HomeMy WebLinkAbout082592 CC AgendaAGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER - 28816 Pujol Street
AUGUST 25, 1992 - 7:00 PM
At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will
determine which of the remaining agenda items
can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00
PM and may continue all other items on which
additional time is required until a future meeting.
All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 PM
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 92-14
Resolution: No. 92-64
CALL TO ORDER:
Mayor Patricia H. Birdsall presiding
Invocation
EIder Greg LeBlanc
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
Flag Salute
Councilmember Moore
ROLL CALL:
Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz, Parks, Birdsall
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
PUBLIC COMMENTS
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council
on items that are not listed on the Agenda or on the Consent Calendar. Speakers are
limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council about an item
not listed on the Agenda or on the consent Calendar, a pink "Request To Speak" form
should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address.
For all other agenda items a "Request To Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk
before the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual
speakers.
~ 21mgendd082692 I 08/18182
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be
enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless
members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent
Calendar for separate action.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
2
Resolution ADDroving List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 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
3
City Treasurer's Report as of June 30, 1992
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Receive and file report.
4
Appointment to Parks and Recreation Commission
(Continued from the meeting of 8/11/92)
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Delay appointment until the meeting of October 13, 1992.
~ 2/~gende/082692 2 08119/92
Set Hearina on Source Reduction and Recvcling Element and Household Hazardous
Waste Element
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1
Set a public hearing on the preliminary Source Reduction and Recycling Element
(SRRE), the Household Hazardous Waste Element (HHWE), and a proposed
Negative Declaration for October 13, 1992.
5.2 Direct the City Clerk to publish the Notice of Public Hearing.
6
7
Release of Faithful Performance Warranty Bond and Material and Labor Bond in Tract
No. 19872-1
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1
Authorize the release of Faithful Performance Maintenance Bond for
street, water and sewer systems and the Material and Labor Bond in
Tract No. 19872-1;
6.2
Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
and the Developer.
Release of Faithful Performance Warranty Bond and Material and Labor Bond in Tract
No. 19872-2
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1
Authorize the release of Faithful Performance Maintenance Bond for
street, water and sewer systems and the Material and Labor Bond in
Tract No. 19872-2;
7.2
Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors,
and the DeVeloper.
8
Release of Faithful Performance Warranty Bond and Material and Labor Bonds for Tract
No. 20848
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Authorize the release of Faithful Performance Bond for Street, Water and
Sewer Systems and Material and Labor Bonds in Tract No. 20848;
8.2 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
----- 2legendNOB2692 3 O8119192
9
10
Authorize Reduction in Bond Amounts in Tract Nos. 23220 and 24232
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
Vesting Final
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Approve Vesting Final
Conditions of Approval.
Authorize the reduction Street, Sewer and Water Faithful Performance
Bond amounts;
Approve the Subdivision Improvement Agreements and 18-month
extension of time;
Accept the Faithful Performance Bond riders in the reduced amounts, all
in Tract No's 23220 and 24232;
Direct the City Clerk to so notify the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
Tract Mao No. 25004-1
Tract Map No. 25004-1, subject to the
11
Advance for Construction of Maroarita Road Extension Interim Imorovements (Project
No. PW 92-04)
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1 Approve an advance of $562,650 from the General Fund Revolving
Fund to the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) for the construction of
Margarita Road Extension Interim Improvements.
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.
"' 2/~endl/082592 4 0811 g/g2
12
Abatement of Hazardous Vegetation from Vacant Lots or Parcels as per Ordinance 91 -
18, Chaoter 6.16
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ORDERING CONFIRMATION OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AGAINST PARCELS
OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR COSTS OF ABATEMENT AND
REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS WEEDS
13
Vesting Tentative Tract MaD 25320 and Zone Change No. 5631
(Continued from the meeting of 8/11/92)
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1 Continue Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No. 25320 to September 8, 1992.
COUNCIL BUSINESS
14
15
Eagle Mountain Landfill Proiect
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
City Council recommend, through its Western Riverside Council of
Government's Executive Committee representative, support of an Eagle
Mountain condition that the revenues to the County from the Eagle
Mountain project be distributed 100% between the County and all of its
cities based upon population.
