml loc~1 ordinances.
lls. Lind "v~sed that these flndtm3s are required because the Planntng
r4mm~ss~on ~s act~m3 as the planning agency for the day. The C~ty of
RIVERSTDE COUNTY PLANN:ZNG COlet:[SSTON H:ZNUTES FEBRUARY 7o 1990
Temecula does not have a general plan, and has 30 months tn .htch to form one.
ProJects are allowed to be approved withtn that ttme, however. providing that _~
the above ftndtngs are made.
Cmmtss(~ner Beadllng asked where the ctty's boundary was. and ms advised that
tt was along the edge of the vtneymrd area. In answer to Cmmtsstoner
Beldltnl, Iqr. k13fs satd that he ms not ire that staff had any conversations
rlth the ct~y regerdtng Protection of the vineyards, but the tntent of the wall
end landscaping was to buffer the vtneyard area frem the project. They could
1repress upon the Ctty Manager the tmporUnce of buffering the v~neyard area.
CmmtSstoner Turner satd that from what he his seen, 1;he C11;y ~end$ to be more
conservative than the County.
TESTIIqONY OF. PROPONENT:
R~chard Cruzen (Alba Engineering, 41890 Enterprise Ctrcle South, Tenecula) said
that they concur wtth the recommendations of staff and the conditions of
approval.
Staff ended Condition No. 21.b. by mddtng: "...vlth the exception of Lots
76, 102. 103, 136,137 and 141." Comtsstoner Donehoe asked ~f the right to
farm ordinance was tn the conditions of approval. Hr. PacHott satd no, and
that tt should be. Due to the A-1-10 zontn9, staff reconmended adding a
requirement for an ECS to ~nclude the language from the right to farm
ordinance, which would affect all lots within 300 feet of the A-1-10 zoning.
The hemrtng was closed at 9:26 a.m.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amended No. 4, ~s a
proposal to subdivide 80 acres tnto 257 lots; the property tn questton is zoneu
R-T; surrounding zontng ts A-1-10, R-R. R-A-5, R-A-2~ and R-T; the property ~n
questton ts currentl~ vacant; surrounding land uses tnclude vineyards,
scattered lmrge lot residential. residentIll under construction end $pectf~c
Plan No. 194; the project 1(as withtn the newl~ ~ncorporated Ctty of Temecula;
the proposed project denstry of 3.8 dwelltrig untts per acre ts consistent wtth
the Southwest Area Co,mnuntt~ Plan designation of 2-4 dwelltrig untts per acre;
the proposed project ~estgn ts compatible with the extstln9 rlneyar~s adjacent
to the east; the proposed project aestgn ts :ons(stent with the kneral Plan
Land Use Pol~ctes and General Destgn Considerations of the Southwest Area
CemmunlV Plan whtch calls for adequate buffering between agricultural land
uses and residential land uses; and all envtro~ntal concerns can be mitigated
through the conditions of approval; there (s a reasonable probability that the
prOJect WIll be consistent with the General Plan proposal hetng constderod or
studted by the Ct~ of Temecula. or whtch will he studted withtn a reasonable
ttme by the Ct~y of Tmmecula; there ts little or no probtbtlttOf of substantial
Cart(met to or (ntarference with the Ctty of Temcula's future adopted kneral
tlmn If the project ts ulttmttl~ lnconstmtont with the Plmn; end, the project
cmpltes with all other ~ppltcable requtremnts of State la~ and local
Ccmprehenshe kneral Plan~ ,and, envtro~ntJ1 concerns can he mitigated
thrOMgh the conditions of aplrovll.
~
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING COHNISSION IqlNUTES FEBRUARY 7. 1990
MOTION: UpOn rotton by Commissioner Turner, seconded by Cmmtsstoner Wolf, and
unanimously icetried, the Cmmtsston racemended to the City of Temecula
adoptton of ~the Negattve Declaration for EA 33254, approval of the waiver of
ratto for Lots 76, 102,103, 136, 137, and 141, and
the lot le_ngth-to-wtdth
32
· prove1 of Tentmthe Tract Map No. 2 09, kendad No. 4, tn accordance with
~condtttOns of ipproval as amended this ate, and based on the above listed
findings and conclusions.
XTDI 2-1 - Tape 1A)
:IONA~ USE PEIIqlT 3036, AMENDED NO. I - EA 33805 - Chevron U.S.A., Inc. -
la Area - First Supervisortel District - 0.75~ acre, north of Rancho
nia ld, east of Front St - To replace existing service station with new
(Cont. from 2/20/89) -
Hearing
roened at 9:26 a.m. and was closed at 9:36 a.m.
STAFF
approval c
No. 1, based on
was continued in
time to datemine
ant proposes ~o replace an existing service station
on 0.75 acre located north of Rancho California Road
LONS: Adoption of the Negative Declaration for EA 33805 and
tonal Use Pemtt No. 3036, Amended No. 1, Planning Correction
findings and conclusions in the staff report. This item
to allow staff, County Counsel and the City Attorney
the County or the City of Tamecola would be the legal
4
hearing body. The
with a new !service
and east of' Front Street. irroundtn9 land uses are commercially developed
properties. Zoning on site C-l/C-P, and surrounding zoning is M-N and
C-1/C-P. l~he project lies the Southwest Territory Land Use Planning
Category II land uses at this tim.. Staff
Area and ft'ts the requirements ~
added the following findings:
4. There is a reasonable probabil that the project will be consistent
with the General Plan pro osal ng considered or studied by the City
of leecula, or which wtl~ be stu within a reasonable tim by the
Ct~ of Tamcould.
5. The' is little or no probability of stanttal detriment to or
inhereflorence with the Ct~ of Teecola' future adopted General Plan
the project is ultimately Inconsistent wi tthe.P, lan. if
6. The roJect camplies with all other mppltca e requirements of State law
and ~;cml ordinances.
$tmff mlded the f~llmwtng Condition 35 (ranumbering Co tlons 35 and 36 to
read 36 aml 37): "Thts ;emit will allw the sale of bee and wine only and no
hard liquor will he ellowed to
Ccmmmtsstoner Turner ~oted that the geologist had qutte a blt 1~ ~y about
ltWefacttOn and alternatives for mitigation, primarily regard1 lacement of
advised that the elevation ms referencing the 100 year flo~l. Cmmts oner
Turner sat~ that the eater lines on some of the old buildings
Zontng Area: Sktnner Lake
Sularvisorlal Nstrlct: Ftr~t
E,A. Number: 33254
Regional Team No.: One
TEIrrATZVE TRACT NAP NO. 23209
MENDED NO. 4
Plennlng Ceeelsston: 2-7-90
Continued free 12-20-89
Agenda Ztem No.: 1
RZVERSZDE COUNTY PLANNZNG DEPARTNEWT
STAFF REPORT
'2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Applicant:
Engineer/Rap.:
Type of Recluest:
Location:
Extstlng Zontng:
Surrounding Zoning:
SIte Characteristics:
Area Characteristics:
Comprehensive General Plan
Designation:
Land Division Data:
Agency Recommendations:
Letters:
Sphere of Znfluence:
Alba Consulting
Alba Consulting
Subdlvtdl 80 acres tnto 257 lots
West of Butterfield Stage Road and northerly
of RlnchO California Road
R-T
R-A-5, R-A-2 1/2, R-R, A-1-10, R-T, and SP
199
HIlly vacant land traversed by several
washes.
VIneyards, vacant land and an approved tract
under construction
Lend Use: Category ZZ
Denstry: 3.8 delllng units per acre
Total Acreage: 80
Total Lots: 257
DU Per ACre: 3.8 d~ellingunltsperacre
Road: 01-24-90
Health: 01-22-90
Flood: 01-22-90
Flre: 01-22-90
Bldg. I Safety:
Land Use: 01-24-90
Grading: 01-23-90
OPpostng/Supperttng: None '
Not wtthln a ctty sphere
ANALYSZS:
Prolect Descrlotl~n:
Tract Nap No. 23209, Amended No. 3 proposes to subdivide 80 acres tn 257 lots, The
proposed project ls located ~est of Butterfield Stage Road and north of Ranch
California Road In the newly Incorporated CIty of Temecula,
Land Use/ZonlnQ:
The proJect slte Is presently vacant. Surrounding land uses Include vineyards adjacent
to the east, scattered large lot residential to the north, residential under
construction to the west, and Speclfl~ Plan No. 194, Nargartta VIllage, to the south
southeast and southwest.
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 23209, AND. NO. 4
Staff Report
Page -2-
southeast, and southief.
General Plan Constltencv and Area Cop~xttbtlltY:
The pro3ect stte ms of December 1, 1989 1tea vtthln the newly Incorporated CIty of
Temecula. The pro;act also 1tea wtthtn the spproved Southwest Area Community Plan.
The Sk~AP designation for thts site 18 2 to 4 d~elltng untts per acre. The pro~ect's
proposed denstry tsi 3.8 d~el llng units per acre Is consistent wtth the SWAP designated
density for the site.
The proposed project ts zoned R-T ~hich allo~s mobilehome subdivisions and mobilehome
parks as well as stngle family residential development. The pro3ect stte Is adjacent
to vineyards to the east ~htch are designated s CItrus/VIneyard/Rural Policy Area on
the Southwest Area Community Plan. The northern boundary and the northwest corner of
the proposed project are bounded by land zoned R-A-5 end R-A-2 1/2. Spectftc Plan No.
194, Hargartta VIiliege, 1tea ad;iscent to the proposed pro;ject to the south, southwest
and southeast. Elements of thts Specific Plan are ad;iacent to the vineyards to the
'east. These elements have density designations of one (1) d~elltng untt per acre and
(.7) dwelling units per acre. Clearly, these lud density designations In Spectftc
Plan No. 194 are de;signed to buffer the htgher denstry elements of SP No. 194 from the
vineyards to the slat.
The General Design Considerations sectton of the Southwest Area Community Plan states
that, "Adequate buffers shalq be encouraged In order to mtnlmlze land use conflicts
between agricultural operations and other lend uses." Staff ha$ re~luested that the
project be designed wtth buffers along the boundary adjacent to the vineyards. Staff
has also requested the project be destgned with larger lots of 10,000 square feet ~n
the western porttons of the project, transittoning to 20,000 square feet on the eastern'
boundary of the project adjacent to the vineyards and the 1o~ denstry element of SP
No. 194. The project applicant has refused to destgn the proposed pro~ect to meet
these concerns and as such the proposed pro3ect 13 incompatible ~lth the extsttn9
vineyards ed3acent~ to.the east.
Staff ftnds that the proposed pro~ect has a denslty ~hlch Is consistent wtth the Lend
Use Element of the Soutl~eat Ares Coalsunity Plan, but the destgn of the pro~ect ts not
consistent wtth th· element of the Southwest Area Community Plan ~hlch calls for
adequate buffertngl between agricultural land uses end residential land uses, and that
the proposed pro3ect as destgned ts Inconsistent ~lth the compatibility re(lulrements
of the Southwest Area Community Plan. Therefore, Staff ftnds this project to be
Inconsistent ~lth the Comprehensive General Plan and Incompatible wtth area
dave 1 opment.
TENTATZVE TRACT NAP NO. 23209~ AND, NO. 4
Staff Report
Page 3
Environmental Artfirsts:
An tntttal study for Environmental Assessment llo, 33254 via done for the project,
The Environmental Assessment t~entlfted the following concerns: Stephens' Kangaroo
Rat Habttat (SKR), slopes, vegetation, energy resources, Paleontologlcal resources,
and schools.
BIological report No. 361 was prepared for the project site. This report identified
Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Habitat on the project site, Conditions'have been drafted and
approved by County Counsel for cases where Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Habitat has been
Identified tn areas outstde established Stephens' Kangaroo Rat study areas. The
conditions of approval for this case Include the applicable SKR conditions. These SKR
conditions requtrea habitat conservation plan be established prior to the tssuance
of butldlng or grading permits, and that the project comply wtth the provisions of this
habttat conservation plan. Exhlbtt D 1denttries the areas of the proposed project
vhich has Stephens' Kangaroo Rat Habitat.
The project proposes significant cut and ftll slopes. This concern can be addressed
through the recommendations outltned In the County Geologist's letter. All other
environmental concerns vill be mitigated through the conditions of approval,
FINDINGS:
Tentative Tract-No, 23209, Amended No.'3 ts a proposal to subdivide 80 acres tnto
257 lots,
The property In quasalon ls zoned R-T.
Surrounding zontng ts A-1-10, R-R, R-A-5, R-A-2 1/2, R-T, end $pectftc Plan No.
194.
The property tn questton ts currently vacant.
Surrounding lend uses Include vineyards, scattered large lot residential,
residential under construction, and Spectflc Plan No, 194.
The project 1tea wtthtn the newly Incorporated CIty of Temecula.
The proposed project density of 3.8 d~e111ng units per acre ls consistent vlth
the SouthveSt Area C~untty Plan designation of 2-4 d~elllng units per acre.
The proposes project destfn Is Incompatible vlth the existing vineyards adjacent
to the east.
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23209, AMD. NO. 4
Staff Report
Page 4
e
10.
The proposed pro3ect design ts inconsistent vtth the Genera~ Lend Use Policies
and General Design Considerations of the Southwest Area Community Plan which call
for adequate buffering between agricultural land uses and residential land uses.
All environmental concerns can be mitigated through the conditions of approval.
CONCLUSZONS:
1. Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amended No, 3 Is tnccxnpat~ble w~th Area Development.
2. Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amended No, 3 ts Inconsistent with the compatibility
reQuirementS of the Southwest Area Community Plan and therefore is inconsistent
w~h the Comprehensive General Plan.
RECOHHENDATIONS:
pENIAL OF TENTAT!ZVE TRACT NO. 23209, ANENDED NO, 3 based on the findings and
conclusions as found in the staff report.
RW:lgg
12-11-89
FURTHER PLANNZNG CONSZDERATIONS: Date: February 7. 1990
Tentative Tract Nap No.23209 was continued from the December 20, 1989 Planning
Commission Hearing at the reauest of the Ctty of Temecula. The applicant had met with
staff prior to the December 20, 1989 Planning Commission Nearing to request a
continuance and a meeting with staff to address staff's concern about the pro3ect
design. Staff and the applicant have met, and as a result, the applicant has
Incorporated landscape buffers and block walls into the pro~ect design to address
staff's concerns !about pro3ect compatibility wtth the vineyard area adjacent to the
east. Staff finds that the pro3ect design now meets Its concern about compatibility
wtth area develoOment. The redesigned tract (Tract No. 23209, A~. No. 4) reflects
these changes.
Therefore, staff now finds the pro3ect to be consistent with the compatibility
requirements of the Southwest Area Community Plan. The destgn of the pro3ect is
consistent w~th the element of the Southwest Area Conm~unlty Plan calltrig for adequate
buffers between agricultural uses and residential land uses, and that the pro~ect is
consistent with the Comprehensive General Plan and compatible wtth area development.
The conditions of approval have been amended in order to reflect amended pro3ect
design.
TENTATIVE TRACT NAP NO. 23209, AND. NO. 4
,tall Report
,~age 5
FTNDZNGS:
Tentative Tract Map No. 23209, Amended No. 4 tS a proposal to subdiv~Oe 80 acres
into 257 Tots.
The property in question is zoned R-T.
Surrounding zoning is A-1-10, R-R R-A-5 R-A-2 1/2 R-T and Specific Plan No.
194. ' ' ,
The property in question is currently vacant.
Surrounding land uses include vineyards, scattered large lot resident:~l
residential under construction, and Specific Plan No. 194. '
The project lies within the newly incorporated Clty of Temecu'a.
The proposed project density of 3.8 dwelling units pet acre is corsistent with
the Southwest Area Community Plan designation of 2-4 ~wellinS u~its per acre·
The propossd Project design is compatible with the existing vineyards adjacent
t: the east·
10.
11.
The propose~ Project design is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Policies
an~ General Design Considerations of the Southwest Area Community Plan which call
for adequate buffering between agricultural land uses an~ residential land uses.
All environmental concerns can be mitigated through the conditions of approval.
There is a reasonable probability that the project will be consistent with the
General Plan Proposal being considered or studied by the City of Temecula, or
which will be. studied within a reasonable time by the City of Temecula. (Adde:
by Staff 2-7-90)
12.
13.
There is little or no probability of 'substantial detriment to or interference
with the City of Temecula's future adopted General Plan if the project is
ultimately inconsistent with the Plan. (Added by Staff 2-7-90}
The project complies with all other applicable requirements of State Law and
local ordinances. {A~ded by Staff 2-?-90)
CONCLUSIONS:
Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amd. No.4 is compatible with area development.
Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amd. No. 4 ~s consistent with the Southwest Area
Community Plan, and the Comprehensive General Plan·
The environmental concerns can be mitigated through the conditions of approval.
,ENTATIVE TRACT NAP NO. 23209,-AMD. NO. 4
Staff Report
Page 6
RECONNENDATZONS:
ADOPTZON cf a Neg!ative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 33254 ~ased on the
conclusion that tihe pro3ect will not have a significant effect on the envircnment; and.
APPROVAL of the waiver of the lot length-to-width ratio for Lots 76, 102,103, 126,
137, and 141; (Added by Staff 2-T-90); and
APPROVAL of TENTATIVE TRACT 23209. AND. NO. 4, subject to the conditions of approval.
Rw:~gg ....
1/24/g0
~ TR 2;5209 A LAND USE I ~
I? I~// l iI ' _,_,s_T~__.
fl SCATTERi~'D il:kv/ "m~p
.-- ,,, t,.! ~ ,..~z',,;:,,,-."*..,,,
/ < L'r'~-J"-JL , ic,_, .__...,,
u/~. ~,~~... ,""' ....""
GRADED_ i! VINEYA $ HILLY
: 1 t, ~~==~==.~-.=~-~.-'.'. ' ....._..--
~ '
.. ,VINEYARDS \
-*: ,~'. HILLY
VAC//,~. ~ "~, /-."-"' ~...-
LOCATI~NAL MaP
AiN}. ALBA CONSULT}NG i
Lime eO AC. INTO 2 5 7 LOTS
AMII SKINNER LAKE Sup.Dkt. Ist
Sac. :19 T.?~R. 2W. A-~ll.wc:x's Bk. 914 Pg. 31
'Ck:dsUcm LA SERENA WY. --SECONDARY-- 88'
Elmmint BUTTERFIELD STAGE RD.--iRTERIAL-- I10'
_- ..--: Rd. tr, l:g. DSC l:)ste 11/2C)/89 Orewn By
NO 8t~ALE
/77
' s /"A-1-10
SP ZONE ' '
q"'
/,~4]'/~NAt Nap
:'U,e! 80AC. IT0 257 LOTS eee~ w~.
let,: E9 T. TGJq, ll Aleeeam"s BIc 914 PO. Sl "1
Cku, ll1:kxl LA SE:RENA W'I: --SECONDARY--
Baleant BLrFTERFF, LD STAGE RD.--iRT~-- I10
'|"N Ik R;. ssc b ',raw,' "'Drown ey ~/f.
~ ,teN' ,~ .
~..;.~ ;'::~,'
..~-~,
· DISTRIBUTIOI~ OF STEPHENS' DUIrmAR~ RAT (SKR)
TENTATIVE I'R,~T lEO. Z3~09
RZVERSZDE COIJNTY PLANNZNG DEPART'NEtrr
SUaDZVZSTON
CONDZTZONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 23209
ANENDED NO. 4 !
DATE:
EXPZRES:
STANDARD COIIDZT{ONS:
The folloWring conditions of approval are for Tentative Tract No. 23209, Amended
No. 4.
The subdt;vtder shall defend, Indemnify, end hold harmless the County of
Riverside, tts agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding agethat the County of RIverside, tts 8pnts, officers, or em~oloyees
to attack,~ set aslde, vold, or annul an approval of the County of Riverside,
advisory agencies, appeal boards., or legislative body concerning Tentative Tract
No. 23209,i Amended No. 4, which action ts brought wlthln the time period provided
for tn California Government Code, Section 66499.37. The County of Riverside
will promptly notify the subdivider of any such clatm, actton, or proceeding
against the County of Riverside and will cooperate fully in the defense· ]:f the
County fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or
proceedin9 or fat ls to cooperate fully tn the defense, the subdivider shall not,
thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the County of
Riverside.
The tentative subdivision shall comply wtth the State of California Subdivision
HaD Act and to all the recluirements of Ordinance No. 460, Schedule A, unless
modifted by the conditions listed belov.
This condlttonally approved tentative map will exptre two years after the County
of R1verslde Board of Supervisors approval date, unless extended as provlaed by
Ordinance:No. 46U.
The final map shall be prepared by a 11cansad land surveyor subSect to all the -
reautrements of the State of California SubdIvision Nap Act and Ordinance No.
460.
The sulxItVlder shall submit one copy of a solls report to the RIverside County
Surveyor'S Offtce and two coptea to the DepartJeent of Bulldlng and Safety. The
report shell address the soils stability and geological conditions of the stte.
Zf any gradtng tf proposed, the subdivider shall submit one prtnt of
comprehenSIve gradtng plan to the Department of Building and Safety. The plan
shall comply wtth the Untform Butldlng Code, Chapter 70, as amended by Ordinance
No. 457 and as may be additionally provided for tn these conditions of approval.
A gradtng permit shall be obtatned from the Department of Butldlng end Safety
prtor to commencement of any grading outstde of County maintained road right-
of-way.
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23209
AMENDED NO. 4
Conditions of Approval
Page 2
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be patd prtor to recordat~on of the fina~
map.
The subdivider shall comply wtth the street Improvement recoeveendatlons outlined
In the Riverside County Road Department's letter dated 6eptembef-~r-HJ~9T,
January 24, 1990, a copy of whtch ts attached. (~meneed by Staff 2-7-90)
Legal access as requtred by Ordinance No. 460 shall be provtded from the tract
map boundary to a County maintained road.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the publlc and shall
continue .~n force unttl the governing body accepts or abandons such offers.
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Road
Commissioner. Street names shall be subSect to the approval of the Road
Commissioner.
Easements; when reQutred for roadway slopes, drainage facilities utilities
etc., shall be shown on the final map tf they are located within the land
division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted
and recorded as directed by the County Surveyor.
water and sewage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the
provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health I)epartment's letter dated
~ueJ~St-q~T-t~J~, January 22, 1990, a copy of which is attached. (Amended by Staff
2-7-90)
The subdivider shall comply wtth the flood control recoew~endattona outlined by
the Riverside County Flood Control Dtstrlct's letter dated BeptmRbef-~r-~
January 22, 1990, a copy of which is attached. Zf the land dtvtalon lies within
an adopted flood control dralnage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of Ordinance
No. 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area dralnageflctlltles shall
be collected by the Road Commissioner. (Amended by Staff 2-7-90)
The subdivider shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
tn the County Fire Narshal's letter dated A~J~ge-e9T-IH~, January 22, 1990; a
copy of which Is attached. (Amended by Staff 2-7-90)
The subdlytder shall comply wtth the recommendations outltned In the Butldin9
and Safety Department - Land Use Sectlon's transmit,a1 dated SeptembeHT-HJ~T,
January 24, 1990, a copy of whlch Is attached.
The subdivider shall comply wtth the recommendations outltned tn the Building
and Safety Department - Grading Sectlon's transmit,el dated Gep~lMIdief-JFT-~8gT
January 23, 1990, a copy of which Is attached. (Amended by Staff 2-7-90)
'ENTATZVE TRACT NO. 23209
ANENDED NO. 4
;ondltions of Approvaq
· Page 3
19.
20.
The subdivider shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the County
Geologist's transmittal dated April 28, 1989, a copy of which is attached.
$ubdivisian phasing, including any proposed common open space area improvement
phasing, ill applicable, shall be sub3ect to Planning Department approval· An),
proposed phasing shall provide for adequate vehicular access to all lots ~n each
phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and putross o~ the
subdivision approval·
Lcts crea~ed by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
All lots shall have a minimum s~ze of 8,000 square feet gross.
All lot length tO width ratios shall be in conformance with Sectic- 3.8C
o~ Ordinance No. 460 witr, the exception of lots ?6, 102, 103, ~36= 137.
and 141. {Amended at Planning Commission
Corner lots and through lots, if any, shall be provided with additional
area pursuant to Section 3.BE cf Ordinance No. 460 an~ so as not to contain.
less net area than the least amount of net area in non-co-net and through
letS.
Lots created by this subdivision .shall be in conformance with the
oevelopment standards of the R-T zone·
When lots are crosse~ by major ~ublic utility easements, each lot sha!~
have a net usable area of not less than 3,600 square feet, exclusive of
the utility easement.
Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free condition
andishall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other
erosion control measures as approved by the Director of Building and
Safety.
TraSh bins, loading areas, and incidental storage areas shall be located
away and visually screened from surrounding areas with the use of block
wal}s and landscaping·
'ENTATZVE TRACT NO. 23209
AMENDED NO. 4
Conditions of Approve3
Page 4
22.
23.
24.
Prior to the RECORDATION of the final map, the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
am
Prior to the recordation of the final map, the applicant shall.submit
written clearances to the Riverside County Road and Survey Department that
all pertinent requirements outlined in the attached approval letters from
the following agencies have been met:
County Fire Department County Health Department
County Flood Control County Planning Department
County Parks Department County Airports Department
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board
Prior to the recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet
(ECS) shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate identifqed
environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the off~ce of the
County Surveyor. 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.
a ,
The following note shal~ be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet:
"County S~ope Stability Report No. 115 was prepared for this property and
is on file at the Riverside County Planning Department." {Ranumbered by
Staff 2-7-g0]
The landscape easements shown on Tentative Tract Hap No. 23209, Amd. No.
4 shall be delineated on the environmental :onstraints sheet. (Added by
Staff 2-7-90)
The notice appearing in Section 6.a of Ordinance No. 625~ the Riverside'
County Right-to-Farm Ordinance, shall be placed on the Environmental
ConStraints Sheet, with Lots No 110-134, 242-255, and 6-10 identified
therein, in the manner provided in said Section 6.a., as being located
partly or wholly within, or within 300 feet of, land zoned for primarily
agricultural purposes by the County of Riverside· {Added by Planning
Commission 2-7-90)
If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits, an
overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planntn9 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
sedimentation during Rnd after the gradin9 process.
erosion and
'ENTATZVE TRACT NO. 23209
ANENDED NO. 4
Conditions of Approval
Page 5
Approximate time frames for grading and identification of areas
which may be graded during the higher probability rain months o~
January through Hatch.
Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
25.
26.
27.
All cut slopes located adjacent to ungraded natural terrain and exceed ten (10)
feet ~n vertical height shall be contour-graded incorporating the fo'low~rg
gFadln9 techniques:
The angle of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted tc 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 curves wqth radii
designe~ in proportion to the total height of the slopes where
drainage and stability permit such rounding.
Where cut and/or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizo~ta~ length,
the horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous,
unOulatin9 fashlor,.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall provide evidence
tc the Director of Building and Safety that all 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 BUILDING PERMITS, the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
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 reau~ring
landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard
landscaping.
RoofSmounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted wqthin the
subDiivision, however, solar equipment or any other energy saving Devices
shall be permitted with Planning Department approval.
All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic
irrigation·
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 23209
NqENDED NO. 4
Conditions of Approve]
Page 6
28.
29.
30.
Prtor to the tssuance of OCCUPANCY PERNITS, the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prtor to the ftnal bulldtng Inspection approval by the Building and Safety
Department a 6 fat high block well she11 be constructed along the
landscape easement as ShcNn on Tentative Tract Nal} No. 23209, Amd. No. 4,
end a 6 feet htgh block wall shall be constructed along the perimeter of
the l}roJect on all lots and portions of lots along the perimeter of the
pro~ject not covered by the landscape easements. (Amended by Staff
2-7-90)
All landscaping and irrigation shall be Installed ~n accordance wtth
approved l}lans and shall be vertfted by a Planntng Del}artment field
Inspection.
Development Nltlgatlon fees shall be patd Jn accordance wtth County
Ordinance No. 659.
Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed throughout the subdivision In
accordance wlth the standards of Ordinance No. 461.
Street trees shall be planted throughout the subdivision in accordance with
the standards of Ordinance No. 460.
Prior to tssuance of grading permtts a Paleontologtcal Study shall be performed
and submi!tted to the Planntng Department for approval. Zf the potential for
paleontologjcal resource are 1denttried l}rtor to the tsauance of grading permits,
a Qualifl,ed paleontologist shall be retained by the developer for consultation
and comment on the l}roposed 9radtn9 ~tth respect to potentlal pmleontologtcal
lml}acts. Should the l}aleontologlst flnd the potential ts high for impact to
significant resources, a pre-grade meetlng between the paleontologjst and the
excavation and grading contractor shall be arranged. tehen necessary, the
l}aleontologtst or representative shall have the authority to temporarily dtvert,
redlrect or halt gradlng acttvlty to a11o~ recovery of foestls.
Prtor to the tasuance of gradtng or butldlng permtt:
The Secretary of the Znterlor must have ell},}roved the Stephens' Kangaroo
Rat Habitat Conservation Plan and any l}roposed taktng of the SKR must be
tn compliance vlth the el}proved plan.
The Secretary of the Znter~or must have Issued to the County, the Sectton
lO(a) Permit reclutred by the Endangered Species Act of 1973 end satd Permit
must be tn effect; and
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 23209
ANENDED NO. 4
Conditions of Approval
Page 7
31.
32.
A re~rt, prepared by a biologist pemltted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Serv'lce to tr~p the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat for scientific purposes,
documenting the mm~nt Ind queltty of occupted Stephens' Kangaroo Rat
Habt'.at aub;lect to disturbance or destruction must have been subeitted to
and _pproved by the Planntng DIrector.
Prior to the Issuance of a grading or butldtng permtt, the applicant shall comply
wtth the provision of Ordlnmnce No. 663 by praytrig the appropriate fee set forth
in that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of
a Habitat Conservation Plan prtor to the payment of the fee requtred by Ordinance
No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee reclulred by the Habitat Conservation
Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution.
Prior to the recordat,on of the ftnal subdivision map, the subdivider shall
submit the following documents to the Planntng Department for review, which
documents shall be sub3ect to the approval of that department and the Office of
the County Counsel:
1. A declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions; and,
A samDle document conveyin9 tttle to the purchaser of an Individual
lot or unit which Drovtdes that the declaration of covenants,
conditions, and restrictions ts incorporated therein by reference·
The declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions submitted for
review shall (a) Drovtde for a mtnimum term of 60 years, (b) provide for
the eStablishment of a property owners' association comprised of the o~ners
of each individual lot or unit as tenants tn common, and (c) contatn the
following provisions verbatim:
"Notwithstanding any provision in this Declaration to the contrary,
the following provision shall apDly:
The property o~ners' association established heretn shall manage and
continuously maintain the 'common area', more particularly described
on "Tentative Tract Nap No. 23209, Amd. No. 4", attached hereto, and
shall not sell or transfer the 'co~w~on area' or any part thereof,
absent the prtor written consent of the Plannlng Dtrector of the
County of RIverside or the County's successor-In-interest.
The property o~ners' association shall have the rtght to assess the
ovners of each Individual lot or untt for the reasonable cost of
maintaining the 'coRs~on area' and shall have the rtght to 1ten the
property of any such o~ner who defaults In the payment of a
maintenance assessment. As assessment 1ten, once created, shall be
prior to all other 1tens recorded subsequent to the notice of
assessment or other document creattng the assessment 1ten.
TENTATZVE TRACT NO. 23209
AMENDED NO. 4
Conditions of Al~provel
Page 8
Thts Oecllratton $hall not be termtnatecl, '$ubmtantlmlly' amended, or property
aleannexed:therefrom absent the prtor wrttten consent of the Planntn9 DIrector
of the County of Rlver$t~e or the County'$ successor-In-interest- A proposed
amendment $hall be considered 'substantial' tf tt effects the extent, usage, or
maintenance of the 'common area',
In the event of any conflict between this I)eclaratton and the Arttcles of
Incorporation, the Bylaws, or the property ovners' association Rules and
RegulateoRs, tf any, this Declaration $hell control,"
Once approved, the declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be
recorded at the same time that the final map ls recorded. (Added by Staff 2-7-90)
RW:csf,lgg
12/11/89
1/25/90
OFFICE OF ROAD COMMISSIONER & COUNTY SURVEYOR
Januar~ 24, 1990
Ci(X)),"T,/AD~f~'TRATrV[
P.'iAU. LI~
P 0 BOX
RNT..KSIDE.. CAUTOK~L4 9254:112
(714)
Riverside County Planning Commission
r , CA 92501
Ladies !and Gentlemen:
Tract 23209 - Amend #4
Schedule A - Team 1 - SHD #9
AP #111-111-111-9
~ith respec~ to the conditions of approval for the
referenced tentative land division map, the Road Department
recommends that the landdivider provide the following street
improvements, street improvement plans and/or road dedications in
accordance with Ordinance 460 and Riverside County Road
Improvement Standards (Ordinance 461). It is understood that the
tentative map correctly shows acceptable centerline elevations,
all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses with
appropriate Q's, and that their omission or unacceptability may
require the map to be resu~nitted 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 to
describe the conditions for a complete design of the improvement.
All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall
be referred to the Road Commissioner's Office.
The landdivider shall protect downstream properties from
damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns,
i.e., concentration of diversion of flow· Protection
slhall be provided by constructing adequate draina. ge
f~acilities including enlarging existing facilities and/
or by securing a drainage easement. All drainage
easements shall be shown on the final map and noted as
follows: "Drainage Easement - no building, obstructions,
or encroachments by land falls are ellowed". The
protection shall be as approved by the Road Department.
The landdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all
offsite drainage flowing onto or through the site· In the
eVent the Road Commissioner permits the use of streets for
ainage
inancepurposes, the provisions of Article XI of
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.
4080 LF. NO!~ STRF. ET · IUYI2SIDL CALDORNM 92.%01
January 24, 1990
Page 2
10.
12.
13.
Major drainage is involved on ~/tis landdivision and its
resolution shall be as approved by ~he Road Deparra~nt.
Streets "A", "B", 'C", "D", "E", "G", "H", "J", "L" and "M"
Shall be improved within the dedicated right of way in
accordance with County Stabaxed No. 104, Section A.
( 40'/60' )
Streets "F" and "I" shall be improved within the dedicated
right of way in accordance with County Standard No. 105,
Section A. (36'/60')
La Serena Way shall be improved within the dedicated right
of way in accordance with Coun=y Standard No. 102, Section
A. (66'/88', including 32'/44' along APN 914-310-006)
Butterfield Stage Road shall be
dedicated right of way in accordance
No. 100, Section A. (43'/55')
hnproved within the
with County Standard
Walcott Lane shall be improved with 32 feet of asphalt
concrete pavement within a 45 foot pert width dedicated
right of way in accordance with County Standard No. 103,
Section A. (22'/33')
Corner cutbacks in conformance with County Standard No. 805
shall be shown on the final map and offered for dedication.
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 Cc~mnissioner. Completion of road
improvements does not imply acceptance for maintenance by
County.
Standard cul-de-sacs and knuckles and offset cui-de-sacs
Shall be consUructed fJ~roughout the landdivision.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less
th~n fourteen days following placement of the asphalt
surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per
square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section 37,
39 and 94 of the State Standard Specifications.
The landdivider will provide east and west bound left turn
lanes on La Serena Way at the intersections with Street
'B', Street 'J' and Butterfield Stage Road as approvedby
the Road Department.
'aanuary 24, 1990
Page 3
55
18.
19.
20.
21.
21a.
22.
The landdivider shall provide utllt~y clearance from Rancho
California Water DtsUrlct prior to the recorda~ion of the
fine.1 map.
The maximum centerlAne gradlent and the minimum centerline
All centerlAne intersections shall be at 90° with a minimum
50' tangent measured from flow lane or as approved by the
ROad Conwnissioner.
COncrete sidewalks shall be constructed throughout the
landdivision An accordance with County Standard No. 400 and
401 (curb sidewalks).
T~.u minimum lot' frontages along the cul;de-sacs and
. ckles shall be 35 feet.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable Riverside
The minimum garage setback shall be 30 feet measured from
the face of curb.
The landowner/developer shall provide/acquire sufficient
pUblic offsite rights of way to provide for primary and
secondax7 access road(s) to a paved and maintained road.
Said access road(s) shall be constructed in accordance with
COunty Standard No. 106, Section B. (32'/60') at a grade
and alignment approved by the Road Comissioner.
Said offsite access road shall be the westerly extension of
La Serens Way to the paved and maintained portion.of La
Serena Way or as approved by the Road Commissioner.
Said offsite access roads shell be ~he southerly and
easterly extensions of Butterfield Stage Road to Rancho
California Road or as approved by the Road Cc~ssioner.
PEior ~o the recordation of the final map, or the granting
of a waiver of the final map, the developer shall deposit
with the Riverside County Road DaUnt, a cash sum of
$150.00 per lot as mitigation for traffic signal impacts.
Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment, a
written agreement my be entered into with the County
deferring said payment to the time of issuance of a
building permit.
.danuary
Page
3e
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
Electrical a~d cmnun~cations trenches shall be provided ~n
accordance vith ~e 461, STandard 817.
Lot access shell be restricted on Butterfield Stage Road
and La $erena Wa~ and so noted on -...he final map.
Landdivisions creating cut or fill slopes adjacent to the
streets shall provide erosion control, sight d~stance
cont~-ol and slope easements as a~ b~ the Road
oepartmento
When blockwalls are required to be constructed on top of
slope, a debris retention wall shall be constructed at the
SUrest right of way line to p~wvent silting of sidewalks as
approved by the Road Cooeissionat.
If the existing right of way along La Serena Way exceeds
that which is required for this project, the developer may
submit a request for the vacation of said excess right of
way. Said procedure shall be as approved by the Board of
Supervisors. If said excess or superseded right of way is
also County owned land, it may be necessary to enter into
an agreement with the County for its purchase or exchange.
The applicant by design is requesting a vacation of the
existing dedicated rights-of-way along South General Kearny
Road end the 66 foot road easements as shown on the
underlying P.N. 1/44-46. Said vacation shall be applied
for by the applicant end approved by the Board of
Supervisors prior to the recordation of the final map or
any phase thereof.
The street design and improvement concept of this project
shall be coordinated with PM 1/44-46, PM 14/93-95, PM
88/49-50, Tentative TRs 23101, 23103, 22148 and 20761.-
Street ligh=ing shall be required in accordance with
Ordinance 460 and 461 throughout the subdivision. The
County Service Ares (CSA) Administrator determines whether
this proposal qualifies under an existing assessment
district or not. If not, the lend owner shall file, after
receiving tentative approval, for an application with LAFCO
for annexation into or creation of a 'Lighting Assessment
District' in accordance with Governmental Code Section
56000.
All private end public entrances and/or intersections
opposite this project shall be coordinated with this
project and shown on the street improvement plans.
Tract 23209 - Amend #4
~anuary 24, 1990
Page 5
32.
33.
A s=riping plan is required for La Serena Way and
Bu=~erfield S=age Road. The removal of T~he existing
s~riping shall be ~he responsiblli=y of applican=. Traffic
signing and s~riping shall be done b~ County forces wi=h
&11 incurred costs borne by ~he applicant.
Pursuan~ ~o Sec=lon 66493 of =he Subd~vision Map Ac~ any
subdivision which is par~ of en existing Assessmen~
Dis~ric~mus= cc~nply wi~h ~he requirements of said Section.
Road Division Engineer
· *-:.~,..". '.r.,,· ~'-~:-.:",..; · *. ' '*:':** ':*'.: ·
· '..::,.i':~::!:.~'*:i.~:~:i~'.~!::':,':...''-' ''. :."
.-"'~"::.""· ..';'::';' ·'TRACT/PAI{CEL MAP I!
..' .::. :,:.,.f..~,~,-f,.-,~.;,.... ,..- . .....
o-' ',.:.,.-. , ,;,~ .. : . .. ' . ;.°".
.,... ...,~.~., .: - ,. , : ,-. .
·:,:!~>: i,,~::~:i;:~.'.(~...:,'....,: '., ......_ .......... .: ~7 .
.~:::~ ~,-';,,~:ii:'!;'7~:. ~.. ,.': ,...."...:,:~;'~':-,i,!.i.'.;::..:,!:q,c'.:,.:,:...,...':'... · ..-;:.... ,
OG'F~:'~:;%';" ""':' ~'.of:.v,'-~:;~'~-;~"-~r~"..:,,.are still:..Cu~ren~ for
Revis'ed~nork'Change Nap J~o.:'. ""'(-)/'. ":da~ed'
:: .~:.-.',.;.'.,~..~:~,.~':..,,':',~:,,..,ri: :.. ~..: ~.,,;.,-.....,>.r.:,,' · · .,..: ....· .. · .. ,.., ...
....:,: ~-:~,:~.~.!:~,,?,. :,.'.'1~ ..- . :' .' ? ... -.- .;, .-..:- .: ., - . - · : ·
... ....:i:;:',~:.:: ' '-":'. '* .- :- *. ..... :* ' '
: .:...:..:::,;.~. :~':~ ,: · · . .. · .:. - :..'. :. '. .
· ...'.:1 .~ ~',.~}S ' '~.t.; ,,, · .' . :. '.' *':, ' .'J ': ..,,~... :'~ '. ,': ....
: _ ~r . . . T..~ ': :=.}~;.' "' .' ..
"""' "" '~'~,' ',~~'-"' 7-~-.:~
· . .'.' ..... , ".', .... "': .."...? Dat. e
oI lvers_ae
TO: RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNIN6 DEPT.
DATE: ,,tingust 16, 1989
ATTNT~ndy Wilson
FROM: AM M~RTINEZ, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SPECIALIST IV
"~C:MAP23209, AMENDED NO. 3
RE: [
Environmental Health Services has revieved Amended No. 3 dated
August 15, 19189 . Our current comments viI1 remain as stated
in our letter dated January 26, 1989.
SM:tac
GEN. FORM 4. (by. 8/871
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
lemwglmmmalmek mEak~m
3011t, mlml!~ ItlE[~
· ulD~?m ImO&Dwmv
COIIOemA. CA I1?10
Illit
IllDID. CA IllOl
ILlll
I~llb fl&lll Dm
ILleL. G~ IIllO
T II~IIE
IlltO
Iltv!lllll(. C&
fill m$1l~me kVT:)
DEPARTMENT
of HEALTH
ii
IllmS IIt~ ITIKIT MAId, INNT elfPiCK IO! 18?0) · IIIVJllSIPl, ii. Illel
January 26. 1989
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING Dg:PT.