Desianation of Voting Deleaate Leaaue Annual Conference
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1
Appoint a voting delegate and an alternate to represent the City of
Temecula at the Annual League of California Cities Conference Business
Meeting.
~ 21eOendw'082692 6 08119192
16
17
18
Appointments to Development Code Advisory Committee
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1 Appoint a representative from the City Council and five members-at-
large to the Development Code Advisory Committee.
General Plan Contract Amendment for Completion of Development Code
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1 Amend the General Plan Contract by $26,405 for the completion of the
Development Code.
Emeraencv Management Presentation
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1 Receive and file report.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
Joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting: September 3, 1992, 6:00 PM, Main
Conference Room, City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula California
Next regular meeting: September 8, 1992, 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center,
28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
2/a~enda/082592 6 08/1 g/92
Ordinance: No. 92-
Resolution: No. 92-
CALL TO ORDER:
President Ronald J. Parks
ROLL CALL:
DIRECTORS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mu~oz, Parks
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors, should
present a completed pink "Request to Speak" to the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state
your name and address for the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Pool Lease with Temecula Valley Unified School District
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1
Lease the pool and bath house facility at Temecula Elementary School
through September 30, 1994.
DISTRICT BUSINESS
2 Desion Services- Pala Road Park Proiect
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
Aw;~rd contract to Wimmer Yamada Associates (WYA) to provide
conceptual schematic design drawings, construction documents, and
project administration for the Pala Road Park Project which consists of
developing a community park on approximately 28.6 acres.
2.2
Request $185,400 from the Community Facilities District 88-12 and
appropriate $185,400 to account #250-199-120-5802.
2.3
Appoint two (2) members from the Board of Directors to serve on the
Project Committee for the Pala Road Park Project.
~ 2/agende/082692 7 08119/92
DEPARTMENTAL REPORT
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT - Dixon
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting September 8, 1992, 8:00 PM, Temecula
Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
~ 21egenda/082692 8 0811
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING : :~:~:: ~!
Next in Order:
Resolution: No. 92-
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
Chairperson J. Sal Mu~oz presiding
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
Award of Contract for Construction of Maraarita Road Extension Interim Improvements
(PW 92-04)
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1
Approve the award of contract for construction of Margarita Road
Extension Interim Improvements (Project No. PW 92-04) to R.J. Noble
Company for $511,500 and authorize the Chairperson of the
Redevelopment Agency ("RDA") and the City Clerk to execute said
contract.
1.2
Advance $562,650 from the General Fund Revolving Fund to the RDA.
1.3
Transfer $562,650 (bid amount plus 10% to allow for possible change
orders) from the RDA fund to the Capital Projects fund and appropriate
$562,650 to Account No. 021-165-606-5804.
~ 2/~genda/082682 9 08/18182
1.4 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DECLARING CERTAIN FINDINGS REGARDING CITY
EXPENDITURES IN CONNECTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
MARGARITA ROAD EXTENSION INTERIM IMPROVEMENTS AS REQUIRED BY
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY REGULATIONS (SECTION
1.103-18)
Construction Cost Particioation for Storm Drain Improvements on Front Street/I-15
with PM 22515 and CUP No. 5
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
Approve participation in the construction of a major storm drain under
Front Street in conjunction with the developers of PM 22515 and CUP
No. 5 in an amount not to exceed $34,000;
2.2
Direct General Counsel to prepare the necessary agreement on behalf of
the Redevelopment Agency;
2.3
Authorize the Chairperson to sign the agreement.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting September 8, 1992, 8:00
Community Center, 28816, Temecula, California
PM, Temecula
--'- 2/aOendNO82692 10 08118/92
ITEM
1
ITEM
2
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET
FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES 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 amount of
$776,564.25.
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this day of
,1992.
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
5/Reso,~269
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TE1VIECULA)
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Resolution No. 92- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the day of , 1992 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
C OUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
C OUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
5FResos269 ~
CITY OF TEMECULA
UST OF DEMANDS
08/07/92 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
08/10/92 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
08/13/92 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
08/25/92 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
08/07/92 TOTAL PAYROLL:
$33,961.88
$35,737.03
$57,909.62
$559,581.14
$N},374.58
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 08/25/92 COUNCIL MEETING:
$776,564.25
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
CHECKS:
001
100
110
140
160
190
191
193
210
250
300
310
320
330
GENERAL
GAS TAX FUND
RANCHO CAUF. RD. REIMB.
COMMUNITY DEVE. BLK. GRANT (CDBG)
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TCSD
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
CAPITAL PROJECTS (TCSD)
INSURANCE FUND
VEHICLE FUND
INFORMATIONS SYSTEMS
COPY CENTER FUND
PAYROLL:
001
100
190
320
330
GENERAL (PAYROLL)
GAS TAX FUND (PAYROLL)
TCSD (PAYROLL)
INFORMATION SYSTEMS (PAYROLL)
COPY CENTER FUND (PAYROLL)
$519,567.13
$24,512.13
$3,081.50
$36,428.51
1468. 17
$37,522.99
321.67
$11,494.62
$28,455.53
$3,797.26
$116.23
$14,269.05
$4,660.86
$55,442.89
$10,036.97
$21,582.87
$1,030.56
$1,281.29
$687,189.67
$89,374.58
TOTAL BY FUND:
$778,564.25
PREPARED BY KARMA MCINTYRE
ARY JANE HI~NRY, F FICER
"bAVID DIXON, C~ee~MANAGER r
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
, ' ..... Y CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
FUND
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
100
lo0
lo0
10o
100
160
190
190
190
190
190
CHECK DATE
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08107192
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08107/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
07/16/92
08/07/92
08107192
08107/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08107/92
08/07/92
08107192
08/07192
08/07/92
CHECK NO.
11331
11339
11340
11~,1
11343
11343
11344
11346.
11347
11347
11349
11351
11351
11352
11354
11355
11356
11358
11359
113~0
11361
11362
11362
11363
11364
11365
11370
11137
11339
11341
11343
11347
11362
11353
11329
11330
11332
11333
11334
CITY OF TEMECULA
CHECKS BY FUND
VENDOR NAME
CHILDREN'S HEALTH CTR
AVP VISION PLAN
CHEVRON U.S.A. INC.
COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT
DENTIC*ARE OF CALl FORNIA
DENT/CARE OF C*ALIFORNIA
FLOWER CORRAL
MCC*ANN PRINTING SERVICE
PERS (HEALTH ]NSUR.PREMIU
PERS (HEALTH INSUR.PREMIU
RANCHO BLUEPRINT
TARGET STORE
TARGET STORE
THORSBORNE, ALICIA
UNITED WAY OF THE INLAND
RODREGUEZ, JOHN
HREHA, JOSEPH
Z CBO
MUNICIPAL MANAGEMENT ASSI
ALEXANDER HAMILTON INSTIT
ACCUCOPY
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH, I
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH, I
IGOE & COMPANY
C-A. MUNI.BUSZNESS TAX ASS
LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSI
HENRY, MARY JANE
PERS (HEALTH [NSUR,PREMIU
AVP VISION PLAN
COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT
DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA
PERS (HEALTH INSUR.PREMIU
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH,
UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TRAV
JOCHUM, LORI
LEE, ARLEEN
PAPPAS, SHERLYN
MCNAIR, JOANN
COHEN, SYLIVIA
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
REFUND/DUP, BUS. LZCS. 35.00
INSURANCE PREN. AUG. 92 409.57
JUNE BILLING/7920772253 167.73
INSURANCE PREM. AUG. 92 168.75
INSURANCE PREM. AUG. 92 27.90
ADMIN. FEE 92 15.00
FUNERAL FLOWERS/CORA BURD 46.33
NAY NEWSLETTER 419.60
INSURANCE PREN. AUG. 92 12,621.06
ADMIN FEE 108.05
POLICE/PRINTS 121.11
REPLACE CK#9925 51.72
FiLM 225.64
MILEAGE REINS. JULY 92 11.76
06/04/92,06/18/92 &07/02/ 281.00
ICBO DINNER MEETING/JULY 10.00
JULY EXPENSE RPT REIM8. 30.15
ELECTRIC*AL INSPECTION SEN 190.00
PAYMENT FOR C*ANCELLED LUN 20.00
Q & A GUIDE (PERSONAL DEC 19.75
TO PAY FOR PRINTING JOB 162.11
INSURANCE PREN. SEPT. 92 527.62
ADMIN. FEE 92 15.00
LOAD FEE/BENEFIT ELEC. F 480.00
MEMBERSHIP FEE 40.00
REG. SEMINAN 09/16/92 95.00
EXP RPT REIMB JUNE 92 18.00
LATE CHG 25.00
FUND 001 TOTAL: 16,342.85
INSURANCE PREM. AUG. 92
INSURANCE PREM. AUG. 92
INSURANCE PREN. AUG. 92
INSURANCE PREM, AUG. 92
iNSURANCE PREM, SEPT, 92
FUND 100 TOTAL:
107.64
19.50
27.90
4,005.06
94.50
4,254.60
CAL. ASSOC. LOC*AL ECON. O
FUND 160 TOTAL:
102.00
102.00
REFUND/KIDS IN RHYTHM 27.00
REFUND/PIANO CLASS ZO.O0
REFUND/SWIM SESSION ill 20.00
REFUND/SWIM SESSION ill 20.00
REFUND/4 DAYS OF DAYCAMP 49.00
CITY OF TEMECULA
CHECKS BY FUND
/""'UND
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
CHECK DATE
08/07/92
08/07/92
08107192
08/07/92
08107192
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
CHECK NO.