4080 Lemon Street
RXversZde, CA 92502
ATTN: Aleme C-~d~
!t~; TRACT )lAP 23209: All that certmXn real property
sXtuated zn the unzncorporated item of the County of
RXversxde, State'of CalXforn~a, descrxbed ms Pmrcels 1,
6, 19, 20, 31 and 50 as shown Zn document recorded
June 27. 1986 ss lnstrument No. 1SO0S of Rovers:de County
Records, all in the Xurrxeta portion of the Temeculm Ranthe.
ms shown by map of the Temecula Land lnd Wmter Compmny, on
f~le xn Book 8, Page 359 of maps, records of Smn Dxego
County, Calxforn~m
(304 Lots)
Gentlemen:
The Department of Pu~lxc Health has revxeved Tentatlve Mmp
No. 23209 and recommends thmt:
h water system shall be ~nstslled according to
plans and specification as approved by the vmter
compsny &rid the Health Depmrtment. Permanent
prznts of the plans of the water system shall
be ,ubmXtted Xn triplicate. with a minimum ,c, le
not Is** th,n one inch equals 200 feet. along vxth
the ormgin*l drawing to the County Surveyor. The
prXnt, ,hall ,how the Znternal pSpe di,meter.
IOCat:~On Of VaJVel &rid f~re hydr&nt,; p~pe
jo,nt ,pecific,txon,. ,rid the size of the m, mn
,t the 3unction of the new ,y, tem to the
exi,ting ,y,tem. The plane ,h, lZ comply ~n
,~Z re,pact, with D~Y. 6. P, rt l. Chapter 7 of
the CalXfornl* Health Lnd Safety Code, Cal~fDrn~,
Admini,tr,t~Ye Code. Tmtle 22, Oh,pier 16. ,rid Gener,]
Order No. 103 of the Pubmic Ut~lmtie, Comam,sxon of the
State of CslZfornX** when ,ppl~c,ble.
Riverside Coxrnt~ Planning Dept.
Page 'Two
Attn: Alex Germ
january 26, 1989
The plans shall be signed
!water company with the following certification: "l
[certify that the design of the water system in Tract
Nap 23209 1, accordance with the water system exp,ns~on
plans of the Rkncho California Water District
and that the water service,storage and distribution
system will be adequate to provide water service to
such tract. Th~s certification does not constitute a
guarantee that it will supply water to such tract at
!any specific q~Jantitles, flows or pressures for f~re
protection or any other purpose". This certification
shall be signed
company.
Th~s Department has g statement from Rancho California ~ater
D~str~ct agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every
~o~ ~n the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory
f~nanczal arrangements are completed v~th the subd~v~der.
It v~ll be necessary for the f;nanc~al arrangements to
made prior to the recordat~on of the final map.
This Department has a statement from the Eastern Ntrn~c~pal
Voter D~str~ct agreeing to alloy the subdivision sewage
system to be connected to the sewers of the Dlstr~ct. The
sewer system shall be Installed according to plans and
speczf~cat~ons as approved by the D~str~ct, the County.
Surveyor and the Health Department, Permanent prints of the
plans of the sewer system shall be submitted In triplicate,
alon[ with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor. The
prints shall show the Internal pipe diameter, location
manholes, complete profiles, pipe and 3olaf specifications
and the slte of the sewers at the 3unction of the new sysLem
to the exusting system. I single plat indicating location
of sewer lines sad water lines shall be a portion of the
sewage plans and profiles.
The plans shall be signed by a registered engineer and the
sewer district with the following certification: 'I certify
that the design of the sewer system In Tract Map 23209 is
accordance with the sewer system expansion plans of the
Eastern Municipal Water D~strlct and that the waste disposal
system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated
wastes from the proposed tract."
RxversZde County Pl&nnxng Dept,
Page Three
Attn: AAex Gann
j&nuar~ 26. 1989
zt_c zds Zgu_9 _ bt_L ui -ms -
It v~11 be necessary for f~nancZai arrangements to be
completely final~zed prior to recordation or the fZnaJ map.
It v~l be necessary for annexaLzon proceedzngs Lo be
completely fZnalxzed prior to recordatzon of the txnal map.
EnvxrOnmen~al Health Services
SH:tac ~
KENNETH L IrDWAItDS
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
I~IVERIIDE. C. ALIFORNIA 12502
Riverside Coun!ty
Pl arming Department
County Adminis ratave Center
Riverside, California
1995 MARK['r STREET
Im-O BOX 1033
TELEPHONE (714) 717'2015
FAX NO (714) ?88-9965
Attention: Regtonal Tea No I
Pllmnnerl~..:r~ ~,'~o~
Re:
We have reviewed this case and have the following coments:
Except for nuisance nature local runoff which 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.
traverse the property. There is adequate area outside of the
natural Watercourses for building sites. 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 minimum of
supports.'
This project is in the Area
drainage plan fees shall be paid in accordance with the applicable r~les and
regulations.
The proposed zoning is consistent with existing flood hazards. Some flood
control facilities or floodproofing may be required to fully develop to the
implied density.
..V//The District's report dated ~-~ep*.2~ Iqgi is still current for this project.
__ The District does not object to the proposed minor change.
This project is a part of The project will he
free of ordinary storm flood'hazard whe~'improvemen{~'~ave been constructed :,,
accordance with approved plans.
The attached connents apply.
~ H. KASHUBA
ior Civil Engineer
DATE: J .- ,.. l.~ I GI qO
·
RIVERSIDE COUNTY IrLOOD CONTROL AN D
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
September 2~, 2989
BOX 1033
Riverside County
Planning Department
County Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attentionz Regional Team No. i
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re: Tract 23209
Amended No. 3
This iS a proposal to divide 80 acres in the Rancho California
area. The site is located on both sides of La Serene Way west of
Butterfield S~age Road.
The topography of the area consists of well defined ridges and
naturaZ watercourses which traverse the property. The site is
subject to s~orm flows from several watersheds. The developer ~
proposes to intercept these offsite flows and convey them through
the tract in a storm drain system. Onsite flows are proposed to
be conveyed through the street system and into storm drain sys-
tems. The-diversions being created by the storm drain picking up
flow between Lots 119 and 120. and Lots 163 and 164 is acceptable
since Tract 23101 has accounted for these flows.
Following'are the District's reconn~endationsz
1. This tract-~s located within the limits of the
Murrieta Creek/Santa Gertrudis Valley and 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 ~dministration of Area Drainage Plans'. amended
February 16, 1988:
a. Drainage fees shall be paid to the RDad Commissioner
as part of the filing for record of the subdivision
final map or parcel map. or if the recording of a
final parcel map is waived. drainage fees shall be
paid as a condition of the waiver prior to recording
a certificate of compliance evidencing the waiver of
the parcel map~ or
Riverside. County
Planning Department
Rez Tract 23209
Amended No- 3
-2-
September 27, 1989
b. At the option of the land divider, upon filing a re-
quired affidavit requesting daferment of the payment
of fees, the drainage fees may be paid to the Build-
ing Director at the time of issuance of a grading
permit or building permit for each approved parcel,
whichever may be first obtained after the recording
of the subdivision final map or parcel map~ provided
however, this option to defer the fees may not be
exercised for any parcel where grading or structures
have been initiated on the parcel within the prior 3
year period, or permits for either activity have been
issued on that parcel which remain active.
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".
Offsite drainage 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.
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-
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
Rez Tract 23209
Amended No. 3
-3-
September 27, 1989
Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented
immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition
of debris onto downstream properties or drainage
facilities·
If the tract is built in phases, each phase shall be pro-
tected from the 1 in 100 year tributary storm flows.
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final
map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic cal-
culations should be submitted to the Diettic= via the
Road Department-for review and approval prior to recorda-
tion of the final map. Grading plans should be approved
prior to iscuance of grading permits.
Ouestions concerning this matter may be referred to Zully Smith
of this office at 714/787-2333.
c, Alba Engineering Inc.
/ ry truly yorr ,
~OHN~H. KASHUBA
'or Civil Engineer
ZS:mcy
4t~209 Omi ~ Suae 405
be. CA 92201
(619) 3424886 ~
IUVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRr. DEPARTHINT
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FOESTRY
AND FIE PK)TECTION
GLEN J. NENNA/q
FIRE CHEf
1-22-90
Pinmains & [..Sinetri.s O~k:e~
4080 Lemon Strut, Suite
Riverskit, CA 92501
(7 t 4) 787-6606.
TO:
ATTN:
RE:
PLANNING DEPARTHENT
ALEX GANN
TRACT 23209 - AHENDED #4
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division,
the Fire Department recommends the followinS fire protection measures be provided
in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recoEnized fire protection
standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
Schedule "A'* fire protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2½") located
one at each sCreeC in=erseccion and spaced no more than 330 feet apart in any
direction, with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 fee= from a hydrant.
Minimum 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 Fire
Department for review. Plans shall conform to 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: "I certify that the design of the water system is
in accordance with the requirements prescribed by Che Riverside County ~ire
Department."
The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted
by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being
placed on an individual lot.
MITIGATION
Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Riverside County Fire Department, a cash sum of $400.00 per lot/unit as mitiZation
for fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of
payment, he/she may enter into a written agreement with the County deferring said
payment =o the time of issuance of a building permit.
SubJecc: Tracc 23209 Page 2
All questions regarding the meaning of conditions shall be referred to the
Planning and EngtneertnB,staff.
RAYMOND H. KEGIS
Chlef Flre DeparCmenC Planner
Laura Cabral, Fire Safe=y Specialis=
ma
Admini~rative Center · 1777 Atlanta Avenue
Riversicle, CA g2507
june 2, 1989
Riverside County Planntng Department
Attention: Dave lahlgren
County Administrative Center
40SO Lemon Street ,~,~;,~-e///: V/7 O
Riverside° CA 92S01 · '
RE: Tract Z3Z09, Amended/f,,~,~ ~~'
Ladies and Gentlemen: =
The Land Use D'~v~ston of the Department of Building and Safety
has the following comments end conditions:
Prior to the ~ssuanCe Of butldtng ~ermtts, the developer shall
o~ta~n Planning Department approval for all on-site and off-
site s~gnage advertising the sale of the subdivision pursuant
to Section lg.6 of 0rd~nance 348.
F~reDlaces may encroach 1' into realutred minimum S' side yore
setbacK.
Mechanical eau~Oment may not be located ~n required m~n~mum S'
si~e yard setback.
Very truly yours,
Aaministration (714) 682-8840 · (714) 787-2020
BUZLDZNG AND SAFETY DEPARTHENr
GRADZNG SECTZON
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
APN
PLANNZNG / RANDY WZLSON
TONY HARMON
January 23, 1990
TRACT 23209 AHENDHENT #4
914-310-016, 018, 032
The "Grading Section" has reviewed a conceptual grading Plan for this site
The plan iS acceptsDie, Consequently, the "Grading Section" recommend=
approval of thqs Project if the following condition:; are included.
Prior to commencing any grading in excess of 50 cuDic yards,
applicant snell oPtalp a grading Permit aria aPProval to construct frcr
tme Bu~l~ing and Safety Department.
Prior to approval of this use/suDdivision a gra~ng ~ermit and approve'
of the rough grade small De oDdaimed from the Buila~ng and, Safer:
Department.
='ant anc irrigate f~ll slopes greater than or eoual to 3' an~,'or cu'
slc=es g'reater tman or equal to 5' in vertical helgmt wltm grass
gr~unc ccver. Slopes that exceed 15' in vert~c81 height are to
;r;'/~ce~'w~t~ shreds anO/or trees per count cr~nance 457 see f~rm
,
-amescape ~lans are to be s~gneO Oy a regqstereO lanCecape arcnqtect
PopDeC per the requirements of Ordinance 457, see form 284-47.
Gracing in excess of 199 cublc yar:s will require Performance securlt,
to Pe Dcstec wnt~ the Building and Safety department.
In ~nstances w~ere a grading plan iHvolves import or export, prior
oPta.~n~ng a grading permit, the applicant shall have oDtalne~ approve
for tme imPort/export location from the Building and Safety Department-
this may require a written clearance from the Planning Department.
A noteraZed letter of permission, from the affected Property owners
required for any Proposed offsite grading. '
A recorded drainage easement is required for the Propose0 lot to lo
drainage.
The PropoSed block wall appears to run Parallel to and at the top of
slope. A Registered Civil Engineer shall mitigate the slopes effect
the wall's footing. The wall will require a separate permit.
NOTE: For the final grading plan, please Drovide the aPPlicable informsriO
form Building and Safety Department grading forms: '>84-120 284-21 284 86
ant 284-46. Thank you. ' , , -
INTNIIeDNIBAIITMINTAI, LNTTNPi
, COUNTY OF RIVERBIDE
PLANNZNG DEPARTKENT
8, 1989
T0: KtB Johnson - Tee
FROH Steven A. bpfermn - Engineering Geologist
RE: --[eetatlee Tract E32139
Slope Stability Report No. Z2S
The follevlng report has been revttved relat4ve to slope stability at the
subject Stte:
· Prellmlnar? 6eotechntcal Znvesttgatton of Tentative Tract Pap 23209, Rancho
California, RIverside County, CA," by Letghton and Associates, ]nc., dated
Hatch 22, Z989.
This report determined that:
Ftll and cut slopes on the order of 25 feet and 20 feet high,
respectively, at an Inclination of 2:1 (hortzontal:vert4cal) are
p~oposed for the development.
Proposed slopes should be stable agatnst beth the deep-seated fa41ure
and the surftctll fatlure provtded no adverse geologtc conditions extst
tn the cut slope.
3. Cut slope excavation could expose adverse beddtng (out-of-slope) wh4ch
may have a potential for sltdtng.
4. The slopes my be subject to erostve rtllln9.
Thts report recmmnended that:
1. Cut slopes should be geotechntcallylmpped by the proJect geologist
lurtng gradtrig.
Iremedia1 measures such as flattening slopes or construction of earthen
butt,eases wtll be provtded tf adverse geologtc conditions are
encountered dartrig grading.
Cut end f111 slopes should be provtded vhtch appropriate dratnage
fatam Bed landscaped vfth drought-tolerant, slope-stabilizing
vegetattee as soon as possible after gradtrig.
4. krm should be provtded at the top of all slopes, and lot dratnage
directed such that surface runoff on the slope face ts wintmtzed.
Thts report sattsfies the General Plan reWiremen; ~or a slope stability
report. The recomendattuns tn thts report shall be adhered to tn the destgn
and construction of thts project.
$AK:al
DATE: October 21, 1988
· TO: Assessor
But 1 dt rig: and Safety
Surve~ori- Dave 13uda '
Road Departmlnt
Nealth - Itilph Luchs
Ftf~ Protection
Flood Control Dtstrlct
Flsh& &line
U.S. Postol $ervtce- Ruth E. hvtdson
"Comatsstoner Jack aresson
C. J. CrOttnger
Rancho CA Water
Southern CA Edison
Southern GA Sas
General Telephone
CAL TRANS t8
Temecul m E1 eraentity
Temecula .Union School Dis"t.'
- .=- E1 s t nore'Un t d~..11~91~ :S choo 1
~a dowv'~ ~"Comunt ty 'Asso~:'
U. C. R.-Archo.
DCT 6 lS88
RIVERS:';):_ CO,.ir;TY
PLANNt;<G DEPA.=. r;/.=NT
TRACT Z3ZO~ - (Tm-1) - E.A. 33254 - A~
Cansuiting - IMx Narrtson -Sktnner La
Area -Ftrst Supervtsortal District - i
of luttarfteld Stage & La Serene Way I
of Rlncho California Road - R-T Zone -
Acres lnto 304 lots - Nod 119 - A.
914-311~'016,914-310-018,032
Please revtew the case described above, along wlth the attached case map.
0tvtston Cmmtttee meeting has been tentattvel~ scheduled for November 17, 1988.
clears, It wtll then go to public heartrig.
Your coBwrits and recomend~tTons are requested prtor to Novledger 17, 1988 tn or~
~e may tnclude the~ tn the staff report for thls particular use.
Should 3mu have any questions regordtng thts Item, please do not hesttate to contact
Alex knn at 787-2363.
~lanner
If
C014qENTS:
The Elstnore Unton High School Dtstrtct facilities are overcrmeded and our
educational progres sertousl~ tapacted by Increasing student population caused
by he~ residential, cmmertcal and Industrial construction. Therefore,
pursuant to CIllfor~tl Government C{Kle Sectton S3080 of AB 2926 and $B 327, thts
dtstrict levtes I fee against all new development projects ~thtn Its boundaries.
DATE: 10-25'88 SICdlATUIE
IR. EASE prtat am lad tttle Dr. Larry ltaw. Superintendent
1080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE CALIFORNIA 92501
1714) 7874181
~cbm, d D. Sterf ey
St. Vae P~vmdent
Jsmes A. My
Doul KM
To, A. ~
Jon A. Idmdb
T. C. be
December 17, 1987
Riverside County Division of
Envirormen~al Health
land Use Section
Poet Office Box 1370
Riverside, California 92502
SubJec'c: Water Availability
Reference: Tract 23209
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that the -above-referenced
proper~y is located within ?,he boundaries of Rancho
California Water District. Water service, therefore,
would be available upon completion of financial
arrangements between RCWD end the property owner.
Water availability would be contingent upon the
proper~y mmer signing an Agency A~reement which
assigns water management rights, if any, to RCWD.
Sites for additional water production facilities may
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 C~T-TFORNIA WATER DISTRICT
Senga P. Deherty
Engineering Services Representative
F011/dpth244
RANCHO
CALIFORNIA
WATER DISTRIC
DATE: October 2!, 1988
-sav G;"tJS
PLAnn;rKS D PA crn;nc
Ftre Protection
Flood Control Dtstrtct
F4sh & Game
~4I.S. Postal lattice - lath E. Devtdson
Comisstoner Jack ares son
C. J. CrOttnger
Rancho CA Water
Southern CA Edison
Southern GA Gas
General Telephone
CAL TRANS #8
Temecula Elementary
Teeecula Union School DisT,.
[1sinore Union lttgh School
Ikadc~view Comnuntty Assoc.
U. C. R.-Archo.
TRACT 23209 - (Tab1) - [.A. 33254 - All
Consulting - Nix Hlrrtson - Skinner Lsl
Area -Ftrst Supervtsorlal Dtstrtct- i'
of Butterfield Stage & La Serene Way N'
of Rancho CalifOrnia Road - R-T Zone - I
Acres t fifo 304 1 ors - Nod 2 19 - A. i
914-31C)-016,924-310-018,032
Please raylay the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Let
Division Coentttee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for November 27, 2988. If
clears, tt rill then 9o to public bearing.
Your coneants and recoeaemtattons are requested prtor to November 17, 1988
el maJr tnclude the tn the staff report for this particular case.
Should you have sn.v questions regarding thts 1ten, please do not hesitate to contact
Alex &ann st 787-2363.
rl a nner
PLEASE print Ram and tttle
4080 LEMON STREET, 9'" FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 7874181
46-209 OASIS STREET. RO0~"'~_ 4
DAT~: October 22, X988
=IiVE. iDE COUrlC.u
PLArI~irlG DEPARaTIEn
TO: Assessor
Butlding and Safety
Surveyor - DIve Ouda
Road Department
Health - Ralph Luchs
Ftre Protection
Rood Control DIstrict
Fish & Game
U.S. Postal Service - Ruth E. Divtdson
Co~nisstoner Jack Bresson
C. J. Cr~ttnger
R!X:iIViDn~
ARU
OCT 2( 1988
3EOEEVE *'
NOV 02 1988 &
RIVER~IUE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMIEN1
Rancho CA Water
Southern CA Edison
Southern GA Gas
General Telephone
CAL TRAN$ #8
Temecula ;Elementary
Temecula :Union School Past.
Elstnore Union iligh School
Neadowview Comnunity Assoc.
U. C. R.-Archo.
-- TRACT Z3ZO9 - (Te-Z) - E.A. 33254 - AlE
Consulting - flax Hlrrtson - Skinner Lit
Area -Ftrst Supervtsorial District - W1
of Butterfield Stage & La Serena Way
of Rancho California Road - R-T Zone -
Acres into 304 lots - Nod ]19 -
914-310-016,914-310-018,032
Please review the case described above, along wtth the attached case map. A Lit
Division Comntttee roetang has been tentatively scheduled for November 17, 1988. If i
clears, it wt.ll then go to public heartng.
Your camants and recomnendattons are rYequested prtor to November 17, 1988 in order the
~e my include them in the staff report for thlS Particular case.
Should you have any questions regarding this 1tern, please do not hesitate to contact
Alex inn at 787-1363.
P] Inner
CO~qENTS:
p -,p,,,-4 y ( ~ F - .3 7 ~) .
DATE:/*/':~te SIGNATURE
PLEASE print ha-,. and tttle
EASTERN JNFORMATION CENTER
A/chllNoOiclt Research Unit
UNverstlty ~ Callfro'nil
llt~ftillt CA g2S21
4080 LEMON STREET, P FLOOR
RIVER~II)E, CALIFORNLA. 92501
(714) 7874181
46-209 OASIS STREET. ROOM 30~
INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-827~7
:
- coun
'PLinni DEPi mEn
DATE: October 21, 1988
Ee)EgVE"
TO: Assessor
Butldtng and Safety
Surveyor - Dave Duda NOV
Road Department
Health - Ralph Luchs
Fire Protection
Flood Control DIstrict
Fish & Glee
U.S. Postal Service- Ruth E. Davidson
Coe~isstoner Jack Dresson
C. J. Crottnger :
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
=LANNING DEPARTMENT
Rancho CA Water
Southern CA Edison
SOuthern GA Gas
General ~elephone
CAL TRAN~ #8
Temecula [Elementary
Temecula 'Union School Dist.
Elstnore Union liigh School
I&eadowview Comeunity Assoc.
U. C. R.-Archo.
TRACT 23209 - (Tm-1) - E.A. 33254 -
Consulting - Max Harrison - Skinner Lab
Area - First Supervisortel Dtstrtct- W1
of Buttedfield Stage & La Serene Way R1
of Pancho California Road - R-T Zone -
Acres into 304 lot$ - Mod 119 - A.F
914-310-016 ,g14-310-018,032
Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Lar
Division Comntttee meeting has been tontattvely scheduled for November 17, 1988. If t
clears, it will then go to public hearing.
Your comments and recoemaendatlons ape reWeted ;~tor to Novearlier 17, 1988 in order the
ee may tnclude thee in the staff report for this particular use.
Should ~ou have any Westtons regarding thts 1tee, please do not hesitate to contact
Alex Germ at 787-1363.
Planner
C(INENTS:
~ ,.., . ~ .-. -.:..
I~TE: SIrNATURE
PLEASE print am and tttle
4nan LEMON WrRF. ET. 9TM FLOOR
RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS WIT4EET, ROOM
INDIO. CALIFORNIA 92201
(619) 342-82?7
IIAI~ lie CAI_D~ I& I~ $. ~AlION AND N~UINO AOlN~r
OEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
m~ e. t.o. mx 23~
October 26, 1988
Development Revtev
08-Riv-79-8.23
Your Reference:
TTN 23209
Planning Department
Attention Mr. Alex Germ
County of RIverside
.080 Lemon Street
RIverside, CA 92501
Dear Mr. Gann:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed Tentative
Tract Map 23209 located westerly of Butterfield Stage and
northerly of Rancho California Road in Temecula Ranch.
This proposal is somewhat removed from an existing or proposed
state h~ghway.
We have no speciflc comment on this proposal.
Zf additional information ls desired, please csll Mr. Thomas J.
NevlZle st (71.) 383-"38U-
Very truly yours,
H. N. LEWANDOWSKI
District Permits Engineer
,f~x~t~errt California Edimon Company
1OO LONG lEACH lOUSEVAmP
LDNG lEACH. CA~FORNIA 90801
liverside County
load
P. O. i0x 1090
liverside, CA 92502
At~ention: Subdivision Section
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT: Tentative Tra~t Map No. 23209
November 9, 1988
Please be advised that the division of Che property shown on
TentatiVe Tract Map No. 23209 will not unreasonably inCerfere
with the ~ree and complete exercise o~ any easement(s) held by
Southern California Edison Company within the boundaries of said
CenCaCive Ccact map.
This letter should not be construed as a subordination o~ the
Company*s riqhts. title and interest in and to said easement(s),
nor should this letter be construed as a waiver o~ any o£ the
provisions contained in said easement(s) or a waiver of any costs
for relocation o~ a~ected ~acilities-
In the event Chat the development requires relocation of ~acil-
ities, i~ any, on the subject property by right o4 easement or
otherwise, cbe o~ner/develope~ will be ~equested to bear the cost
o{ such teloration and provide Edison with suicable replacement
rights. Such costs and replacemenC rights are gequired prior to
Che performance o~ the reloeation.
Xt additional information is required in connection with the
above mentioned subject, please call Dennis C. Bazant at (213)
491-2644.
Vary t - yOUrS,
BEE, OrATION AND DISTRIBUTION
DCB/bJw
14609-36MPC
de:' Riverside County
ALIA ENGINEERING, INC.
PLANNING * ENGINEERING · SURVEYING
August 11, 1989
1012-00
Count7 of Riverside
Planninl Department
4080 Lemon Street, gth Floo~
Riverside, California 92501
Attention: Randy Vilson
Subject: Tract 23209
Dear Nr. Wilson:
Transmitted herewith is Amendment
amendment was requested by Flood
c,hanges in the drainage patterns.
~e hereby request variances to
lots:
No. 3 of Tract 23209. This
Control and consists of minor
Ordinance AGO for the following
Lots 76, 102, 103, 136, 137,
Please schedule L.D.C. as soon as possible.
If 7ou have any questions, please call.
President
LaYerda E'Nond
Hike Lundin
M H,tier't SI. Sumie 100, SIn Dego CA 92131 · lelP'enl (619) 549-3303
41890 Emeq::eme Cm:se Souin. Sle 230 ,, Raft'no Cam,morN. CA 92390 ·Teiepnone {?'~4) 6?67282
ALIA ENGINEERING, INC.
PLANNING , ENGINEERING · SURVEYING
August 14, 1989
1012-00
Counc7 of Riverside
Planning Deparcment
1080 Lemon Street, 9Ch Floor
Riverside, California 92501
A~en~ion: Randy Wilson
SubJect:
Tract 23209
Dear Hr. Wilson:
This p~oject proposes slopes in excess of 10 feet in height.
These slopes are necessary in order to maintain drainage patterns
and to prevent drainage from florin2 across property lines.
addition, some slopes are necessary due to county design
requirements for major roads i.e. La Serena and Butterfield
Road.
XLC/J s
RespectfuliT,
Richard L. Cruzen
President
~e68 Nex~ gin. $,ee 100 · San I:be9o CA ~3~ . Temmc~e (6~e) 5a~3303
d¶8~0 Eneqmse Cem So,m. ~e 230. Rancno Caedmn~. CA 92390 · lmel~one (?~d) 6~7282
APPLIO A lION'FOR LAND IIIl AND DIYELOPNENT
~,T~. I~,- I~-t~
CHANGE OF ZONE NO D ImUILIC UIE FEIIiMrr NO
CO.,D-,o.A,. u~E X'm.c,' ,,,,..o. 23:209
leERMr/NO O/EMIIOR/~Y USE II~IIIMIT NO ,,
I~MCEL MaPNO
1. IlI~IIN's Name
Midtrig Ad0reiS
"rele~ho, nt NO
( ) (8 &m - 5 I~m.)
PROJECT iNFORMATION
I PurDose Of Reo-es~ IOescr,l~e DrOteCt) (OrO,nlfiCe 348 tel nO ) ~-~ ~ L ¢T~
6 L~p~e~e&~cti~eec~e~dm~e~4~ft~C4N~t~m~1~r~.M~c~
d010 LEMON rrlEET. It'. FLOC~
IIIV~IIIIDE. CALIFOINIA 1~601-MS?
C/s4) ?l?-tlll
AINq,.ICATIONS FCXli ~
MAPS
CONDfflONAL, UI! KiltarTS UIE F!WMrrl
REBUIRED PIt~RTY OFINEHI JlOTIIrr~Tl~ll INPOIIMATiON .
-, ..~ IddUlamdy,0k,%, s,'~a '
IRBMBvm~)
VImANC,,ES
I'!MPCNqAPrr UIE PEIqMfT$
1. ~W~~a~t~w~~e~0~1~d~ew~T~v~s~m~aet~c~se
""
c. ORemllermellelclmAImle~.
e. POliI,ANIpDIVllONIOIIIL1':Anh"X11'llkc~ei'elllMItlMffllD.
3. CIvil I! I%l;ylttlllloPllplny.wlwllf,lftJl~l~,.,'ll
Thl IDow rioleo mtOrmt,O~ my tit ~.~ Iw eofillGIq · Itw mlvrleGI Gomplrsy i~ IM IINIg41 C4~my It'll
TrTLE /
lam.-JlmJ
CadE:
· STAFF USE ONLY
· ENifiRONIIENTAL INPORIIA TIGN FORM
lee to contact me PllnNng Departmere at
tART I: Gaffcell II~il'RIItiliR
2 lettwfea~'~P~ leflllcllotlhealmelle~ YEi~ NI::~'
ff"Yl&' panel Gale Neroeel. NIO penal Iht gr~.'l_k I ,Y 'An I line fit Nun~lr. If Imow~ end Enwroememlt tmpl:~
CASE NO (temelMip, ZeeeCeenge. etr-,-)
F..A, NQ. ffKNIeeLIIRN0.
1. :stheWo;ectweetmanAi~L'~l~4~e leecellNdeeZeee'~ YES~ NC)X'
To rimerows· I yew preeeel ie leeme· me Ileeil laueee Zeei eewlel the table intomlhon SeC'IK~. o, fee·, tc me
~ I faun MzarO rlpoe 8 ne(alllry.
Nl~wl!Rtl~lfOIwl-~lllnl~fOIWItllOk ....
ant Tec:hr~GII ;ll~OfF.9 YES ~
TO ~lllrffleN il your prl)lecl II ~ tO
leon Or mar, me m tm sDece Drovee4 tmlaw the resu~ ef yeuf ehecP, meone we~ t~e tte nmn~ Tllm
3 H your ptO~C1 ,em fhe 0eter~ Ire& Itt ed~nn 1 NOwl/nd M,tlm Irllq ~ES ' NC~
The Pilnntng C)fi~II m IFICleO lad lltelflade w~ll proriO· yo~ tlfith tntomllteon COeCem~r~ t>ewseed f~?,ercls Ye>~ n~ · ,s :
wslm tO COfiml ~ U.S SO~I ~t:Oe
~y~k~rpr~c1is~4~D~eC~i~w~r~d~az~k~Dm~t)i~w~cQri~r~pi~w~f~he~D~hc~e~P~i~eter~e:l~ :4
Of C)r~ffllflcl d60 if your IXOIICl II ·
d II. wlter lePv~,e ivldll)4e el lhe prolecl Ida'> YE~ NO '
H -NO ' flow fir mull tie witOf laPill) be
Ngmt)ef 04 tee1 Or m~el
I
ECONOMIC AND HOUSING LOANS
Riverside County
/LmlmRD/,INATELT $3.S KTi,,LI811 NA$ IEEN Ig.D[ AVAILABLE FOR [C31101~ZC O[VEZ. ORt[IC
IIBII$lll L8116 IN 1118. MPLIr, ATIOII$ CN¢ I[ FILED I//TH THE ItIVERS1DF.
D[tIR*ilCENT OF ECONOFI1C NID EIIFIJN]T/D[VELOPHEtiT LOCATED AT 3499 TEN'rH
P.0. 10X 3110, ItIVEIJJO[, CRLIFOINIA, 12S02.
ClIIIINZTI' D[V'~,,LOF'HEICT ILOEK r, lAh'TS (CBIG) FRON THE U.S. DEPARTttENT Or
NID gllNi '~EVELOR~:trt ARE USED TO CREATE AND SAV~. JOBS N¢ HOUSING FOR LO,.
NODEiATE ]~I~'~FeZ COUNTY IZSIDErI'S. 111[ LOANS HAVE IBEX USED FOR ClIgERCIA;.,
· . :.
11B/rrlllg. o.lCOUillO/i¢ !1~ FI)JEETS.
COfttiR=l~ AND INDUSTIt]~ PRD3EETS i~l]C.-I SAYc. OR EREATE JOSS FOR LO,:
1HE TOT,I,;. PitOJ[CT CMi I[ FINAN;E:;. TI, i-; MAZII.'tL~'. LO~,~, 2S S50'0,00~ A~.D TH~-'
C&P OF $:ZS,OOD LOANED F'[R JOB CUATr,.D OR R[TA]N.;~. THE HOUSING LOAN
LOA~ UP TD SD PERCENT Or THe'. COST FOR CO~STR;.;=TZO.% OR REnAE;L]TA'T.]O:, ~,"
]N=ON.[ HDUS]Nr.. FUNDS I~$T BE FULLY $£CUR~.D BY R~.t,;. PROP[~,TY A.~
DEVILOldER [OU,~TY |$ REQUIRED.
THE LDNI FUI¢ 1S OFF[RED JOINTLY OT 1HE COUNTY A~D $[VEhl[£h OF iTS
FOR FURT~£R ]NFI~T|ON, COWTA[:T TOUR COlE AREA IEFR[$ENTAT]V[ O~
$TRODTIECK AT [114) 718-9770.
RZVERSZDE COUNTY PLANN/RG DEPARTtENT
COUNTY ADH]NZSTRATZVE CENTER, NZNTH FLOOR
_ 4080 LEIOI STREET
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501-3657
Roger S. Streeter, Planntng Dtrector
A PUBLIC lEARIllS has been scheduled before the PLARIIIRli (ZRs, ISSIOII to
constder the application(s) clescrlbed below. The Planntng Department has
tentatively found that the proposed proJect(s) wtll have no significant
envtromnental effect and has tontattvely completed nqattve declaration(s).
The Planntng Cmmtsston wtll constder whether or not to adopt the negative
declaration along wtth the proposed project at thts heartng.
Place of Heartng: Board Rom. 14th F'lear. 4080 Leon Street, RIverside, CA
Date of Heartrig: VE])REg)AY, DaER ZQ, lg89
The ttme of heartng ts Indicated vtth each application l~sted below.
Any person m~y submtt wrttten cmments to the Planntng Department before the
hearing or my appear and he heard In support of or opposition to the adoptton
of the negattve declaration and/or approval of thts project at the time of
heartrig. If you challenge any of the projects tn court, you my be 11mired to
ratstng only those tssues you or someone else ratsed at the publtc heartng
described tn thts notice, or tn wrttten correspondence clellvered to the
Planntng Con~lsston at, or prtor to, the publlc heartrig. The envtromnental
f~ndtng along wfth the propose project application may be vtewed at the public
Information counter Honday through Frtday from 9:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m.
TRACT HAP NO. 23209, AHENDED NO. 3, EA 33254 ts an application submitted by
Alba Consulting for property located tn the Sktnner Lake Area and
Ftrst Supervtsortal Dtstrtct and generally described as betrig ~est of
Butterfield Stage Road and La Serena lay; north of 'Rancho California
Road and ~hlch proposes to dtvtde 80~ acres tnto 257 lots
TIRE OF HEARIll: 9:30 a .m.
-- /
· IN W. POOLE, ETAL
; STATE WIDE DEVELOPERS
'L: rATELLA AtE. t202
LOS ALAN/TOS, CA. 90720
914-310-005, 007, 009
KE/TH I $ANDRA DAY.
5283 OEZNDA AVE.
LAS VEGAS. NV 89120
914-310-006
OWNER:
CARLTON & BARBARA FRENCH
31131 ALMARA LANE
LGUNA HILLS, CA. 92677
914-310-016, 018
OWNER:
LAVERDA EDOND
1011N. WOODS
FULLERTON, CA. 92635
914-310-019 thru 032
ROBERT & LARRAINE OCANNA
r BOX 615
.IEIA, CA. 92362
310-046
PETER & FaABRIELLA GIOVANNONI
1784 W. ALCOMAR AVE.
ANAHEIN,CA. 92804
914-310-047
'GEORGE T. STARCEVICH
39865 NICHOLAS RD.
MURRIETA, CA. 92362
914-300-052
CARROLL ANDERSON
JOHN MOORE
P 0 BOX 324
MURRIETA, CA. 92362
914-300-055, 058
DUANE & RENEE FR/EL
31236 CAMINO DEL ESTE
TEMECULA, CA. 92390
914-300-056
TRIPLE J INVESTNENTS
P 0 BOX 806
FALLBROOK, CA. 92028
943-020-006
BURTON & MARGARET CLEVIDENCE
P, ATT & FRANCIS ANDREWS
9621 CARNATION AVE.
FOUNTA]N VALLEY, CA. 92708
943-040-001,002, 003
CALLAWAY VINEYARD & WINERY
32720 RANCHO CALIFORNIA
TENECULA, CA. 92390
943-070-001,002
L. K. ~ONES
1540 W. 8th ST. 121
UPLAND, CA. 91786
914-310-049
RANCliO CALIF DEVELOPMENT CO
P 0 BOX 755
T~HECULA, CA. 92390
923-200-lX)9, 010 i 923-210-001
923-2104X)6. 014
GEORGE T. STARCEVICH
39865 NICHOLAS RD.
MuRRIETA, CA. 92362
-300-051
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
EXHIBITS
$%.~TAFF~320~.TTM 32
CITY OF TEMECULA
Q ~"g CALLE ~S
o ! ~
~4RG4R~T ~
CALIFORNIA
\:PROJECT SITE
Location Map
CASE NO.: Tentative Tract Map No. 23209
EXHIBIT: A
P.C. DATE: March 160 1992
VICINITY MAP
S%STAFFRF~3209.1'tM
SWAP - Exhibit B
tM
CITY OF TEMECULA
I I
Designation:
2-4 D.U.IAcre
ZONING - Exhibit C
Case No.: Tentative Tract Map No. 23209
P.C. Date: March 16. 1992
Designation: R-T
S%STAFFRFl'~3209.TTM
CITY OF TEMECULA
i
CASE NO.:
EXHIBIT: D
P.C. DATE:
Tentative Tract Map No. 23209
March 16, 1992
SITE PLAN
S~STAFFRPT~23209 .TTM
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
CORRESPONDENCE
$~TAFFRPT~.23201.TTM 36
Corrected copy~
June 14, 1991
Mayor Ron Parks and Councilmembers
City of Temecula
43180 Business Park .Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
Dear Mayor Parks and Councilmembers:
Enclosed is copy of letter from Callaway Vineyard & Winery sent to
the Temecula Planning Department on April 15, 1991 regarding
tentative Tract Map ~23103.
We appeared before you in protest at your meeting of May 28, 1991.
Az that time, a two week extension was approved by the council.
we have had an opportunity to show and to discuss our problems of
air movement westward from our vineyard with you and Councilmembers
Sa! Munoz, Peg Moore and Karel Lindemans, Messrs. Gary Fatland and
Dcrian Johnson of the Marlborough Development Corporation, Michael
Lundine, and John Gerritsen of Robert Bein, Will Frost & Associates
(who are developing the property to the north of Marlborough).
AZ this time we have no problem with the tentative map approval and
that the final map approval to be heard before the city council be
subjec~ =o Ehe following:
The road elevation, the pads and the contour in the valleys be
maintained as close to natural as possible. That the air
movement, wind patterns be maintained so there will be no
frost problems in Callaway vineyards in the future.
Also, Councilman Kare! Lindemans has suggested that if it is
necessary to move dirt and pads to lower Butterfield
Stagecoach Road to have better air movement, that a study be
done to determine how much dirt, how far will it be hauled off
the property, how much would it cost to haul, and that
Callaway and other wineries, Marlborough Development
Corporation the City of Temecula share in the cost. Whatever
is adopted on this issue sets precedent for the continuation
of Butterfield Stage Road north bordering our property. ~
Corrected copy
June 14, 1991
Page 2
we would like to thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Senior Vice President & Viniculturist
JM:ll
Enclosure
CC:
Jon Moramarco
Pat Birdsall
Peg Moore
Sal Munoz
Karel Lindemans
Dorian A. Johnson, Marlborough Development Corp.
Gary Fatland, Marlborough Development Corp.
Michael Lundine
John Gerritsen, Robert Bein, Will Frost & Assoc.
ATTACHIV~,NT NO. 5
DEVELOPIV~-NT FEE CHECKLIST
SXST^FFRm23209rm.CC 12
CITY OF TEMECUI~
DEVELOEVIF, NT F~,I~, CHECKLIST
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23209
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to theft 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 Future General Plan
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 14.A.o
Condition No. 31
Condition No. 84
Condition No. 53
Condition No. 16. a.
Condition No. 8
Condition No. 80
S\STAFFRFrX23209TTM.CC 13
ATTACH1VIENT NO.
INITIAL STUDY
sxsT^~yr~32ogrr~.cc 14
f
=IiVEq)iDE coun;
PLNIlli!)6 DEPARailEIl
ENVIRONMEN'rAL ASSESSMENT FORM:
ENVIqONMENTAL A~JSMENT (E-A.) NUMBER: 33254
PROJECT GAM TYPE(e) AND NUIdlEP~8); Tract No. 2320q
NmFUCANTI NAMF; Alba ConsultInn
NAME OF PERSON(m) FREIM/III) EA~ Randy W~ 1 son
L PROJICT NFORMAllON
A. DESCRIR1ON Cectucle pr~peae=l fnWdmum iX mixm rune mm am ~vri~mcVla):
Subdivide 80 acres tnto 257 lots
ITANDARD EVALUATION
MOOLLE MJMBERIs): 1 l_q
B. TOTAl, PROJECT AIREk ACRES qll ' er SQUARE FEET
C. ASSESSCR'S PARCEL NO.(s): 914-310-016, 01A-310-018, 01.q, 02q, n?l,
025. N26. 027.
n22. n23. q24.
D. E/STING ZONING: RT
E. PROPOSED Z(;)NING: RT
F. STREET REFERENCES:
I~ ~ PROPO SA/. IQ CC)NFORMANCE? ,
I$ ll4E PR~ N CONFORMNiCE? ~
West of Rutterfield Stane Road. North Of R^ncho Cali~nrnia Roac
G. I~CllON, TOV~mP, FIANO E I:~mPT~ CR Al'rAO H A LEGAL )llrrl0N:
Section 29. Township 7 South. Ranae 2 Hest
Vacant land traversed by drainaqes.. Soecific Plan ~lg.q to the-west and south wf+h
vineyards to t~ east.