11335
11336
11337
11338
11339
11341
11342
11345
113~7
113~8
113~8
113~8
113/8
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11350
11351
1135~
11357
11357
11362
11366
11368
11369
VENDOR NAME
.........................
HOPT_OT, Z~ICHF. LT-E
EDffi. TIR, SUZANNE
DO~TLE, BONNIE
DIAMOND, BARBARA
AVP VISION PLAN
COLONIAL LIFE & ACCIDENT
COSTCO HHOLESALE
KIDS PARTIES, ETC.
PERS (HEALTH INSUR.PREMIU
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
'RANCHO HATER
RANCHO HATER
RANCHO HATER
RANCHO HATER
EANCRO HATER
RANCHO HATER
RANCHO HATER
RANCHO HATER
RANCHO HATER
RANCHO MATER
RANCHO t,/ATER
RANCNO HATER
RANCHO i4ATER
PANClIO HATER
PANCHO HATER
RANCHO HATER
RANCHO HATER
RANCNO HATER
PANCHO HATER
PANCHO HATER
RANCHO HATER
TARGET STORE
UNITED HAY OF THE INLAND
· LAIDLA~ TRANSIT
LAIDLAW TRANSIT
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH, I
KNOTT # S BERRY FARM
SEA HORLD
HOFSTER, DONNA
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
REFUND/SHIM SESSION IlI 45,00
REFUND/SHIM SESSION 20.00
REFUNO/OAYCANP 130.00
REFUND/DOG DAY CANCELLED 3.00
INSURANCE PREM. AUG. 92 112.90
INSURANCE PREM. AUG. 92 203.50
SNACKS FOR DAYCAMP 170.00
ENTERTAINMENT FOR OAYCAMP 50.00
INSURANCE PREM. AUG. 92 ~,191.52
CASH REIMB. JULY 92 96.89
CASH REIMB. JULY 92 18.86
CASH REIMB. JULY 92 120.80
CASH REIM8. JULY 92 ~0.~1
0124000202 31,27
01105038~2 167.53
0110503852 85.42
0113200002 36.70
01-13-20200-2 1,523.68
0115015002/ 88.87
0115015002 90.07
0115015002 238.16
0116033311 473.25
0116036431 152.76
012~000202 26.09
0124000202 32.35
0124000902 95.20
012401897J/03/25-04/2~ 45.19
01-24-01897-1 65.36
01-2~-01897-1 52./8
01-2~-~6000-0 430.31
012U~65001 163.19
01315001111/0/,/27-05/27 196.94
0131501111 58.63
0131501111 193.99
PRIZES FOR SLIMMY STARS 50.00
06/04/92, 06/18/92 &07/02 ~2.00
TRANSPORTATION/KNOTTS ~17.61
BUS TRAMS. (SAN DIEGO ZOO 9.09
INSURANCE PREM. SEPT. 92 1~1.75
TICKETS FOR KNOTTS 933.65
SEA HORLD TRIP 1,161.70
CRAFTS FOR DAY CAMP 50.64
FUND 190 TOTAL: 12,392.76
CiTY OF TEHECULA
CHECX[S BY FUND
FUND
300
300
300
320
330
330
33O
CHECK DATE
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
08/07/92
CHECK
11339
11367
11362
11367
11339
113z~7
11362
VENDOR NAME
AVP VISION PLAN
PERS (HEALTH INSUR.PREHIU
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH,
COBB GROUP
AVP VISION PLAN
PERS (HEALTH IN$;UR.PRENIU
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH, I
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
INSURANCE PREM. AUG. 92 3.9~
INSURANCE PREH. AUG. 92 142.68
INSURANCE PREM. SEPT. 9Z 7.88
FUND 300 TOTAL: 156.30
SUBSCRIPTION FOR NETWORK
FUND 320 TOTAL:
89.00
89.00
INSURANCE PREM. AUG. 92
INSURANCE PREM. AUG. 92
INSURANCE PREM. SEPT. 92
FUND 330 TOTAL:
2~.95
569.92
31.50
626,37
TOTAL:
$ 33,-961.88
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
.,,...OOl
)1
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
CHECK DATE
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/9Z
08/10/92
08/10/9~
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/9~
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/9Z
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/9~
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
CHECK NO.