J~Mmlerlcllllxol~eleleln'kemli31Deigreedm~81xce'- ComDle~actionsltN
~.leNIDenly).VedVL
2 N
4.Y
BN
8Y
9_,,~,,N
~o,.~_~
11..~L_
H&ufd Zofm(Iqg. Vl.1)
NA PI U R (Ire. VL3)
i ~quef- ~r~ ~ Zone Fig. Vt.1)
NA S PI U R (Fig. VI.4)
Grow~'sheki~ Zone (1rio V!.l)
NA 6 PS U R (Fig. V!.l)
6iopes(Riv. Co. e4:X:)kam Bmpe Maps)
Semrrdc Maps or On-Me kvrict~on)
NA 8 PS U n Fe. W.6)
~ Hazam (Oe-ee
Expensive Sob (U.I.Djk. loll
~Uoelefv~lolll, ufvey,s)
lroekm ~.8.D.A. &:m Conwer,,.tm~
if vim Soil
WeX:I'F. mOeXXt&IWMWe(FiO. VL1,
ORI. 48O, k14,i&OnL484)
Dram Immdekm Atom (Fie. VI.T)
NA U R
(Fro. Vie)
Aiflpoe Noile Fig. 1.18.5. 9.18.1
&VLI; · 1894 AIC;IJ(Z ~ MAF.B.)
NA A I C D (ice, vII1)
Reamed NoiM (Fig. VL13 - Vt.16)
NA A e C D (F~O, V1.11)
Highway Node Fig. Vtl?- V~29)
NA A B C D
NA A I C D (F~Q. vt.11)
Pmlec~ Qmner.ltw l:f k Affecting
Noiee kns~m UMS (Fig. Vt.11)
Pmle~ Ssnmitiv~ Io Air
Water QuW,ty trapacts From
Pmiect !'i~e?lk.4 m Waif Query
llafelM Mfe~-'l end Wastes
Huan:lM F'n Am (Fig. Vt.3Q - VL31 )
REIOURCEB
Delln/Uonl for Lend LMe lullablty mud Noise AcceptmbQty bungs
NA-NotApplmble I-Oeneth, tme Im-INMeWW~ldeee
e-Cee,eemMayAmeee C-mewdyuMmeeee D-taeme0am,meed
1. OImEN~NO CtJI~-wtVAIIONMAPDEIII31~IION(I): Not desianated a~ onen
~, I,qOUiEImI,NWtl~~ Southwest Terrace
~ ~FH: Ranthe Caltfornta/Temecula
E. I~Rjlit, IFANY: m;nuthwest Ares Cnnm~mity I)l:~n
& (X)MMtJITYR,NIDEaK NAIION(I~ IF ANY; ,2,rJ_d~lling ,nft~ n~r
IJMMARYOFPOUCt~AFFECTI~PRCr~iN' Project ts considered Catea~rv II which
P~uires a full ranae of oubltc services. Ad~uate transit~en with surround~nq
anrroved and existina land uses ts necessary. The Sout~est Area Co~unitv Plan
designation for this site is 2 to 4 ~ellina units per acre.
~r.~rm~tpm~cu~mic~c~w~m(Y)~no(N)wh~h~my~Nt:dic~m~mj~nd/~rm~v~e~y~~~
or M mffectocJ by N m,~l:u mmm. Aim ,.&fm:.mrtc md figames ate ~ in the Cc,,,r,,.mr;nm. lve General Pimmn. For any imbue
RIBUC FAClI,fflF~ AND IEMVIC!I
rim_ ! _ I~ .'-~ Trill (F'i~. N.19. N.24/
liv. C~. 100 / Fq,_ m _ ben Trail Mepl)
Ullmiem 0rig. N2S - N.26)
~ {FIg. N.¶? - N.18)
~ ~MVKmII {FIe. N.I?. N.18)
~ ~ ILIU - tl&4.
&ILI· &l&lO& IVY7 · IV36)
CRy a~mm~of lm. l-m~cm
bt~tthin the new city of
Te~ecula
lelwpertldlllmilmlilin"IMi',~m"flanGI1oN~~
k~m", mdew M aid IM ~ Imkia 'qr'P!~4 m I,e r,,,,--¢ =:t end ooml:jele Its k, ft:&4;
ll-?~ lee 111~ .- I
D. lelorpefiofthepmmctmimmkln'AmmmmtDemlOrmmdmmCSemmepmmm',mdimnotlneComnu~.~,~eN
eumikx~ml01,3, Oand?. Cr,,,.;"l!?--'tkmnm4, E, eend?llklna~lmmmm.
land me mmem)f, es) nicere,,)' m romeeel the ~.~2emCf ImmlmcL
OA ,cm'~m~mL c&,,..f am,;. etc.) Category I!
Cummnt~maemlOomy(a) lormmmlmtmemmdonemilnOw~ Ammobxikateandumetype
meanmat mr) Cateqorv l!
S I D.1 diatom kmm D~.. d the dmm~ be .._,2%A:f st the d_~m~..,;.mr, t moo? Exm~n:
4. Communny Plan clem~nmeo~,m):j-4 dwel lina units per acre
II ~ ~:. No The oc~ect is rnn~i~ten~h the ~U:;r"i.m~Fnm+4on O~ ~-~ O~a.
however!, the proSect desion is not comoatible with the vin~,yard~ to thP ~,
Is the I~C=mmm cmm~ web exiting m~l kL;amtd m~ lad umes?
IRetm~llmn: No. land uses to the east arp vtnevard~ and tn th. ~n,,theaSt.MpP_roved
Specific Plan ~.19q has 1 dwellina unit per acre.
l ~ ..Ira/~m ~ ~~UWaUMmri~i~ No. Land use
comattbtltty Review, CatSpry II Land ~e ~atibilttv. -A orooosed land use ff".~
be achiev throu_Oh pro~ect desiOn. The desion of the proDosed nroJect does not,
1. Im the f,,~;:v' wr'n l eelh me dmmFmlmlm)? I net. eme~
4",
IlCrlON/ IItORMA110N IdI~31NA5 NFOINATION ~.~'V~N
11! B 4 Slope Stability Report 3-23-89 Yes
111B 8 Slope Stability Report 3-23-89 Yes
1II B28 Biology Report 3-23-89 Yes
III B29 Biology Report 3-23-89 Yes
Fore Image madrod ye (Y) under t,:timr4 IILB cad NJ. ideey N bctlo, end kaue number encs clo the
I,dk:/~, Inlheb~nN l ehown ~
1. Lie ell eddto~ rolevent dam eourees. tncludk~g
2. ewe em end~e8 of ~ regedbg
8. hie epe~ rn~Uo, fleeewes. If tenUrehie w~ f~LH/k~ e, enviro, memal ~pac~ repor~ (E.t.R.)
4. If edcllt~l Bformatkm is reQulreO before the efwifor,,JMN ee~t can be comiCcreeL refe~ to
~.abee=tiort A.
6. ff ebclitioMl sheets am neciecI to comp4e. te thi& lection, GheCk 1he box 8t me end of the seCtiOn and attach
the nl=leee~/ihee~
IECTION/
18UENO.
II! B4
III B8
I!1 B28
III
III B35
8OURCES, AGENCIE$ CONSULTED, FINDINGSOFFACT, MfflGA~ONMEASURES:
A Slope Stability Report was done on the project's proposed 9radinq.
Hitigatton measures for the proposed grading are outlined in the County
Geologist's letter dated 4-28-89.
A Slope Stability Report was done on the proJect's proposed qrading.
MItigation measures for erosion due to the proposed grading are outlined in
the County Geologist's letter dated 4-28-89.
A Biological Report was performed to survey the biological resources of the
project site. ST~phens' Kangaroo Rats were found to OCCUPy Dart Of the site.
~tigatton measures to be taken ire the participation of the developer in the
Habtta~Conservatton Plan and Ordinance 663 as outlined tn the conditions of
approval.
A Btoloatcal mort was nerform~d on the DroPCOt stte. No tmoacts to flor~
deemed sensitive or endangered weee located on the site. No mitigation
measures are required.
The potential for Paleontoloqtcal resources on the project site exists. The
conditions of approval reoutre a PaleonloQtcal study be performed prior t9
the stte betng graded. If Paleonlogtcal resources are 1dendrifted as ltkely
IV B7
IV
IOURCl;~k ADEN{:I~ CONIIJLTID, ~ OF FACT. MITIGATION MEASURES: -~
tn this report, a cluallfied Paleontologists shall be present durrin9
grading.
Impacts to the school System serv(no the area the nPOiect ~s located are to
be m~t4gated per Ca14forn4a Government randated school fees.
No 4rapacts to the new C~ty of Temecula ere ~dent4fted. The oroiect is
4dentSlied as be4ng w~th~n the new C4ty of Temecula.
D lee mr }h~gllpmemL
")~l)mm Immdmmm d mmml Irarome · mi{nlkmmml N m Ilmm m~4vr...m,~t mere{ · ~ Dmm=mmmlm~ mmy Imm
ImmmmmmmmL
lmml
O llmm mmimm:m mmda hmmwm · mi~nmlkmmnt minkram m Im .m%4dr..mmm; hmmmmmr,'mmm d minx Im· mienturin
ITEM NO. 13
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY '::
FINANCE OFFICER '.~_~'~~,~,~F---
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TE1VIECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
June 9, 1992
Appeal No. 25 for Variance No. 10, Denial of a proposed 55 foot high freeway
sign
RECO1VIM~-NDATION: The Planning Depamnent Staff recommends that the City Council:
ADOPT Resolution No. 92- upholding the Planning
Commission's denial of Variance No. 10 based on the Analysis
and Findings contained in the Staff Report.
BACKGROUND
On April 20, 1992, the Planning Commission considered Variance No. 10, an application to
increase the height of an approved freeway oriented sign from 45 feet to 55 feet. Ordinance No.
348 provides for a maximum height of 45 feet for a freestanding freeway oriented sign. The
45 foot high sign was-approved by the City Council in February.
A flag test conducted for the sign determined that the approved 45 foot high sign is of sufficient
height for site identification. The Planning Commission determined that the proposed variance
was not in conformance with Ordinance No. 348, or SWAP, and therefore is Likely to be
inconsistent with the future adopted General Plan. The project site is similar in topography and
characteristics to other parcels in the vicinity; therefore, the site does not exhibit unique
qualities that would warrant the granting of a variance request.
At its regular meeting of April 20, 1992 the Planning Commission denied the applicant' s request
for Variance No. 10, based on the following:
There are no exceptional circumstances applicable to the existing size and configuration
of the subject property. The project site is afforded frontage on Front Street. The site
therefore is allowed one free-standing sign per City ordinance. The approved 45 foot
high sign provides adequate visibility for the proposed advertising.
S\STAFFRIq'X2IAPPF, AL.CC I
The granting of this variance will not be compatible with the general weftare of the
public in that the propgsed sign does not conform with Ordinance No. 348, and the
policy ghidelines in Section lll.8.f. of SWAP pertaining to scenic highway corridors.
SWAP states that signs along scenic highway corridors shall be the minimum necessary
for identification and shall blend with the environment.
The appwved 45 foot sign allows the applicant to adequately identify the pwject site in
a manner compatible with the intent of City sign regnhtions. Signage proposed under
the Variance is not consistent with design and construction types generally endorsed by
the City. As such, the proposed use is not likely to be consistent with the City's future
adopted General Plan, which is being conducted in a timely manner.
The Commission also reiterated the finding that no exceptional circumstances existed with the
property to warrant a variance. Commissioner's Blair and Chinheft stated that the applicant
could pursue the phcement of CalTrans logo signs along 1-15 for additional visibility.
The Planning Commission denied the request by a vote of 5-0, based on the above fmdings.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments:
ResolutiOn - page 3
Planning Commission Minutes dated April 20, 1992 - page 7
Planning Commission Staff Report dated April 20, 1992 - page 8
vgw
S~TA~APPF. AL.CC 2
ATTACHIVrlr. NT NO, 1
RESOLUTION 9~.__
APPEAL 25 OF VARIANCE NO, 10
SX3TAFFRFI"X~APPRAL,.,CC 3
ATrA~ NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
ARE SOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIl OF ~ CITY
OF TEMECULA DENYING APPEAL NO. 25, VARIANCE
NO. 10, TO INSTALL A 55 FOOT mGH FREEWAY SIGN
AT AN APPROV!~x} AIYrOMOTIVE SERVICE FACIlITY
LOCATF~r} AT ~ SOUT!~RLY TERMINUS OF FRONT
STREET AND mGHWAY 79 SOUTH, 29115 FRONT
WltEREAS, Lou Kashmere, fried Appeal No. 25 in accordance with the Riverside
County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted
by reference;
WllEREAS, said Appeal application was processed in the time and manner prescribed
by State and local law;
WtlXREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Appeal on
June 9, 1992, at 'which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or
opposition to said Appeal; and
W!tFJII~.AS, the City Council received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the Appeal;
NOW, THEREFORE, THY~ CITY COtYNCIl OF ~ CITY OF TEMECtYLA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section I. Findin[,s.
findings:
That the Temecula 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, ff 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 f'mds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
S~T~APPEAL.CC
4
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 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 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 City Council in denying the Appeal, makes the following additional findings,
to wit:
1. There are no exceptional circumstances applicable to the existing size and
configuration of the subject property. The project site is afforded frontage on Front Street.
Therefore, by City Ordinance, the site is allowed one free-standing sign. The approved 45 foot
high sign provides adequate visibility for the proposed advertising.
2. The granting of this variance may not be compatible with the general
weftare of the public in that the proposed sign does not conform with Ordinance No. 348, and
the policy guidelines in Section llI.8.f. of SWAP relative to scenic highway corridors.
3. The approved sign allows the applicant to adequately identify the project
site in a manner compatible with the intent of City sign regulations. Signage proposed is not
consistent with design and construction types generally endorsed by the City. As such, the
proposed use is not likely to be consistent with the City's future adopted General Plan, which
is being conducted in a timely manner.
Section TI. Conditions. That the City of Temecula City Council hereby denies
Appeal No. 25, Variance No. 10, to install a 55 foot high freeway sign at an approved
automotive service facility located at the southerly terminus of Front Street and Highway 79
South, 29115 Front Street.
Section llI. PASSED, DENIEr) AND ADOPTED this 9th day of June, 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDSALL
MAYOR
S~TAFFRFrX25AP~.CC 5
I ]~V~BY 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 9th day of June, 1992
by the following vote of the council:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
CO~CILMEMB~:
JUNE S. GI~PI=K
CITY CLERK
S~STAFFRP~APPE, id,.CC 6
ATTAC~ NO. :2
APRH, :20, 19~):2 PLANNING COM1V!IgSION MINUTES
SXSTAm~.rn2S~I,E~.CC 7
,f
. ZmOBT.'rC wI~RTNG
S.X ADp~cxt~on for x V-r~nce to exceed the' maximum sian
heiaht ~llowed hv Ordinance No. 348. ~roDosed 55 foot
h~ah ~reeway sian. locxted xt ~9115 Front Street.
Mark Rhoades summarized the staff report.
Chairman Hoagland opened the public hearing at 6:40 P.M.
Lou Kashmere, 19555 Camino De Paz, Nurrieta, stated that
the request for a variance to the height was due to the
fact that the elevation of the property to the east was
10 feet higher than his property, therefore, making a 45'
high sign not visible to one side of the interstate.
The Commission as a whole stated that they felt there was
no exceptional circumstances with the nature of this
property to approve the variance. Commissioners
Chiniaeff and Blair stated that they felt the applicant
should pursue the placement of Ca1 Trans logo signs along
the interstate.
It was moved by Commissioner Chiniaeff, seconded by
Commissioner Fahey, to close the public hearing at 6:50
P.M. and AdoPt Resolution No. 92-fnext~ denying Variance
No. 10 based on the analysis and findings contained in
the staff report. The motion was carried unanimously.
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
APRIL 20, 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
S\STAFFRPTX2~APPEAI~.CC 8
STAFF I~gPORT - PLANNING
- CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 20, 1992
Case No.: Variance No. 10
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
RECOMMI~
DATION:
ADOPT Resolution No. 92- denying Variance No. 10
based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff
Report.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:.
Lou Kashmere
PROPOSAL:
A variance to increase the maximum freestanding freeway
sign height from 45 to 55 feet in height.
LOCATION:
29115 Front Stme~
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSEDZONING:
M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
North:
South:
East:
West:
M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial)
R-R (Rural-Residential)
None Requested
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
North: Concrete Facility
South: Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Murrieta Creek
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Proposed Freeway Sign Height:
Proposed Sign Square Footage:
Appmved Sign Height:
55 feet
150 square feet
45 feet
$WrAFFRF~IOVA!IAN.PC
BACKGROUND
Variance No. 10 was submitted to the City Of Temecula on February 18, 1992. The request
is an application to increase the height of a 45 foot high freeway oriented sign which was
approved by the City Council on February 11, 1991. The same sign (45 foot high) was denied
by the Planning Commission on November 18, 1991.
PROJECT DESCRIFrlON
The proposed variance is an application to increase the height of an approved sign from 45 to
55 feet. Ordinance No. 348 allows that the maximum height of a freesiariding freeway oriented
sign is 45 feeL'
The proposed sign will be an illuminated box displaying the logo of the station' s franchise. The
sign will be mounted on a 48 inch wide single pylon.
The location of the sign is the same as what was approved by the City Council in February.
The sign location is in the southeast comer of the project site, on the north side of the southerly
driveway entrance.
ANALYSIS
The analysis of the flag test conducted for the 45 foot high sign determined visibility from all
directions but one. Visibility of the sign was adequate from the southbound lanes of 1-15 and
Front Street, and westbound on lower Highway 79. The sign at 45 feet is not visible from the
northbound lanes of 1-15.
The findings required to grant a variance include compatibility with surrounding uses and special
circumstances. As a result of the flag test, it is evident that the sign will have freeway,
highway, and street visibility at 45 feet. In addition, the topography of the site is similar to that
of surrounding parcels.
Therefore that no special circumstances exist. ff the proposed variance is granted, the sign will
not be compatible with signs existing in the vicinity. The City has not to date approved any
signs over 45 feet.
ZONING, SWAP, AND FUTURE GENERAL PlAN CONSISTENCY
As proposed, the request is not consistent with Ordinance No. 348 unless the variance is granted
pursuant to the required findings. The height of the sign proposed by this variance does not
conform with the intent of the City's sign code which allows for 45 foot high signs, where they
axe permitted. The proposal is also inconsistent with SWAP relative to potential scenic highway
corridors. SWAP states that on-site advertising shall be the minimum necessary for
identification, and shall blend with the environment. As such, Staff finds that the requested
variance will probably not be consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives that will be
contained in the City's future adopted General Plan.
SWrAnnU'mOVAiUAN.~ 2
SUMMARYICONCLUSIONS
Staff finds that the approved-sign is of sufficient height for site identification. The proposed
variance in not in conformsnee with Ordinance No. 348, or SWAP, and is likely to be
inconsistent with the future adopted General Plan. In addition, the site does not exhibit unique
qualities that would wan'ant the granting of a variance request.
There are no exceptional circumstances applicable to the existing size and configuration
of the subject property. The project site is afforded frontage on Front Street. The site
therefore is allowed one free-standing sign per City ordinance. The approved 45 foot
high Sign provides adequate visibility for the proposed advertising.
The granting of this variance will not be compatible with the general welfare of the
public in that the proposed sign does not conform with Ordinance No. 348, and the
policy guidelines in Section nI.8.f. of SWAP pertaining to scenic highway corridors.
The approved sign allows the applicant to adequately identify the project site in a manner
compatible with the intent of City sign regulations. Signage proposed is not consistent
with design and construction types generally endorsed by the City. As such, the
proposed use is not likely to be consistent with the City's future adopted General Plan,
which is being conducted in a timely manner.
RECOMMENDATION
ADOPT Resolution No. 92-__ denying Variance No. 10
based on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff
Report.
Attachments
ResolUtion - blue page 4
Exhibits - blue page 8
s~sT, e~n~r~lov.,au~.~c 3
ATTACHIV~-~ NO. 1
RESOLUTION
sxrrAynrrxxov,,~A~.yc 4
A'ITACttMI:INT NO. 1
RESOLUIION NO. 92-
A RESOLIYEION OF ~ PLANNING COMMYRSION OF
Tnv, CITY OF TEMY_,CULA DENYING VARIANCE NO. 10
TO CONSTRUCT AS$ FOOT HIGH FlaRE STANDING SIGN
ILOCATEn AT AN APPROVI~B AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE
~FACH.rTY LOCATED AT 29111 FRONT S'rBlv. RT.
WITEIII~'oA~, Lou Kashmere fried Variance No. 10 in accordance with the Riverside
County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted
by reference;
WRERRAS, said Variance application was processed in the time and manner prescribed
by State and local law;
WFrlr. RR,aiS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said
Variance on April 20, 1992, at which time intereswd persons had opportunity to testify either
in support or Opposition to said Variance; and
WvfRI/lr-AS, the Planning Commission received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the
Variance;
NOW, THEREFORE, TB'R PLANNING COMMISSION OF T!:ff, CITY OF
TEMECULA, DOES RESOLVE, DETER_MINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section I. 'Findings. 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:
general plan.
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the
:2. The planning agency finds, in appwving pwjects 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 smclied or which
will be studied within a reasonable time.
sxsTAvn~mtov~.~ 5
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 mended 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. Pursuant to Sections 18.27(a) and 18.30 (c), no variance may be approved unless
the following findings can be made:
1. Special circumstances exist applicable to a parcel of property, including
size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, whereby the strict application of this
ordinance deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity that is
under the same zoning classification.
2. The proposed use must conform to all the General Plan requirements and
with all applicable requirements of state law and City ordinances.
3. The overall development of the land is designed for the protection of the
public health, safety and general welfare; conforms to the logical development of the land and
is compatible with the present and future logical development of the surrounding property.
D. The Planning Commission, in denying the proposed Variance, makes the
following findings, to wit:
1. There are no exceptional circumstances applicable to the existing size and
configuration of the subject property. The project site is afforded frontage on Front Street, by
City Ordinance, therefore, the site is allowed one free-standing sign. The approved 45 foot high
sign provides adequate visibility for the proposed advertising.
2. The granting of this variance may not be compatible with the general
welfare of the public in that the proposed sign does not conform with Ordinance No. 348, and
the policy guidelines in Section llI.8.f. of SWAP relative to scenic highway corridors.
S~'TAFFRPT~IOVA[[AN.X}C ~
3. The approved sign allows the applicant to adequately identify the project
site in a manner compatible with the inmnt of City sign reguh~ons. Signage proposed is not
consistent with design and construction types generally endorsed by the City. As such, the
proposed use is not likely to be consistent with the City's future adopted General Plan, which
is being conducted in a timely manner.
E. Pursuant to SECTION E, the Variance proposed does not conform to the logical
development of its proposed site, and may not be compatible with the present and future
development of the surrounding property.
SectiOn H. Enviromental Compliance. The project is determined to be exempt from
the provisionS of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
SectiOn HI. Conditions. That the City of Temecula plnnning Commission hereby denies
Variance No=. 10 to construct a 55 foot high free standing sign located at an approved
automotive service facility located at 29115 Front Street, therefore no conditions of approval are
proposed for :this project.
SectiOn IV.
PASSED, DENYEn AND ADOPTED this 20th day of April, 1992.
JOHN E. HOAGLAND
I nl~tF~Y CERT~Y that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission Of the City of Tcmecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 20th day of April,
1992 by the foliowing vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
s~r~ppu,r~sov~,p,N.pc 7
ATTA~ NO. 2
s~rA~,nlovAR~a~.~c 8
CITY OF TEMECULA
SITE
VICINITY' MAP
NOT TO
c~: ~o.: ~A~,x~c~ ~o' ~o
EXI-HRIT: A
P.C. DATE: AP~II~ 20, 1992
VICINITY MAP
S~TAFFRP~IOVARIAN.PC
CITY OF TEMECULA
SP. 180
\,
\\
\\
ZONING EXHIBIT C
Case No.: Variance No. 10
P.C. Date: April 20, 1992
Designation:
Designgon: "C" (COMMERCIAL)
M-SC (MANUFACTURING-SERVICE COMMERCIAL)
S~TAFFRPTX lOVARIAN. PC
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO.: V~~CE NO. ~0
EXI-ffRIT: D
P.C. DATE: A~RII, 20, 1992
S~TAFFIUrI~IOVAilAN.I~
SITE PLAN
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO.: VARIANCE NO. 10
EXI~BIT: E
P.C. DATE: APRIL 20, 1992
S~VrAFFRP~!0VApJAN.pC
SIGN ELEVATION
ITEM NO.
14-
APPROV
CITY ATI'ORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJF. CT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City MEager
Planning Department
June 9, 1992
Appeal No. 23 for Parcel Map No. 22515, Third Extension of Time
RECOMMI~,~ATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that .the City Council:
ADO Fr Resolution No. 92- approving Appeal No. 23
modifying Planning Commission' s approval of the Third Extension
of Time for Tentative Parcel Map No. 22515 to delete the
requirement of Covenant's, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's)
as depicted in Condition No. 12 of the Conditions of Approval.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission approved the Third Extension of Time for Tentative Parcel Map No.
22515 with a 5-0 vote at its March 16, 1992 meeting. This Parcel Map was originally approved
by Riverside County jn November of 1987 and it allowed the subdivision of a 3.57 acre parcel
into three (3) commercially zoned parcels.
Condition No. 12 for this approval requires the applicant to prepare CC&R's to provide for the
effective establishment, operation, management, use, repair and maintenance of all common
areas, drainage and other related facilities.
The applicant has indicated in his explanation letter that no common areas exist within this
project (refer to Attachment No. 2). CC&R's were recommended to Planning Commission by
Staff to effectively maintain the common areas which include shared access drive aisles to each
parcel and the maintenance of the associated drainage conveyances and future landscaping of
these shared drive aisles. Since the Planning Commission approval of the project, new facts
have determined that the City will maintain the large drainage facilities being installed by the
developer and shared access can be handled by separate documents recorded with the map.
Therefore, Staff recommends deleting the Planning Commission's recommendation to require
CC&R's.
Sk~TAFF~APPF, AL.CC I
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Resolution - page 3
Applicant's Letter of Explanation - page 6
Planaing Commission Minutes (March 16, 1992) - page 7
Planning Commission Staff Report (March 16, 1992) - page 8
Development Fee Checklist - page 9
vgw
SXSTAFFRPT~3APPBAL.CC 2
ATTAC~ NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. ~
S~'TAFFIHq'~13A~q~,AL.(X~ ~
A~TA~ NO. 1
RESOL~ON NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF TIff, CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING APPEAL NO. 23, TO
'ELIMINATE CONDITION NO. 12 FOR THE THnID
EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
NO. 22~15 LOCATED ON Tl:ff, NORTI:m,~,ST SIDE OF ~
SOUTttERLY TERMINUS OF FRONT STREET.
WIt'ERF-tI, S, Sam McCann, fried Appeal No. 23 in accordance with the Riverside County
Land Use, Zoniag, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by
reference;
WHEREAS, said Appeal application was processed in the lime and manner prescribed
by State and local hw;
WttEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Appeal on
June 9, 1992, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support or
opposition to said Appeal; and
WItY,~, the City Council received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the Appeal;
NOW, THEREFORE, TI~. CITY COUNCIL OF TIff- CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section I. FindinVs. 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 hw that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, ff 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:
a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action
proposed will be consistent with the general plan pwposal being considered or studied or which
will be studied within a reasonable time.
S~TAFFRPT~3APPRAL. CC 4
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 complied with all other applicable
requirements of state hw 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 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 City Council. in approving the Appeal, makes the following additional
findings, to wit:
This project as designed does not include common areas that will need to
2. The requirement of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) is
not necessary to insure proper development and maintenance of the common areas.
Section II. Conditions. That the City of Temecuh City Council hereby approves
Appeal No. 23, to eliminate Condition No. 12 for the ~ Extension of Time for Tentative
Parcel Map No. 22515, located at the northeast side of the southerly terminus of Front Street.
Section 11I. PASSED, AlPROVED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of June, 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDS.ALL.
MAYOR
I HEREBY CERT~Y that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City
Council of the City. of Tern,cub at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th day of June, 1992
by the following vo~e of the Council:
COUNCH2vfEMBERS
NOES:
COUNCILlVlEMBERS
COUNCILMEMBERS
JUNE S. GR~-RK
CITY Ct-~-RK
S~TAFFRFrX~APPFAL.CC 5
ATTACHlVfENT NO. 2
APPLICANT'S I,~',TTER OF EXPLANATION
$\STAFFRPTMBAPP~.AI,.CC
6
Tentative Parcel Map 22515 Ext of Time #3
Appeal for Condition No. 12
Tentative Parcel Map 22515 has three se arate
· re not any common areas. Each ss~clation because
a rlvewa s a P landsca
y of Temecula. be maintained by the
The cost of CC&R's and' incorporation of an property owners
association is costly and unnecessary. Please delete condition 12
in the conditions of approval.
ATTAC~ NO. 3
MARCH 16, 1992 PLANNING COMMLqSION MINUTES
S~ST~APPRAL. CC
PLANNIN~ COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 16.1992
Commissionjr Chiniaeff moved to close the public hearing at 9:55 P.M. and R~'
affirm the Negative Declaration for Tentative Tract Map No. 23209 and Adoot
Resolution No. 92-(next) approving Tentative Tract Map No. 23209 based on
the Analysis and Findings contained in the staff report and subject to the
Conditions of Approval, deleting Condition No. 29 and Condition 17(d); end
addition of a condition requiring the applicant to advise property owners of the
possible future implementation of wind machines at the vineyards, seconded
by Commissioner Ford for the purpose: of discussion.
Commissioner Ford recommended Condition 17 be amended to read "Prior to
the issuance of the first occupancy permit or Model Complex Permit the
following Conditions shall be satisfied."
AYES:
3 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford
NOES:
2 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Hoagland
Chairman Hoagland opposed the motion based on inadequate buffering on the
southwest portion of the tract.
Commissioner Fahey opposed the motion based on inadequate buffering of the
lots next to the vineyards.
10.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 22515, 3RD EXTENSION OF TIME
10.1 Prooosal for third extension of time for ;a 3 lot commercial oarcel maD. Located
on the east side of the southerly terminus of Front Street.
Planner Mark Rhoades summarized the staff report.
Li~rry Markham, Markham & Associates, 41750 Winchester Road, Temecula,
representing the applicant, requested that Condition 12 requiring CC&R's, and
Condition 26 requiring County Flood Control review be removed.
Robert Righetti advised that there is a storm drain plan being done in
conjunction with this property and the property across the street.
James Marpie, 19210 St. Gallen Way, Murrieta, representing Citizens For
Responsible Watershed Management, advised that this project is upstream from
the drinking water, which could be protected from pollution at a minimal cost.
Mr. Marpie explained the percolation procedure for capturing the rainfall run-off.
It was moved by Commissioner Blair, seconded by Commissioner Fahey to
close the public hearing at 10:10 P.M. and Adoot Resolution No. 92-(next)
approving the Third Extension of Time for Parcel Map No. 22515 based on the
~ PCMIN3/16~92 -11 - 3/20/92
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 16.1992
schools.
Mary Jones, 32085 Vista Del Monte, Temecula, expressed concern with the
potential for flooding from drainage run-off and expressed a concern that
previous issues recommending denial Were not being adequately addressed.
Greg Tortoretti, 31984 Dane Court, Temecula, reiterated concerns regarding
impacts on schools, traffic and emergency service responses.
Terry Kavicki, 31951 Valone Court, Temecula, expressed concerns with
pollution, the impact the project will have on the vineyards, wildlife preservation
end schools.
James Marpie, 19210 St. Gallen Way, Murrieta, representing Citizens For
Responsible Watershed Management, advised that this project is upstream from
the drinking water, which could be protected from pollution at a minimal cost.
Mr. Marpie explained the percolation procedure for capturing the rainfall run-off.
Bo Kemble addressed some of the concerns expressed by the area residents,
advising that the project is conditioned to improve Butterfield Stage Road along
the project frontage as well as providing improvements to Butterfield Stage
Road out to Rancho California Road; park plans have been left open to the
Parks Department for design; most of the drainage will flow to the west and tie
into the storm drain system in that area; and, Temecula Unified School District
was present at all DRC meetings and have offered no comments.
Mary Jones, 32085 Vista Del Monte, Temecula, reiterated her concerns for the
potential flooding to Walcott Lane, a decrease to the park site due to
improvements, and she advised that the developer had not discussed the
proposed project with her and she is an adjacent property owner.
B6'Kemble advised that the developer had a letter to grade from Marlborough
and a verbal authorization from an adjacent property owner off La Serene Way.
Mike Gray, representing the County Fire Department, stated that the County
currently acknowledges a deficiency in the eastern portion of the City;
however, the Fire Stations that will be built in that area rely on the development
of homes first. Mr. Gray advised the next fire station that is scheduled to built
will be located at Butterfield Stage Road and Highway 79.
Commissioner Fahey and Chairman H0agland stated that they did not feel the
project offered adequate transition from agriculture to residential.
Mark Rhoades suggested that a condition be added requiring the developer to
advise potential property owners of the possibility of future implementation of
wind machines at the vineyards.
PCMIN3/16/92 -1 O- 3/20/92 ~--
ATTACH1VfENT NO. 4
MARCH 16, 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
S~STA~APP~.AL.CC 8
STAff REPORT - PLANNING
' CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
March 16, 1992
Case No.: Tentative Parcel Map No. 2251!6 (Third Extension of Time)
RECOMMENDATION:
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
PrelcN!red By: Mark Rhoades
ADOPT Resolution 92- approving the Third Extension
of Time for Parcel Map No. 22515 based on the Findings
contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
Sam McCann
Markham and Associates,
Third Extension of Time for a three lot commercial subdivision on
3.57 acres.
Northeast side of the southerly terminus of Front Street.
C-P-S (Scenic Highway COmmercial)
North:
South:
East:
West:
N/A
Vacant
North:
South:
East:
West:
C-11C-P (General Commercial)
R-R (Rural Residential)
Interstate 1:5 Corridor
M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
Vacant
Vacant
Freeway
Industrial Use
PROJECT STATISTICS
S~,STAFFI~2S"IS-2.Tliq~
Proposed Parcels:
Gross Acres:
Parcel Size
BACKGROUND
3
3.57
Parcel 1
Parcel 2
Parcel 3
.91 Acre
1.32 Acre
1.34 Acre
This project was originally approved by Riverside County in November of 1987. Subsequently
the First Extension of Time also approved by Riverside County in September of 1989. The
Second Extension of Time was approved by the City of Temecula Planning Commission on
December 16, 1991.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This proposal project is a request for the Third ExtenSion of Time for Tentative Parcel Map
22515. The project is a commercial map with 3 parcels which will take access from Front
Street. The proposed map abuts the I-15 freeway to the east.
ANALYSIS
The project is currently zoned Scenic Highway Commercial, and as such the map is consistent
with Ordinance No. 348. The existing site consists of gentle terrain which has been highly
disturbed by recent grading activity. Concerns relative to the map included the two proposed
driveway access points, and the configuration of the drainage easement. Since the Second
Extension of Time was approved, Staff has received Cal Trans clearance for the location of
the driveway entries because of the proximity to the freeway offramp. In addition, the
drainage easement has been redesigned to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department.
FUTURE GENERAL PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY
The current SWAP designation for the proposed project site and surrounding area is "C"
(Commercial). The current pattern of area development would suggest that the project will
likely be consistent with the City of Temecula's future adopted General Plan when it is
completed.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The previous Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 31724 is still applicable
to this project.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
If the Third Extension of Time is approved, the map will be extended to November of 1992.
The project is compatible with all applicable City Ordinances,
FINDINGS
S%STA~2515-2.TPM 2 ~
e
10.
11.
The proposed extension of Time for Tentative Parcel Map 22515 will not have
significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the previous Initial
Study performed for the project. The previously adopted Negative Declaration is
recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding proposed development, zoning and SWAP.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with, the
future adopted General Plan, if the proposed !use is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan,due to the fact that the project is consistent with surrounding proposed
development.
The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law due to the fact that the
project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance No. 460.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations and access due to the fact that the project has access
to public roads and sufficient building area.
The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat as determined in the initial study.
The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure with passive or active solar possibilities.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated rights-of-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. Access is provided from Front
Street.
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 project as conditioned. The project will not interfere with
any easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed
necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference.
~ S'~STAFFRFT~2515-2 .TPM 3
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION:
ADOPT Resolution 92- approving the Third Extension
of Time for Parcel Map No. 22515 based on the Findings
contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval·
vgw
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution - page 5
Conditions of Approval - page 11
Staff Report, 2nd Extensiion of Time - page 19
Exhibits - page 20
a. Vicinity Map
b. SWAP
c. Zoning Map
d. Site Plan
S~STAF-~qPT~.2S1S-2.TPM 4 """',
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 92_
S~STAFFRPT'~2251 5*2.
5
RESOLIJTION NO. 92-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE THIRD EXTENSION OF TIME
FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 22515 TO SUBDIVIDE A
3.86 ACRE PARCEL INTO 3 PARCELS AT THE NORTHEAST
SIDE OF THE SOUTHERLY TERMINUS OF FRONT STREET.
WHEREAS, Sam McCann, filed the Third Extension of Time for Parcel Map No.
22515 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 Tentative Parcel Map application was approved by the Riverside
County Board of Supervisors on November 8, 1987 at which time interested parties had an
opportunity to testify either in support'or opposition,
WHEREAS, the Riverside County Planning Commission considered the First
Extension of Time on September 8, 1989 at which time interested persons had an opportunity
to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Second Extension of Time
on December 16, 1991 at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either
in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the March 16, 1992, Commission hearing, the
Commission approved said Third Extension of Time;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNI N G 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 '.o Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall adopt
a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted
or the requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan,
if all of the following requirements are met:
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
plan·
S~STAFFFIPT~2515-2.TPM
6
The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed
will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(3) The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
The Riverside County General 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 Parcel 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 Parcel Map No. 22515 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 i~nconsistent with the plan, because the
project is similar in use and intensity to adjacent development.
(3)
The proposed use or acti,on 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.
~ S~'STAFFFU:rT~2515'2*~'PM 7
Pursuant to Section 7.1 of COunty OrdinanCe No. 460, no subdivision may be
approved unless the following findings are made:
A. That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and
specific plans.
That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of
development.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the
proposed density of the development.
That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements are not
likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and
unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements are
not likely to cause serious public health; problems.
That the design of the proposed land diVision or the type of improvements will
not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through,
or use of, property within the proposed land division. A land division may be
approved if it is found that alternate easements for access or for use will be
provided and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously
acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record
or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction.
The Planning Commission in recommending approval of the Third Extension of Time
for proposed Tentative Parcel Map No. 22515, makes the following findings, to wit:
The proposed extension of Time for Tentative Parcel Map 22515 will not have
significant negative impact on the environment, as determined in the previous
Initial Study performed for the project. The previously adopted Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the
General Plan being prepared at this time, due to the fact that the project is
consistent with the surrounding proposed development, zoning and SWAP.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with,
the future adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan,due to the fact that the project is consistent with surrounding
proposed development.
S%STAFFRPT~2515-2.TPM 8 ~
De
The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law due to the fact
that the project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance
No. 460.
Ee
The site is suitable to accommodate the tproposed land use in terms of the size
and shape of the lot configurations and access due to the fact that the project
has access to public roads and sufficient building area.
Fe
The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure
fish or wildlife or their habitat as determined in the initial study.
Ge
The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to
future passive energy control opportunities due to the fact that the lots are
large enough to provide sufficient southern exposure with passive or active
solar possibilities.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated rights-of-
way which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. Access is
provided from Front Street.
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 project as conditioned. The
project will not interfere with any easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed
necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental
documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by
reference.
As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Third Extension of Time for Tentative
Parcel Map proposed is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
Environmental Assessment No. 31724 was adopted by the County of Riverside for the
proposed Tentative Parcel Map No. 22515. The previous adopted Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby re-affirmed.
S~$TAFFRPT~22515-2. TPM 9
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves the Third Extension of Time
for Parcel Map No. 22515 for the subdivision of a 3.86 acre parcel into 3 parcels located at
the northeast side of the southerly terminus of From Street and subject to the following
conditions:
A. Attachment 3, attached hereto.
SECTION 4.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day 0f March, 1992.
JOHN E. HOAGLAND
CHAIRMAN
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution; was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the CiW of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 16th day of
March, 1992 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS-
S~STAFr-.P~S~S-Z.T~ 10
ATTACHMENT N0. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
~ S~STA~2515-2.T'PM 1 I
CITY OF TEMECULA
- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Parcel Map No: 22515 (3rd E.O.T.)
Project Description: The proposed project is a request for the Third Extension
of Time for Tentative Parcel Map 22515. The project is a commercial map with
3 parcels which will take access from Front Street. The proposed map abuts
the I-15 freeway to the east.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 922-120-004
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
This conditionally approved Tentative Map will expire November 3, 1992, unless
extended as provided by Ordinance 460.
The project shall conform to the Conditions of Approval established for the original
approval.
Access shall be restricted along I-15 and Front, except for approved openings on Front
Street.
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 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 a~tach, set aside, void, or annul an
approval of the City of Temecula, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative
body concerning Tentative Parcel Map No. 22515, which action is brought within the
time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The 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 the 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.
e
The applicant shall comply with the CaI-Trans letter dated December 24, 1991, a copy
of which is attached.
S%STAF~2515.,2.TI~R I 2 ~
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
The following are the Del~a~ment 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 personnel of the
Department of Public Works.
It is understood that the Developer correctly shows on the tentative site plan all existing and
proposed easements, traveled ways, improvement 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:
As deemed necessary by the Department of PUblic Works, the developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencieS:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Muni~:ipal Water DistriCt;
Riverside County Rood Control district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
CalTrans; and
Parks and Recreation Department.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the
public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers. All
dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of
Public Works.
Front Street shall be improved with 40 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds
for the street improvements may be posted, within the dedicated right-of-way in
accordance with the modified offset section for Front Street, (60'/80'). (Modified City
Standard No. 101 )
10.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Front Street and so noted on the final map with
the exception of entry points as approved by The Department of Public Works.
11.
Easements, when required 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 Department of Public Works.
~ S%STAFFRPT~2515-2.TPM 13
12.
A declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shell 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
Engineering conditions:
A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
The CC&R's shell 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 CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association
are subject to the approval of Planning,. I:)epertrnent of Public Works, and the
City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A
recorded copy shall be provided to the City.
The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas drainage and
related facilities.
Ee
The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and .
maintained so as not to create a public ~nuisance. _,
Fe
The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition
required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving
reasonable notice, may enter the property and parform, at the owner's sole
expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&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.
The declaration shall contain language prohibiting further subdivision of
any lots, whether they are lettered lots or numbered lots.
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently
maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City.
Such proof of this maintenance shall be submitted to Planning and the
Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permits.
e
Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring
access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking
areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded
concurrent with the map.
$~STAFFRP~22515-2.TRVl 14
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
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 noti limited to: pavement, curb and gutter,
sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, and other traffic
control devices as appropriate. :
B. Storm drain facilities.
C. Undergrounding of 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 requirements of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of
Public Works.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department
of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards traffic signal
impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal
mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said
payment to the time of issuance of a building permit.
All driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
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
Department of Public Works. ,
All driveways shall conform to the applicable City of Temecula standards and shall be
shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with City Standard 207A and
401 (curb sidewalk).
The subdivider shall submit two (2) prints of ;a comprehensive grading plan to the
Department of Public Works. The plan shall 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.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted
as directed by the Department of Public Works at the time of application for grading
plan check.
The subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Department of Public
Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site.
S~STAFFRPT~2515-2.TPM 15
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
PRIOR
31.
32.
33.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public
Works. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public
Works.
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 drainage easement shall be obtained from ;the affected property owners for the
release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy
of the recorded drainage easement shall be submitted to the City for review prior to
the recordation of the final map.
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with supporting
hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the Riverside County
Flood Control District for review.
The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto
or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works 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 use of streets be prohibited
for drainage purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate facilities as approved by
the Department of Public Works.
A drainage channel and/or flood protection wall will be required to protect the
structures by diverting sheet runoff to streets, or to a storm drain.
A portion of the site is in an area identified on the flood hazards maps as Flood Zone
B. All structures shall be protected from this hazard.
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.
TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS:
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an
encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-way.
No grading shall take place prior to the improvement plans being substantially
complete, appropriate clearance letters have been obtained, and approval of the
grading plan has been granted by the Department of Public works.
S~STAFFIqPT%22515-2,TPM 16 ~
34.
35.
36.
37.
PRIOR
38.
39.
40.
If grading is to take place between the months ef October and April inclusive, erosion
control and runoff mitigation plans will be required. All plans shall be submitted with
appropriate notes as'directed end approved by the Department of Public Works
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The Charge shall equal the prevailing Area
Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is
payable to the Rood 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.
An encroachment permit shall be required from CalTrans for any work within their
right-of-way.
A permit from the County Rood Control District is required for work within their right-
of-way.
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 Soils Engineer shall issue a Rnal Soils Report addressing
compaction and site conditions.
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 with the approved rough grading plan.
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. 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 Agreement for payment of Public Facility, fee, a copy of
which has been provided to developer. Concurrently, with executing this-Agreement,
developer shall post security to secure payment of the Public Facility fee. The amount
of the security shall be $2.00 per square foot, not to exceed $10,000. Developer
understands that said Agreement may require the payment of fees in excess of those
now estimated (assuming benefit to the project in the amount of such fees). By
execution of this Agreement, developer will waive any right to protest the provisions
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\STAFFF!~T~22515-2 .Tlqd 17
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
41.
Construct all required improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter, A.C.
pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees street lights, storm drains and
drainage devices as required by the Department of Public Works.
42.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with
adequate detours during construction. Traffic control plans shall be provided as
directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required to be prepared by
a registered Civil Engineer.
43.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per
square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the
State Standard Specifications.
TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
44.
All previous County of Riverside Road Department and CalTrans Conditions of Approval
shall apply except as modified by these conditions.
45.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for Front Street and shall be included in
the street improvement plans.
46. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for the
design requirements.
47.
Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the
Department of Public Works.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
48.
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 Department of Public Works.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
49. All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan.
50.
Provide limited landscaping in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent
to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance.
S%STAFFRPT~22515-2,TPM 18
S"rA"ll OF C..ALIFORI llA I1,,e'2_14[:S~, TRA~ATICIN AND ~ AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT l, P.O. IOX 231
"""' AN IERNARDINO, CAUFaRNIA rJ4O2
TDD ~14) 383-,4609
December 24, 199l
Development Review
08-Riv-15-3.43
Your Reference:
TPM 22515
Planning Department
Attention Mr. Mark Rhoades and
Mr. Matthew Fagan
City Hall
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Dear Mr. Rhoades and Mr. Fagan:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed
Tentative Parcel Map No. 22515 located adjacent to the southbound
1-15 off-ramp to south Route 79 and Front Street in Temecula.
Please refer to the attached material on which our comments
have been indicated by the items checked and/or by those items
noted under additional comments.
If any work is necessary within the State highway right of
way, the developer must obtain an encroachment permit from the
Caltrans District 8 Permit Office prior to beginning work.
If additional information is desired, please call Mr. Steven
Wisniewski of our Development Review Section at (714) 383-4384.
Very truly yours,
Attachment
Development Review Engineer
Riverside County
RECEIVL:O
DEO 2 7 1991
CI'P( OF TEMECULA
CALTRANS DEVELOP~(ENT REVIER FORM
Your P, EFERENCE
TO'. APPLI CANT
DATE
PLAN CHECKER ' ( CO RTE PM)
WE REQUEST THAT THE ITEMS CHECKED BELOW BE INCLUDED IN THE CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT:
NORHAL RIGHT OF gay DEDICATION TO PROVIDE
HALF--UIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHWAT.
· NORMAL STREET IIqPROVEHENTS TO PROVIDE
HALF--UIDTH ON THE STATE HIGHgAY.
CURB AND GUTTER, STATE STANDARD NB-A , TYPE A2-8 ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY
PARKING SHALL BE PROHIBITED ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY BY THE PROPER PLACEHEHT OF NO PARKING SIGHS.
3 5 FT RADIUS CURB RETURNS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT iNTERSECTIONS WITH THE STATE HIGHWAY, STATE STANDARD N8
CASE--A WHEELCHAIR RANPS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE CURB RETURNS AS DEFINED IN THE HIGHWAY DESIGN NANUAL,
SECTION 105 . 4 (2) .
A POSITIVE VEHICULAR BARRIER ALONG THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE SHALL BE PROVIDED TO LINIT PHYSICAL ACCESS TO THE
STATE HIGHWAY,
VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL NOT BE DEVELOPED DIRECTLY TO THE STATE HIGHWAY,
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL SE PROVIDED BY EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD CONNECTIONS.
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL 5~ PROVIDED BY STANDARD DRIVEWAYS.
VEHICLP,_AR ACCESS SHALL NOT BE PROVIDED WTTHIq __
THE INTERSECTIO4 AT """
VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL 5~ PROVIDED BY A ROAD--TYPE CONNECT]ON,
VEHICULAR ACCESS CONNECTIONS SHALL BE PAVED AT LEAST WITHIN THE STATE HIGHWAY HIGH1 OF ~;Y.
ACCESS POINTS TO THE STATE HIGHWAY SHALL BE DE~'~LOPED IN A HANHER THAT WILL PROVIDE SIGHT DISTANCE F~ __
MPH ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY.
/].J~NDSCAP]HG ALONG THE STATE HIGHWAY S"ALL PROV]:E FOR SAFE SIGHT DISTANCE ~ CONPLY ~ITH F]XE~ OBJECT SET AND BE TO STATE STANDARDS.
A LEFT --TURN LANEt INCLUDING SHOULDERS AND ANY ~ECESSART UIDENINGt SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE STATE
~ TRAFFIC STUOY iNDICATING ON AND OFF -- SITE FLO'-' =ATTERNS AND VOLUHES t PROBABLE INPACTS AND PROPOSED
HEASURES SHALL BE PREPARED,
PARKING SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN A NANHER THAT WILL NOT CAUSE ANY VEHi CULAR HOVENENT CONFLICTS t INCLUD]k: PAR(Ik:
TALL ENTRANCE AND EXIT ~ WITHIN OF 1-~ ENTRANCE FRON THE STATE HIGHWAY ·
ARE SHALL BE TAKEN WHEN DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY TO PRESERVE AND PERPETUATE THE EXISTING DRAINAG~ PATTERk
OF THE STATE HIGHWAY, PARTICULAR COnSIDERATiON SHOULD BE GIVEN TO CUHULAT]VE INCREASED STORH RUNOFF TO INSUR~
THAT A HIGHWAY DRAINAGE PROBLEH IS NOT CREATED.
b/~LEASE REFER TO ATTACHED ADDITIONAL CCHNENTS, PROVIDE TO APPLICANT.
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT T~IS IS A CONCEPTUAL. REVIER ONLY. FINAL APPROVAL
BE DETERMINED DURING THE ENCROACHME~"P PERMIT PROCESS.
CONSTRUCTION/DEMOLITION UITHi~I PRESENT OR PRCjF-OSED STATE RIGHT OF MAY SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED FOR POTENTIAL
HAZARDOUS HASTE ( I · E · A$IESTO$ t PETROCHEMICAL$ w ETC.) ANi) MITIGATED AS PER REOUIRENENTS OF REGULATORY AGENCIES.
WHEN PLANS ARE $tJINITTED~ PLEASE CONFORM TO THE REGUIREMENT$ OF THE ATTACHED eeZ']ANDOUT'. THIS MILL EXPEDITE
THE REVIEV PROCESS AND TIME REOUIRED FOIl PLAN C:HECX. PROVIDE TO APPLICANT.
ALTHOUGH THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED BY THIS PROPOSAL DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT
ON THE STATE HIGHMAY SI'$TEMw CONSIDERATION MUST BE GIVEN TO THE laIqULATIVE EFFECT OF CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT
IN THIS AREA. ANY MEAStJRES NECESSARY TO MITIGATE THE CLiqLILATIVE IMPACT OF TRAFFIC AND/ON DRAINAGE SHALL BE
PROVIDED PRIOR TO OR WITH DEVELOIMNT OF THE AREA THAT ,NECESSITATES THEM.
CONSIDERATION SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE PROVISIONt OR FUTURE PROVISION~ OF SIGNILIZATION AND LIGHTING OF tHE
INTERnION OF AND THE STATE HIG~Y k%EN ~QUeN, iTS ,ARE I,e'T.
IT APPEARS THAT THE THAFF]C AND/OR DRAINAGE GENERATED IV THIS PHiL COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON
THE STATE HIGH!~AY SYSTEM OF THE AREA. ANY MEASURES TO MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC AND/OR DRAINAGE IMPACTS SHALL 6[
INCLUDED VITN THE DEVELOPMENT.
THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHWAY IS INCLUDED IN THE CALIFORNIA MASTER PLAN OF STATE HIGHWAYS ELIGIBLE FIle
OFFICIAL SCENIC H]GHI~AY DESIGNATION AND IN THE FUTURE YOUR AGENCY HAY WISH TO HAVE THIS ROUTE OFFICIALLY
DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHUAY.
THIS PORTION OF THE STATE HIGHkaAY HAS BEEN OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED AS A STATE SCENIC HIGHWAYt AND DEVELOPHEI~T
IN THIS CORRIDOR SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SCENIC HIGHMAT CONCEPT.
TT IS RECOGNIZED THAT THERE IS CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC CONCERN ABOUT NOISE LEVELS ADJACENT TO HEAVILY TRAVELLED
HIGHWAYS. LAND DEVELOPMENTt IN ORDER TO HE COMPATIBLE WITH THIS CONCERNt NAY REQUIRE SPECIAL NOISE ATTENUATiO i
HEASURES. DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY SHOULD INCLUDE ANY NECESSARY NOISE ATTENUATION..
/
CALTRANS DISTRICT 8
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BRANCH
P.O. Box 23i
SAN BERNARDINO, ~ 92402
A COPY OF ANT CI3ND 1T I ORS OF APPROVAL OR REVISED APPROVAL.
A COPY OF ANT DIXIJMENTS PROVIDING ADDITIONAL STATE HIGHVAT RIGHT OF WAY UPON RECORDATION OF THE MAP.
/~bNY PROPOSALS TO FURTHER DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY.
A COPY OF THE TRAFFIC OR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY.
A CHECK PRI NT OF THE PARCEL 131t TRACT NAP.
A CHECK PRINT OF THE PLANS FOR ANY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE STATE HIGI~AT RIGHT OF WAT.
A CHECK PRINT OF THE GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS FOR THIS PROPERTY WHEN AVAILABLE.
Date: December 24, 1991
Riv-15-3.43
(Co-Rte-PM)
TPM 22515
(Your Reference)
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
The Caltrans symbol which indicates Access Control shall be used at the
State Right-of-WaY on tentative/final parcel map.
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
STAFF REPORT - SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME
.,""- S~STAFFRPT~2515"2-TPIVl 19
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
December 16, 1991
Case No.: Tentative Parcel Map No. 22515 (Second Extension of Time)
RECOMMENDATION: 1.
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
RE-AFFIRM the Negative Declaration for Environmental
Assessment No. 31724 adopted by the County of
Riverside for Tentative Parcel Map 22515.
ADOPT Resolution 91 - approving the Second
Extension of Time for Parcel Map No. 22515 based on
the Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to
the attached Conditions of Approval.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Sam McCann
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
Markham and Associates
Second Extension of Time for a three lot commercial subdivisior.
on 3.86 acres.
LOCATION:
Northeast side of the southerly terminus of Front Street.
EXISTING ZONING:
C-P-S (Scenic Highway Commercial)
SURROUNDING ZONING:
North:
South:
East:
West:
C-1/C-P (General Commercial)
R-R (Rural Residential)
Interstate 15 Corridor
M-SC (Manufacturing-Service Commercial)
PROPOSED ZONING:
N/A
EXISTING LAND USE:
Vacant
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Vacant
Vacant
Freeway
Industrial Use
S~.STA,~2515.,2.~
PROJECT STATISTICS
Proposed Parcels: ' 3
Gross Acres: 3.86
Parcel Size Parcel I .91 Acre.
Parcel 2 1.32 Acre
Parcel 3 1.34 Acre
BACKGROUND
This project was originally approved by Riverside County in November of 1987. Subsequently
the First Extension of Time also approved by Riverside County in September of 1989. The
current application was submitted in October of 1990.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is a request for the Second Extension of Time for Tentative Parcel Map
22515. The project is a commercial map with 3 parcels which will take access from Front
Street. The proposed map abuts the I-15 freeway to the east.
ANALYSIS
The project is currently zoned Scenic Highway Commercial, and as such the map is consistent
with Ordinance No. 348. The existing site consists of gentle terrain which has been highly
disturbed by recent grading activity.
The current status of the proposed map requires the approval of the Second Extension of Time
in order for the proposed map to remain active. At the present time the map will not be able
to record until this proposed map is again acted on by the Commission as a Third Extension
of Time.
FUTURE GENERAL' PLAN AND SWAP CONSISTENCY
The current SWAP designation for the proposed project site and surrounding area is "C"
(Commercial). The current pattern of area development would suggest that the project will
likely be consistent with the City of Temecula's future adopted General Ran-when it is
completed.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The previous Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 31724 is still applicable
to this project.
~ S~STAFFRFT'~2515-2, TPM 2
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
This application is being pr~}cessed in order for the Tentative Map to remain active. The
processing time for the application was complicated by a misunderstanding relative to the
required submittal fees and the lack of the applicant's response for several months, As a
result of that time delay, the map will not be able to record until the Third Extension of Time
is approved, which would extend the map to November of 1992.
Staff is currently reviewing the Third Extension of Time. Any and all outstanding concerns
relative to the map will be incorporated into the Third Extension.
FINDINGS
The proposed Parcel Map will not have significant negative impact on the environment,
as determined in the previous Initial Study performed for the project, The previously
adopted Negative Declaration is recommended for adoption,
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding proposed development, zoning and SWAP.
There is not a likely probabiliW of substantial detriment to, or interference with, the
future adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan,due to the fact that the project is consistent with surrounding proposed
development.
e
The proposed use complies with State planning; and zoning law due to the fact that the
project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance No. 460.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations and access due to the fact that the project has access
to public roads and sufficient building area.
The desigr~ of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure'fish or wildlife
or their habitat as determined in the initial study.
The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide 'sufficient southern exposure with passive or active solar possibilities.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated rights-of-way which
are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic. Access is provided from Front
Street.
S%STAFFRFT'~251S.-2.TPM 3 ~
10.
11.
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 project as conditioned. The project will not interfere with
any easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed
necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein incorporated by reference.
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION: 1.
®
RE-AFFIRM a Negative Declaration for Environmental
Assessment No. 31724 adopted by the County of
Riverside for Tentative Parcel Map 22515.
ADOPT Resolution 91 - approving the Second
Extension of Time for Parcel Map No. 22515 based on
the Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to
the attached Conditions of Approval.
vgw
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution - page 5
Conditions of Approval - page 11
County Staff Report - page 19
Exhibits - page 20
a. Vicinity Map
b. SWAP
c. Zoning Map
d. Site Plan
'~ S~STAFFFIPT~2S 15,2 .TPM 4
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 91_
S%STA~2515-2. TPM
5
RESOLUTION NO. 91-,_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF TEMECULA APPROVING THE SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME
FOR TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 22515 TO SUBDIVIDE A
3.86 ACRE PARCEL INTO 3 PARCELS AT THE NORTHEAST
SIDE OF THE SOUTHERLY TERMINUS OF FRONT STREET.
WHEREAS, Sam McCann, filed Parcel Map No. 22515 (2nd E.O.T.) 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, the Planning Commission considered said Extension of Time on
December 16, 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
approved said Extension of Time;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OFTHECITY OFTEMECULA
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 recluirements are met:
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
pl-~n.
The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
(1)
There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action proposed
will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time.
S~ST~2S;S-;.TN 6
(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 Parcel 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 Parcel Map No. 22515 Second
Extension of Time proposed will be consistent with the general plan
proposal being considered or studied or which will be studied within a
reasonable time.
(2)
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan.
(3) The proposed use or action, complies with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, no subdivision may be
approved unless the following findings are made:
That the proposed land division is consistent with applicable general and
specific plans.
That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
That the site of the proposed land division is physically suitable for the type of
development.
~ S%STAFFRFT'~2515-2 .TPM 7
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 proposed Tentative Parcel Map, makes the following findings, to wit:
The proposed Parcel Map will not have significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the previous Initial Study performed for the
project. The previously adopted Negative Declaration is recommended for
adoption..
There is a reasonable probability that this project will be consistent with th~
General Plan being prepared at this time, due to the fact that the project is
consistent with the surrounding proposed development, zoning and SWAP.
There is not a likely probability of substantial detriment to, or interference with,
the future adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is ultimately inconsistent
with the plan,due to the fact that the project is consistent with surrounding
proposed development.
The proposed use complies with State planning and zoning law due to the fact
that the project conforms to the current zoning for the site and to Ordinance
No. 460.
The site is suitable to accommodate the proposed land use in terms of the size
and shape of the lot configurations and access due to the fact that the project
has access to public roads and sufficient building area.
The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure
fish or wildlife or their habitat as determined in the initial study.
S~STAFFFIFT%22515-2,TPM ~ ~
The design of the subdivision is consistent with the State Map Act in regard to
future passive energy control opportunities due to the fact that the lots are
large enough :to provide sufficient southern exposure with passive or active
solar possibilities.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and proposed dedicated rights-of-
way which are open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic, access is provided
from Front Street.
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 project as conditioned. The
project will not interfere with any easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's Conditions of Approval are deemed
necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare.
Said findings are supported by minutes, maps, exhibits, 'and environmental
documents associated with these applications and herein incorporated by
reference.
As conditioned I~ursuant to SECTION 3, the Parcel Map proposed is compatible with
the health, safety and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2. Environmental Compliance.
Environmental Assessment No. 31724 was adopted by the County of Riverside for the
proposed Tentative Parcel Map No. 22515. The previous adopted Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby re-affirmed.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves the Second Extension of
Time for Parcel Map No. 22515 for the subdivision of a 3.86 acre parcel into 3 parcels located
at the northeast side of the southerly terminus of FrOnt Street and subject to the following
conditions:
A. Attachment 3, attached hereto.
S~STAFFRPT~2515-2 .TPM 9
SECTION 4.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ~DOPTED this 16th day of December, 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 16th day of
December, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
S%,STAr-.FRFT%22515-2 .TPM 1 C) ~
AI'i'ACHMENT NO. 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
~ S~,STAFFI~.25'IS-2.TPM 1 '~
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Parcel Map No: 22515 (2nd E.O.T.)
Project Description: The proposed project is a request for the Second Extension
of Time for Tentative Parcel Map 22515. The project is a commercial map with
3 parcels which will take access from Front Street. The proposed map abuts
the I-15 freeway to the east.
Assessor's Parcel No.: 922-120-004
Planning Department
,
This conditionally approved Tentative Map will expire November 3, 1991, unless
extended as provided by Ordinance 460.
, o
The project shall conform to the Conditions of Approval established for the original
approval.
Access shall be restricted along I-15 and Front Street, except for allowed openings on
Front Street.
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 pa~/
the fee required by the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance
or resolution.
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 Tentative Parcel Map No. 22515, which action is brought within the
time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The 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 the 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.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the 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 One Thousand, Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars
($1,275.00). which includes the One Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars
($1,250.00) fee, in compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish and Game Code
Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Twenty-Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee
S%STAFF:RFr~251S-2.TPM 12 ~
to enable the City to file the Notice of Determination required under Public Resources
Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such for~y-
eight (48) hour peEiod 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 711.4(c).
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
As deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works, the developer shall receive
written clearance from the following agencies:
Rancho California Water District;
Eastern Municipal Water District;
Riverside County Rood Control !district;
City of Temecula Fire Bureau;
Planning Department;
Department of Public Works;
Riverside County Health Department;
CATV Franchise;
CalTrans; and
Parks and Recreation Department,
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to the
public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers, All
dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Department of
Public Works, ,
,
Front Street shall be improved with 40 feet of asphalt concrete pavement, or bonds
for the street improvements may be posted,, within the dedicated right-of-way in
accordance with the modified offset section for Front Street, (60'/80'). (Modified City
Standard No. 101 )
10.
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Front Street and so noted on the final map with
the exception of entry points as approved by the Department of Public Works,
11.
Easements, when required 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 Department of Public Works.
~ S~.STAFFRPT~251S-2.TPM 13
12.
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&jt'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
Engineering conditions:
A. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
The CC&R's 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 CC&R's and Articles of Incorporation of the Property Owner's Association
are subject to the approval of Planning;, Department of Public Works, and the
City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrent with the final map. A
recorded copy shall be provided to the, City,
The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of all common areas drainage and
related facilities.
The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated and
maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the condition
required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due demand and giving
reasonable notice, may enter the property and perform, at the owner's sole
expense, any maintenance required thereon by the CC&R's or the City
ordinances. The propera/shall be subject to a lien in favor of the City to secure
any such expense not promptly reimbursed.
The declaration shall contain language prohibiting further subdivision of
any lots, whether they are lettered lots or numbered lots.
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently
maintained by the association or other means acceptable to the City.
Such proof of this maintenance =shall be submitted to Planning and the
Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permits.
Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements ensuring
access to all parcels and joint maintenance of all roads, drives or parking
areas shall be provided by CC&R's or by deeds and shall be recorded
concurrent with the map, or prior to the issuance of building permit
where no map is involved.
S~STAFFRFT~2515-2.TPM I 4 ~
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
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, street lights, signing, striping, and other traffic
control devices as appropriate.
B. Storm drain facilities.
C. Undergrounding of 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 requirements of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the Department of
Public Works.
Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Department
of Public Works a cash sum as established, per lot, as mitigation towards traffic signal
impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal
mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring said
payment to the time of issuance of a building permit.
All driveway centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
Department of Public Works.
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
Department of Public Works.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable County of Riverside standards and shall
be shown on the street improvement plans in accordance with County Standard 400
and 401 (curb sidewalk).
The subdivider shall submit two (2) prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the
Department of Public Works. The plan shall 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.
A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted
as directed by the Department of Public Works at the time of application for grading
plan check.
The subdivider shall submit two (2) copies of a soils report to the Department of Public
Works. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site.
"' S%STAFFRFT'~251~-2.TPM 15
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
A drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public
WorkS. All drainage_facilities shall be installed as required by the Department of Public
Works,
On-site drainage facilities, located outside ofi 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 drainage easement shall be obtained from the affected property owners for the
release of concentrated or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. A copy
of the recorded drainage easement shell be submitted to the City for review prior to
the recordation of the final map.
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map, along with supporting
hydrologic and hydraulic calculations should be submitted to the Riverside County
Flood! Control District for review.
The subdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all off-site drainage flowing onto
or through the site. In the event the Department of Public Works 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 use of streets be prohibited
for drainage purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate facilities as approved by
the Department of Public Works.
A drainage channel and/or flood protection wall will be required to protect the
structures by diverting sheet runoff to streets, or to a storm drain. ~
A portion of the site is in an area identified on the flood hazards maps as Flood Zone
B. All structures shall be protected from this hazard.
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:
31.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and an
encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works.
32.
33.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of,way.
No :grading shall take place prior to the improvement plans being substantially
complete, appropriate clearance letters have been obtained, and approval of the
grading plan has been 9ranted by the Department of Public works,
S~STAFFRPT~2515-2.TPM 16
34.
-35.
36.
37.
PRIOR
38.
39.
40.
If grading is to take place between the months of October and April inclusive, erosion
control and runoff m_itigation plans will be required. All plans shall be submitted with
appropriate notes as directed and approved by the Department of Public Works
A flood mitigation charge shall be paid. The charge shall equal the prevailing Area
Drainage Plan fee rate multiplied by the area of new development. The charge is
payable to the Rood 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.
An encroachment permit shall be required from CalTrans for any work within their
right-of-way.
A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within their right-
of-way.
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 Soils Engineer shall issue a Final Soils Report addressing
comicaction and site conditions.
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 with the approved rough grading plan.
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. 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 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
executior~ 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 amount thereof.
$~STAFFRPT%22515*Z.TPM 17
PRIOR
41.
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.
42.
Existing city roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with
adequate detours during construction. Traffic control plans shall be provided as
directed by the Department of Public Works, and may be required to be prepared by
a registered Civil Engineer.
43.
Aspbaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per
scluare yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and 94 of the
State Standard Specifications.
Transoortal;ion Enoineerino
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
44.
All previous County of RiverSide and CalTrans Conditions of Approval shall apply
except as modified by these conditions.
45.
46.
A si,gning and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the Department of Public Works for Front Street and shall be included in
the Street improvement plans.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering for
design requirements.
47.
Bus bays will be provided at all existing and future bus stops as determined by the
Department of Public Works.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
48.
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 recluired by the Department of Public Works.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
49. All Signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping plan.
50.
Provide limited landscaping in the corner cut-off area of all intersections and adjacent
to driveways to provide for minimum sight distance.
S~STAFr-~mZ~S ~ S-2.T--. 18 ~
COUMi'
PLArlFI;!IG DF, PA:tCI
DATE: "-~:.-",her S.~. !': :7
RE: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32SIF
E. A. NLMBER:
R EG I ONAL TEAM NO.
f
I"") ~t."". ' 'Zq~ ~
Dear Applicant: · ' u I
·
Tl~e Riversi.de County Board of Supervisors has taken the fOi$~Owjy).~ action
referenced tentative tract map at its regular meeting of '~r'v=-,.~,.r ~ ."'--. --
" APPROVED tentative map subject to the attached conditions.
___ DENIED tentative map based on attached findings.
___ APPROVED withdrawal of tentative rap.
The tract map has been found to be consistent with
cn the a
all pertinent elements of
Riverside County General Plan and is in compliance with the California Environmer
Cuality Act of 1970. 3~ie project will not have a significant effect on the environr
and a Negative DeclaraFion has 1been adopted.
A conditionally approv'ed tentat~v'~' l~ract map shall expire 2A'nonths after the approval
the Boarj of Supervisor~ Hearing, the date of which is shown~"above, unless within t
period of time a fina') m~, shall h'a~v~ been approved and f~le ~)vi'th the County Recor<
Prior to the expiration date ]~)ie',lan~t~ivfder/nl~y/.a~.pply in "~ri~
P t h o. la.n.n~n D~'F r'.t_h.!'rt {30} days p o
rati · ~ .x~./~u~ .... sO~S, may extend the pericd
one y~ar and upon further ap~l~ctti~>n-a second and a third year.-
~-~
~- '~' Very truly yours
,
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARll.IE~IT
Roger S. Streeter, Planning Director
/~. t ,_. ~
~nL. :lbnncle. Su~'.'.,,.v~i,12 nlar.n~r
FILE- WHITE
APPLICANT - CANARY
ENGINEER- PINK
2'),~-39 (Key.
,__,
4080 LEMON STREET, 9T" FLOOR
RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787'6181
46'209 OASIS STREET. ROOM 3
INDIO. CALIFORNIA 922
(619) 342'82
SUBMrTTN. TO TH'. BOAJlD OF SUI~ERVISORS
COUNTY OF Rll~rr. RSlDE, b'TAT1E OF C. AUFORNLA
FROM: The Planning Department $UBMIllALDA~: October 8, 1987
SUBJECT: Notice of Decision of Tentative Parcel Haps acted on by
the Planning Con~nisston on September 9, 1987.
RIECOMMENDED MOllON:
RECEIVE AND FILE the Notice of Decision for the following
tentative parce'~Tmaps acted on by the Planning Con~nission
on September 9, 1987.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO, 22515 - ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAN FROST
& ASSOCIATES - First SupervtsOrtal District - Temecula -
Schedule E - R-R and C-1/C-P Zone: ADOPTE0 the Negative
Declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 31724 and APPROVED
the tentative map.
The decision of the Planning Con~nisston is considered final
and no action by the Board of Supervisors is required unless,
within 10 days after the Notice of Decision appears on the Board's
agenda, the applicant or an interested person files an appeal
accompanied by the fee set forth in Ordinance No. 460, unless
the Board orders the matter set for public hearing before the
appropriate appeal board.
PTev. Agn. ref.
Depts. Comments DIEt.
AGE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY pLANNING COHMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 9, 1987
(AGENDA ITEN 1-4 - REEL 954 - SIDE 1 - 767-877)
PARCEL HAP 22515 - EA 31724 - Robert liein. William Frost & Associates -
Temecula District - First Supervisortal District - 3 lots - 3.862 acres -
Schedule E Land DiviSion
The hearing was opened at 10:27 a,m, and closed at 10:37 a,m,
STAFF.RECO~ENDATION: Adoption of the negative declaration for EA '31724 and
approval of Parcel Hap 22515 subject to the proposed conditions. Surroundi
properties were zoned C-1/C-P and M-SC, and contained residential, connerci~l
and industrial land uses. Staff felt the proposed project represented an
infilling within the contnercial corridor along 1-15.
Roy Howard, representing the applicant, accepted the conditions as presented
but questioned the need for the additional paleontological and archaeological
review (Condition 19[c]) since reports containing this information were
already available. There had been a full archaeological review for the
adjacent freeway. Ms. Likins explained this condition had been imposed as
result of these reports, as they had recommended that an archaeologist and
that the condition be amended to give the a Director the option to
delete this requirement if they could furnish additional information indicat-
ing this type of monitoring was not necessary. He. Crotinger advised that if
this type of information was submitted prior to the recordation of the f~nal
map, the applicant could request a minor change to delete the condition.
Commissioner Bresson questioned the need to have the grading o r
the condition. He suggested that the applicant make this request to the Board
of Supervisors,
Hr. Klotz asked whether there were any common open space areas within the
project. He. Likins advised there were none, but there would he reciprocal
easements. Hr. Klotz then suggested the deletion of Condition 18(c}, which
required CC&Rs containing provisions for ownership or the irrevocable right to
use the open space and amenities by the owners of the project.
There was no further testimony, and the hearing was closed at 10:33 a.m.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Parcel Hap 22515 is an application to subdivide
3.36 acres into three commercial lots; surrounding land uses are vacant,
connercial, industrial, and residential;surroundinq zoninq is C-1/C-P and
I~-SC; envlroN~ental concerns identified by Environmental ASsessment 31724 are
liquefaction, archaeology and paleontology; and the project site falls within
the Rancho California-Temecula subarea of the Southwest Territory Land Use
Planning Area. The project i's a Category I land use; represents infilling
within the c~n~ercial corridor along 1-15; is consistent with General Plan
policies, compatible with area development, and in conformance w~th Ordinance
460; and all environmental concerns can be mitigated through the conditions of
approval. The proposed project will not have a significant effect on the
environment,
8
RiVERSiDE COUNTY PLANNING COHHZSSZON HZNUTES
SEPTEHBER ~, 1c,
FIOTZON: Upon motion by Commissioner BreSson, seconded by Commissioner
Purv~ance and unanimously carried, the Ccim~isston recumnended to the Board of
Supervisors adoption of the negative decl~aration for EA 31724 and approval of
Parcel Pap 22515 subject to the proposed conditions, with the deletion of
Condition 18(c), based on the above findings and condusions and the
recoa~nendations of staff.
9
U"JtaJ
-.-~=,,
Z
g~
Zoning Area: Temecula
Supervisorial District:
E.A. Number 31724
Kegionai Team No. One
First
PARCEL MAP NO. 22515
Planning Co~'....lssion:
Agenda Item No. 1-4
Sept. 9, 1
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPART~NT
STAFF REPORT
1. Applicant/Engineer:
2. Type of Request:
3. Location:
4. E~isting Land Use:
5, Surrounding Land Use:
6. Existing Zoning:
7. Surrounding Zoning:
8. Comprehensive General Plan
Designation:
9. Land Division Data:'
10. Agency Recommendations:
I1. Letters:
12. Sphere of Influence:
Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates
Schedule E Subdivision
North of Junction of Front Scree~ and
Interstate - 15
Vacant
Vacant, commercial and industrial
C-1/C-P and R-R
C-I/C-P, M-SC
Land Use: Category'II
Total Acreage: 3.86 Acres
Total Lots: 3
Proposed Min. Loc Size: .91 Acre
See Attached fetters:
ROAD: 07-24-87
HEALTH: 06-29-87
FLOOD: 07-17-87
FIRE: 07-15-87
OTHER: Dept. of Transportation: 07-08-8
Mount Palomar: 06-30-87
Opposing/Suppor:ing: None as of this wrin
Noc within a city sphere
ANALYSIS:
Project Description
Parcel Map No. 22515 is a Schedule "E" subdivision of 3.86 acres within the
Temecula zoning area, located northwesterly of Front Street and Interstate 15.
The commercial land division proposes three parcels ranging in size from .91
acre co 1.34 acres nec.
Land Use/Zoning
The subject property is presently vacant with the northerly third of the site
zoned C-1/C-P. The remaining portion is zoned R-R. Change of Zone 4783,
approved by the County of Riverside Planning Commission on February 18, 1987
and by the Board of Supervisors on May 12, 1987, will chanLe the subjec: site's
current zoning co C-P-S.
*PARCEL HAp NO. 22515
Staff Report
Page -2-
The landuses and zoning thaC surround the property are varied. Murrieta Creek,
which runs parallel with Front Street in a north/south direction, traverses the
mid portions of lots that line =he vest side of Front Street. The creek foms
a nacura;1 separation be=veer the commercial/industrial land uses and zoning alo~
Front Stareat and the residerEid1 land uses and zoniq designations along Pujol
~nile there are established c~ercial and industrial land uses north of the
site in iche Temecula Historical Discric~, the majority of =he commercial property
surrounding the sire is either vacant or under construction.
Environmental Concerns
The initial study conducted for Environmental Assessment No. 31724 identified
the fol~owing environmennal concerns: 1) liquefaction; 2) archaeology: and
3) paleontology. A liquefaction report (County Geologic Report No. 431) indica~ed
that the potential for liquefaction at the subBect site is considered low. An
archaeology study o[ the site (Planning Department ~o. 1155) indicated that no
cultural remains were found on the surface of the study area. However, the
project has been conditioned for additional monitoring ac the time of grading.
All other concerns will be mitiga~ed through conditions of approval.
General,Plan
The project site is located within the Southwest Territory Land Use Plannin.
Area and the Rancho California - Temecula subarea. Land use policies call for
Category I and II land uses, with major industrial and commercial land uses
located within the 1-1'5 corridor.
In tens of infrastructure, with the commercial develooment on Front Street and the
proximity o[ the site to 1-15, the subject site might appropriately be labeled
Category I1. Category II, described as "urban" land uses, is characterized by
a broad mix of land uses. It allows neighborhood commercial development, 15
acres o:r less, along major, arterial, or secondary highways in infilling situa-
tions. The proposed project fulfills these policies. Front S~reet is designa~ed
as a major, and the parcel map represents an infllling of existing and proposed
commercial land uses along Yronn Street.
The access onto Front Street is being restricted. Two access openings will be
allowed - one between parcels 1 and 2 and one between parcels 2 and 3. Therefore,
reciprocal ingress and egress agreemen~svill be required.
Based on the foregoing, Parcel Map No. 22515 is consistent with the General Plan.
Staff finds the proposed subdivision consisten~ with the esnablished pa~tern of
commercial zoninE and development in =he area. The project also meets tI~e
applicable requirements of Ordinance 460.
PARCEL Ka.P NO. 22515
-Staff Report
Page -3-
~llqDINGS:
1. Pircel l~ap 22515 Is an appltca~on to subdivide 3.36 acres into 3 com~ercial
lots.
2. Surrounding Land uses ate vacant, c~erc~al/induscrisl and residential.
3. Surrounding zoning is C-1/C-P and H-SC.
4. Environmental concerns identified by Environmenta~ Assessment No. 3172~ are
~ique/accion, archaeology and paleontology.
5. The pro~ect site. fal~s viibin the Rancho Ca[i~ornia -Temecu~a subarea o[
the Southwest TerritOry Land Use Planning Area.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The pro~ect is a Category II land use.
2. The project represents lnfilling within the commercial corridor along 1-15.
3. All envirorunental concerns can be mitigated through conditions of approval.
The proposed subdivisi~n is consisten~ vi~h General Plan Policies,'compa~ible
with area development, and in con[ormance with Ordinance ~60.
RECO~}iENDATION£:
Based on the' findings and conclusions incorpora~ed in this staff report, staff
recommends the following:
ADOPTION o£ ~he Negative Declara~ion for Enviro~ .ntal Assessment No. 3172~; and,
AI~PROVAL of Parcel Hap No. 22515, subjec~ to the attached condi~ions of approval.
LBL:ms
8-26-87
,,-, / /
\
/ /
/e/
Im · G(:X:)°
VAC -
VAC
App. RI ,BEIN }NILLtAM
, i~.T, ~ .ASSOC. ~ .
Ssc. T. 8 $.,R.BW. A,t=eisor's Bk. 922 P'g. 12" ' J J
Circulation {~ EXPRESSWAY VARIABLE
Element (~) FREEWAY VARIABLE
Rd. Bk. Pg. 56A Dots 8/19/87 Drown By JCW
d
I
RIm~4
f
/
n, /
']xxx,\,J/ /
C -P -~
R -A-2
N
,kpp. ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST E~ ASSOC.
Use :5 LOTS.
~Lrec} TEMECULA lit S~. ~st
Sec. T.'8 S.,R.3W. ~e~s~'i Bk. 922 ~. 12
CirculGt~n ~ EXCESSWAY VARIABLE
E~t ~ F~EWAY VARIABLE
Rd. Bk.h. 56A O~te 8/19/87 ~ By JCW vn
~~~ C~ ~NI~ D~P~T~T
u:X:aI',O,N~ wap
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTHENT
SUBDIVISION
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL HAP NO. 22515
DATE:
EXPIRES:
STANDARD CONDITIONS
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the County of
Riverside, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceeding against the County of Riverside or its agents, officers, or
employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the County
of Riverside, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body
concernini Parcel Map No. 22515, which action is brought about within the
time per od provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37.
The County of Riverside will promptly notify the subdivider of any such
claim, action, or proceeding against the County of Riverside and will
cooperate fully in the defense· If the County fails to promptly notify
the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to
cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be
responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the County of
Riverside.
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California
Subdivision ~p Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule
E, 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 subject to all
the requirements of the State of California Subdivision PLap Act and
Ordinance 460.
The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the Riverside
County Surveyo r's Office and tw~ copies to the Department of Building and
Safety· The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
If any grading is proposed, the subdivider shall submit one print of
comprehensive grading plan to the Department of Building and Safety. The
plan shall comply with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, as amende~
by Ordinance 457 and as maybe additionally provided for in these
conditions of approval.
TE:ENTATZiVE PARCEL HAP NO. 22515
Condttiions of Approval
Page 2
7. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Building an~
Safety prior to commencement of any grading outside of county maintained
h of way.
road rig t
8. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the
final
9. The subdivider shall comply with the street improvement rec'onvnendationS
outlined in the Riverside County Road Department's letter dated July 24,
1987, a copy of which is attached.
10. Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract
map boundary to a 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
o~fers. All dedicati'ons shall be free from all encumbrances as approved
by the Road Commissioner. Street names shall be subject to approval of
the Road Conanissioner.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilitieS,
utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located
within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication a
conveyances shall be ~ubmitted and recorded as directed by the
Surveyor.
13.
Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance
with the provisions set forth in thie Riverside County Health Departmen t's
letter dated June 29, 1987, a-copy of which is attached.
14.
The subdivider shall comply with the flood control recommendations
outlined by the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated
July 17, 1987, a copy of which is attached. If the land division lies
within an adopted ~ ood control drainage area pursuant to'Section 10.25 of
Ordinance 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage
facilities shall be co lected by the Road Corrm~issioner.
15.
The subdivider shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations
outlined in the County Fire Marshal's letter dated July 15, 1987, a copy
Of which is attached.
16-.
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 access to all lots in each phase, and shall substantially
conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval.
TENTATIVE PARCEL HAP NO. 2251'5
ConditiOns of Approval
Page 3
18.
Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
a. All lots shall have a minimR size of .91 acres net.
b. All lot length to width ratios shall be in conformance with Section
3.8C of Ordinance 460.
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the C-P-S 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.
Prior to RECORDATION of the final map the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prior to the recordation of the final map the applicant shall submit
written clearances to the Riverside County Road and Survey Department
that all pertinent requirements outlined in the attached approval
letters from the following agencies have been met.
County Fire Department County Health Department
County Flood Control County Planning Department
Prior to the recordation of the final map, Change of Zone No. 4783
shall be approved by the Board of Supervisors and shall be effective.
Lots created by this land division shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the zone ultimately applied to the property.
P~ier ~cs reee~da~4e~ ef ~e ~4aa~ s~bdivisiea map~ ~he app~iea.~
appreva~-wkiek ska~ deme~s(~a(e (o (he satis(ae(~e~ e( (ke gepa~,~ea{
~ka( ~ke (e-ta~ IFre~ee{ w-i~q be deve~efed a~d N~fl{a4Red
w~tk (ke ~m{eR( a~d f~rpese ~f (he appFeva~,
t~ ~ke dee~me~( (e ee~ve~,
3½ (evesaM(s~ cedes amd restrie(ie~s (e t~e ~eeerded
~ke ap~reved dee~me,(s ska]~ ~e reeerded a( (he same
s~bd~v4s4e~ Mp ~s re£erdedv &a4d de~mea{s ska~ ¢e~{a4~ prev4s4eas
ame~4{~es by {he ew, ers e~ (he ~e~ee{, ~he appreved ~eeume~{5 ska~
else een{a4R a prev4s~eR w~4E~ prev4des (~a{ {ke ~G & R~6 may ~e{ be
te,m~a(ed~ er s~bs{am(4a~y amended wi(he~( (he eeese,~
e~ 4ts sNeeesser-i~-i~{eres~. ~a~y~ (he api~revee(
TENTATIVE PARCEL NAP NO. 22515
Conditions of Approval
Page 4 -
4neerperete ¢ tH, evisiN ~er ~esitH, eca~ 4qres~ 4~ egress,CDeleted by
Planning Canmission September 9o ZgS7)
d, If street lightin is proposed to be installed in this subdivision, it
shall be installed in accordance with-the standards of Ordinance 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 street light layout first from the Road Department's
traffic engineer and then fr~n the appropriate utility purveyor.
2} Following approval of the street lighting layout by the Road
Deparment's traffic engineer, the developer s all also file an
h
application with LAFCO for the formation of a street lighting
district, or annexation to an existing lighting district, unless
the site is within an existing lighting district.
3} Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall secure
conditional approval of the street lighting application from
LAFCO, unless the site is within an existing lighting district.
e. Prior to recordation of the final map, a six-foot high chain li--~
galvanized wire fence shall be installe~! along the CALTR~..
right-of-way, unless fencing already exists.
f. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints
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 County Surveyor· 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 Cali fornia lnstitute of Technology, Palomar
Observatory recomendations dated June 30 1987 a copy of which is
attached. ' '
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 22515
Conditions of Approval
Page 5
19.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERNITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
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 height shall be modified by
an appropriate combination of a special terracing {benching} plan,
increase slope ratio {i.e., 3:1}, retaining walls, and/or slope
planting combined with irrigation. All driveways shall not exceed a
fifteen percent grade.
A11 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 adjusted to the
angle of the natural terrain.
2)
4)
Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall reflect
the natural rounded terrain.
The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves with
radii designed in proportion to the total height of the slopes
where drainage and stability permit such rounding.
Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, the
horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous,
undulating fashion·
Pri'or to the issuance of grading permits, a qualified archaeologist
shall be retained by the developer to monitor grading activities with
respect to potential archaeological impacts. The archaeologist will
be requ i red to do the fol 1 owing:
1} Fully document and recover any significant cultural material which
appears· If complex deposits are uncovered, the archaeologist
shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt
grading activity to allow sufficient time for recovery and
adequate documentation·
2) Any material collected during the monitoring shall be donated to a
local institution which has the proper facilities for curation,
display and use by scholars and the general public.
3) The work shall be described in a Professional report which
receives sufficient distribution to insure its availability to
future researchers and shall be submitted to the Planning
Department.
TENTATIVE PARCEL HAP NO. 22515
Conditions of Approval _
Page 6
20.
Prior to the issuance of grading permttso 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 n~eting between the paleontologist
and the excavation and grading contractor shall be arranged. When
neicessary, the paleontologist or representative shall have the
authority to temporarily d~vert, redirect or halt grading activity to
allow recovery of fossils.
Upon the sale of any of the parcels created by this subdivision,
reciprocal ingress and egress easements shall be recorded. (Added at
Planning Co~aission September 9, 1987)
LBL :ms
08-26-87
OFFICE OF ROAD COMMI~SIONER 6 COUNTY SURVEYOR
LeP, oy D. Smoot
Io&J:) ccx~u~l$$1occel A COuNT~ I, UIV!TOI
July 24, 1987
RIverside County Planning Comtsston
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92501
Re: Parcel/~ap 22515
Schedule E - Team 1
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 improvement plans and/or road dedications in accordance with
Ordinance 460 and Riverside County Road Improvement Standards (Ordinance 461).
It is understood that the tentative map correctly shows acceptable centerline
profiles, all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses with
appropriate O's, and that their ~nission or unacceptability may require the map
to be resubmitted for further consideration. These Ordinances and the following
conditions are essential parts and a requirement occurring in DNE is as bihding
as though occurring in all. They are intended to be complementary and to
describe the conditions for a complete design of the improvement. All questions
regarding the true meaning df the conditions shall be referred to the koaa
Commissioner's Office.
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 shown 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.
The landdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all offsite
drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the
Road Cocnmissioner permits the use of streets for drainage
purposes, the provisions of Article XI of Ordinance/to. 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.
Parcel P~p 22515
J~ly 24, 1987
Page 2
e
e
10.
11.
NaJor drainage is involved on this landdivision and its resolution
shall be as approved by the Road Department.
Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed throughout the landdivision
in accordance with County Standard No. 400 and 401 (curb sidewalk).
Front Street shall' be improved with concrete curb and gutter
located 40 feet from centerline and match up asphalt concrete
paving; reconstruction or resurfacing of existing paving as deter-
mined by the Road Commissioner within a 50 foot half width
dedicated right of v~y in accordance with County Standard Ho. 101,
(Hodified 60'/80').
Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall
deposit with the Riverside County Road Department, a cash sum of
$2,500.00 pe~'groSs acre as mitigation for traffic signal impacts.
Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment, he may
enter into a written agreement with the County deferring said
payment to the time of issuance of a building permit.
Improvement plans shall be ba!sed 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
Commissioner. Completion of road improvements does not imply
acceptance for maintenance by County.
Electrical and communications trenches shall be provided in
accordance with Ordinance 461, Standard 817.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal)shall be applied not less than
fourteen days following placement of the asphalt surfacing and
shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard.
Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Sections 37, 39 and 94 of the
State Standard Specifications.
Lot access shall be restricted on Front Street and so noted on the
final map with the exception of one 40' opening between parcels 1
and 2 and one 40' opening between parcels 2 and 3.
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.
P. arc~;- Nap 22515
July 24, 1987
Pa~e 3
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
The landdivider shall comply with the Caltrans reconTnendations as
outlined in their letter dated July B, 1987 (a copy of which is
attached), prior to the recordation of the final map.
The landdivider shall provide utility clearance from Rancho Calif.
Water District prior to the recordatton of the final n~ap.
A copy of the final map'shall be submitted to Caltrans, District
08o Post Office Box 231, San Bernardino, California 92403;
Attention: Project Development for review and approval prior to
recordation.
The minimum centerline radii shall be as approved by the Road
Department.
All driveways 'shall conform to the applicable RiVerside County
Standards.
The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be
coordinated with PM 21390 and PP 9164.
GH:lh
~ery trul..~ yourT,(~
~~us~ug~''-' ~:~ "~
Hughe~
Road Division Engineer
CICJNTY OF RIVERSIDE- DEPARTMENT O1:
June 29, Z 987
HEALTH
R~vers~de County Pl&nning Commission
4080 Lemon Street
R~verssde, CA 92502
PL;.;. '. , L .:
BE;;PARCEL HAP 225t5: That-portion or the Rancho Temecula
gr&nted by the government or the United States or America to
Lugs Vignes by patent d&ted 3&nuary 18, Z860 and recorded in
Book Z. P&ge 37 of the P&tents, Records of San Diego County
C3 Lots)
Gen~tlemen:
The Department or Public Health has reviewed Tentative Map
No.. 2251S and recommends that:
A water system shall be installed according to
plans and specifications as approved by the water
company and the Health Department. Permanent
prints of the plans of the water system shall
be submitted in triplicate. with a m~nlmum scale
not less than one inch equals 200 feet, along
the original drawing to the County Surveyor. The
prints shall show the internal pipe diameter.
location of valves and fire hydrants; pspe and
3oint specificat~ons. and the size of the main
at the Junction of the n*ew system to the
existing system. The plans shall comply
-all respects with Dlv. 5, Part 1. Chapter 7 of
t.he California Health and Safety Code, California
Administrative Code. Title 22, Chapter 16, and General
Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of the
State of California,when applicable. The plans shall
be signed by a registered engineer and water company
with the following certification: "I certify that the
design or the water system in Parcel Map 22515
accordance with the water system expansion plans or the
Rancho California Water District and that the water
service, storage and distribution system will be
adequate to provide water service to such parcel. This
certification does not constitute a guarantee that it
will supply water to such tract at any specific
quantities. flows or pressures for fire protection or
any other purpose"
RIverside County Planning Commission
Page Two
~une 2g. ~87
This certification shall be signed by a responsible
oFfScsal or the water company. _Tla_~_~lans must ~R
submitted to the County. Surveyor's Office to review
at least two week!_~rior to the request for th!
£R~ordatxon 9~ the FInal ma9.
This'Department has a statement From Rancho CaliFornia Water
District agreeing to serve domestic water to each and every
lot in the subdivision on demand providing satisfactory
/lnancial arrangements are completed with the subdivlder.
It will be necessary rot the Financial arrangements to be
made prior to the recordatXon oF the Final map.
This Department has a statement From the Eastern Municipal
Water District agreeing Lo allow the subdivision sewage
syslem to be connected to the severs or the District. The
sewer system shall be Installed according to plans and
specifications as approved by the DIstrict. the County
Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the
plans of the sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate,
alon9 with the original drawing, to the County Surveyor. The
prints shall show the internal pipe diameter, location oF
manholes, complete prarlles, pipe and 3oxnt specifications
and the size of the sewers at the Sunorion of the new system
to the e×xstin9 system. A single plat Indicating Iotariot,
of sewer lines and water lines shall be a portion of the
sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed. by a
registered engineer and the sewer district with the
following certification: "I certify that the design of the
sewer system in Parcel Map 22515 is xn accordance wmth the
sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water
DIstrAct and that the waste disposal system is adequat'e at
this tame to treat the anticipated wastes from the proposed
parcel." !b~_~l~Di_~ust be submitted to the CoMrj~y
SurveygLi!_Q£/i~e to review at least two weeks ~rlor to the
L~9~!st For the recordatxon of the final ma~.
Riverside Pl&nning Commission
P&ge Three
June 29, 1987
It ~ill be necess&ry for the fin&nci&l &rr&ngements to be
m&d.e prior to the record&tion or the rin&l m~p-
It wil1 be necessary rot the &nnexation proceedings to be
completely rin&lized prior to the recordat~on or the r~nal
map.
$tncerely.
Environmental Health ~ervi~e~ ~ivi~ion
SM:tac
KENNL"rI,~.L,. EDWARDS
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND - WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
IIIVI;RIIDI:o CAI, IFOelNIA
July 17, 1987
Riverside Cbmty
Oounty Administrative C~ter
P, iverside, Ca~if~-nia
Attention: l~gional Team No. 1
Lesley Likins
ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Parcel Map 22515
Parcel Map 22515 is a proposal to divide 3.86 acres into 3 lots in the Tenecu-
la Valley area, between Front Street ar~ Interstate 15.
Stonm-Bter discharged f==m a double box culvert beneath Interstate 15 tra-
verses the southern portion Of t/~ site. T~ exhibit indicates a direct oon-
nectlon to the Caltrans culvert. Flows ~ould be conveyed through the property
in a 108-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe aria discharged into Murrieta
Creek. Freevet, t/~ proposed pipe may not aaequately convey the double box
culvert's discharge.
Following are the District' s reccmmendation~:
This parcel map is 'located within the limits of the Murrieta Creek/
Tenecula Valley Are Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been
adopted by the Board. Drainage fees shall be psid as set forth under
the provisions of t/~ "Rules and Regulations fDr Administration of
Area Drainage Plans", amended July 3, 1984:
Drainage fees shall be paid to the Road {h-,dssioner as part of
the filing for record of th~ subdivision final map or parcel map,
or if the recording of a final parcel map is waived, drainage fees
shall be paid as a condition of th~ wa/ver prior to recr..--3ing a
certificate of ocr~pliance evidencing th~ waiver of t2~ ~ eel map;
or
At the option of the land divider, upon filing a required af-
fidavit requesting defermerit of the payment of fees, the drainage
fees shall be paid to the Building Director at the time of is-
suance of a grading permit or building permit for each approved
parcel, whichever may be first obtained after the recording of ~
subdivision final map or parcel map; hz~ever,
Drainage fees shall be paid to the Road Ccmmissioner as a part of
the filing fDr record of the subdivision final map or pa:cel map,
or before receiving a wa/ver to record a land division, for each
lot within tie land division where construction activity as evi-
denced by one of ttB following actions has occurred since May 26,
1981:
- 2 - July 17, 1987
(b) .fading or structures }my. been initiated.
e
The proposed pipe shDuld be deigned tD ~,vey the tributary 100 year
peak flow r~te or t]~ flow rate required by ~ =tans, whichever is
· greater. T}~ pipe should be a~lded with an adequate outlet.
3. (l~site drBinage facilities l~-~a~-~ outside of road right of way should
be co~ned within drainage easements s]~wn c~ ttB final map. A note
should be added to the final map stating, "Drainage easements shall be
kept free of buildings and c,>structions".
Offsite drainage Tacilities should be locatea_ within publicly
dedicated dra/nage easements obtained fTcm the affected property
owners. ~ documents shDuld be recorded and a copy sukr~itted to the
District prior to recordat/on o£ t}e ~inal map.
Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions shDuld be designed to
convey t_he tributary 100 year storm flows. Additional energency
escape should also be provided.
A copy of t~e improvement plans, grading plans and final map along
with supporting bydrologic and b~draulic calculations should be "
subnitted to the District fz3r review prior to recordat/on of the fi,.~l
map. A registered engineer must sign, seal and r~te his expiration
date on plans and calculations suhm/tted.
Questions concerning this matter may be referred to Stx~rt McKibbin of this
office at 714/787-2333.
Very truly yours ,.
~cbert Be]n, William Frost
& Associates
SE~:bjp
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
RAY HEBRARD
FIRE CHIEF
7-15-87
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ATTN: TEAM X
RE: PN 22515
Plannlnl & Enllneerln
4080 Lemon Street. ~lte
Rivet~ldc. CA 9Z$01
(714) 787.6606
With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land divisior
the Fire Department recomends the following fire protection measures be provid~
in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recognized fire protection
standards:
FIRE PROTECTION
The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 4000 GPM
and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 2000 GPM for 2
hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure.
Approved super fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2½x2]) shall be located at each street
intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction, with
no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire
Department for review. Plans shall conform to 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: 'I certify that the design of the water system is
i. accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire
Department'.
The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and
accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustibe building
material being placed on an individual lot.
All questions regarding the meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the
Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff.
MICHAEL E. GRAY, Planning Officer
~ OF CAI. IFOINIA * IUSINE.~,~. TIANSI~:MTsATION AND HOUSING A~ENCT
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'
July 8, 1987
Plann.ing Department
County of Riverside
~080, Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92501
GEOIGE DEUI~h~EJ~&N C~
Your Reference:
TPH 22515
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed Tentative
Parcel Map 22515 located adjaoent to the southbound off-ramp of
1-15 to Highway 79 (Front Street) in Temecula.
PleaSe refer to the attached material on which our comments have
been indicated by the items checked and/or by those items noted
under additional comments.
It should be noted that if any work is necessary within the
highway right of way, the developer must obtain an encroachment
permit from the District 8 Office of the State Department of
Transportation prior to beginning the work.
If additional information is desired, please call Mr. Patrick M
Cormally at (714) 383-4384. '
R. G. POTE 9
District Permits Engineer
Att.
co: Lee Johnson. Riverside County Road Department
WE WOULD LIKE TO NOTE: -
(Co Rte
,
.our ReferenCe)
AlthoJSh the traffic and drainage generated by this proposll do not appear to have
a si~nificant effect on the *tare highway system, eon~ideration must be given to
the cumJlative effect or continued developu~nt in thim area. Any measures
neeemmary to mitigate the o4mJlative impact of traffic and drainage should be
provided prior to or with development or the area that necessitates them.
It appears that the. trarrlc and drainage generated by .~him proposal could have a
mi~niricant effect on the mute hi~ay roystem or the area. Any measures ne~emsar
to mitigate the traffic and drainage impacts should be included with the
develop.~nt. ·
This portion of state highway is included in the Caliror~ta Na~ter Plan or .state
Highways Eligible for Official Scenlo Hlg~ay Designation, and in the future your
agency my wish to have this route officially designated as a state scenic h-18hway
This portion of state hig~ay has been officially demiB~ated as a state scenic
highway, and develop~nt in this corridor' mhculd be compatible with the scenic
highway concept.
Zt is recognized that there im conmiderable ~Jblic ~oncern about noise levels
adjacent to heavily traveled 'highways. Land development, in order to be ccm]battbl
with th~s concern~ u~y require special noise at~enuation measures. Developmen~ or
proper~y should include any necessary nois'e attenuation.
Normal right of way dedication to provide ---__ l~alf-~ridth on the state highway.
Normal street improveznents to provide _ half-width on the state highway.
Curb and gutter, State Standard _ along the state highway.
Parking be prohibited along the state highway by Painting the curb red
and/or by the proper placement of "no parking" signs.
'radius curb ret~Jrns be provided at lnters~c't'ions with the state highway.
A standard wheelchair ramp u~Jst be provided in t~e'~et. urns.
A positive vehicular barrier along the property' frontage be provided to limit
Physical access to the ~tate highway.
V.~.icular access not be developed directly to the state hig~ay.
Vehicular access to the state highway be provided by existing public mad
connections.
. V cular cess hall n be ded.yithln
. Vehicular accus to the state htg~ay t~e p~ovided by a r~d-t~e ~n~tion.
Fo~ 8-Pb19 (Rev. 5/87)
(Continued on reverse)
08-Riv-15-3.438
(Co-Rte-PM) ~'~
TPM 22515
(Your Reference)
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
Access:restrictions should be indicated on the parcel map along the r
of way of 1-15. An additional 50m of access restriction along
southern end of the Front Street right of way is also requested.
It appears the proposed 108' R,C.P. may reduce capacity of
We would like to see appropriate hydraulic calculations when
our sys
availabl
:tiVE:DiDE COUR[
. PLAnninG DEPA:tCrn r
DATE: June 9, 1987
TO: Assessor
Butldtng and Safety
Surveyor Dave Duda
Road DeparUnent
Heal th
Ft re Protection
Flood Control Dtstrlct
Fish & Game
LAFCO Ooug Vterra
JUL 0 G ig87 ~4.,
RIVERS:DE. COlJN
PLANN;NG
RECEIVED
JUN 3 0 1987
PALOMAR 0B~Er.'.'fi0rtY
Rancho Calif. Water Dist.
Southern Cal if. Edison
Southern* 'Cat i f. Gas
General Telephone
Dept. of Transportation e8
Temecula Chamber of ConTnerce
Regional Water Quality Cpntrol #9
E~stern Municipal Water
{Mt Palomar~,
Connissioner Bresson
PARCEL MAP 22515 - (Tm-1) - E.A.
Robert Bein, William Frost & Asso
Temecula District - First Supervt
District - North of Junction of F
and 1-15 - R-R & C-1/C,P Zone - S
E - No Waiver - 3.86 acres into 3
Related Case 4783 - Hod 119 - A.P
922-120-004
Please review the case described above, along with the attached case map. A Land
Division Committee meeting has been tentatively scheduled for July 16, 1987. If it
it will then go to public hearing.
Your comments and recommendations are requested prior to July 2, lg87 in order tha
include them in the staff report for this particular case.
Should you have any questions regarding this item, please do not hesitate to conta
Lesley Likins at 787-1363
Planner
COMMENTS:
?LEASE SEE ATTACHED
DATE: 6/30/87 SIGNATURE
PLEASE print name and title pc. RobeFt to/Assistant Otrector/?alomar
4080 L'EMON STREET. 9'" FLOOR
RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92501
(714) 787-6181
46-209 OASIS STREET. ROOM
INDIO. CALIFORNIA 92
(619) 342-8
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
OffICE Of THE DIRECTOR PALOIdAII OISEKVATOIY IOS-I¢
This. case ls vtzhln 30 mlles of che Palomar Obseryar. ory and ls therefore
wlthln the zone requtrtn2 the use of low-pressure sodium vzpor lamps for
st.feet lighting, as stipulated by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors.
We request r.hat r.he design for or.her types of outdoor ltghtlnR that may be
employed on this property be made consistent vi=h the spirit of =he decision
of the Board of Supervisors which Is tnr.ended to mitigate the adverse ef[ec=s
such facilities have ~n the astronomfcal research at ~alomar. Bene[icial
steps r.o that end include:
1. Use the minimum amount of light needed for the task.
Orient and shield light to prevent direct upward illumination.
Turn o[f lights at ll:0C"p.m. (or earlier) unless, in commercial
applications, =he associated business 18 open past that time, in which
case the lights shouId be turned o[f at closing.
Use low-pressure sodium lamps for roadways, walkways, equipment yards,
parking lots, security and other similar aOplicanions. These lights
need noc be turned off a~ 11:00 p.m.
For fur:her information, call (818) 356-~035.
Robert J. Brucaco
Assistant Director
~le i.(s) P~ ~.~1.~ ittlOM1 lafomttoh ~,sttd ~
~&~T I~
~k SPA~ ~O N[I~ATI~ mP
~k ~ 5Nce and bqemtt~ ~p ~sl~ttm(s) or Pm~ in Q~stloe:
__ ~r kes!ft~tq ~ricelteff ~Oted $peCl tic Plan
__ ~Ml~ Aqel VlldTlfl/Y. ,ti~ ~sl/~d is ONe Spice
~tl~ttoaS and/Or FledgeF:
11. EX~fOee(k'Tk. HA2AJt~S &Jet) II{SO~IC[S I~vl(ld
C~k fl~l HaZards an4 Jt~souTpces Nd;S gaYtrOpe%at hazards aM/or ~SOu~eS ~et ~7 affect t
p~ffrtl.
3. ~ Fault Z~e IS. ~ V~0
4. SIo~s aM [~slon 16. ~ [Nr~ bsources
lZ. __ O~er
C~ck The fOlloetng If ~e D~Jecz ,~1~ cr, Le ihy ~zirHgt 8r Ih~7iAg
1 ~ 23. ~lte I~cts iS.__ Traffic
~ re. Ua~r Oual$t~ l;,cts Zl. OtNr
,,,, +.
~~ ~ S~'; Of ~ltctes itfeC 1,9 t~Jec~: ~E Or~ ~ ~ in ~ ,
Riti~dtlOnS a~dlor F~ndi^gs:
bed US[ C~TTB)~ MO LAND US! DFTEn~&&TION
1. The project tl ~Ithln ~ ur~e a
ires er CIt; Sphere ef JaG, mace
t. Tee PrcJKt his gw felleq4n9
facilities er UW.F mill he BMededa
lea Be mat aamvl red
3. The
i.
Calmemit
4. The project fill mitigate echo01
%lequtred Of C;Ite~:ry I ,r,J y projects.
The project has e fie mle~te fire
restarts, ts-e~
a~v~e or ~te~r7 I. II ,~d v projects.
0~e~ Infrast~t~ Items:
OV, er:
The co^c|v$1ons redthee Ire dePeedaet O~ the lCCurlgy Of the leforakltIon P~vtded. Bash ~ ~e tnfor-
ttloe P~vl~d. ~e ~lannt~ ~lr~et ~s ~n~tt,ely olte~lne4 thlt: (~Kk
)
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPART)tENT
COUNTY ADH]NZSTRATIVE CENTER. NII~H FLOOR
4080 LEMON STREET
RIVERS/DE, CALIFORNIA 92501-3657
Roger S. Streeter, Planning bitactor
A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the PLANNING COl4MZSSION to consider
the application(s) described below. The Planntng Department has tentatlvel
found that the pro sed pro act s) will have no st ntftcant envlronmenta{
effect and has tentatively comptet,~ negative declaration(s). The Planning
C~,,,isston will consider whether or not to adopt the negative declaration along
with the proposed project at this hearing.
Place of Hearing: Board Room, 14th Floor, 4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, CA
Date of Hearing: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1987
The time of hearing is indicated with each application listed below.
Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Department before the
hearing or may appear and be heard in support of or opposition to the adoption
Of the negative declaration and/or a proval of this project at the time of
hearing. If you challenge any of t~e projects in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the
Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. The environmental
finding along with the proposed project application may be viewed at the public
tnfomation counter !tonday through Friday from B:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m.
PARCEL NAP 22515, EA 31724 is an application submitted by Robert Betn, William
Frost & Associates for property located in the Temecula District and
First Supervtsorial District which proposes to divide 3.86~ acres into
3 lots on property generally described as north of Junction of Front
Street and 1-15
TIME OF HEARING: 9:30 a.m.
(,
'/'.
II
i
I
J JR a~4~
fj. Ja, a,
./
d JI d dr
I#
L
I$$ Ar~.OC:
CIO IAYKONDSKZTH
27&4,~ DEL KIO ,STC E
TF, AfCUI,.A, CA
I~ACOR DEVELDPREN'T CO
· fi IOX 755
TERECuLA, CA
TOTAL LABELS PRINTED
9.?,J90
9ZZZJ. O05~-.
pEt~c31.~ Land L
PENFOLD RARGE
1,;RECULA, CA 92390
9ZZX~OOC~-
PHARRZS CHLELL L
PHARRZ5 6ENEYZEVE B
2d54 N 5ANTIAGO ELY NO 200
92;. 3,3. OOC 7.
~'~D
p C BOX 543.53
LOS Ak,~,ELE.$, CA
9005-~
9ZZ3.J. GOZ;
KANChO SPACE CENTER. LTD
28999 FRONT ST
TERECULA CA
92.,390
g22X~OO2q
RANCHG SPACE CENTEL LTD
28999 FRONT ST
TEP./:CULA CA
92390
92.21XG02~
LAND
VAC
HI
t PM ?-.Z515
· ' ~ ~ APTS VAC
,, q)
L.L S \ VAC. ,"""""
\
': ': 4.31% It_"
VAC
i!
App. ROBERT BEIN. WILLIAM FROST 8, ASSOC. Lo¢ 'r,o~,k~.....~.
Area TEMECULA I~r, Sup.'Dist.
Sec. T. ~ $.,R.~W. ~aetsor'~ Bk. 922 Pg. 12 ~
Circulation ~ EXPRESSWAy VARIABLE
Element . ~ FREEWAY VARIABLE
Rd. Bk. ~. 56A Dole 8/19/87 ~o~n By JCW ,
R~E~IOE ~O~ ~N/NG DEPARTMENT .o ~¢~L~
A'I'FACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
S%$TAFFRFT~2516-2 .TPM
2O
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
Ip~OJ~_CT
VICINITY
CASE NO. z.,~.O.T'
P.C. DATE IZ--t~=- J
CITY OF TEMECULA
.(
SWAP
MAP
SP- 180
./
P.C. DATE i~.__i~_c:~
N ~
CASE 0 s:- T'
· ~.-:' ._.C~. .
CITY OF TEMECULA
ZONE MAP
k
r ~m~
CASE NO. Z~-~ E .o.~.
P.C. DATE ~,...l(,=>-/"' J
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
c~. ~
..'
;'
· ~' /
I
...... L .......
':1
'1
L
CASE NO. ~..'-"' ~'.c:~t.
P.C. DATE
-.~
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
S%STAFFRPT%22516-2.TPM
2O
CITY OF TEMECULA
O
CASE NO.:
EXHIBIT: A
P.C. DATE:
PP-D. JECT SiTE o
'~ ~, '~- .
·
LOCATION MAP
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 22515, THIRD EXTENSION OF TIME
VICINITY MAP
MARCH 16, 1992
S%STA~25 t 5-2.TPM
CITY OF TEMECULA
SWAP - EXHIBIT S
DESIGNATION: C
\\ I
',,\ ,~/~ /
"~1
/I
,/1
ZONING - EXHIBIT C DESIGNATION:
Case No.: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 22515, THIRD EXTENSION OF TIME
P.C. Date: MARCH 16, 1992
C -P-S j
S%STAFFRPT%.22515-2 .TPM
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO.:
EXHIBIT: D
P.C. DATE:
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 22515, THIRD EXTENSION OF TIME
SITE PLAN
MARCH 16, 1992
S%STAFFRPT~2515-2.TN
ATTACItM'F-NT NO. S
DEVELOPM'F, NT FEE CFIY~CKI,~T
S~TAFFRF'~23APPRAL.CC ~}
CASE NO.:
CITY OF TEMECUIA
DEVRLOPMENT FEE C!~-CK'~JST
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2251~, Third Extension of Time
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Fe~
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
(Quimby)
Public Facility
(Traffic Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Tic Signal Mitigation)
Public Facility
(Library)
Fire Protection
Flood Control
(ADP)
Consistent with Specific Plan
Consistent with Future General Plan
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 4
Condition No. N/A
Condition No. 40
Condition No. 16
Condition No. N/A
Condition No. 7
Condition No. 35
N/A
s~^nnun-~.~.~.cc 10
ITEM NO. 15
FINANCE OFFId~~r~
CITY MANAG
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
June 9, 1992
Change of Zone 5631 and Vesting TentatiVe Tract Map No. 25320
RECOMMI~3N'DATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Change of Zone 5631 and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320.
ADOPT Resolution No. 92- upholding the Planning
Commissions' recommendation of Denial for Change of Zone 5631
based on the Analysis contained in the staff report; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 92- upholding the Planning
Commissions' recommendation of Denial for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 25320 based on the Analysis contained in the staff
report and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
BACKGROUND
Change of Zone 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 were recommended for denial
at the Planning Commission meeting of September 16, 1991. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
25320 and Change of Zone 5631 were originally fried with the Riverside County Planning
Department on November 14, 1989. Subsequently, this project was transferred to the City of
Temecula on April 24, 1990. At the City's pre-DRC meeting, the following issues were raised:
park site considerations, maintenance of slope areas, grading, slope stability, drainage, traffic,
and density. On January 3, 1991, it was determined at the formal DRC meeting that staffs
concerns relative to this project could be mitigated through project design.
At the Planning Commission meeting on September 16, 1991 a number of concerns were
expressed by the commissioners. Commissioner Fahey felt that the proposal would be
inconsistent with the future General Plan due to the proposed change in density along a
prominent ridgeline. She also expressed concerns relative to potential drainage impacts to the
S'~STAFF~320VTIv!.CC 1
Lake Village area and increased Lraffic flows on Pauba Road. Commissioner Chiniaeff felt that
the proposed lot pattern on the east side of the project appeared strained. Commissioner Blair
felt that the lights at the Spox:ts Park axe of major concern and are a health consideration.
Commissioners Fahey and Hoagland advised that the Commissions recommendation for denial
was not intended to preclude any development of the site, but rather was a recommendation for
denial of this particular proposal based on the issues enumerated above (topography, drainage,
traffic, lighting impacts).
A number of individuals also spoke in opposition to the project. Concerns raised by these
individuals included excessive grading, density, increased traffic flow, and possible
contamination of the retention basis in Lake Village.
The Commission voted 5-0 to deny Change of Zone 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
25320 based on pwbable inconsistency with the future General Plan due to the increased density
along a pwminent ridgeline, as well as the significant grading required, potential negative
impacts the increased density would have on traffic and drainage into the Lake Vilhge area, and
potentia~ impacts associated with lighting from the Sports Park.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
9.
City Council Resolution No. 92- , Change of Zone 5631 - page 3
City Council Resolution No. 92- , Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25320 -page 7
Conditions of Appwval-Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 - page 13
Planning Commission Minutes dated September 16, 1991 - page 14
Planning Commission Minutes dated January 28, 1991 - page 15
Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 16, 1991 - page 16
Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 28, 1991 - page 17
Fee Checklist - page 18
Initial Study - page 19
Exhibits - 20
a. Vicinity Map
b. SWAP Map
c. Surrounding Zoning
d. Change of Zone 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320
vgw
S\STAFFRFI'~320VTI~.CC~ 2
ATTACItMY-NT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO.
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5631
SXSTAFFRFR~3~0V'rM.C~ 3
ATTACHMENT NOi 1
RF~OLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF Tiff. CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY
OF TEMECUIA DENYING CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5631
CHANGING THE ZONE PROM (R-R) RURAL
RESIDENTIAL TO ONE-FAMH.Y D~rE~J.ING (R-l) ON
PROPERTY LOCATED ON THY. NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA
ROAD BETWEEN YNEZ AND MARGARrrA ROADS AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO, 945-050-004.
WIFE__, t~lford Properties fried Change of Zone No. 5631 in accordance with the
Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has
adopted by reference;
WI~~, said Change of Zone application was processed in the time and manner
prescribe~l by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Change of Zone on September
16, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or
opposition;
WF[EREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended denim of said Change of Zone;
WHE~, the City Council conducted a public :hearing pertaining to said Change of
Zone on June 9, 1992, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in
support or opposition to said Change of Zone; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff
Report regarding the Change of Zone;
NOW, TttEREFORE, TIrE CITY COUNCIL .OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1..Findings.
findings:
That the Temecula 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 hw that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the
following requirements are met:
S\STA~320VTM.CC 4
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:
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 hw and local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County Genera] Plan, as mended 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 proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General
Plan.
C. The City Council in denying the' proposed Change of Zone, makes the following
findings, to wit:
1. There is a reasonable pwbability that the proposed Change of Zone will
be inconsistent with the future General Plan due to the increased density along a pwminent
ridgeline.
2. There is a reasonable probability that the pwposed Change of Zone will
be inconsistent with the future General Plan due to the extensive grading proposed.
3. The proposed Change of Zone is not compatible with the health, safety and
weftare of the community due to potential drainage impacts to the Lake Village area.
4. The proposed Change of Zone is not compatible with the health, safety and
welfare of the community due to potential Sports Park lighting impacts to the surrounding
residences.
5. The proposed Change of Zone is not compatible with the health, safety and
weftare of the community due to increased traffic flows on Pauba Road.
S'~T~320VTM.CC 5
Section 2. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study prepared for this project
indicates that although the propg_sed 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 a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
Section 3. Conditions. The City of Temecuh City Council hereby denies Zone
Change No. 5631 to change the zoning on 56.6 acres of land from (R-R) Rural Residential to
(R- 1 ) One-Family Dwelling on property located on the north side of Pauba Road between Ynez
and Margarita Roads and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 945-050-004.
Section 4. The 'City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, DENII~J~ AND ADOPTED this 9th day of June, 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDSAlL
MAYOR
I ltF~RERy 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 9th day of June,
1992 by the foilowing vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
CO~CILMEMBERS:
CO~CH, MEMB~:
CO~CR,MEMBERS:
JUNE S. GI~'~
CITY CLERK
S\STAFFRFr~15320VTM.CC 6
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
RESOLLrHON NO. 92-__
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25320
~ s~sT~lnu, r~ov'm. cc 7
ATTACHMENT NO., 2
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY
OF TE1VIECULA DENYING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 25320 WHICH PROPOSED TO SUBDIVIDE A 56.6
ACRE PARCRI, INTO 102 SINGLE FAMII,Y RESIDENTIAL
LOTS AND 4 OPEN SPACE LOTS ON PROPERTY
LOCATED ON TFIF, NORTH SIDE OF PAUBA ROAD
BETWEEN YNEz AND MARGARITA ROADS AND KNOWN
AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-050..004.
WFIEREAS, Bedford Properties fried Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Vesting Tentative Tract Map application was processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WIIEREAS, the Planning Commission considereal, said Vesting Tentative Tract Map on
September 16, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in
suppen or opposition;
W'tIEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended denial of said Vesting Tentative Tract Map;
WHwREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Vesting
Tentative Tract Map on June 9, 1992 at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify
either in support or opposition to said Vesting Tentative Tract Map; and
WHEREAS; the City Council received a copy of the Commission proceedings and Staff
Report regarding the Vesting Tentative Tract Map;
NOW, TItEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings.
fmdings:
That the Temecula 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, ff all of the
following requirements axe met:
SXSTAIq~'R'nT~'~320VTi'i'CC 8
1. The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the general
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 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 pwhability 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 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 proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General
Plan.
C. The City Council in denying the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map, makes
the following findings, to wit:
1. Them is a reasonable pwbability that the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract
Map will be inconsistent with the future General Plan due to the increased density along a
prominent ridgeline.
2. There is a reasonable probability that the proposed Vesting Tentative'Tract
Map will be inconsistent with the future General Plan due to the extensive grading proposed.
3. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map is not compatible with the
health, safety and weftare of the community due to potential drainage impacts to the Lake
Village area.
4. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map is not compatible with the
health, safety and welfare of the community due to potential Sports Park lighting impacts to the
surrounding residences.
5. The proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map is not compatible with the
health, safety and weftare of the community due W increased traffic flows on Pauba Road.
,S~qTA~320VTM.CC 9
Section 2. Environmental Compliance. An Initial Study prepared for this project
indicates that although the propgsed 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 a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
Section 3. Conditions. The City of Temecula City Council hereby denies Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 proposing to subdivide 56.6 acres of land into 102 single family
residential lots and 4 open space lots on property located on the north side of Pauba Road
between Ynez and Margarita Roads and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 945-050-004.
Section 4. The City Clerk shah certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, DENTI~I} AND ADOPT!?x} this 9th day of June 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDSALL
MAYOR
I lt'F. RI~.Ry CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecuh at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th day of June,
1992 by the foilowing vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
C OUNCIZblEMBERS:
COUNCH~MEMBERS:
COUNC~ERS:
J'GNE S.
CITY CI-~-RK
sxs~^mu,r~s2ov~.cc 10
ATTACHEMENT NO. 3
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25320
~ S\STAFFRPT\5631 cz .~c 13
CITY OF TEMECULA
~:ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Tract Map No:
25320
Project Description: Subdivide 56.6 Acres
into 102 Residential Lots and 40oen Space
Lots
Assessor's Parcel No.:
945-050-004
Planning Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule A, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. 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 approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date by the City Council, unless extended as provided by Ordinance
460.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all the
requirements of the State of California Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance
460·
The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soil!s report to the City Engineer and
two copies to the Department of Building and Safety. The report shall address
the soils stability and geological conditions of the site.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 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.
~ S\STAFFRPT~5631 .CZ 15
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street nam_es 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 land division
boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted and
recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
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 access to
all lots in each phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and purpose
of the subdivision approval.
A Homeowners Association shall be established for maintenance of Lots 103
through 106. Open Space/Common Area and the developer/applicant shall pay
for all costs relating to establishment of the Homeowners Association.
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:
a. Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2 to 1.
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. An erosion control landscaping plan
demonstra.ting methods of erosion protection for these slopes shall be prepared
by a qualified professional; and shall be submitted to the City Planning
Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading permits.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated December 4,
1990, 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.
Lots created by this subdivision shall comply with the following:
S\STAFFRPT~,5631 .CZ 16 "%'
16.
17.
18.
19.
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development s_tandards of the R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) zone as
provided in the tract's approved Development Design Manual.
Graded but undeveloped land shall. be maintained in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided
with other erosion control measures as approved by the Director of
Building and Safety.
The 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.
Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints 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 recommendations.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
If the project is to be phased, prior to the issuance 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 probability
rain months of January through March.
3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
S~STAFFRPT~5631 .CZ
17
20.
21.
4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase.
b~
All cut Slopes located adjacenti 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 gradually adjusted to
the angle of the natural terrain.
Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall
reflect the natural rounded terrain.
The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves
with radii designed in proportion to the total height of the
slopes where drainage and stability permit such rounding.
Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal
length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved
in a continuous, undulating fashion.
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
easements and that slope maintenance responsibilities have been
assigned as approved by the Diirector 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, redirect or halt
grading activity to allow recovery of fossils.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS! the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
aa
Prior to the issuance of building 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:
S\STAFFRFT~5631 .CZ 18
Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all
landscap_ed 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.
Parkways 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. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees
planted.
Wall plans shall be submitted for the project perimeter and along
Pauba Road. Wooden fencing shall not be allowed on the
perimeter of the project· All lots with slopes leading down from
the lot shall be provided with gates in the wall for maintenance
access·
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal points 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 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.
10. All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked.
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
~ S\STAFFRPT\5631 .CZ 19
with the City as mitigation for public library development.
Prior to the sul~mittal of building plans to the Department of Building 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 45 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 instal!led including, but not limited to,
parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard
landscaping.
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices
shall be permitted with Planning Department approval.
Building separation between all buildings including fireplaces shall comply
with the tract's approved Design Manual.
All street side yard setbacks shall comply with the tract's approved
design manual.
All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and a manually
operated permanent underground irrigation system.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, a plot plan sh'all be Submitted
to the Planning Department pursuant tO Section 18.30 of Ordinance No.
348 accompanied by all applicable filing fees, as a plot plan that is not
subject to the California EnvironmentaiQuality Act and is not transmitted
to any governmental agency other than the Riverside County Planning
Department. The plot plan shall ensure the conformance of the final site
development with the tract's approved Design manual, and shall contain
the following elements:
A final site plan showing the lots, building footprints, all setback,
and floor plan and elevation assignments to individual lots.
S\STAFFRPT~S631 .CZ 20 ~
22.
23.
One (1) color and materials sample board (maximum size of 8 x
13 inche_s by 3/8 inch thick) containing precise color, texture and
material swatches or photographs (which may be from suppliers'
brochures). Indicate on the board the name, address and phone
numbers of both the sample .board preparer and the project
applicant, tract number, and the manufacturer and product
numbers where possible (trade names also acceptable).