11381
11381
11381
11383
1138~
11385
11387
11387
11387
11389
11389
11389
11389
11389
11389
11390
11391
11391
11391
11391
11391
11391
11391
11391
11391
11391
11391
11392
113~3
1139~
11395
11395
11395
11395
11395
11396
11396
113~
11397
11397
11397
11399
11399
11399
11399
11399
11399
11401
11402
11404
11404
CITY OF TENECULA
CHECKS BY FUND
VENDOR NAME
ALL CITY MANAGEMENT
ALL CITY MANAGEMENT
ALL CITY MANAGEMENT
CAL]FORHIAN
CANYON REPROGRAPHIC$
CHESHIRE EMBROIDERY
DAVL]N
DAVLIN
DAVLIN
FRANKLIN SEMIlIARS
FRANKLIN SEMINARS
FRANKLIN SENIMAMS
FRANKLIN SEN]liARS
FRANKLIN SEMINARS
FRANKLIN SEMINARS
GET PAGED
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PROOLICTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GRAFFITI REMOVAL SERVICES
HANKS HARDWARE
JOBS AVAILABLE
NARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
NARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
MARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
RARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
HARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
MCCANN PRINTING SERVICE
MCCANN PRINTING SERVICE
NCCANN PRINTING SERVICE
RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MFG
RAN-TEC RUBBER STAHP NFG
RAN~TEC RUBBER STAMP NFG
RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
RIVERSIDE OFFICE SUPPLY
SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE
SC SIGNS
SPACE SAVER SYSTEM, INC.
SPACE SAVER SYSTEM, INC.
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
TRAFFIC CONTROL/05/03-05 5,608.68
TRAFFIC CONTROL 05117-051 3,256.86
TRAFFIC CONTROL 06/14'06/ 6,460.79
53590/59390 57.78
BLUE PRINTS 269.92
CAPS WITH LOGO (POLICE) 329.72
AUDIO/VIDEO PRODUCTION OF 80.17
AUDIO/VIDEO PRODUCTION OF 150.00
AUDIO/VIDEO PRODUCTION OF 295.80
5427; KIT g/o BINDER 47.95
77~32 SIMULATED LEATHER; 28.00
924; FILLER PAGES; CLASS] 19.95
21032 STORAGE HOLDERS; BU 27.80
SALES TAX 7.75% 10.32
FREIGHT 9.50
MONTHLY RENTAL 126.50
W5-075132 STAMP TRAY 1.46
W5-122052 SELF-INKEO uENT 4.36
A9-50090; BINOER HOLDERS 33.40
SALES TAX 7.752 3.33
DIFFERENCE IN PRICING 0.12
N12PL; NYLON POSTS FOR DA 9.92
SALES TAX 7.75~ 0.76
DIFFERNECE IN PRICING 1.91
HI-702072 FiLE POCKET;P/B 56.13
DIFFERENCE IN PRICE 2.82
TAX
SERVICE FOR JUNE 92 800.00
PUBLIC WORKS16/30/92 107.96
OPEN P.O. JOB RECRUITMENT 166.40
COFFEE SERVICE; CITY HALL 84.01
COFFEE SERVICE; CITY HALL 27.20
COFFEE SERVICE; CITY HALL 62.25
COFFEE SERVICE; CITY HALL 29.40
COFFEE SERVICE; CITY HALL 136.25
NEWSLETTER 266.Z0
JULY NEWSLETTER; POLICE D 249.05
SALES TAX 7.75% 19.30
NAMEPLATE: CRAIG D. RUIZ 15.20
NAMEBADGE: CRAIG O. RUIZ 2.50
TAX 1.37
2630A; CALCULATORS 85.90
TAX 6.66
2630A; CALCULATORS 343.~0
TAX 26.63
WT ROGERS ROG 51521; SMOK 20.00
TAX 1.55
OPEN P.O. JOB RECRUITMENT 307.~
POSTING OF PUBLIC HEARING 315.00
FILE DIVIDER 196.45
CREDIT MEMO/FREIGHT BILLE 34.82-
FUND
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
100
100
100
100
100
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
CHECK DATE
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/9Z
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/9Z
08/10/92
08/10/9Z
08/10/9Z
08/10/92
08/10/9Z
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/9Z
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/9Z
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
CHECK NO.