One (1) copy of the architectural elevations colored to represent
the selected color combinations, with symbols keyed to the color
and materials board. The written color and material descriptions
shall be located on the elevation.
Six (6) copies of each of glossy photographic color prints (size 8
x 10 inches) of both color and materials board and colored
architectural elevations for permanent filing, heari.ng body review
and agency distribution. All writing must be legible.
Said plot plan shall require the approval of the Planning Director prior to
the issuance of any building permits for lots included within the plot
plan. The submittal of plot plans prior to the issuance of building permits
may be phased provided:
1o A separate plot plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for each phase, which shall be accompanied by
appropriate filing fees.
Each individual plot plan shall be approved by the Planning
Director prior to the issuance of building permits for lots included
within that plot plan.
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.
All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with
approved plans and shall be verified by City field inspection.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall comply with the
~ S\STAFFRPT\5631 .CZ 2 1
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
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 paymen~c 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 defend, indemnify, aind 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 Tentative Tract
Map No. 25320, which action is brought-within the time period provided for in
California Government Code Section 66499.37. The 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 the 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.
The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site
property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall 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 66462 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.
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
provided. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in
the residence.
Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the developer or his assignee must
conform to the park district Quimby Ordinance, unless waived to time of
issuance of a building permit.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
S%STAFFRPT~S631 .CZ 2 2 --
29.
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be reviewed and
approved by the Plan_ning Department prior to final approval of the tract maps.
The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the
open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, and exterior of all
buildings.
30.
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 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 to 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 required by the City as Conditions
of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence 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 to the City for public purposes.
31.
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 and
facilities, or (2) as share in the corporation, or voting membership in an
association, owning the common areas and facilities.
32.
Maintenance for all landscaped and open areas, including parkways, shall be
provided for in the CC&R's.
33.
Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the 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 One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) 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 711.4(c).
Riverside CountV Fire Department
~ $\STAFFRP'1"'~5631 .CZ 23
34.
Schedule "A" fire protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2 1/2")
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. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20
PSI.
35.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire
Department for review. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer,
containing 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.
36.
The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and
accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building
material being placed on an individual lot.
37.
All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant roofing material as
described in Section 3203 of the Uniform Building Code. Any wood shingles
or shakes shall have a Class "B" rating and shall be approved by the Fire
Department prior to installation.
38.
Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Riverside County Fire Department, a cash sum of $400.00 per lot/unit as
mitigation for fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the
time of payment, he/she may enter into a written agreement with the County
deferring said payment to the time of issuance of the first building permit.
Riverside County Department of Public Health
39.
A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as
approve~l by the water company and the Health Department. Permanent prints
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 joint specifications, and
the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system.
The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the
California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22,
Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of
the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a
registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "1
certify that the design of the water system in Tract Map 25320 is in
accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California
S\STAFFRPT~5631 .CZ 24
Water District and that the water service, storage, and distribution system will
be adequate to provi_de water service to such Tract Map."
40.
This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to
such tract map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection
or any other purpose". This certification Shall be signed by a responsible
official of the water company. The plans must be submitted to the County
Surveyor's Office to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the
recordation of the final map.
41.
This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District agreeing
to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand
providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider.
It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made prior to the
recordation of the final map.
42.
This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be
connected to the sewers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed
according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the County
Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the
sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing,
to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter,
location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the
size of the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system.
A single plat indicating location of sewer lines and water lines shall be a portion
of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered
engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "1 certify that
the design of the sewer system in Tract Map 25320 is in accordance with the
sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that
the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated
wastes from the proposed tract map."
43.
The plans must be submitted to the County Surveyor's Office to review at least
two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the final map.
Transportation Engineering
PRIOR TO RECORDATION:
44.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the City Engineer for Pauba Road along the project frontage
including any transitions. Signing plans onry shall be required for internal
Streets A through G. These plans shall be included with the street
improvement plans.
~ S\STAFFRPT~SS3 ~. CZ 25
45.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering
for the design requirements.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
46.
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:
47.
All signing and striping shall be installed per the approved signing and striping
plan.
Engineerina Department
The following are the Engineering Department Condirtions 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 all existing easements, traveled
ways, and drainage courses, and their omission may require the project to be
resubmitted for further consideration.
48.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
49.
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. 460.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
50.
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;
o Engineering Department;
- Riverside County Health Department;
- CATV Franchise;
Parks and Recreation Department; and
S\STAFFRPT~5631 .CZ 2 6 ~
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
California Water Quality Control Board.
All road easements a~d/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
City Engineer.
Pauba Road shall be improved with 32 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. 102 (64'/88').
Street "A" from Pauba Road to Street "B", Streets "B", "E", and "F" shall be
improved with 40 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. 104, Section A (40'/60').
Street "A" east of Street "B", Streets "C", "D", and "G" shall be improved with
36 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. 105, Section A (36'/60').
Curb return radii of 35' feet shall be installed at the intersection of Street "F"
and Street "G"
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Pauba Road and so noted on the final
map with the exception of street intersections as approved by the City
Engineer.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No.
805.
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:
a. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
The CC&R's 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
A S\STAFFRPT~5631 ,CZ 27
59.
60.
necessary to protect the interest of the City and its residents.
The CC&R's ~nd 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 CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of all slope areas within the
subdivision.
All slopes exceeding 5' in height shall be maintained by the homeowners
association.
The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated
and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the
condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due
demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property and
perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon
by the CC&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.
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.
A Notice o;r Intention to form and/or join the .Landscape and Lighting District
shall be filed with the City Council. The engineering costs involved in District
information shall be borne by the developer.
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, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing,
striping, and other traffic control devices as appropriate.
Storm drain facilities.
S\STAFFRPT~Se31 .CZ 28 ~
61.
62.
63.
c. Landscaping (street and parks).
d. Sewer and doriestic water systems.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the
City Engineer.
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 minimum centerline radii shall be 300 'feet or as approved by the City
Engineer.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
City Engineer.
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 City Engineer.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0.50 percent.
All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the property line.
The subdivider shall submit four prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the
Engineering Department. The plan shall 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.
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.
71. On-site drainage facilities, located outside of road right-of-way, shall be
S\STAFFRPT\5631. CZ 2 9
contained within drainage easements shown on the final map. A note shall be
added to the final m_ap stating "Drainage easements shall be kept free of
buildings and obstructions."
72.
If required after approval of the final drainage report, a drainage easement shall
be obtained from the affected property owners for the release or concentrated
or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. If a drainage easement
cannot be obtained from the property owners adjacent to Lot 20, then the
storm drain system shall be designed to outlet north of Lot 30 into the existing
drainage basin.
73.
All lots containing storm drains for public use shall contain a dedicated
easement for storm drain purposes and provide for an access road to the storm
drain outlet.
74.
The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by
alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of flow.
Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities,
including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
75.
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:
76.
Prior to any work being performed in public rig~ht-of-way, fees shall be paid and
an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office.
77.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
78.
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:
79.
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
$\STAFFRPT%S631 .CZ 30 ~
Soils Report addressing compaction and site conditions.
80.
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 with the approved rough
grading plan.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
81.
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.
82.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and
94 of the State Standard Specifications.
83.
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 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.
S\STAFFRPT'%S631 .CZ 3 1
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DATED
SEPTEMBER 16, 1991
S\STAFFRPT~5631cz,cc 14
PLANNINe COMMIBSION MINUTES ew-PTw-Wn~-q .¶ 6, .s g 9 .l
13. Tentative Tract 25277 and 2one Change 5724
13.1 Proposal to change the zone from R-R, Rural Residential,
to R-l, single family residential and to create 102
residential lots and 7 open Space. lots. Located on the
southwesterly side of Pechan a Creek abutting the
easterly side of Temecula Creek Inn Golf Course.
CHAIitMAN HOAGL]&ND opened the public hearing at 9:40 P.M.
COMMIBBIONERBLAIR moved to continue Tentative Tract 25277
and Zone Change 5724 to the regularly scheduled meeting of
October 21, 1991, seconded by COMMIBBIONER FORD.
AYES: 5
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Chiniaeff,
Fahey, Ford, Hoagland
None
14. Change of 2one No. 5631; and Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No. 25320
14.1 Proposal to change to zoning designation of the subject
property from R-R (Rural Residential 20,000 ~quare feet
minimum) to R-1 (one-family residential - 7,200 square
feet minimum); and, subdivide approximately 56.6 acres
into 102 single family residential lots and 4 open space
lots. Located on the northside of Pauba Road, West of
Margarita Road.
CHARLES RAY provided the staff report.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLAND opened the public hearing at 9:50 P.M.
ROBERT KEMBLB, Robert Bien, William Frost & Associates,
28765 Single Oak Drive, Temecula, representing-the
applicant, stated that they concurred with the staff's
findings and recommendations. Mr. Kemble stated that
they felt they had adequately addressed the issues and
concerns raised by staff and the Commission during the
last meeting.
The following individuals spoke in opposition to the
project:
KEN RUDOLPH, 43082 Corte Villa, Temecula
GARY PETCH, 43065 Vista De1 Rancho, Temecula
KEYIN PRUCHETTI, 30559 Pauba Road, Temecula
STEVE NELSON, 43015 Showalter Road, Temecula
AUDREY MEDARIS, 30601 Moontide Court, Temecula
Pcken~/16/g: 17 9-ms-el
~T.tq'NTHG COMMIBBION MINOTRB
16, 199Z
MICHAEL NaDIRIS, 30601 Moontide Court, Temecula
BRZAN NaNTAZS, 42635 Remota Street, Temecula
MARCIX 2IaVIN, 30110 Ia, Primavera, Temecula
NATB DIBIABI, 30445 Hira Loma Drive, Temecula
BOB INBIN, 30353 Verfonda, Temecula
PHILIP SAUl(, 43209 Vista Del Rancho, Temecula
MARCINk NADJES, 42808 SOta Suzanne, Temecula
The individuals listed above strongly disagreed with
the recommendations by the staff for the following
reasons: grading, higher density, increased traffic flow,
contamination of the small lake area, etc. Marcia
Slavin, president of the Lakeview Homeowners
Association brought in water samples from the lake
which shows past and present water contamination.
ROBERT KEMBLE stated that the applicant came back to the
Commission after addressing issues and concerns raised by
the Commission in the January meeting; however,
consideration of alternative uses was not a concern the
applicant was requested to address. Mr. KembIe added that.-
the problem with the lake were not as a result of the
Acacia development up stream. ~
COMMISSIONER FAHEY stated that she had expressed
concerns at the January hearing that she feels have
not been adequately addressed and added that she.
felt there was a probable inconsistency with the
future General Plan due to the proposed change in density
on a prominent ridgeling and that the requested increase
in density vs. the existing zoning of the project site
has the potential of a negative environmental impact that
cannot be mitigated.
Commissioner Fahey indicated that project Conditions of
Approval relating to drainage tothe Lake Village area and
increased traffic flow on Pauba Road were inadequate to
mitigate potential project impacts, and concluded that she
could not support this project.
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stated that this site has
been designated residential since the early 1980's.
Commissioner Chiniaeff also stated that he thought the
proposed lot pattern on the east side of the project
appeared strained.
PCm~'gn6/ga 18 9-18-' "'
FMk)~Z~G CO!OIZBBZO~ NZNZ~EB
16, ¶991
COMMISSIONER BLAIR stated that she had expressed
a number of concerns regarding the project in
January and feels they still exist. She added
that she felt the lights at the Sports Park are
of major concern and a health consideration..
COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to Deny Change of Zone
No. 5631 and Den~ Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No. 25320 based on the proposals being inconsistent
with the future General Plan due to the increased
density along a prominent ridgeling, the significant
grading required, and recommend Deny adoption of the
Negative Declaration due to the potential negative
impact the increased density may have on traffic and
drainage into the'Lake Village area, seconded by
COMMISSIONER BLAIR.
COMMISSIONER CHINIAEFF stated that he would support
the motion based on the potential grading impacts of this
project.
COMMISSIONER FAHEY advised that this was not a
denial for development of the property; however, the ..
requested zoning should respect site limitations including
topography of the area.
AYES:' 5
NOES: 0
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Chiniaeff,
Fahey, Ford, Hoagland
None
CHAIRMAN BOAGLAND advised the public that this
would be a recommendation to the City Council and
was not a final action.
16. Variance No. 6
16.1 Proposal for variance in order to allow an additional
freestanding sign display in lieu of the maximum allowed
freestanding signs per Ordinance 348.
RICHARD AYALA provided the staff report.
CHAIRMAN HOAGLANDopened the public hearing at 10:45 P.M.
LARRY MARKHAM, Markham & Associates, 41750 Winchester
Read, Temecula, representing the applicant, indicated
their concurrence with the staff report.
rcL~m, wgn6/ga 19 9-1s-9~
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
DATED
JANUARY 28, 1991
~ S~STAFFRPT\5631ez.cc 15
PLANNING COMMIBBTOM MINDTuB
28, 1991
JOHN CAVaNAUOH advised the Commission that by law the
Planning Director is authorized to make an interpretation
if there is an ambiguity and justify it throughan analogy
in other provisions of the ordinance, which they had found
in other variances, C.U.P.'s, etc.
CNAIRMANCNINXAIFF indicated that he did not support the
motion to deny the extension of time and called for the
vote.
AYES: 2 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Hoagland
NOES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Fahey, Ford, Chiniaeff
CHAIRMAN CHINIA~FF entertained a motion to continue Item
No. 6 and direct staff to bring it back and recommend an
amendment to the ordinance for Plot Plan Time Extensions.
GARY THOILMHILL suggested that it be continued off-calendar
and re-notice·
COMMISSIONER FAHEY moved to continue Plot Plan 10675
Extension of Time off-calendar to allow for an ordinance
amendment which allows for Time Extensions of'Plot Plans, .'
seconded by COMMIaSIONE~FORD.
AYES: 4
COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Fahey, Ford,
Chiniaeff
NOES: I COMMISSIONERS: Hoagland
L
CHAIRMAN CHINIAEFF declared a five minute recess at 7:30 P.M.
7. VESTING TENTATIVI TRACT MAP NO, 2 182 1
7.1 Proposal to subdivide 7.71 acres into five (5) single
family residential lots.
Item No. 7 continued off-calendar.
Chairman Chiniaeff stepped down due to a potential conflict of
interest on Item No. 8 and handed the gavel over to Vice Chairman
Ford.
CHANOE OF ZONE 5631 AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT HAp NO. 25320
S.1 Proposal to change the zoning designation of the subject
property from R-R to R-l; and subdivide the subject 56·6
acre parcel into 102 single family residential lots and
PCMINl/28/91 -7- 1/30/91
PLaNNIM~ iC0MMI88TON MINUTe2
4 open space lots. Located On the North side of Pauba
Road, East of Ynez Road.
OLXVER M12JICa provided the staff report.
Mr. Mujica advised the CommiSsion that staff had received
property and it's impact on the wildlife and migratory
bird population and residents of Lake Village. He added
that staff had contacted the Department of Fish and
Wildlife and they indicated that the lake was in their
jurisdiction and all developments that may impact this
lake must be reviewed and approved by their agency.
COMMISSIONER FORD opened the public hearing at 8:05 P.M.
ROBERT KBMBLB, Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates,
representing the applicant, expressed concurrence with
staff's recommendation. He Stated that the applicant
was not in concurrence with Condition No. 50 requiring
approval from the Department of Fish and Wildlife, since
the applicant felt it was unnecessary. Mr. ~emble also
opposed Condition No. 83 regarding the public facilities.'
fee, which was presented to Staff and the Commission in
letter form. ~
MR, XO, Bedford Properties, 28765 Single Oak Drive,
Temecula, provided a brief history about the project
and answered questions presented by the Commission.
The following individuals expressed their opposition
to the development due to the negative impacts it would
have on the environment. AlSo they expressed a desire
to see a decrease in the density if the project were
approved; however, their recommendation was for the
City to utilize this as park' land.
MARCIA SLAVBN, 30110 La Primavera, Temecula.
JAMES CONLBY, 30369 Veronda Place, Temecula.
HARRY SaCKIN, 43098 torts Villa, Temecula.
8TANLEYMELAD, 9445 Aldabra Court, San Diego.
NATE DIBIAHI, 30445 Mira Loma Drive, Temecula.
NORMAN DUNN, 30434 Colina Verde, Temecula.
PCMIN1/28/91 -8- 1/30/9:
.PLANNING COMMISSION MTNUTwB ~ANUARY 98, 1991
PHILLIP BXUM, 43209 Vista DelRancho, Temecula.
LETTIE BO~S, representing the Temecula Valley Unified
School District, expressed a concern for the potential
flooding of the Vail School ~rounds which lies just
beyond the Lake Village Lake
MR. XO presented a brief historyregarding the progression
of the intended land uses from multi-family to single
family and that the lake is line with soilcement. He also
advised the residents that without this development, Pauba
Road would not be improved.
The Commission expressed a concern for speed control on
Pauba Road, comments from the Department of Fish and
Wildlife and Regional Water Quality Control Board and the
density of the project.
COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND moved to close the public hearing
at 8:50 P.M. and continue Change of Zone 5631 and Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 in order to allow staff and
the applicant the opportunity to address the environmental
concerns expressed by the Commission and the residents,
seconded by COMMISSIONER BLAIR. ' .-
COMMISSIONER FORD asked that staff address the following
issues as well: site distances approaching Pauba Road,
effects of lighting from the Sports Park, landscaping,
existing easements on the south side of Pauba Road and the
quality of water that will flow into the storm drain.
COMMISSIONER HOAGLAND amended his motion to include this
direction to staff with the second's concurrence.
AYES: 3
NOES: i
COMMISSIONERS:
COMMISSIONERS:
Blair, Ford, Hoagland
Fahey
ABSTAIN:i COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff
3. PARCEL MAP 25607
Proposal for a two lot residential subdivision.
Located at the southeast corner of Ormsby Road and Estero
Street.
STEVE JIANNINO provided the staff report.
PCMINl/28/91 -9- Z/30/91
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DATED
SEPTEMBER 16, 1991
S\STAFFRPT~5831 cz .cc
16
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning Commission
Gary Thornhill
September 16, 1991
Change of Zone No. 5631; and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320
RECOMMENDATION:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
BACKGROUND:
RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative
Declaration for Change of Zone No. 5631 and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320;
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Change of Zone No. 5631; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
25320.
Change of Zone No. 5631 is a request to
change the zoning designation of the subject
property from R-R (Rural Residential -.20,000
square foot minimum lot size) to R-1 (One-
Family Residential 7,200 square foot
minimum lot size).
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 proposes to
subdivide the subject 56.6 acre parcel into 102
single family residential lots and 4 open space lot.
On January 28, 1991, the Planning Commission
reviewed the proposal for Change of Zone No. 5631
and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320· At the
conclusion of the public hearing the Planning
Commission continued this item in order to allow the
Planning Staff the opportunity to address the
following issues:
S\STAFFRPT~5631 .CZ
ANALYSIS:
Potential environmental impacts to the
lake within the Lake Village
Community;
Site distance requiremnents on Pauba
Road;
Effects of lighting from the Sports Park
on proposed project;
Existing easements on the southside of
Pauba Road; and
The quality of water that will flow into
the storm drain system.
In response to the concerns expressed by the
Planning Commission at their meeting of January 28,
1991,-the Planning Department Staff has analyzed
the following issues.
Potential Environmental Impacts - The Lake Village
Community Association (LVCA) identified a concern
regarding the potential environmental impacts, to the
existing habitat of their lake, caused by the surface
run-off from the proposed subdivision. The LVCA
indicated the this concern was due to the types of
chemicals (i.e. motor oil, pesticides, fertilizers, etc.)
that may run-off into their lake· Based on this input
by the LVCA, the Planning Commission directed the
Planning Staff to forward a copy of' the project
information to the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE).
Pursuant to this direction, staff transmitted the
following material to the ACOE: 1 ) Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 25320; 2) Vicinity Map; 3) Aerial
Photograph; 4) Drainage/Hydrology Study; and 5)
An Exhibit Identifying the "Ordinary Highwater
Mark"/20-year Floodplain.
In a letter from the Army Corps of Engineers (Dated
August 14, 1991), it was determined that the
proposed project does not discharge dredged or fill
material into a water of the United States or adjacent
S\STAFFRPT~5631 .CZ 2
CONCLUSION:
wetland. Therefore the project as designed is not
subject to their jurisdiction under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act and no Section 404 permit is
required from their office.
Run-off Water Quality - Based on the concerns
regarding the quality of water that would flow from
the proposed project, staff transmitted the following
material to the California Water Quality Control
Board (CWQCB): 1 ) Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
25320; 2) Vicinity Map; and 3) Drainage/Hydrology
Study.
It was determined by the CWQCB that the proposed
project would not impact the adjacent and/or
surrounding areas, nor will it impact the existing
storm drainage system.
Lighting from the Sports Park - The Community
Services Department has indicated that the lighting
from the Sports Park should not impact the subject
development due to the type of lighting installed,
which is designed to minimize to glare and complies
with the Mr. Palomar Lighting Ordinance No. 655.
Siaht Distance on Pauba Road - The Traffic
Engineering Department has reviewed the traffic
study submitted with the proposal and has
determined that adequate sight distances are
provided.
Existing Easements on Southside of Pauba Road -
After reviewing the properties along the sOuthside of
Pauba Road, across from the subject property, Staff
has determined that the proposed subdivision does
not interfere with any existing easements on the
southside of Pauba Road.
Based on our additional review of the project and
those issues identified, the Planning Department
Staff supports this project as designed.
S\STAFFRPT~5631 .CZ
3
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
RECOMMEND ADOPTION of the Negative
Declaration for Change of Zone No. 5631 and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320;
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Change of Zone No. 5631; and
w
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
25320.
OM:ks
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Resolution (Change of Zone No. 5631)
Resolution (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320)
Conditions of Approval
(Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320)
Exhibits:
A. Tentative Tract Map
Planning Commission Staff Report
(Dated January 28, 1991 )
Planning Commission Minutes
(Dated January 28, 1991)
Large Scale Plans
S\STAFFRPT~5831 .CZ 4
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5631 TO CHANGE THE ZONING
DESIGNATION FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) TO R-1
(ONE-FAMILY DWELLING) FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
LOCATED ON PAUBA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-050-004.
WHEREAS, Bedford Properties filed Change of Zone No. 5631 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision
Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Change of Zone application was processed in the time
and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Change of Zone on
January 28, 1991 and September 16, 1991, at which time interested persons had an
opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Change of Zone;
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:
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:
S\STAFFRPT~5631 .CZ 5
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 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 Planning Commission in recommending approval of the
proposed Change of Zone, makes the following findings, to wit:
a)
There is a reasonable probability that Change
of Zone No. 5631 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 subject request is consistent with The
SWAP designation of 2-5 DU/AC.
b)
There is not !a likely probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
General Plan, if Change of Zone No. 5631 is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to
the fact that an approval of such a change
from Rural Residential to One-Family
Dwellings may be consistent with the goals
and/or policies of the City's future General
Plan.
S~STAFFRPT~5631 .CZ 6 ~
c)
The project is compatible with surrounding
land uses. The harmony creates a compatible
physical relationship with adjoining properties,
due to the fact that the adjoining
developments are also single family in nature
and the proposed project is consistent with
the zoning ordinance.
d)
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 density is consistent
with the zoning ordinance.
D. The Change of Zone is compatible with the health, safety
and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2.~. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that 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 a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby recommended for adoption.
SECTION 3__~.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Change of Zone No. 5631 to change the zoning designation from R-R
(Rural Residential) to R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) for the subject property located on
Pauba Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 945-050-004.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of September, 1991.
JOHN HOAGLAND
CHAIRMAN
S\STAFFRPT~5831 .CZ
7
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 September, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
· PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
S~STAFFRPT\5631 ,CZ 8
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25320 TO
SUBDIVIDE A 56.6 ACRE PARCEL INTO 102 SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 4 OPEN SPACE LOTS
LOCATED ON PAUBA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-050-004.
WHEREAS, Bedford Properties filed Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
25320 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 Tentative Tract
Map on January 28, 1991 and September 16, 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 Tentative Tract Map;
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:
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
S~STAFFRPT~5631 .CZ
9
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 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 Tentative Tract 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 proceeding in a timely fashion with a
preparation of the general plan.
(2) The Planning Commission finds, in recommending
approval of projects and taking other actions, inciuding the
issuance of building permits, pursuant to this title, each of
the following:
(8)
There is reasonable probability that Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 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
S\STAFFRPT\5631 .CZ 10 ~
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 s:~ate law and
local ordinances.
D. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are
made:
S\STAFFRPT~5631 .CZ
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the proposed density of
the development.
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at
large, for access through, or use of, property
within the proposed land division. A land
division may be approved if it is found that
alternate easements for access or for use will
be provided and that they will be substantially
11
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 Tentative Tract Map, makes the following findings, to
wit:
a)
The proposed Tract Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study
performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding current residential development.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with, the future
adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to
the fact that the project is consistent with
surrounding development.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law, due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning for
the site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule
A.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density, due to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and a design manual
will be implemented with this project.
The design of the subdivision or the proposed
S~STAFFRPl"~5631 .CZ 12 """
improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidable injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
g)
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure.
h)
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated rights-of-way which are
open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic,
access is provided from Pauba Road.
i)
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 project as
conditioned. The project will not interfere
with any easements.
j)
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
k)
Said 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 Tentative Tract
Map is compatible with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2__~. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the
proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
S\STAFFRP'D,5631 .CZ 13
therefore, is hereby recommended for adoption.
SECTION 3_~. (~onditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 for the subdivision of a 56.6 acre parcel into 102
single family residential lots and 4 open space lots located on Pauba Road and known
as Assessor's Parcel No. 945-050-004 subject to the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION 4_.=.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of September, 1991.
JOHN 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 September, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
S\$TAFFRP'T%5631 .CZ 14
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DATED
JANUARY 28, 1991
S%STAFFRPT~5631P, z,ce 17
Case No.:
Recommendation: 1.
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
January 28, 1991
Change of Zone No. 5631
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320
Prepared By: Oliver Mujica
ADOPT Resolution No. 91-
recommending adoption of the
Negative Declaration for
Change of Zone No. 5631 and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320;
ADOPT Resolution No. 91-
recommending approval of
Change of Zone No. 5631; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91-
recommending approval of
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
Bedford Properties
REPRESENTATIVE:
Robert Bein, William Frost & Associates
PROPOSAL:
Change the zoning designation of the subject property from
R-R (Rural Residential) to R-1 (One-Family Dwelling); and
subdivide approximately 56.6 acres into 102 single family
residential lots and 4 open space lots.
LOCATION:
North side of Pauba Road, between Ynez Road and
Margarita Road.
EXISTING ZONING:
R-R (Rural Residential)
-- STAFFRPT\VTM25320 1
SWAP DESIGNATION:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
BACKGROUND.:
2-5 DU/AC
North: R-R
South: R-1
R-R
East: R-R
West:
(Rural Residential)
(One-Family Dwellin. g) and
(Rural Residential)
(Rural Residential)
R-1 (One-Family Dwelling)
R- 1 (One-Family. Dwellings)
Vacant
North:
South:
East:
West:
Sports Park
Single Family Residential
Sports Park
Single Family Residential
Total Land Area:
No. of Proposed Lots:
Min. Residential Lot Size:
Proposed Density:
SWAP Designation:
56.6 acres
102 residential
4 open space
7,200 sq.ft.
1.8 DU/AC
2-5 DU/AC
On November 14, 1989, the applicant filed Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 to the Riverside
County Planning Department, which proposed to
subdivide the subject 56.6 acre site into 103
residential lots and 4 open space lots; and Change of
Zone No. 5631.
The project was reviewed by the Riverside County
Land Division Committee (LDC) on December 14,
1989; February 1, 1990; and March 29, 1990.
During these meetings the LDC requested and
reviewed the followi!ng items:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Paleontological Survey
Biologic~al Survey
Slope Stability Report
Traffic Study
Design Manual
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Archaeological Survey
Slope Analysis
Subsequently, this project was transferred to the
City of Temecula on April 24, 1990.
On September 13, 1990, this project was reviewed
by the Preliminary Development Review Committee
(Pre-DRC) in order to informally evaluate the project
and address any possible concerns, as well as
suggesting possible modifications. The comments
by the Pre-DRC included the following:
1. Park Site Considerations
2. Maintenance of Slope Areas
3. Grading
4. Drainage
5. Slope Stability
6. Design Manual
7. Traffic
8. Density
Subsequent to the Pre-DRC meeting, Staff met with
the applicant to discuss the required supplemental
material in order to address the Pre-DRC's concerns.
On January 3, 1991, Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No. 25320 was reviewed by the Formal
Development Review Committee; and, it was
determined that the project, as designed, can be
adequately conditioned to mitigate the DRC's
concerns. The DRC has forwarded a
recommendation of approval subject to conditions.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 proposes to
subdivide the subject 56.6 acre parcel into 102
single family residential lots, as follows:
Minimum Lot Size:
Average Lot Size:
Minimum Pad Size:
Average Pad Size:
7,200 sq.ft.
13,233 sq.ft.
6,000 sq.ft.
7,822 sq.ft.
STAFFRP'I'~VTM25320
3
ANALYSIS:
4n addition, the following open space lots are
provided:
Lot 103:
Lot 104:
Lot 105 (Slope)
Lot 106 (Accessway)
0.6 acres
0.4 acres
12.6 acres
0.3 acres
The proposed subdivision has been designed in
accordance with the standards of the proposed R-1
(One-Family Dwelling) zone, as well as Ordinance
Nos. 348 and 460.
Traffic Impacts
The Transportation Engineering Staff has reviewed
this project; and has determined that the proposed
project will have a minimal impact to the existing
road system and there will be no adverse unmitigable
significant traffic impacts resulting from the
development of this proposed project.
Land Use and Zoning
The subject site iS currently vacant. Surrounding
land uses include single family residential homes to
the west (approximately 10,000 sq.ft. average lot
size) and south (1/2 and I acre lots) and the City
sports park along the north and east. The proposed
zoning (Change of Zone No. 5631) is R-1 as are the
adjacent properties to the west (Lake Village
Community). The properties to the south of the
subject site are zoned R-R and R-1.
Design Considerations
As noted above, the proposed subdivision has been
designed in accordance with the standards of the R-
I (One-Family Dwelling) zone. Due to the tracts
"vesting" status, a Development Design Manual was
submitted with this project. The design manual will
be implemented through the Conditions of Approval.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 4 "
Design Manual
As noted above, a development design manual will
be implemented with Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No. 25320. These guidelines have been created to
specifically address the development of this
subdivision, in order to ensure appropriate sizing and
massing of the homes in relation to the size of the
proposed lots. For example, the building height will
not exceed two-stories, with a maximum height of
35 feet; building will consist of one and two-story
elevations with staggering provided to create visual
interest and a varied street scene; and placement of
one story elements at front setbacks and corner lots.
Access and Circulation
Pauba Road will be improved along the subject site
with a half width street.
Access from Pauba Road will be provided by Streets
"A" and "B" (Lots 1-65); Street "E" (Lots 66-84);
and Street "F" (Lots 85-102). Internal circulation
will be provided by Street "A" (Lots 14-57); Street
"B" (Lots 1-13); Street "C" (Lots 58-65); Street "D"
(Lots 66-84); and Street "G" (Lots 85-102).
Grading and Landform Alteration
The project site is located within a fairly prominent
natural ridgeline and hillside of Temecula. However,
the mass grading effort was designed to adhere to
the gross natural topography of the site in its original
condition. While substantial grading and
recontouring of this site, which includes 540,000
c.y. of excavation and 540,000 c.y. of fill will occur
in the immediate area, the overall plan is intended to
promote preservation of site topography. The
terraced landform creates view lots for a majority of
the lots within the proposed subdivision, in which
the slopes range from 25 to 85 feet in height. It
should be noted that a recommended Condition of
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
5
Approval has been included to require that all slopes
over five (5') feet in height shall be landscaped
immediately upon the completion of grading and shall
be maintained by the homeowner's association.
SlOPeS
Planting shall commence as soon as slopes are
completed on any portion of the site and shall
provide for rapid short term coverage of the slope as
well as long-term establishment cover per City of
Temecula standards.
Cut slopes equal to or greater than five (5') feet in
vertical height and fill slopes equal to or greater than
three (3') feet in vertical height will be planted with
a ground cover to provide stability and protect the
slope from erosion. Slopes exceeding fifteen (15')
feet in vertical hei,ght will be planted with shrubs,
spaced not more than ten (10') feet on center or
trees spaced not to exceed twenty (20') feet on
center or a combination of shrubs and trees at
equivalent spacings, in addition to the ground cover.
Special consideration will be given to the slopes
along the northern side of the tract where a variety
of plant types and sizes will be provided for visual
and aesthetic purposes.
The plants selected and planting methods shall be
suitable for the soil and climatic conditions. All areas
required to be landscaped shall be planted with tuff,
ground cover, shrub or tree materials selected from
the plant palette contained in the guidelines.
Drainage
The existing surface run-off currently flows towards
the west, along Pauba Road, and drains into the lake
of the Lake Village Community; and towards the
north onto the sports park and into the existing
desalination basin to the northwest of the subject
property.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 6
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
The proposed drainage plan has been designed to
maintain the existing flows through the use of
terrace drains that will drain onto the sports park;
and a storm drain structure will be constructed from
Pauba Road along the westerly propert~ line and into
the desalination basin, which in turn will flow into
the Lake Village Lake.
The Planning Department Staff has been contacted
by the Lake Village Community Association (letter
dated January 16, 1991 ) regarding their concerns
with potential affects of drainage and run-off from
the proposed project; and the potential impact on the
wildlife and migratory bird population residents in
Lake Village. In response to these concerns, Staff
has contacted the US Department of Fish and
Wildlife and has learned that the Lake Village Lake is
within their jurisdiction and all developments that
may impact this lake must be reviewed and approved
by their agency. Therefor, Staff has included a
Condition of Approval that requires the clearance
from the US Department of Fish and Wildlife, prior to
the recordation of the final map.
The proposed project is consistent with the SWAP
Land Use Designation of 2-5 DU/AC. In addition,
Staff finds it probable that this project will be
consistent with the new General Plan when it is
adopted.
An Initial Study was performed for this project which
determined that although the proposed project could
have a significant effect on the environment, no
significant impact would result to the natural or built
environment in the City because the mitigation
measures described in the Conditions of Approval
have been added to the project, and a Negative
Declaration has been recommended for adoption.
-~ STAFFRPT~VTM25320 7
In order to ensu!re the implementation of the
mitigation measures adopted through the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process, which in
this case is the Negative Declaration per the
Environmental Assessment, the Planning Department
Staff has included the following Condition (See
Condition No. 25) within the recommended
Conditions of Approval:
"Prior to the issuance of grading permits
and/or building permit, the developer or his
successor's interest shall submit a mitigation
monitoring program to the Planning
Department for approval, which shall describe
how compliance with required mitigation
measures will be met and the appropriate
monitoring timing of the mitigation."
In addition, pursuant to the requirements of
Assembly Bill 3158 (Chapter 1706) which authorizes
the charging of certain fees for the filing of Negative
Declarations which provide funding for the
Department of Fish and Game, the Planning
Department Staff has included the following
Condition (See Condition No. 28) within the
recommended Conditions of Approval:
"Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval
of the 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 One Thousand,' Two
Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars ($1,275.00),
which includes the One Thousand, Two
Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee, in
compliance with AB 3158, required by Fish
and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the
Twenty-Five Dollar ($25.00) County
administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public
Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 Cal.
Code of Regulations 15075. If within such
STAFFRPT~VTM25320 8
FINDINGS:
forty-eight (48) 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
711.4(c)."
Chanqe of Zone No. 5631
There is a reasonable probability that Change
of Zone No. 5631 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 subject request is consistent with the
SWAP designation of 2-5 DU/AC.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
General Plan, if Change of Zone No. 5631 is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to
the fact that an approval of such a change
from Rural Residential to One-Family
Dwellings may be consistent with the goals
and/or policies of the City's future General
Plan.
The project is compatible with surrounding
land uses. The harmony creates a compatible
physical relationship with adjoining properties,
due to the fact that the adjoining
developments are also single family in nature
and the proposed project is consistent with
the zoning ordinance.
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 density is consistent
with the zoning ordinance.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320
9
Vestinq Tentative Tract MaD No. 25320
The proposed Tract Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study
performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding current residential develop-ment.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with, the future
adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to
the fact that the project is consistent with
surrounding dievelopment.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law, due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning for
the site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule
A.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density, due to the fact that the Project has
access to public roads and a design manual
will be implemented with this project.
The design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidable injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
10
10.
11.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated rights-of-way which are
open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic,
access is provided from Pauba Road.
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 project as
conditioned. The project will not interfere
with any easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320
11
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
adoption of the Negativ~ Declaration for
Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25320;
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Change of Zon~'~o. 5631; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 91- recommending
approval of Vesting Tentati"~e Tract Map No.
25320.
OM:ks
Attachments:
Resolution (Change of Zone No. 5631 )
Resolution (Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320)
Conditions of Approval
(Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320)
Environmental Assessment
Lake Village Community Association Letter
Exhibits:
A. Vicinity Map
B. Zoning Map
C. SWAP Map
D. Tract Map
E. Building Envelope Plan
F. Cross Sections Base Map
G. Cross Sections
H. Design Manual
Large Scale Plans
STAFFRPT%VTM25320
12
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDrNG APPROVAL OF
CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5631 TO CHANGE THE ZONING
DESIGNATION FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) TO R-1
(ONE-FAMILY DWELLING) FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
LOCATED ON PAUBA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-050-004.
accordance
Ordinances,
WHEREAS, Bedford Properties filed Change of Zone No. 5631 in
with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Change of Zone application was processed in the time
and manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered said Change of Zone on
January 28, 1991, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify
either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion ofthe Commission hearing, the Commission
recommended approval of said Change of Zone;
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:
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
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 13
taking other actions, including the issuance of building
p_ermits, 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)
c)
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 Planning Commission in recommending approval of the
PropoSed Change of Zone, makes the following findings, to wit: '
b)
a)
There is a reasonable probability that Change
of Zone No. 5631 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 subject request is consistent with The
SWAP designati,on of 2-5 DU/AC.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
General Plan, if Change of Zone No. 5631 is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to
the fact that an approval of such a change
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
14
from Rural Residential to One-Family
Dwellings may be consistent with the goals
and/or policies of the City's future General
Plan.
c)
The project is compatible with surrounding
land uses. The harmony creates a compatible
physical relationship with adjoining properties,
due to the fact that the adjoining
developments are also single family in nature
and the proposed project is consistent 'with
the zoning ordinance.
d)
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 density is consistent
with the zoning ordinance.
D. The Change of Zone is compatible with the health, safety
and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2_=. Environmental Compliance.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that 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 a Negative 'Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTION 3..~.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby recommends
approval of Change of Zone No. 5631 to change the zoning designation from R-R
(Rural Residential) to R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) for the subject property located on
Pauba Road and known as Assessor's Parcel No. 945-050-004.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of January, 1991.
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
15
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
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 28th day of January, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
STAFFRPT~VTM25320 16
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25320 TO
SUBDIVIDE A 56.6 ACRE PARCEL INTO 102 SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 4 OPEN SPACE LOTS
LOCATED ON PAUBA ROAD AND KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 945-050-004.
WHEREAS, Bedford Properties filed Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
25320 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 Tentative Tract
Map on January 28, 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 Tentative Tract Map;
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:
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.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 17
(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 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 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 Tentative Tract 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 proceeding in a timely fashion with a
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 Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 proposed will
be consistent with the general plan proposal
being considered or studied or which will be
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 18 "
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. (1) Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No.
460, no subdivision may be approved unless the following findings are
made:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
That the proposed land division is consistent
with applicable general and specific plans.
That the design or improvement of the
proposed land division is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans.
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the type of
development.
That the site of the proposed land division is
physically suitable for the proposed density of
the development.
That the design of the proposed land division
or proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and unavoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
That the design of the proposed land division
or the type of improvements will not conflict
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 19
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.
(2) The Planning Commission in recommending approval
of the proposed Tentative Tract Map, makes the following findings, to
wit:
a)
The proposed Tract Map will not have a
significant negative impact on the
environment, as determined in the Initial Study
performed for the project. A Negative
Declaration is recommended for adoption.
b)
c)
d)
There is a reasonable probability that this
project will be consistent with the General
Plan being prepared at this time, due to the
fact that the project is consistent with the
surrounding current residential develop-ment.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to, or interference with, the future
adopted General Plan, if the proposed use is
ultimately inconsistent with the plan, due to
the fact that the project is consistent with
surrounding development.
The proposed use complies with State
planning and zoning law, due to the fact that
the project conforms to the current zoning for
the site and to Ordinance No. 460, Schedule
A.
STAFFRPT~VTM25320 20
e)
f)
g)
h)
j)
k)
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, access, and
density, due. to the fact that the project has
access to public roads and a design manual
will be implemented with this project.
The design of the subdivision or the proposed
improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidable injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat as determined in the
initial study.
The design Of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities due to
the fact that the lots are large enough to
provide sufficient southern exposure.
All lots have acceptable access to existing and
proposed dedicated rights-of-way which are
open to, and are useable by, vehicular traffic,
access is provided from Pauba Road.
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 project as
conditioned. The project will not interfere
with any easements.
The lawful conditions stated in the project's
Conditions of Approval are deemed necessary
to protect the public health, safety and
general welfare.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with these applications and herein
incorporated by reference.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 21
E. As conditioned pursuant to SECTION 3, the Tentative Tract
Map is compati. ble with the health, safety and welfare of the community.
SECTION 2. Environmental ComplianCe.
An Initial Study prepared for this project indicates that although the
proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in the
Conditions of Approval have been added to the project, and a Negative Declaration,
therefore, is hereby granted.
SECTION 3. Conditions.
That the City of Temecula Planning Commission hereby approves Vesting
Tentative Trac~ Map No. 25320 for the subdivision of a 56.6 acre parcel into 102
single family residential lots and 4 open space lots located on Pauba Road and known
as Assessor's Parcel No. 945-050-004 subject to the following conditions:
A. Exhibit A, attached hereto.
SECTION 4_~.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of January, 1991.
DENNIS CHINIAEFF
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 28th day of January, 1991 by the following vote of the Commission:
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
22
AYES:
NOES:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS
STAFFRP~VTM25320 23
CITY OF TEMECULA
~ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Tentative Tract Map No:
25320
Project Description: Subdivide 56.6 Acres
into 102 Residential Lots and 4 Open Space
Lots
Assessor's Parcel No.:
945-050-004
Planning Department
The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision
Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule A, unless
modified by the conditions listed below. 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 approved tentative map will expire two years after the
approval date by the City Council, unless extended as provided by Ordinance
460.
The final map shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor subject to all the
requirements of the State of California Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance
460.
J
®
The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the City Engineer and
two copies to the Department of Building and Safety. The report shall address
the soils stability and geological conditions of the site.
Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the final
map.
Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract map
boundary to a City maintained road.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320
24
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
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 ~e 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 land division
boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be 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 access to
all lots in each Phase, and shall substantially conform to the intent and Purpose
of the subdivision approval.
A Homeowners Association shall be established for maintenance of Lots 103
through 106. Open SPace/Common Area and the develoPer/applicant shall pay
for all costs relating to establishment of the Homeowners Association.
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:
a. Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of 2. to 1.
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 t~ the City Development Code. An erosion control landscaping plan
demonstrating methods of erosion Protection for these slopes shall be Prepared
by a qualified Professional; and shall be submitted to the City Planning
Department for review and approval prior to issuance of grading Permits.
The aPPlicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated December 4,
1990, 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
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
25
15.
16.
Southwest Area Plan.
Lots created by this ~ubdivision shall comply with the following:
Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the
development standards of the R-1 (One-Family Dwelling) zone as
provided in the tract's approved Development Design Manual.
Graded but undeveloped land shall' be maintained in a weed-free
condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided
with other erosion control measures as approved by the Director of
Building and Safety.
The 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.
17.
18.
19.
Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints 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 recommendations.
Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
If the project is to be phased, prior to the issuance 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
STAFFRPT\VTM25320
26
20.
sedimentat, on during and after the grading process.
A~proximate time frames for grading and identification of
areas which may be graded during the higher probability
rain months of January through March.
3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations.
4. 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 gradually adjusted to
the angle of the natural terrain.
Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall
reflect the natural rounded terrain.
The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves
with radii designed in proportion to the total height of the
slopes where drainage and stability permit such rounding.
4. Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal
length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved
in a continuous, undulating fashion.
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
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, redirect or halt
grading activity to allow recovery of fossils.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 27 --
21.
Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
Prior to the issuance of building 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.
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.
Parkways 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. Front yards shall be landscaped and street trees
planted.
Wall plans shall be submitted for the project perimeter and along
Pauba Road. Wooden fencing shall not be allowed on the
perimeter of the project. All lots with slopes leading down from
the lot shall be provided with gates in the wall for maintenance
aCCeSS.
Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent
trees at key visual focal points 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.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320
28
fm
All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on
the subj_ect property shall be shown on the project's grading plans
and shall note those to be removed, relocated and/or retained.
10.
All trees shall be minimum double staked. Weaker and/or slow
growing trees shall be steel staked.
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 liibrary development.
Prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of Building 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 45 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.
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices
shall be permitted with Planning Department approval.
Building separation between all buildings including fireplaces shall comply
with the tract's approved Design Manual.
All street side yard setbacks shall comply with the tract's approved
design manual.
All. front yards shall be provided with landscaping and a manually
operated permanent underground irrigation system.
STAFFRPT~VTM25320 29 --
Prior to the issuance of building permits, a plot plan shall be submitted
to the Planning_Department pursuant to Section 18.30 of Ordinance No.
348 accompanied by all applicable filing fees, as a plot plan that is not
subject to the California Environmental Quality Act and is no.t transmitted
to any governmental agency other than the Riverside County Planning
Department. The plot plan shall ensure the conformance of the final site
development with the tract's approved Design manual, and shall contain
the following elements:
A final site plan showing the lots, building footprints, all setback,
and floor plan and elevation assignments to individual lots.
One (1) color and materials sample board (maximum size of 8 x
13 inches by 3/8 inch thick) containing precise color, texture and
material swatches or photographs (which may be from suppliers'
brochures). Indicate on the board the name, address and phone
numbers of both the sample board preparer and the project
applicant, tract number, and the manufacturer and product
numbers where possible (trade names also acceptable).
One (1) copy of the architectural elevations colored to represent
the selected color combinations, with symbols keyed to the color
and materials board. The written color and material descriptions
shall be located on the elevation.
Six (6) copies of each of glossy photographic color prints (size 8
x 10. inches) of both color and materials board and colored
.architectural elevations for permanent filing, hearing body review
and agency distribution. All writing must be legible.
Said. plot plan shall require the approval of the Planning Director prior to
the issuance of any building permits for lots included within the plot
plan. The submittal of plot plans prior to the issuance of building permits
may be phased provided:
1. A separate plot plan shall be submitted to the Planning
Department for each phase, which shall be accompanied by
appropriate filing fees.
Each individual plot plan shall be approved by the Planning
Director prior to the issuance of building permits for lots included
within that plot plan.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320
30
22.
23.
24.
25.
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.
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.
The subdivider shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of
Temecula, its agents, officer, and employees from any claim, action, or
proceedir~g 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 Tentative Tract
Map No. 25320, which action is brought within the time period provided'for in
California Government Code Section 66499.37. The 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 the 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.
The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site
property interests, and if he or she should fail to do so, the developer shall at
least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an
STAFFRPT~VTM25320 31
agreement to complete the improvements! pursuant to Government Code
Section 66462 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.
26.
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
provided. Telephone, cable TV, and/or security systems shall be pre-wired in
the residence.
27.
Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the developer or his assignee must
conform to the park district Quimby Ordinance, unless waived to time of
issuance of a building permit.
28.
All utilities, except electrical lines rated 33kv or greater, shall be installed
underground.
29.
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Department prior to final approval of the tract maps.
The CC&R's shall include liability insurance and methods of maintaining the
open space, recreation areas, parking areas, private roads, and exterior of all
buildings.
30.
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 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 to 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 required by the City as Conditions
of Approval. The developer shall submit evidence of compliance with this
requirement to, and receive approval of, the City prior to making any such sale.
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
32
31.
32.
This condition shall not apply to land dedicated to the City for public purposes.
Every owner of a dv~elling unit or lot shall own as an appurtenance to such
dwelling unit or lot, 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.
Maintenance for all landscaped and open areas, including parkways, shall be
provided for in the CC&R's. '
33. Within forty-eight (48) hours of the approval of the 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 One Thousand,
Two Hundred, Seventy-Five Dollars {$1,275.00), which includes the One
Thousand, Two Hundred, Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) fee in compliance with AB
3158, required by Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d)(2) plus the Twenty-
Five Dollar ($25.00) County administrative fee to enable the City to file the
Notice of Determination required under Public Resources Code Section 21152
and 14 Cal. Code of Regulations 15075. If within such forty-eight (48) 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 711.4(c).
Riverside County Fire Department
34.
Schedule "A" fire protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2 1/2")
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. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPM for 2 hours duration at 20
PSI.
35.
APPlicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the Fire
Department for review. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer,
containing 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.
36.
The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and
accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building
material being placed on an individual lot.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320
33
37.
All buildings shall be constructed with fire retardant roofing material as
described in Section 3203 of the Uniform Building Code. Any wood shingles
or shakes shall have a Class "B" rating and shall be approved by the Fire
Department prior to installation.
38.
Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the
Riverside County Fire Department, a cash sum of $400.00 per lot/unit as
mitigation for fire protection impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the
time of payment, he/she may enter into a written agreement with the County
deferring said payment to the time of issuance of the first building permit.
Riverside County Department of Public Health
39.
A water system shall be installed according to plans and specifications as
approved by the water .company and the Health Department. Permanent prints
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 joint specifications, and
the size of the main at the junction of the new system to the existing system.
The plans shall comply in all respects with Div. 5, Part 1, Chapter 7 of the
California Health and Safety Code, California Administrative Code, Title 22,
Chapter 16, and General Order No. 103 of the Public Utilities Commission of
the State of California, when applicable. The plans shall be signed by a
registered engineer and water company with the following certification: "1
certify that the design of the water system in Tract Map 25320 is in
accordance with the water system expansion plans of the Rancho California
Water District and that the water service, storage, and distribution system will
be adequate to provide water service to such Tract Map."
40.
This certification does not constitute a guarantee that it will supply water to
such tract map at any specific quantities, flows or pressures for fire protection
or any other purpose". This certification shall be signed by a ~esponsible
official of the water company. The plans must be submitted to the County
Surveyor's Office to review at least two weeks prior to the request for the
recordation of the final map.
41.
This subdivision has a statement from Rancho California Water District agreeing
to serve domestic water to each and every lot in the subdivision on demand
providing satisfactory financial arrangements are completed with the subdivider.
It will be necessary for financial arrangements to be made prior to the
recordation of the final map.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320
34
42.
This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water District and shall be
connected to the sew_ ers of the District. The sewer system shall be installed
according to plans and specifications as approved by the District, the County
Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints of the plans of the
sewer system shall be submitted in triplicate, along with the original drawing,
to the County Surveyor. The prints shall show the internal pipe diameter,
location of manholes, complete profiles, pipe and joint specifications and the
size of'the sewers at the junction of the new system to the existing system.
A single plat indicating location of sewer lines.and water lines shall be a portion
of the sewage plans and profiles. The plans shall be signed by a registered
engineer and the sewer district with the following certification: "1 certify that
the design of the sewer system in Tract Map 25320 is in accordance with the
sewer system expansion plans of the Eastern Municipal Water District and that
the waste disposal system is adequate at this time to treat the anticipated
wastes from the proposed tract map."
43. The plans must be submitted to the County Surveyor's Office to review at least
two weeks prior to the request for the recordation of the final map.
Transportation Enqineerinq
PRIOR TO RECORDATION:
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer and
approved by the City Engineer for Pauba Road along the project frontage
including any transitions. Signing plans only! shall be required for internal
Streets A through G. These plans shall be included with the street
improvement plans.
45. Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering
for the design requirements.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENT PERMITS:
46. 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:
47. All signing and striping shall be installed per the aPproved signing and striping
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
35
plan.
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 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.
48.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
49.
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. 460.
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP:
50.
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;
Parks and Recreation Department; and
US Department of Fish and Wildlife.
51.
All road easements and/or street dedications shall be offered for dedication to
the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such
offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the
City Engineer.
52.
Pauba Road shall be improved with 32 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. 102 (64'/88').
STAFFRP'I%VTM25320
36
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
Street "A" from Pauba Road to Street "B", Streets "B", "E", and "F" shall be
improved with 40 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. 104, Section A (40'/60').
Street "A" east of Street "B", Streets "C", "D", and "G" shall be improved with
36 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. 105, Section A (36'/60').
Curb return radii of 35' feet shall be installed at the intersection of Street "F"
and Street "G".
Vehicular access shall be restricted on Pauba Road and so noted on the final
map with the exception of street intersections as approved by the City
Engineer.
Corner property line cut off shall be required per Riverside County Standard No.
805.
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:
a. The CC&R's shall be prepared at the developer's sole cost and expense.
The CC&R's 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 CC&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.
dg
The CC&R's shall provide for the effective establishment, operation,
management, use, repair and maintenance of all slope areas within the
STAFFRPT~VTM25320 37 --
subdivision.
All slopes exceeding 5' in height shall be maintained by the homeowners
association.
59.
60.
61.
The CC&R's shall provide that the property shall be developed, operated
and maintained so as not to create a public nuisance.
The CC&R's shall provide that if the property is not maintained in the
condition required by the CC&R's, then the City, after making due
demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the property' and
perform, at the owner's sole expense, any maintenance required thereon
by the CC&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.
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.
A Notice of Intention to form and/or join the Landscape and Lighting District
shall be filed with the City Council. The engineering costs involved in District
information shall be borne by the developer.
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, medians, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing,
striping, and other traffic control devices as appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping (street and parks).
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 461 and as approved by the
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
38
62.
63.
City Engineer.
Prior to~ recordation ~f 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 minimum centerline radii shall be 300 feet or as approved by the City
Engineer.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
All street centerline intersections shall be at 90 degrees or as approved by the
City Engineer.
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 City Engineer.
A minimum centerline street grade shall be 0;50 percent.
All driveways shall be located a minimum of two (2) feet from the property line.
The subdivider shall submit four prints of a comprehensive grading plan to the
Engineering Department. The plan shall 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.
The subdivider shall submit four copies of ai 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.
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."
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 39 --
72.
If required after approval of the final drainage report, a drainage easement shall
be obtained from the _affected property owners for the release or concentrated
or diverted storm flows onto the adjacent property. If a drainage easement
cannot be obtained from the property owners adjacent to Lot 20, then the
storm drain system shall be designed to outlet north of Lot 30 into the existing
drainage basin.
73.
All lots containing storm drains for public use shall contain a dedicated
easement for storm drain purposes and provide for an access road to the storm
drain outlet.
74.
The subdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by
alteration of the drainage patterns; i.e., concentration or diversion of 'flow.
Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities,
including enlarging existing facilities or by securing a drainage easement.
75.
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:
76.
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.
77.
A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Department prior to
commencement of any grading outside of the City-maintained road right-of-
way.
78.
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:
79.
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.
.- STAFFRPT~VTM25320 40
80.
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 shail be in substantial conformance with the approved rough
grading plan.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY:
81.
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.
82.
Asphaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than 14 days following
placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon
per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section Nos. 37, 39, and
94 of the State Standard Specifications.
83.
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 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.
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 41 --
ATTACHM'F-NT NO. 8
FEE CFIECKLIST
sxs'r^~nnus32ov-m.cc 18
CASE NO,:
CITY OF TI~IECULA
DE_VRLOI'M~.NT FEE CHECKLX.gT
Change of Zone No. 5631 - Vesting Tentative Tract Map No, 25320
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project.
Fe~
Habitat Conservation Plan
(x-Pat)
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. 23
Condition No. 27
Condition No. 80
Condition No. 60
Condition No. 21 .b
Condition No. 38
Condition No. 77
N/A
NO
ATTACItMF-NT NO.
INITIAL STUDY
S~TA~320VTM. CC
19
CITY 'OF TEMECULA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY
Background
1. Name of Proponent:
2. Address and Phone
Number of Proponent:
Date of Environmental
Assessment:
Bedford Properties
28765 Single Oak Drive
Temecula, CA 92390
(714) 676-5641
January 7, 1991
4. Agency Requiring
Assessment:
Name of Proposal,
if applicable:
CITY OF TEMECULA
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320
6. Location of Proposal:
North Side of Pauba Road, between
Ynez and Margarita Roads
Environmental Impacts
(Explanations of all answers are provided on attached sheets.)
Yes
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compac-
tion or overcovering of the soil? X
Maybe
X
STAFFRP'I'~VTM25320 42
da
Substantial change in topography
or. ground surface relief features?
The destruction, covering ,or modi-
fication of any unique geologic or
physical features?
Any substantial increase in wind or
water erosion of soils, either on
or off site?
X
.X
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? ...X
Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth
quakes, landslides, mudslid~es,
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';Iocally
or regionally?
Water. Will the Proposal result in:
Substantial changes in currents, or
the course or direction of water
Yes
Maybe
X
STAFFRP~VTM25320 43
em
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?
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? X
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:
Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any native species of
plants (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, and aquatic plants)?
X
X
Yes
X
Maybe
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRP'I'~VTM25320 44
Reduction of the numbers of any
un_ique, rare, or endangered species
of plants ?
Ca
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area of native
vegetation, or in a barrier to the
normal replenishment of e~xisting
species?
d. Substantial reduction in acreage
of any agricultural crop?
Animal Life. Will the Proposal result
in:
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms or insects)?
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?
b. 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
Ye__~s ~
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
45
planned land use of an area? X
10.
11.
12.
13.
Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
ao
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?
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
8n area?
Housing. Will the proposal affect
existing housing or create a demand for
additional housing?
Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Effects on existing parking facili-
ties, or demand for new parking?
Yes
Maybe
X
STAFFRPT~VTM25320 46
14.
15.
16.
Substantial impact upon existing
tr_ansportation systems?
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air traffic? ,
fg
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?
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
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:
.X
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
47
a. Power or natural gas? _ _ X
17.
18.
19.
2¸0.
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:
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?
X
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
Yes
Maybe
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
STAFFRP'i'~VTM25320 48
21.
prehistoric or historic building,
st_ructure, 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?
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 pr0ject's
impact on two or more sepalrate
resources may be relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment
Yes
.X
Maybe
X
X
.X
STAFFRPT~VTM25320 49
is significant.) X
D~es the project have environmental
effects which will cause substan-
tial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
STAFFRPT~VTM25320 50
III
Earth
1.a.
1.b.
1 .c-d.
1.e.
Discussion of the Environmental Evaluation
No. The project site will be graded as part of a mass grading effort.
There will be substantial grading for this project, which includes
540,000 cubic yards of excavation and 540,000 cubic yards of fill.
However, a conceptual mass grading plan for the project was reviewed
and approved by the City Engineer and designed in accordance with
Temecula's standards and the Conditions of Approval include mitigation
measures in regards to grading. Therefore, the proposed project will not
create an unstable earth condition or change the geologic substructure.
Yes. The proposed development disrupts the soil profile and results in
soil displacement, compaction, and overcovering. However, a slope
stability report was prepared for this project, in which specific
recommendation were made in order to develop the project. Therefore,
this impact is not considered significant, due to the fact that the
Conditions of Approval include mitigation measures in regards to all
grading.
Yes. The project site is located within a fairly prominent natural ridgeline
and hillside of Temecula. However, the mass grading effort was
designed to adhere to the gross natural topography of the site in its
original condition. While substantial grading and recontouring of this
site, which includes 540,000 c.y. of excavation and 540,000 c.y. of fill,
will occur in the immediate area, the overall plan is intended to promote
preservation of site topography. Therefore, this impact is not considered
significant.
Maybe. Wind and water erosion potentials will increase during the
construction phase and remain high until disturbed areas are' replanted
and the proposed drainage facilities are constructed. The wind erosion
impact is considered significant but will be mitigated through the use of
watering trucks and erosion control planting of disturbed areas after
grading. After the project is completed, water will be channeled to
drainage easements and streets. Appropriate drainage control devices
will have to be approved by the City Engineer and designed in
accordance with Temecula's standards and the Conditions of Approval.
Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant, due to the fact
that appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the
-- STAFFRPT\VTM25320 51
1.f.
1.g.
2.b,c.
Water
3.a,d.
3.b.
Project.
Yes. Althoug!~ the project site is not adjacent to any creek or stream
bed, the lake for Lake Village is located to the west of the Project which
may be impacted by the development of this Project. However, in order
to mitigate the downstream impacts brought about by runoff and the
Proposed drainage facilities, the Riverside County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District has indicated that Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 25320 will be required to pay a flood mitigation charge, which
has been included as a Condition of ApProval. Therefore, this impact is
not considered to be significant.
Maybe. The subject site is not located within a subsidence or
liquefaction zone and is not subject to liquefaction and subsidence by the
Riverside County General Plan. However, to mitigate any Potential
hazards, a geological report will be Prepared prior to any construction of
the property. The report will include mitigation measures. Therefore,
this impact is not considered to be significant.
Maybe. The Proposed project consisting of 102 residential units will
generate an increase in vehicle trips to the site. The increased vehicle
trips will increase the carbon monoxide emissions and Particulates in the
area, However, since the ambient air quality in the project vicinity is
.currently very good due to the local wind Patterns, this Potential impact
~s net considered significant. The Proposed project will not by itself
deteriorate the local area's or regional air quality, but will add .to the
cumulative impact on air quality due to the substantial growth in the
area.
No. The Proposed Project will not create any objectionable odors or alter
the area's climate.
No. The Proposed Project will not impact any body of water.
Yes. The Proposed Project will increase the amount of impermeable
surfaces on the site and the existing drainage Pattern will be altered,
especially along the northern property linen However, water will be
channeled to drainage easements and streets through drainage facilities
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
52
3.c.
3.e.
3.f.
3.g.
and control devices which will have to be approved by the City Engineer
and designed_ in accordance with Temecula's Standards and the
Conditions of Approval. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be
significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented
with the project.
Yes. Flood waters will continue to be directed to the streets and flood
channels. The lake within the Lake Village Community may be impacted
by the development of this project. However, in order to mitigate the
downstream impacts brought about by runoff and the proposed drainage
facilities, the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District (the District) has indicated that the project will be required to pay
a flood mitigation charge (Area Drainage Plan fee), which has been
included as a Condition of Approval. In addition, the Department of Fish
and Game has indicated that the project must be reviewed by their Staff.
Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant since
appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the project.
Drainage plans for the site will have to meet the requirements of the
City's Engineer.
Yes. During construction, the proposed project will increase turbidity in
local surface waters. This impact is temporary and is not considered
significant. After the project is completed, water will be channeled to
drainage easements and streets, which will have to be approved by the
City Engineer. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant
since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the
project.
No. The proposed project will not alter the rate of flow of ground water.
No. Although the proposed project will increase the amount of
impermeable surfaces on the site, the addition of irrigation for the
landscape areas will help to off-set any loss of water absorbed into the
ground. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant.
3.h.
3.i.
No. The proposed project will not significantly affect the public water
supply.
Maybe. Conditions of Approval are included for this project which
require proper design and installation of drainage conveyance devices.
Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant since
STAFFRPT\VTM25320 53
VeQetation
4. a,c.
4.b.
aPPropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the Project.
Yes. The Proposed Project involves a mass grading of the subject site
which will eliminate all of the existing. native plants; and the Proposal
includes landscaping and erosion control which will be designed to City
standards. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be significant
since aPPropriate mitigation measures have been implemented with the
Project.
sNito{;. No sensitive vegetational associations or species were identified on-
No. No agricultural Production occurred; on-site.
Wildlife
5.a,c. No.
5.b. Maybe.
A survey for Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Prepared for this
Project analyzed biologic resources
individuals of the Stephen's Kangaroo on-site. In that no
· Rat were found there
~s no occupied habitat within the bounds of the tract map.
ImPlementation of the tract as Proposed will not result in a
taking nor would it result in any adverse effect on the
species or on the species' habitat. In that surrounding
lands to the north, south, east and west have Previously
been developed at urban levels of use or are Presently being
developed at such levels of use, Preservation of this site as
a reserve is inappropriate. In addition, the site is now
isolated from all other known colonies by impassable
residential and other barriers and reinvasion of the site is
virtually impossible. ImPlementation of the Project as
Proposed will not have a significant effect and no mitigation
other than Payment of fees under the Stephen's Kangaroo
Rat Fee Ordinance is required.
STAFFRP~VTM25320
54
Noise
6.a-b.
No. A noise assessment was prepared for this project.
Analysis indicates that the project site is exposed to significant levels of
noise as a result of traffic on Rancho California Road. However, it is
concluded that the project design, as recommended herein, will comply
with the interior noise exposure standard placed on residential
construction by the County of Riverside and the State's noise insulation
standards.
It is further recommended that the final engineering design of the project
be reviewed by a recognized acoustical engineer to ensure compliance
with the County's noise standards.
Light and Glare
Yes. However, the project has been conditioned to comply with
applicable lighting standards. Therefore, this impact is not considered
to be significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been
implemented with the project.
Land Use
No. Project is consistent with both the zoning designation and the
Southwest Area Community Plan.
Natural Resources
9.a-b.
No..This project itself will not significantly increase the rate of use of
natural resources. Construction materials and petroleum products will
be used extensively to support the specific plan project overall.
Risk of Upset
lO.a-b.
No. The proposed project will not promote a risk of explosion or release
hazardous substances nor will it interfere with emergency response plan
or an emergency evaluation plan.
Population
STA FFR PT\VTM 25320
55
11.
Housing
12.
Yes. Although the project proposes to increase the density to 102 lots,
the proposed p_roject is consistent with the City Land Use Designation
which allows a maximum of 283 lots (according to SWAP). Therefore,
this impact is not considered to be significant.
No. Since the proposed project creates housing, the proposed land use
will not create a demand for additional housing.
Transportation/Circulation
13. a. Yes.
13.b-e. No.
13.f. Maybe.
The Traffic Study which was prepared for the proposed
project has addressed potential traffic impacts and has
concluded that the cumulative impacts will not be
significant. In addition, appropriate mitigation measures
have been implemented through the Conditions of
Approval.
Public Services
14. a-e. Yes.
14.f. No.
The proposed project will have significant adverse effect
effect on public services. However, these impacts are not
considered to be significant since appropriate mitigation
measures have been implemented through the Conditions
of Approval.
Energy
15.a-b.
No. The proposed project will not result in the substantial use or
increase in demand of fuel or energy.
Utilities
16.a-f.
No. The proposed project might require the use of utilities but will not
require substantial alteration to the existing system.
Human Health
STAFFRPT~VTM25320 56
17.a-b.
No. The proposed project will not have significant adverse effect on
human health.
Aesthetics
18.
No. Because the proposed project has been designed to be compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood, there will be no significant impact
on aesthetics.
Recreation
19.
Yes. The proposed project will result in an impact upon existing
recreational opportunities. However, the proposed project provides
adequate recreational facilities for the subject residents and appropriate
Quimby fees will be paid. Therefore, this impact is not considered to be
significant since appropriate mitigation measures have been implemented
with the project.
Cultural Resources
20.a-d. No impact.
Mandatory Findings of Significance
21 .a.
Maybe. The proposed project may have a significant impact on plant or
wildlife species. However, the project is located within an area
designated by the Riverside County as habitat for the endangered
Stephen's Kangaroo Rat, the project will be subject to mitigation fees for
the Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat Conservation Plan. In addition,
during grading activities, a qualified paleontologist shall be present.
21 .b.
Maybe. The proposed project may have the potential to achieve short-
term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals. However,
no significant impacts will occur if the mitigation measures are followed.
21 .c.
Maybe. The proposed project may have impacts which are individually
limited or cumulatively considerable which may have environmental
effects. However, no significant impacts will occur if the mitigation
measures are followed.
21 .d.
No. The proposed project will not have impacts which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
-- STAFFRPT\VTM25320 57
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.
January 7. 1991
Date
For
CITY OF TEMECULA
STAFFRPT~VTM25320
ATTACItMI~,NT NO. 10
EXHIBITS
s~,~yn2s~2ov'm. cc 20
L, CITY OF 'TEMECULA _~
,. .
Project Site _
-~
VICINITY M&P
CASE
P.C. DATE
CITY OF TEMECULA ~
-IO
SP 180
D
,\ ~
SWAP MAP
COMMUNITY PAF
_)
~iLLA{
SP
.1 AC MIN.~
CASE NO.'TML~;~,~
P.C. DATE I- ~e'~,
R-I
CZ
CITY OF TEMECULA
911
R-R
,~ LA pRTMAVE:R'_,/
-2 I/2
~200 ~ ~'
ZONE MAP
Ii
dl(| | I imll rT'i
CASE NO,
P.C. DATE I-'~'~I
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA
ITEM 1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
HELD TUESDAY, MAY 26, 1992
A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order Tuesday,
May 26, 1992 at 8:05 P.M., Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula,
California. President Ronald J. Parks presiding.
PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks
ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Mu~oz
Also present were City Manager David Dixon, Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko,
City Attorney Scott Field and City Clerk June Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Moore abstained on Item No. I because she was not present at the meeting
of May 12, 1992.
Mayor Birdsall stated she is opposed to Item No. 2.
It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Birdsall to approve Consent
Calendar Items 1 - 2. The motion was carried unanimously with Director Mu~oz absent.
Minutes
1.1 Approve the minutes of the meeting of May 12, 1992 as mailed.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Parks
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Mu~oz
ABSTAIN: 1 DIRECTORS: Moore
CSDMIN\052692 -1- 06102/92
CSD Minutes
2.
May 26, 1992
Acceptance of Easement Deeds for Slope Maintenance - Vintage Hills
2.1
2.2
Appropriate $4,800 to account #019-193-999-42-5250
documents required for dedication purposes.
Accept Easement Deeds for the TCSD to provided slope maintenance services.
to process legal
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 DIRECTORS: Lindemans, Moore, Parks
NOES: 1 DIRECTORS: Birdsall
ABSENT: I DIRECTORS: Mu~oz
PUBLIC HEARINGS
3. Community Recreation Center Project
Shawn Nelson presented the staff report. Mr. Nelson introduced Bob Mueting of RJM
Design Group to discuss the project. Mr. Nelson also advised that he had received one
letter and one phone call in opposition to the proposed Community Recreation Center.
Bob Mueting, RJM Design Group, reviewed the plans and drawings of the community
recreation center and introduced the design team as follows:
Kevin Stevens - RJM Design Group
Steve Kendrick - architect
Wendy Rogers - architect
Rich Valdez - Ranpak Engineering
Tom Langley, 27505 "B" Ynez Road, Temecula, president of Community Recreation
Center Building Foundation, speaking on behalf of the foundation, expressed approval
of the design plan and program.
Mike Medaris, 30601 Moontide Court, Temecula, stated that he would like to see a
curfew placed on The Community Recreation Center, and offered his back yard as a
test site, asking that an acoustics study be performed.
John Hoagland, 40481 Calle Fiesta, Temecula, asked that the Council consider an
eight lane swimming pool, to accommodate swimming competitions on a national level,
as opposed to the six lane pool that is proposed.
CSDMIN~052692
-2- 06102192
CSD Minutes May '26.1992
It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Birdsall to approve staff
recommendation.
Director Moore asked if space is available to expand the pool.
Bob Mueting stated that the expansion could be accommodated at a cost of $175,000
to $200,000.
Director Lindemans stated that he did not think the noise associated with an olympic
pool would be desirable in this location.
Director Birdsall stated that although there is room to enlarge the pool, there is no
room to add bleachers. She added that she felt this pool was designed for recreation
purposes.
Director Moore stated that she would not like to see the idea of an olympic pool for
the City dropped.
The motion was unanimously carried for staff recommendation as follows:
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.
3.4 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.
3.5 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-03
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)
Director Mu~oz was absent.
CSDMIN~O52692 -3- O6102/92
CSD Minutes May 26.1992
DISTRICT BUSINESS
4. Proposed FY 1992-93 Annual Ooeratina Budqet
City Manager David Dixon presented the staff report.
It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Lindemans to approve staff
recommendation as follows:
4.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-04
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
The motion was carried unanimously with Director Mu~oz absent.
Resolution AcceDtina Fiilina of PrOposed TCSD Rates and Charaes - FY 1992-93
City Manager David Dix, on presented the staff report.
It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Lindemans to approve staff
recommendation as follows:
5.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. CSD 92-05
A RESOLUTION OF 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
The motion was carried .unanimously with Director Mu~oz absent.
Initial Bike Way Project
Shawn Nelson presented the staff report.
CSDMIN\052692
-4- 06/02192
CSD Minutes .. May 26.1992
Director Birdsall asked why the bike way cuts off at Yukon Road instead of going
straight up Margarita.
Shawn Nelson advised that due to the width of the roadway in the area of the
Temeku Golf Course, staff felt that it was not safe to continue north on Margarita.
President Parks stated that the roadways along the Lake Village Clubhouse, Vail
Elementary School, Sparkman Elementary School and Temecula Elementary School
were designated as "no parking"; however, the street is overflow parking for school
functions and therefore should be left open for on street parking.
Shawn Nelson advised that staff was only suggesting "no parking" on the east side
of Moraga near Temecula Elementary and on the west side of Margarita near Sparkman
Elementary School.
It was moved by Director Birdsall, seconded by Director Lindemans to approve staff
recommendation as follows:
6.1
Approve the initial bikeway project which includes painting bike lanes on
appropriate streets, sand blasting and readjusting center lane lanes, and
installing bikeway and no parking signs.
6.2
Award contract to Work Stripping & Marking Service, Inc., 25,993 to
provide bike land stripping, 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 $17,530 from 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
None given.
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT
None given.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORT
None given.
CSDMIN~052692 -5- O6102/92
CSD Minutes
ADJOURNMENT
May 26.1992
It was moved by Director Moore, seconded by Director Lindemans to adjourn to the meeting
of June 9, 1992, 8:00 P.M., Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street.
Ronald J. Parks, President
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk/TCSD Secretary
CSDMIN~052692 -6- 06102/92
.Z'
ITEM
2
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/Board of Directors
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE:
June 9, 1992
SUBJECT:
Combining Balance Sheet as of March 31, 1992 and the Statement of
Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Nine
Months Ended March 31, 1992
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors receive and file the Combining
Balance Sheet as of March 31, 1992 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures
and Changes in Fund Balance for the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1992.
DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited
activity of the Temecula Community Services District for the nine months ended
March 31, 1992.
Please see the attached financial statements for analytical review of financial activity.
ATTACHMENTS:
Combining Balance Sheet as of March 31, 1992
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund
Balance for the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1992
mmmmmm
0
...I
0 cOrC~
CBr""~O ~
E
0"'32
O-r-o
0~,,
~0
_,1
0"
I--
cr) z
I--u,,
LU
I'--
n
OLU
rrZ
ZLU
LUIII
0,>aa
LU
LUZ
n<U'j
LU
C3
C.3LU
'~::LU
ZF"
C.~
OW
'J ~
I_
uZ
r~:-
..J
3--.~
)"r
zmc~c~
bowZ
ad "'a'O0
:~ <'w~:
O w zcD
uJ c:~ ZrJ34:LU
C)
i Z 3 Z
_ LU
UJZ
Z I-.rrr,./3~u,
5 a
m~ <~: Zmrt-
z awO
ITEM NO. 3
Approval
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SU BJ ECT:
Temecula Community Services District Board of Directors/
General Manager
Public Works Department
June 9, 1992
Slope Maintenance Easement Vacation -
Portions of Tract Nos. 20735-~, 20735-6, 21082-L1 and 21082
in "The Villages"
PREPARED BY:
Dana S. Robie
RECOMMENDAT ION:
That the Board of Directors: 1. ADOPT a resolution titled
"Resolution No. CSD92- , a Resolution of the Board of
Directors of the Temecula Community Services District
Vacating the Slope Maintenance Easements Over Portions
of Tract Nos. 20735-~, 20735-6, 21082-~ and 21082", based
on the background analysis and findings contained in the
attached Staff Report, dated May ~, 1992, and 2. Approve
the attached agreement for maintenance of landscaping
between the City and "The Villages" Homeowners
Association.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT: "The Villages" Homeowners Association
REPRESENTATIVE: David Michaels
PROPOSAL: To vacate the slope maintenance easements over portions
of various tracts in "The Villages", as specified in
attached Exhibits "A" through "H".
AR010
Agenda Report
May 12, 1992
Page Two
LOCATION:
Easterly/Southerly side of Margarita Road between 1100'
Northerly and 6500~ Northwesterly of Rancho California
Road.
BACKGROUND:
This is the second step of an established two-step
procedure for vacating public easements. At the present
time, the maintenance of these slopes is under the auspices
of the Temecula Community Services
Department(T.C.S.D. ). "The Villages" Homeowners
Association has requested that the T.C.S.D. vacate the
slopes, with the Association assuming the maintenance
obligation. The Association believes that it can maintain
the slopes for less than the T. C. S. D. charges. The area
encompassed by these easements totals approximately 3.23
acres. The Planning Commission Staff Report dated May
4, 1992 is attached for review. The Planning Commission
found on May 4, 1992 that the proposed vacation is
consistent with the future General Plan.
At a regular meeting of the T.C.S.D., held on May 12.
1992, a "Resolution of Intent to Vacate" was adopted by the
Board of Directors. It was stated by the Board however.
that if the slope areas are to be vacated by the T. C. S. D.,
the City must have an assurance that said slopes will be
maintained in an appropriate manner, either through a
maintenance agreement or a reversion clause. Staff
recommends that the Board approve and enter .into a
maintenance agreement with the Association-to insure
proper maintenance of said slope areas. A public hearing
was set for June 9. 1992.
ATTACHMENTS:
Agenda Report from Public Works to T.C.S.D. (5/12/92).
Agreement for Landscape Maintenance between "The
Villages" Homeowners Association and the City
Staff Report from Public Works to Planning Commission
Resolution No. CSD92- (Intent to Vacate)
Resolution No. CSD92-'( Vacation )
Legal Descriptions and~lats - Exhibits "A" through "H"
Vicinity map
Recording Requested by and
When Recorded, Return to:
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula California 92590
Attn: City Clerk
WITH A COPY TO:
(SpaceAbove for Recorder's Use)
AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING
This Agreement is entered into as of June 9, 1%92 by and
between the Villages Homeowners Association ("Property Owner") and
the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation (the"City"), with
reference to the following facts:
A. Property Owner is the owner of real property located
at the easterly/southerly side of Magarita road of Temecula (the
"Property") which is more particularly described in the attached
Exhibit "A".
B. On May 4, 1992, the City Planning Commission
approved a finding that the vacation of the slope easement areas
would be consistent with the City's General Plan.
C. On June 9, 1992, the City Council, following a duly
noticed public hearing, vacated a landscape maintenance easement
over the property in favor of the Property Owner.
D. Both parties recognized that the proper maintenance
of landscaping on the Property is an integral part of the City's
land use regulations and that the maintenance of the Property must
be consistent to the City's landscaping standards.
THEREFORE, Property Owner and the City hereby agree as
follows:
PURPOSE
1. The purpose of the Agreement is to assure continued
maintenance and care of the landscaping.
PROPERTY SUBJECT TO AGREEMENT
2. The prBperty which is the subject of this Agreement
is described in Paragraph A of the recitals above.
CITY PROCEEDINGS
3. Reference is made to the consistency finding
approved by the City Planning Commission and copies of which are on
file at City of Temecula located at 43174 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California 92590. Further reference is made to the
vacation of the property by the City Council approved on June 9,
1992, subject to the requirements that this agreement be recorded.
LANDSCAPING AS BENEFIT
4. Property Owner agrees that the landscaping which it
is obligated to maintain will benefit the Property owners as well
as the City of Temecula.
DUTY TO MAINTAIN LANDSCAPING
5. Property Owner'shall diligently maintain and care
for the landscaping areas, using the standards accepted by the City
of Temecula. Property Owner shall maintain that standard of care
necessary to prevent the landscaping from deteriorating to the
extent that its value as landscaping is destroyed.
CITY MAINTENANCE OF LANDSCAPING
6. Property Owner agrees that, if it fails to meet the
standard of maintenance necessary to keep the landscaping in a
healthy condition, the City shall give written notice of the
deficiency to Property Owner who shall have thirty (30) days after
receipt of such notice to make the necessary correction. If the
correction is not made within such thirty (30) day period, the City
may elect to take the steps necessary to assure that the
landscaping is maintained and cared for. To do this, the City
shall serve a notice of its intent to enter the Property for this
purpose. The City shall either personally serve the notice upon
Property Owner or mail a copy of it by certified mail to Property
Owner's last known address, or as shown on the tax rolls, at least
fifteen (15) days in advance of the date when it intends to enter
the Property. For this purpose, the City may enter upon the
Property and perform such work and maintain the landscaping. The
City may act either through its own employees or through an
independent contractor.
MAINTENANCE COSTS AS LIEN
7. If the City incurs costs including administrative
costs and attorneys, fees, including City Attorneys' fees, in
-2-
restoring or maintaining the landscaping after following the
procedure set forth in Paragraph 6 above, the City shall make
demand upon Property Owner for payment. If Property Owner fails to
pay the costs incurred by the City within thirty (30) days of the
date demand is made, costs shall be assessed against the Property
pursuant to Section 38773.5 of the Government Code and shall be
transmitted to the tax collector for collection.
NOTICE
8. When Property Owner ceases to be the owner of the
Property, he may file with the City a notice to that effect
containing the name and address of the new owner and a copy of the
deed. Upon doing so, the subsequent grantee is charged with the
obligations under this Agreement.
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
9. (a) If any provision of this Agreement is adjudged
invalid, the remaining provision shall not be affected.
(b) Notice to Property Owner shall be considered to
have been given after mailing, registered or certified, return
receipt requested, to its address above stated.
(c) This writing contains a full,
exclusive statement of the Agreement of the parties.
final, and
Agreement
several.
(d) If there is more than one (1) signer of the
as Property Owner, their obligations are joint and
(e) The obligations upon Property Owner signing
this Agreement may not be assigned without the consent of the City.
AGREEMENT RUNS WITH LAND
10. This Agreement pertains to and runs with the real
property described above. This Agreement binds the successors in
interest of each of the parties.
ADDITIONAL SECURITY
11. In the event the City determines the Property Owner
has failed to perform its obligations as set forth in Paragraph 5
above, and following the City having provided the Property Owner
with thirty (30) days written notice and an opportunity to cure,
City shall have the right to require Property Owner to post
additional security in an amount not to exceed maintenance expenses
for the landscaping of the property for a one (1) year period to
guarantee the performance of the obligations herein. The City may
require either a cash deposit or a surety bond guaranteeing
-3-
performance in a form and signed by sureties satisfactory to the
City. The City may, ~n the case of the cash bond, act for it using
the proceeds, or in the case of the surety bond, require the
sureties to perform the obligations of this Agreement.. At such
time, and at all times in the future, City has the right to require
this additional security until Property Owner has complied with its
obligations under this Agreement for a period of three (3) years,
whereinafter City shall release its request for additional
security.
By:
Name:
Title:
By:
Name:
Title:
CITY OF TEMECULA, a California
Corporation
ATTEST:
By:
President of the Temecula
Community Services District
June S. Greek, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
City Attorney
-4-
RESOLUTION CSD92-
A RESOLUTION THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT VACATING THE SLOPE
MAINTENANCE EASEMENTS OVER PORTIONS OF TRACT NOS. 20735-
4, 20735-6, 21082-4 AND 21082.
WHEREAS, "The Villages" Homeowners Association is the governing body for
Tract Nos. 20735-~, 20735-6, 21082-L~ and 21082; and
WHEREAS, the Temecula Community Services District maintains the slopes for
the above-referenced tracts along Margarita Road, pursuant to dedications of
easement for slope and landscape maintenance purposes; and
WHEREAS, said homeowners association has requested that the City vacate
said easements; and
WHEREAS, said homeowners association has agreed to maintain said slopes in
a landscaped, irrigated and weed-free condition under contract with private forces;
and
WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the proposed General Plan and has determined
that maintenance of said slopes by private forces is consistent with said plan.
NOW, THEREFORE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Board hereby finds that said slope and landscape
maintenance easements described herein and attached hereto as Exhibits "A" through
"H" , are unnecessary for the present and prospective public use.