11406
11408
11411
11412
11412
11414
11414
11415
11415
11415
11415
11416
11416
11418
11403
11403
11413
11413
11413
11380
11388
11388
113t
1131
1131
1131
113~0
11391
11391
11391
11391
113~8
11398
11398
11398
11398
113~8
11400
11400
11400
11400
11400
11400
CITY OF TEMECULA
CHECKS BY FUND
VENDOR NAME
STEAM MASTERS
TEMECULA CREEK INN
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHONE
SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHONE
ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
RADIO/TV REPORTS
RADIO/TV REPORTS
RADIO/TV REPORTS
RADIO/TV REPORTS
PJ~NCHO IHDUSTRIAL SUPPLY
RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY
COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS
SCHUMACHER AUTO SALE & LE
SCHUNACHER AUTO SALE & LE
PARAGON LABORATORIES
PARAGON LABORATORIES
PARAGON LABORATORIES
AEI SECURITY, INC.
FIRST IMPRESSIONS
FIRST IMPRESSIOItS
FIRST XMPRESS[OMS
FIRST IMPRESS[OIlS
FZRST IMPRESSXOMS
FIRST IMPRESSIOMS
GET PAGED
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
RIGHTVAY
RIGHTVAY
RIGHTUAY
RIGHT~AY
RIGHT~AY
RIGHT~AY
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
DEEP CLEAN 10,870 SQ.FT.O 650.00
MEETINGS ZN TOial 41.64
66Tt584806301/Y717-05083 82.48
CELLULAR PHONE/PM 429.92
714-349-3437/GARY T. 47.03
JOB ANNOUNCEMENT;ASST.CIT ~.67
OPEN P.O. JOB RECRUITMENT 350.00
NEVSCL[PS;JUNE 2, 1992 AC 85.00
SANE AS ABOVE 495.00
SALES TAX 7.?5X 47.85
FREIGHT 7.00
40 X 48 TRASH CAN LINERS 71.68
TAX 5.55
3 MONTH ALARM SYSTEM 135.00
FUND 001 TOTAL: 22,626.84
I EA. 30"W X 36"D X 42"H 3,130.00
TAX 272.58
ALL WEATHER ASPHALT COMPO 2~4.50
SALES TAX 7.75X 18.95
SNIPPING/HANDLING 43.72
FUND 100 TOTAL: 3,709.75
MONITORING TEEN CTR./AUG. 35.00
BEEFY T'S 102.00
BEEFY T'S 306.00
XXL 10.38
XXL 31.12
TAX 8.71
TAX 26.13
MONTHLY RENTAL 80.50
153 "L" MANILA FOLDERS 36.00
IOHX~ BOX BOTTOM PENDEFLE 97.98
DIFFERENCE IN PRICING O.03-
TAX 10.38
1 PORTABLE TOILET; VET. P 57.39
SERVICE DAYS; MONDAY & TH 15,00
4 PORTABLE TOILETS; SPORT 209.55
SERVICE DAYS; MONDAY & TH 80.00
2 PORTABLE TOILETS; SAM H 104.78
SERVICE DAYS; MONDAY & TH 40.00
TR-13 MULTI COLOR & SHAPE 47.92
BE-20~0; HEART PONY BEADS 29.97
BE-446; GLASS ALPHABET BE 13,98
BE-2046; NEON HEART PONY 21.98
BE-9800; BUTTON CRAFT 9,40
PL-55; PARISCRAFT 36.99
~-
JND
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
90
190
190
191
191
193
193
193
193
193
193
193
193
193
CHECK DATE
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/ld/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/I0/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/I0/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
CHECK NO.
11/,00
11400
11400
11407
11407
11407
11407
11407
11407
11409
11410
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11382
11382
11382
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
11411
CITY OF TEMECULA
CHECKS BY FUND
VENDOR HANE
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
S & S ARTS AND CRAFTS
TEHECULA VALLEY PiPE
TEHECULA VALLEY PiPE
TENECULA VALLEY PiPE
TEHECULA VALLEY PiPE
TENECULA VALLEY PIPE
TENECULA VALLEY PIPE
WILLDAN ASSOCIATES
RIVERSIDE, COUNTY ASSESSO
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
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHER~ CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
GP-572; TOOTSIES 67.96
BK-~6; CRAFT LIBRARY SET 8.99
FREIGHT/INSUR. 33.17
SPRINKLERS 20.18
MZSC. SUPPLIES 8.73
HUNTER PGH 12" POP UP 20.18
SPRINKLER SUPPLIES 71.56
NISC. SUPPLIES 56.21
PLASTIC NOZZLE 7.14
PLAN CHECK/JUNE 92/SN 82.00
DC1309/05126/92 11.70
52~081602/85-774215 198.46
5277'/~6081602/85-774215 253.21
52~81&02/85-774215 263.83
52~081602/85-774215 261.37
5277796081602/85-774215 242.26
52~81602/85-774215 26~.75
52~081602/85-774215 238.89
5277'/~6081602/85-774215 243.76
52~81602/85-774215 234.12
5777565680203/85-68066S 12.60
5977416008002/85-T&47VO 128.20
59~233803/208-430094 12.00
59~30301/85-&S1429 12.00
607741110~303/208-342807 13.20
6077411767003/8-695745 13.20
667758~805701/Y717-0~95 1,332.00
6677584,808501/Y717-0507"~ 602.29
66777~5808004/N105-01846 22j85
6,147.44
FUND 190 TOTAL:
6677405067702/N17-012012
6677405104002/208-432101
FUND 191 TOTAL:
159.34
162.33
321.67
IRRIGATION REPAIR;VILLAGE 269.08
IRRIGATION REPAIR;VILLAGE 97.70
IRRIGATION REPAIR;VILLAGE 49.12
6077411001102/308-517680 13.20
607741102550]/8-7'~3519 13.32
6077411109403/208-078413 13.20
607741110~503/8-7667~7 13.20
6077411764902/308-517215 13.20
6977678010702/85-737116 12.00
494.02
FUND 193 TOTAL:
CITY OF TEMECLILA
CHECKS BY FUND
FUND
310
310
310
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
CHECK DATE
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/lq/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08110192
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
08/10/92
CHECK NO.
11405
11405
11405
1138&
11417
11417
11417
11417
11417
11417
11~17
11~17
11417
11417
VENDOR MANE
SPEEDY OIL CHANGE
SPEEDY OIL CHANGE
SPEEDY OIL CHANGE
CIT]CORP NORTH AMERICA
CABTEX
CABTEX
CABTEX
CABTEX
CABTEX
CABTEX
CABTEX
CABTEX
CABTEX
CABTEX
ENHANCED COMMUNICATIONS
ENHANCED COMMUNICATIONS
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
REPAIR & NAINTENANCE;VEH! 22.49
REPAIR & NAINTENANCE;VEHI 22.49
REPAIR & NAINTENANCE;VEHI 22.49
FUND 310 TOTAL: 67.47
MONTHLY PAYMENT ON PHONE 1,427.57
MONITOR POI4ER ADAPTER (SH 25.00
MONITOR POkiER ADAPTER (6F 120.00
UL CSA POt, IER CORD (6FT.) 30.00
DIN 5/5 KEYBOARD CABLE N/ 20.00
DIN 5/5 KEYBOARD CABLE M/ 25.00
HD 15/HD 15 VGA EXTN CABL 40,00
HE 15/HD 15 VGA EXTN CABL 30,00
HOUSE PAD; RED/BLUE 36,00
FREIGHT 25.00
TAX 25.27
560250; 24 BUTTON NOOULE 558.00
FREIGHT 8,00
2,369.84
FUND 320 TOTAL:
TOTAL:
CiTY OF TEHECULA
CHECKS BY FUND
ND
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
/_,001
01
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
CHECK DATE
08113192
08/13/92
08/13/92
08113192
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08113192
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/1]/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
CHECK NO.