SECTION 2. That said slope and landscape maintenance easements be vacated
by the City, effective July 1, 1992 and be subsequently maintained by "The Villages"
Homeowners Association.
SECTION 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of
this resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of June, 1992.
Ronaid J. Parks, President
Temecula Community Services District
060992. CSD
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss.
CITY OF TEMECULA ')
I, June S. Greek, DO HEREBY CERTIFY, that the foregoing Resolution Was
duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District
at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 9th day of June, 1992 by the following
vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COU N C I LMEMB ERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
060992. CSD
Agenda Report
May 12, 1992
Page Two
LOCATION:
Easterly/Southerly side of Margarita Road between 1100'
Northerly and 6500~ Northwesterly of Rancho California
Road.
BACKGROUND:
At the present time, the maintenance of these slopes is
under the auspices of the Temecula Community Services
Department(T.C.S.D. ). "The Villages" Homeowners
Association has requested that the T. C .S.D. vacate the
slopes, with the Association assuming the maintenance
obligation. The Association believes that it can maintain
the slopes for less than the T.C.S.D. charges. The area
encompassed by these easements totals approximately 3.23
acres. The Planning Commission Staff Report dated May
q, 1992 is attached for review. The commission found on
May ~,, 1992 that the proposed vacation is consistent with
the future General Plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff Report from Public Works to Planning Commission
Resolution No. CSD92- (Intent to Vacate)
Legal Descriptions and Plats - Exhibits "A" through "H"
Vicinity map
STAFF REPORT - PUBLIC WORKS
' CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 4, 1992
Case No.: Vacations of Slope Maintenance Easements for portions of
Tract Nos. 20735-4, 20735-6, 21082-4 and 21082
Prepared By: Dana S. Robie
Recommendation: Approve Resolution CSD92-
APPLICATION INFORMATION:
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
"The Villages" Homeowners Association
David Michaels
To vacate slope maintenance easements over
portions of Tract Nos. 20735-4. 20735-6. 21082-4
and 21082 on July 1, 1992.
Easterly/Southerly side of Margarita Road between
1100' N'ly and 6500' NW'Iy of Rancho California
Road.
R-2 {Single Family Dwelling)
North: R-1 {One-Family Dwelling) and
Elementary School
Palomar Village Shopping Center
Graded-vacant land
R-3 (Apartments)
South:
East:
West:
At the present time. the maintenance of the slopes
alon9 Margarita road for the above-referenced
tracts is under the auspices of the Temecula
Community Services Department ( T. C. S. D. ). "The
Villages" Homeowners Association has requested
that the maintenance of the slopes specified herein
and attached hereto as legal descriptions and plats -
Exhibits "A" through "H", be vacated by the
T.C.S.D., so that said association may enter into a
contract with private forces to perform these
services. Said association is requesting this
vacation because its members feel: 1 ) the
association can maintain said slopes more cost
effectively, and 2 ) the assessment for said
maintenance would be removed from their tax bills.
DISCUSSION:
Section 65360 of the Government Code requires that prior to any planning action,
including easement vacation, a finding of consistency with the General Plan must be
made. At this time, the City is in the process of establishing and adopting their
General Plan. It is the proposed policy of this plan that all slopes along arterial
roads be maintained in a landscaped, irrigated and weed-free condition. In order
to continue to comply with this policy, upon vacation of these slopes by the
T.C.S.D., on July 1, 1992, the applicant will enter into a contract with private
forces to maintain these slopes to the above-stated criteria. Subsequent to the
adoption of this resolution, the homeowners association will assume all responsibility
to maintain said slopes. Currently, arterial streets within new developments are
conditioned to be maintained by the T.C.S.D. However, there are currently several
slope areas along arterial streets within the City that are maintained by a home
owners association or by the individual property owner. Staff is recommending that
as part of the General Plan, a policy be adopted which would allow the City to
enforce the maintenance of a particular slope if the responsible party does not
provide adequate maintenance. Upon adoption of the General Plan, an ordinance
could be passed providing enforcement power to the City for slope maintenance on
arterial streets. The legal descriptions and plats for these easement areas are
attached hereto and have been reviewed for accuracy by staff. The area
encompassed by these easements totals approximately 3.23 acres.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS:
The maintenance of the slopes by alternative forces will have no adverse affects on
public health and safety, and as said slopes will be continuously maintained, the
criteria of the proposed General Plan will be adhered to.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission APPROVE Resolution CSD92-
finding that the VACATION of the SLOPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENTS Jspecifie~t
herein as attached Exhibits "A" through "H") for TRACT NOS. 20735-~1, 20735-6,
21082-~ and 21082 is CONSISTENT with the General Plan presently being developed
by the City of Temecula.
DSR:mph
Attachments:
Resolution No. CSD92-
Legal Descriptions and'~lats - Exhibits "A" through "H"
Vicinity map
2
RESOLUTION CSD92- C2
A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT REGARDING
VACATION OF THE SLOPE MAINTENANCE EASEMENTS OVER
PORTIONS OF TRACT NOS. 20735-4, 20735-6, 21082-4 AND 21082.
WHEREAS, Streets and Highways Code Section 8300 et seq. provides for a
method by which public service easements may be vacated; and
WHEREAS, the City has received a request from "The Villages" Homeowners
Association to vacate various landscape maintenance easements within Tract Nos.
20735-4, 20735-6, 21082-4 and 21082;
NOW, THEREFORE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Board of Directors declares that it hereby intends to vacate
the landscape maintenance easements within Tract Nos. 20735-4, 20735-6, 21082-~
and 21082.
SECTION 2. The City is conducting this vacation pursuant to the Public
Streets, Highways and Service Easement Vacation Code.
SECTION 3. The Board of Directors shall conduct a public hearing on June 9,
1992 at 8:00 p.m. at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula,
California, at which time al!l interested persons will be heard regarding the proposed
vacation.
SECTION z~. The easements to be vacated are described in Exhibits "A"
through "H", which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passege and adoption of this
Resolution. The City Clerk shall post this Resolution in three locations within the
City, and cause notice of the public hearing to be published in the manner set forth
at Sections 8322 and 8323 of the Streets and Highways Code.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of May, 1992.
Ronald J. Parks, President
Temecula Community Services District
051292. CSD
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )ss.
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, do HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was
duly adopted by the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community Services District
at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 12th day of May, 1992 by the following vote
of the Directors:
AYES: DIRECTORS:
NOES: DIRECTORS:
ABSENT:
DI RECTORS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
051292. CSD
Exhibit "A"
Legal Description for Vacation of
Slope Maintenance Easement
Tract No. 20735-~
Those portions of Lots I through 15, Lot "A" (Margarita Road) and Lot "B" {Avenida
Barca) of Tract No. 20735-4, as fi)ed in Book 16~, Pages I through 5 of Maps, in the
Office of the County Recorder, County of Riverside, State of California, described
as follows:
Beginning at the Westerly terminus of that certain course in said Lot 15 shown as
"N .74020~00" W. 68 . 60~ "; thence North 201~7~22" West 73.30 feet along the Westerly
line of said Lot 15 and the Northeriy prolongation thereof, to the beginning of a non-
tangent curve, concave Southerly, having a radius of 1951.00 feet and being
concentric with and 6.00 feet Northerly from the Northerly line of said Tract No.
20735-~, a radial line to said curve at said point bearing North 190~6'51" West;
thence Easterly 202.32 feet along said curve, through a central angle of 5056~30" to
the beginning of a reverse curve, concave Northerly, having a radius of 8049.00
feet, a radial line to said curve at said point bearing South 13050~21" East; thence
Easterly 377.57 feet along said curve, through a central angle of 2°~1'16"; thence
North 73°28~23" East 397.72 feet to the beginning of a curve, concave Southwesterly
and having a radius of 29.00 feet; thence Easterly, Southeasterly and Southerly
46.00 feet along said curve, through a central angle of 90°52~41"; thence South
15°38'55" East 61.62 feet; thence South 74021~05" West 13.56 feet; thence North
17°53~30" West 37.07 feet to the beginning of a curve concave Southwesteriy and
having a radius of 32.00 feet; thence Northerly, Northwesterly and Westerly 51.26
feet along said curve, through a central angle of 91 °47~08"; thence South 70°19~22"
West 268.26 feet to the Westerly line of Lot 5 of said tract; thence South 70°09~57"
West 121.00 feet to the Westerly line of Lot 7 of said tract; thence South 71004~6"
West 131.00 feet to the Westerly line of Lot 9 of said tract; thence South 72°05t56"
West 375.81 feet to the beginning of a curve, concave Southerly and having a radius
of 1200.00 feet; thence Westerly 79.54 feet along said curve, through a central angle
of 3°47'52" to the point of beginning.
Together with those portions of Lot "A~' IMargarita Road) and Lot "B" IAvenida
Barca) of said tract, described as follows:
Beginning at the most Northerly corner of said Lot "B" ; thence South 30~09~00" West
32.99 feet along the general Easterly line of said tract to an angle point therein;
thence South 15°38~55" East 67.34 feet; thence South 7~4°21 '05" West 5.00 feet to the
beginning of a curve, concave Southeasterly and having a radius of 29.00 feet;
thence Northerly, Northeasterly and Easterly 45.11 feet along said curve, through
a central angle of 89°07~18"; thence South 16~31~37" East 6.00 feet to the point of
beginning.
Containing a combined area of 1. 145 acres, more or less.
See Exhibit "B", attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof.
LEGL-DES\O01
Approval
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Temecula Community Services District Board of Directors/
General Manager
Public Works Department
May 12, 1992
Slope Maintenance Easement Vacation -
Portions of Tract Nos. 20735-LL 20735-6, 21082-~ and 21082
in "The Villages"
PREPARED BY:
Dana S. Robie
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors ADOPT a resolution titled
"Resolution No. CSD92- , a Resolution of Intention of
the Board of Directors of the Temecula Community
Services District Regarding Vacation of the Slope
Maintenance Easements Over Portions of Tract Nos. 20735-
~, 20735-6, 21082-L1 and 21082", and set a date for a public
hearing regarding the proposed vacation, based on the
background analysis and findings contained in the
attached Staff Report.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
"The Villages" Homeowners Association
REPRESENTATIVE:
David Michaels
PROPOSAL:
To set a date for a public hearing to consider whether to
vacate the slope maintenance easements over portions of
v,arious tracts in "The Villages", as specified in attached
Exhibits "A" through "H". State law establishes a two-
step procedure for vacating public easements. First. the
Board sets a hearing date. Then. at least 15 days later,
it may consider whether to vacate said easements.
EXHIBIT "B"
C ENI6J
~AV
BARCA
' eA~vp /
,' DRIVE
DATE,
mLLIILLDANA550C, IATI=5 /"=/_~O' ~-/O -,..~
DF~6,UII BY, FIELD ~ TRACT NO. 20735-4
N~.'~ . ~.~.,.,~ R ~ F SLOPE EASEMENT
,.~ .o,,~rt~.rrr ~.,~, ~,'m ~ MAINTENANCE AREA
n~, ,~-~ OS~ oZl5 151 -
; ....:R~' "' , . -' ; ,:~ "'-:'C" : '; :.:~- .~ ' ' / .' :'~.'
Exhibit "C"
Legal Description for Vacation
of Slope Maintenance Easement
Tract No. 20735-6
Those portions of Lots 26 through 35, 37 through 40, 50, 51 and Lot "E" (Margarita
Road) of Tract No. 20735-6, as filed in Book 164, Pages 10 through 15 of Maps, in
the Office of the County Recorder, County of Riverside, State of California,
described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeasterly terminus of that certain course in said Lot 26 shown
as" N. 30°09'00"E. 32.99' "; thence North 16°31 '37" West 6.00 feet along the Westerly
line of said Lot "E" to a point in a line parallel with and 6.00 feet Northerly from the
Southerly right-of-way line of said Margarita Road (110.00 feet wide), as shown on
said tract; thence North 73028'23'' East 361.50 feet along said parallel line to the
beginning of a curve concave Southerly, having a radius of 1151.00 feet and being
concentric with and 6.00 feet Northerly from said Southerly right-d-way line;
thence Easterly 1152.13 feet along said curve, through a central angle of 57021'08'',
to the Southeasterly line of said Lot "E"; thence South 40°49'31" WeSt 6.00 feet to the
most Easterly corner of said Lot 51; thence South 30012'00'' West 13.32 feet along the
Southeasterly line of said lot, to the beginning of a non-tangent curve, concave
Southwesterly and having a radius of 880.00 feet, a radial line to said curve at said
point bearing North 43°13'14'' East-; thence Northwesterly 332.72 feet along said
curve through a central angle of 21039'48'' to the Northwesteriy line of said Lot 50,
and the beginning of a non-tangent curve, concave Southerly and having a radius
of 1131.00 feet, a radial line to said curve at said point bearing North 24008'27'' East;
thence Westerly 144.90 feet along said curve, through a central angle of 7°20'26";
thence North 16°48'01'' East 2.00 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve,
concave Southerly and having a radius of 520.00 feet, a radial line to said curve at
said point bearing North 19039'20'' East; thence Westerly 231.81 feet along said
curve, through a central angle of 25032'29'' to the Northwesterly line of said Lot 37;
thence North 31047'00'' West 20.00 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve,
concave Southerly and having a radius of 840.00 feet, a radial line to said curve at
said point bearing North 0058'36'' West; thence Westerly 93.38 feet along said curve,
through a central angle of 6022'09'' to the Westerly line of said Lot 35;-thence North
37058'30" West 9.82 feet; thence South 80°~4'42'' West 86.28 feet to the Westeriy line
of Lot 34 of said tract; thence North 47006'39'' West 9.62 feet; thence South 75°40'52''
West 87.99 feet to the Westerly line of Lot 33 of said tract; thence North 59o55'47"
West 10.20 feet; thence South 71057'39'' West 75.10 feet to the Westerly line of Lot 32
of said tract; thence North 62o54'29'' West 10.74 feet; thence South 68°25'27'' West
62.44 feet to the Westerly line of Lot 31 of said tract; thence North 65°30'56'' West
10.98 feet; thence South 68005'55'' West 61.98 feet to the Westerly line of Lot 30 of
said tract; thence North 63°30'42'' West 11.31 feet; thence South 67°40'01" West 62.04
feet to the Westerly line of Lot 29 of said tract; thence North 62°03'05'' West 11.44
feet; thence South 68~17'00'' West 62.05 feet to the Westerly line of Lot 28 of said
tract; thence North 61 °45'30" West 11.49 feet; thence South 69°27'33'' West 61.91 feet
to the Westerly line of Lot 27 of said tract; thence North 61015'08'' West 10.48 feet;
thence South 72°25'11'' West 41.67 feet to the beginning of a curve concave
Southeasterly and having a radius of 25.00 feet; thence Westerly, Southwesterly and
Southerly 38.05 feet along said curve, through a central angle of 87°12'11"; thence
South 14°47'00'' East 52.99 feet; thence South 74o21'05'' West 12.54 feet to the
Westerly line of said Lot 26; thence North 15038'55'' West 67.34 feet along said
Westerly line to the Northwesterly line of said lot; thence North 30009'00'' East 32.99
feet along said Northwesterly line to the point of beginning.
Containing an area of 0,833 acres, more or less.
See Exhibit "D", attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof.
,~ E,,. /2-~/-,~
LEGL-DES\002 ~
Dana S. Robie, L.S.' 5966
EXHIBIT "D"
~AVENIDA
BARCA~
Y----~E: DATE,
~UILLDAN A55OClATt=5 /"=/,,5{9' 2 - 7-
DP, AtIJN tSTI FIELD
~"~ ' ~'~ R B F
Ct~CK~D !~T,
TRACT NO. 20735-6
SLOPE EASEMENT
MAINTENANCE AREA
Exhibit "EI'
_Legal Description for Vacation of
Slope Maintenance Easement
Tract No. 21082-4
Those portions of Lots 31, 32, 52 and Lot "A" (Margarita Road) of Tract No. 21082-
4, as filed in Book 164, Pages 16 through 20 of Maps, in the Office of the County
Recorder, County of Riverside, State of California, described as follows:
Beginning at the most Northerly corner of said Lot 31; thence North 40°49'31'' East
6.00 feet along the Northwesterly line of said Lot "A" to the beginning of a non-
tangent curve, concave Southwesterly, having a radius of 1151.00 feet and being
concentric with and 6.00 feet Northeasterly from the Southwesterly right-d-way line
of said Margarita Road {110.00 feet wide), as shown on said tract, a radial line to
said curve at said point bearing North 40°49'31'' East; thence Southeasterly 119.36
feet along said curve, through a central angle of 5°56'29"; thence South 43014'00''
East 219.21 feet to the beginning of a curve, concave Southwesterly, and having a
radius of 1151.00 feet; thence Southeasterly 64.09 feet along saii~ curve, through
a central angle of 3°11'25'' to a point in the Easterly line of said Lot "A"; thence
South 3007'38'' West 19.13 feet along said Easterly line and the Easterly line of said
Lot 52; thence North 41°17'13" West 77.30 feet to a line parallel with and 7.00 feet
Southwesterly from said Southwesterly right-of-way line; thence North 43014'00''
West 219.21 feet along said parallel line; thence North 45°02'31`' West 71.83 feet;
thence North 55°54'12'' West q4.00 feet to the Northwesterly line of said Lot 31;
thence North 30012'00'' East 13.32 feet along said Northeasterly line to the point of
beginning.
Containin9 an area of 0. 127 acres, more or less.
See Exhibit "F", attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof.
'* Exp./2-:/-~2.
Dana S. Robie, L.S. 5986
EXHIBIT "F"
31
ZTE T.4 ~L.
TYPIC,41_
DATE,
2-1/- 92
FIEL.D
0Zl50/3151
TRACT NO. 21082-4
SLOPE EASEMENT
MAINTENANCE AREA
Exhibit "G"
,Legal Description for Vacation of
Slope Maintenance Easement
Tract No. 21082
Those portions of Lots 1 through 24, Lot "A" (Margarita Road) and Lot "B"
(Margarita Road) of Tract No. 21082, as filed in Book 164, Pages 21 through 24 of
Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Riverside, State of
California, described as follows:
Beginning at a point in the Easterly line of said Lot 1, distant thereon North
12°53~15" East 9.98 feet from the Southeast corner of said lot; thence North 77°06~45"
West 6.03 feet; thence North 15°40~00" East 54.10 feet; thence North 30°40~00" West
5.51 feet to the Northerly line of said Lot 1; thence North 16°00~00" East 50.06 feet;
thence North 27°30~00" West 1:3.15 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 2 of said tract;
thence North 15°1 5~00" Eas.t 49.01 feet; thence North 27°20~00" West 17.07 feet to the
Northerly line of Lot 3 of said tract; thence North 16a10~00" East 52.10 feet; thence
North 29°00~00" West 13.42 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 4 of said tract; thence
North 16a10'00" East 52.08 feet; thence North 32°05~00" West 16.97 feet to the
Northerly line of Lot 5 of said tract; thence North 17°17~00" East 52.15 feet; thence
North 28°17'00" West 21.26 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 6 of said tract; thence
North 16°00~00" East 27.50 feet; thence North 59°25~00" East 25.50 feet; thence North
12°53~15~' East 19.00 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 7 of said tract; thence North
59°00~00" East 26.01 feet; thence North 15000'00" East 31.97 feet; thence North
28o40'00`` West 8.05 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 8 of said tract; thence North
15°30~00" East 51.05 feet; thence North 33a20~00" West 7.23 feet to the Northerly line
of Lot 9 of said tract; thence North 12032~00" East 51.93 feet to the Northerly line of
Lot 10 of said tract; thence North 10°00~00" East 49.49 feet to the Northerly line of
Lot 11 of said tract; thence North 7°24~00" East 49.50 feet to the Northerly line of Lot
12 of said tract; thence North 6°00~00" East 49.59 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 13
of said tract; thence North 1°40~00" East 49.63 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 14 of
said tract; thence North 2°00~00" West 49.64 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 15 of
said tract; thence North 2050'00" West 49.75 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 16 of
said tract; thence North 6030~00" West L~9.82 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 17 of
said tract; thence North 9°35~00" West 49.90 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 18 of
said tract; thence North 12°30~00" West 47.12 feet to the Northerly line of Lot 19 of
said tract; thence North 16°33~00" West 45.86 feet to the Northerly line Of Lot 20 of
said tract; thence North 15°56~00" West 57.44 feet; thence North 67°08~41" West 7.02
feet to the Northerly line of Lot 21 of said tract; thence North 19°21 ~43" West 67.69
feet; thence North 73023'48" West 7.99 feet to the Northwesterly line of Lot 22 of said
tract; thence North 22°46m25" West 66.09 feet; thence North 75°29m27'' West 7.27 feet
to the Northwesterly line of Lot 23 of said tract; thence North 27a00~59" West 75.27
feet; thence North :~5°18~35" West 110.70 feet to the Westerly line of said tract;
thence North 3007'38" East 16.80 feet along said Westerly line to the beginning of a
non-tangent curve, concave Southwesterly, having a radius of 1151.00 feet and
being concentric with and 6.00 feet Easterly from the Westerly right-of-way line of
said Margarita Road II10.00 feet wide), as shown on said tract, a radial line to said
curve at said point bearing North 49°57~25" East; thence Southerly 1063.31 feet along
said curve, through a central angle of 52°55~50"; thence South 12~53~15" West 26.39
feet to a point in the Northeasterly prolongation of the Southeasterly line of said Lot
7; thence South 57~40~08'' West 79.50 feet along said prolongation and said
Southeasterly line to an angle point in the general Easterly line of said tract; thence
South 12°53~15" West 380.11 feet along said line to the point of beginning.
Containing an area of 1-122 acres, more or less.
See Exhibit "H", attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof.
'~ N~,~%
Dana S. Robie, L.
NOT
~3
0
7-
'1'0 5C'~LE
~ IHDIC~T~S ~/8,/~CT TRACTS
eC_,ALE, DATEa
mLUILLDAN A66OCIATE6 ~- - 7 - 9~
D~ ~T~ FIELD ~
~E~. ~ D.S. ~.
n~-e:n K.W. 0215 151
._
..........
"THE VILLAGES"
VICINITy MAP
EXHIBIT "H"
N
Z6 "'
5
L
DE'T/IlL
TYPIC,~L
N.T.~.
I"= 2oo'
R~F
~CK~ ~T~
DSR
D,~TI=::
2 - I0 - D2
02150/3151
TRACT NO. 21082
SLOPE EASEMENT
MAINTENANCE AREA
TEMECULA REDVELOPMENT
AGENCY AGENDA
ITEM
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HELD, TUESDAY MAY 26, 1992
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was held Tuesday, May
26, 1992, 8:40 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujo! Street, Temecula,
California. Vice Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding.
PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks
ABSENT: I AGENCY MEMBERS: Mu~oz
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Mark Ochenduszko,
City Attorney Scott Field and City Clerk June Greek.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None given.
AGENCY BUSINESS
1. Minutes
1.1
It was moved by Agency Member Birdsall, seconded by Agency Member
Lindemans to approve the minutes of May 13, 1992 as mailed.
The motion was carried as follows:
AYES: 3 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Parks
NOES: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 1 AGENCY MEMBERS: Mu~oz
ABSTAIN: I AGENCY MEMBERS: Moore
License Aareement with Temecula Town Association For Use of City ProDertv Located
West of Diaz Road and South of Cherry Street
City Attorney Scott Field presented the staff report.
Vice Chairperson Parks opened the public hearing at 8:55 P.M.
Sydney,B. Vernon, 30268 Mersey Court, Temecula, expressed opposition to the action
stating that he felt that it was a conflict of interest for the Councilmembers who were
RDAMIN\052692 - 1 - 06101192
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES MAY 26.1992
members of the Teme~ula Town Association to vote on the License Agreement for the
Temecula Town Association and asked that they indicate their membership.
City Attorney Scott Field advised that being a member or former member of the
Temecula Town Association is not a conflict of interest since that organization is a
non-profit organization.
Vice Chairperson Parks stated that he is a member and receives no compensation.
Agency members Moore and Lindemans stated that they were members as well and
receive no compensation. Agency member Birdsall stated that she is a member and
receives no compensation; however, her son prepares the Temecula Town
Association's income ta~x returns and therefore she would abstain from voting.
It was moved by Agency Member Lindemans, seconded by Agency member Moore to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
2.1
Approve the License Agreement between the City of Temecula and the
Temecula Town Association, for use of City Property located west of
Diaz Road and south of Cherry Street.
The motion was carried unanimously with Agency Member Birdsall abstaining and
Chairperson Mu~oz absent.
3. Proposed FY 1992-93 Annual OoeratinQ BudQet
City Manager David Dixon presented the staff report.
Agency Member Birdsall stated that the SRO Housing Program which was presented
at the Community Services District Seminar in San Diego, was very innovative and
funds should be set aside for this type of housing.
City Manager David Dixon stated that the City will look at a housing strategy'based
on the adoption of the General Plan.
It was moved by Agency member Birdsall, seconded by Agency member Moore to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
3.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 92-01
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
RDAMIN\052692 -2- 06101192
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES MAY 26.1992
The motion was carried unanimously with Chairperson Mu~oz absent.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
None-given.
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
None given.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Agency member Birdsall, seconded by Agency member Moore to adjourn at
9:15 P.M. The motion was carried unanimously with Chairperson Mu~oz absent.
The next regular meeting of the Temecula Redevelopment Agency will be held on Tuesday,
June 9, 1992, 8:00 P.M., Temecula Community Center, 28816, Temecula.
J. Sal Mu~oz, Chairperson
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk/Agency Secretary
RDAMIN\052692 -3- 06/01192
ITEM
2
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER '~, ~ ___
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
Executive Director/Redevelopment Agency Members
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE:
June 9, 1992
SUBJECT:
Combining Balance Sheet as of March 31, 1992 and the Statement of
Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance for the Nine
Months Ended March 31, 1992
RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency Members receive and file the Combining
Balance Sheet as of March 31, 1992 and the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures
and Changes in Fund Balance for the Nine Months Ended March 31, 1992.
DISCUSSION: The attached financial statements reflect the unaudited
activity of the Redevelopment Agency for the nine months ended March 31, 1992.
Please see the attached financial statements for analytical review of financial activity.
ATTACHMENTS: '
Combining Balance Sheet as of March 31, 1992
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund
Balance for the Nine Months Ended March 3'1, 1992
z ~ ~J
Z
Z
~Z
Z
Z
Z
ITEM NO. 3
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICEE
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
Executive Director, Redevelopment Agency
FROM:
City Clerk/Agency Secretary
DATE: June 9, 1992
SUBJECT:
Review of Redevelopment Agency Conflict of Interest Code
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE amendments to the Redevelopment Agency's Conflict
of Interest Code and DIRECT the City Clerk/Agency Secretary to forward the amended code
to the Fair Political Practices Commission.
BACKGROUND: Government Code Section 87306.5 requires that no later than July 1 of
each even-numbered year, the code reviewing body (FPPC) shall direct each local agency
which has adopted a Conflict of Interest Code to review its Conflict of Interest Code and, if
a change in its code is necessitated by changed circumstances, submit an amended Conflict
of Interest Code to the code reviewing body.
The City Attorney and City Clerk have reviewed the Agency's code and feel the only
changes necessary are the addition of the position of City Treasurer and the addition of the
following notation to the designated Positions:
Desionated Position
Disclosure Categories
Agency Members * *
............................................... 0
City Treasurer * *
.................................................. 0
Executive Director * *
.............................................. 0
Secretary ....................................................... 1
General Counsel * *
................................................ 0
Members of the Old Town Redevelopment Advisory Committee ................. 1
Members of Project Area Committee(s), if applicable ...................... 1
,,
The Agency Members, Executive Director, General Counsel and City Treasurer
are required to file disclosure statements pursuant to State law and thus are not
included herein. The annual filing of an FPPC Form No. 721 by these officials
should include all dual titles (i.e. Agency Member/City Councilmember; City
Manager/RDA Executive Director, etc.)
"' FISCAL IMPACT: None
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
FOR THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR THE
CITY OF TEMECULA
SECTION 1. Purpose. Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Sections 87300,
et sea_., the Redevelopmerit Agency for the City of Temecula (hereinafter referred to as
"Agency') hereby adopts the following Conflict of Interest Code. The provisions of the Code
are in addition to those contained in Title 9, Chapter 7 of the Government Code (Section 87100
et sea_.). Except as otherwise indicated, the definitions contained in Title 9, Chapter 2 of the
Government Code (Section 8200 et sea_.) are incorporated herein and apply to this Code. It is
the purpose of this Code to provide for the disclosure of assets and income of designated
employees and officials which may be materially affected by their official actions, and, in
appropriate circumstances, to provide that designated employees and officials should be
disqualified from participating in Agency decision-making in order that conflicts of interest may
be avoided.
SECTION 2. Designated Positions. The positions listed in Exhibit 'A' are designated
positions. Officers and employees holding those positions are deemed to make or participate in
the making of decisions which may foreseeable have a material effect on their financial interest.
SECTION 3. Disclosure Statements. Designated positions shall be assigned to one or
more of the disclosure categories set forth in Exhibit 'B" . Each designated employee or official
shall file an initial and annual statement of financial interests disclosing that employee's or
official's interest in investments, business positions, interests in real property and income
reportable under the category to which the employee's or official's position in assigned in
Exhibit 'B'.
SECTION 4. Place and Time of Filing.
(a) All designed employees or officials required to submit an initial and annual
statement of financial interests shall use FPPC Form No. 730 and shall file the original with the
City Clerk's Office.
(b) The City Clerk's office shall make and retain a copy of the statement.
(c) A designated employee or official required to submit an initial statement of
financial interest shall submit the statement within 30 days after the effective date of this Code,
disclosing interests held including investments, business positions, and interests in real property
on the effective date of this Code or the date the designated employee or official assumed office,
whichever is later, and income received during the twelve (12) months prior to the effective date
of this Code.
Con~ict.cod~.DA -1-
(d) All person hereafter appointed, promoted, or transferred to designated
positions shall file initial statements not more than 30 days after assuming offme.
(e) Annual statements shall be filed by April 1, of each year by all designated
employees and officials. Such statements shall disclose reportable investments, business
positions, interests in real property, and income held or received at any time during the previous
calendar year or since the designated employee or official took office if during the calendar year.
(f) A designated employee or official required to file a statement of financial
interest with any other agency which is within the same territorial jurisdiction and whose
disclosure requirements are comparable may comply with the provisions of this Code by filing
a duplicate copy of the statement filed with the other agency, in lieu of an entirely separate
statement.
(g) Every designated employee or official who leaves office shall file, within 30
days of leaving office, a statement disclosing reportable investments, business positions, interests
in real property, and income held Or received at any time during the period between the closing
date of the last statement required to be filed and the date of leaving office.
(h) A designated employee or official who resigns his or her position within 30
days following initial appointment is not deemed to assume or leave office, provided that during
the period between appointment and resignation the individual does not make, participate in
making, or use the position to influence any decision of the City or receive or become entitled
to receive any form of payment by virtue of being appointed to the position.
SECTION 5. Contents of:Disclosure Statements. Disclosure statements shall be made
on forms supplied by the City Clerks Office, FPPC Form No. 730, and shall contain the
following information:
(a) Contents of Investment and Real Property Reports. When an investment or
an interest in real property is required to be disclosed, the statement shall contain:
1. A statement of the nature of the investment or interest;
2. The name of the business entity in which each investment is held and
a general description of the business activity in which the business entity is engaged;
3. The address or other precise location of the real property;
4. A statement whether the fair market value of the investment or interest
in real property equals or exceeds one thousand dollars ($1,000) but does not exceed ten
thousand dollars (10,000), whether it exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000) but does not exceed
one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), or whether it exceeds one hundred thousand dollars
($100,000). For purposes of this Code, "interest in real property" does not include the principal
Con~ict.eodLRDA -2-
residence of the designated employee or official or any other property which the designated
individual utilizes exclusively as that individual's personal residence.
Co) Contents of Personal Income Re4~orts: When personal incomet is required
to be disclosed the statements shall contain:
1. The name and address of each source of income totaling two hundred
fifty dollars ($250) or more in value, or fifty dollars ($50) or more in value if the income was
a gift, and a general description of the business activity, if any, of each source;
2.. A statement whether the total value of income from each source, or,
in the case of at loan, the highest amount owed to each source, was at least two hundred fifty
dollars ($250) but did not exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), whether it was in excess of one
thousand dollars $1,000) but not greater than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or whether it was
greater than ten thousand dollars-($10,000);
received;
3. A description of the consideration, if any, for which the income was
4. In the case of a gift, the name, address and business activity of the
donor and any intermediary through which the gift was made; a description of the gift; the
amount or value and the date on which the gift was received;
given for the loan.
5. In the case of a loan, the annual interest rate and the security, if any,
(c) Contents of Business Entity Reports. When the designated employee's or
official' s pro rata share of income to a business entity, including income to a sole proprietorship,
is required to be reported, the statement shall contain:
1. The name, address, and a general description of the business activity
of the business entity; .-
2. The name of every person from whom the business entity receive
payments if the designated employee's or official's pro rata share of gross receipts from such
person was equal to or greater than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) during a calendar year;
3. Income of a business entity is required to be reported only if the direct,
indirect, or beneficial interest of the designated employee/official and his or her spouse in the
business entity totals a 10 percent or greater interest. In addition, for purpose of subparagraphs
2 and 3 of this subsection, the disclosure of person who are clients or customers of a business
~Income is defined in Title 9, Chapter 2 of the Government Code (Section 82030).
definition is attached hereto as Exhibit
Conflict.cod'~DA -3-
That
entity is required only if it is reasonably foreseeable that the client or customer may be
materially affected by the decisions of the designated employee official.
(d) Contents of Business Position Disclosure. When business' positions are
required to be reported, the designated employee/official shall lists the name and address of each
business entity in which he or she is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee, or in which
he or she holds any position of management; a description of the business entity in which the
business is engaged, and the designated employee' s or official' s position with the business entity.
(e) Acquisition or Disposal During a Calendar Year. If any otherwise reportable
investment or interest in real property was partially or wholly acquired or disposed of during the
period covered by the statement, the statement shall contain the date of acquisition or disposal.
No designated employee shall acquire any interest in any real property included within a
redevelopment project area subject to the limited exceptions contained in Section 33130 of the
Health and Safety Code.
SECTION 6. Disqualification. Designated employees and officials shall disqualify
themselves from making, participating in the making of, or in any way using their official
position to influence a governmental decision when it is reasonably foreseeable that the decision
will have a material financial effect (distinguishable from its effect on the public generally) on
the designated employee, or a member of his or her immediate family, or on:
(a) Any business entity in which the designated employee/official has a direct or
indirect investment worth one thousand dollars ($1,000) or more;
Co) Any real property in which the designated employee official has a direct or
indirect interest worth one thousand dollars ($1,000) or more;
(c) Any source of income, other than gifts and other than loans by a commercial
lending institution in the regular course of business on terms available to the public without
regard to official status, totaling two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more in value provided to,
received by, or promised to the designated employee/official within 12 months prior to the time
when the decision is made;
(d) Any business entity in which the designated employeeofficial is a director,
officer, partner, trustee, employee, or holds any position of management; or
(e) Any donor 0f, or any intermediary or agent for a donor of, a gift or gifts
totaling two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or more in value provided to, received by, or promised
to the designated employee/official within 12 months prior to the time' when the decision is
made.
For purposes of this section, "indirect investment or interest~ means any
investment or interest owned by: the spouse or dependent child of a designated employee/official,
Conflict.cod~RDA -.4-
by an agent on behalf of a designated employee/official, or by a business entity or trust in which
the designated employee/official, and/or his agents, spouse, and dependent children own directly,
indirectly, or bene~cially a 10 percent interest or greater.
No designated employee/official shall be required to disqualify himself or herself
with respect to any matter which could not legally be acted upon or decided without his or her
participation.
A designated employee/official required to disqualify himself or herself shall
notify the Executive Director and the Secretary, and the Secretary shall record the person's
disqualification.
Violations Pursuant to Government Code Section 87300, this Code "shall have
the force of law" and any violation of any provision of this Code shall be punishable in
accordance with Government Code Section 91000 to 91015 and include criminal and civil
sanctions, as well as discipline within the City's Personnel System.
Con~ict.cod~RDA -5-
_ SECTION 7. EXHIBIT hA"
DESIGNATED TEMECULA EMlq,,O~ AND OFFICIALS
AND DISCLOSURE CATEGOItlES
The following Redevelopment Agency positions entail the making or participation in the
making of decisions which may foreseeable have a material effect on financial interests:
Designated Position
Disclosure Categories
***Agency Members ........................................... 0
***City Treasurer .............................................. 0
***Executive Director .......................................... 0
Secretary .................................................. 1
***General Counsel ............................................ 0
Member of the Old Town Redevelopmerit Advisory Committee ................. 1
Member of Project Area Committee(s), if applicable ........................ 1
***The Agency Members, Executive Directors, General Counsel/and City Treasurer are all
required to file disclosure statements pursuant to State law and thus are not included herein. The
annual filing of an FPPC Form NO. 721 by these officials should include dual titles - (i.e.
Redevelopment Agency Member/City Councilmember; City Manager/RDA Executive Director)
Con~ict.cod~.DA -6- ~
SECTION 8. EXHIBIT
CATEGORIES OF REPORTABLE ECONOMIC INTERESTS
Designated Persons in Category '1' Must Report:
All investment interests, interests in real property, income, and any business interests in
which the peraons is a director, officer, parmet, trustee, employee, or holds any position of
management..These interests and income are reportable only if partially or wholly derived from
activities conducted within the jurisdiction of the Re, development Agency and located within a
redevelopment project area or within a two mile radius of a project area. Prospective business
interests in a redevelopmerit project area are reportable and business interests existing at any
time during the two years prior to the f~ing of the disclosure statement, are reportable.
The Re. development Agency reserves its right to add other categories of Reportable Economic
Interests and to redesignate positions where necessary or in compliance with the Political Reform
Act. as amended
Con~ict.codXRDA -7-
EXHIBIT "C"
82030. Income. (a) "Income" means, except as provided in subdivision Co), a payment
received, including but not limited to any salary, wage, advance, divided, interest, rent,
proceeds from any sale, gift, including any gift of food or beverage, loan, forgiveness or
payment of indebtedness received by the fLIer, reimbursement for expenses, reimbursement for
expenses, per diem, or contribution to an insurance or pension program paid by any person other
than an employer, and including any community property interest in the income of a spouse.
Income also includes an outstanding loan. Income of an individual also includes a pro rata share
of any income of any business entity or trust in which the individual or spouse owns, directly,
indirectly or bene~cially, a 10-percent interest or greater. "Income," other than a gift, does not
include income received from any source outside the jurisdiction and not doing business within
the jurisdiction, not planning to do business within the jurisdiction, or not having done business
within the jurisdiction during the two years prior to the time any jurisdiction during the two
years prior to the time any statement or other action is required under this title.
(b) "Income" also does not include:
1. Campaign contributions required to be reported under Chapter 4
(commencing with Section 84100).
2. Salary and reimbursement for expenses or per diem received from a
state, local, or federal government agency and reimbursement for travel expenses and per diem
received from a bona fide educational, academic, or charitable organization.
3. Any devise or inheritance.
Interest, dividends, or premiums on a time or demand deposit in a financial
institution, shares in a credit union or any insurance policy, payments received under any
insurance policy, or any bond or other debt instrument issued by any government or government
agency.
5. Dividends, interest, or any other return on a security which is
registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the United States Government or a
commodity future registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission of the United
States Government, except proceeds from the sale of these securities and commodities futures.
6. Redemption of a mutual fund.
7. Alimony or child support payments.
8. Any loan or loans from a commercial lending institution which are
made in the lender's regular course of business on terms available to members of the public
without regard to official status if:
Con~ict.codXRDA -8- ~
.. A. Used to purchase,
improvements to, the principal residence of flier; or
retinanee the purchase of, or for
($10,000).
B. The balance owed does not exceed ten thousand dollars
9. Any loan from an individual's spouse, child, parent, grandparent,
grandchild, brother, sister, parent-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, nephew, niece, uncle,
aunt, or first cousin, or the spouse of any such person, provided that a loan from any such
person shall be considered income if the lender is acting as an agent or intermediary for any
person not covered by this paragraph.
10. Any indebtedness created as pan of a retail installment or credit card
transaction if made in the lender's regular course of business on terms available to members of
the public without regard to official status, so long as the balance owed to the creditor does not
exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
11. Payments received under a defined benefit pension plan qualified
under Internal Revenue Code Section 401(a).
12. Proceeds from the sale of securities registered with the Securities and
Exchange Commission of the United States Government or from the sale of commodities futures
registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission of the United States Government
if the filer sells the securities or the commodities futures on a stock or commodities exchange
and does not know or have reason to know the identity of the purchaser.
Con~ict.codXRDA -9-
,-- RDA RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE.
WHEREAS, the Re, development Agency of Temecula was activated pursuant to
Ordinance Nos. 91-08, and 91-14, respectively; and;
WHEREAS, it is foreseeable that the Redevelopment Agency officers and employees
may participate:in the making of decisions which could have a material impact on their personal
financial interests distinguishable from the public generally; and,
WHEREAS, the California State Fair Political Practices Commission has ruled that such
material interests should be disclosed and in appropriate circumstances the affected official
should abstain from voting or participating in such a decision; and,
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of Temecula adopted a Conflict of Interest Code
on September 10, 1991 as required by Government Code Section 87300; and,
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 87306.5 requires the "local agency" to review
its Conflict of Interest Code, no later than July 1 of each even-numbered year' and to amend said
code if necessitated by changed circumstances,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF TEMECULA DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the attached Conflict of Interest Code, is hereby adopted as the
Conflict of Interest Code for the Redevelopment Agency of Temecula.
SECTION 2. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.'
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of June, 1992.
ATFEST:
J. Sat Mu~oz Chairperson
June S. Greek, City Clerk
rda reaoa 002 -1-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I, June S. Greek, Secretary of the Re, development Agency of Temecula, HEREBY DO
CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 92- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the
Redevelopment Agency of Temecula on the 9th day of June, 1992, by the following roll call
vote:
0 AGENCY MEMBERS:
NOES:
0 AGENCY MEMBERS:
ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS:
June S. Greek, Secretary
rda r~aoa 002 -2- __ ~