11637
11637
11637
11~,0
1 lz~2
11442
11443
1
11~A3
11663
11~z~3
11/-~3
11/~3
11663
11~
11z~6
11z.~
11665
11~z~5
11446
11448
11449
11650
11651
11652
11453
11653
11653
11656
11656
11656
11658
11659
11660
11~&0
11660
11660
11660
11~&0
11~0
11660
11665
11~6
11668
11669
VENDOR NAME
BENEFIT AMERICA
BENEFIT AHERICA
BENEFIT AHERICA
CALI FORM I AN
DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA
DENTICARE OF CALIFORNIA
FRANKLIN SEMINARS
FRANKLIN SEHINARS
FRANKLIN SENINARS
FRANKLIN SENINARS
FRANKLIN SEHINARS
FRANKLIN SEMiHARS
FRANKLIN SEMINARS
FRANKL]N SENiNARS
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCTS
GTE
GTE
RANKS HARDMARE
HANKS HARDttARE
HANKS HARDt~ARE
JENNACO
J.R. FREEMAN COw INC.
J.R. FREEMAN CO, INC.
J.R. FREEMAN COo INC.
LUNCH & STUFF CATERING
NARILYN'S COFFEE SERVICE
MOBIL
PERS EMPLOYEES# RETIREMEN
PER$ EMPLOYEES~ RETIREMEN
PERS EMPLOYEES~ RETIREMEN
PRESS ENTERPRISE
PRESS ENTERPRISE
RAN-TEC RUBBER STAMP MFG
SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
UNIGLOeE BUTTERFIELD TRAV
UNITED ~/AY OF THE INLAND
gALL STREET JOURNAL
~/EST PUBLISHING COMPANY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
MEDICAL REINBURS 707.76
MEDICAL REINBURS 69.00
DEPEND CARE REIMB 1,337.71
OPEN P.O. JOB RECRUITHEN 86.06
INSUR. PREM. SEPT 92 27.90
INSUR. PREN SEPT 92 15.00
2103 CLASSIC BINDER;BURGU 6.95
927; MASTER FILLER 25.95
26512 SIMULATED LEATHER B 39.95
6003; LINED PAGES; CLASSI 11.00
5003; LINED PAGES; CONPAC 2.25
5008; SEE THROUGH POUCH 1.75
SHIPPING AND HANDLING 7.95
TAX 7.62
T398oCOB; RIBBON XEROX 7.08
TT~8-TF; TAPE 3.50
TAX 0.82
C22-62525; BINDER; PRESSB 17.33
TAX 1.36
712~961989/JULY 92 221.37
7166961989/JULY 92 265.35
OPEN ACCOUNT; CITY 19.77
OPEN ACCOUNT; CiTY 66.63
OPEN ACCOUNT; CiTY 10.53
JANITOR[AL SERVICES; CITY 1,213.38
REPAIR IBM TYPEWRITER;PLA 175.00
SERVICE CALL 68.00
TAX 13.56
DINNER FOR COUNCILMEMBERS 90.00
COFFEE SERVICE; CITY HALL 36.70
FUEL CHGS. JUNE 92 758.97
000266 PER REDE 42.94
000246 PERS RET 8,578.30
000246 SURVIVOR 51.63
OPEN ACCOUNT FOR JOB 577.21
SUBSCRIPTION-07/16/92-07/ 87.28
RUBBER STAMP 18.65
OPEN P.O. JOB RECRUITMENT 315.98
679802000001086~/JH ZZ.90
CITY ENVELOPES; LOGO 106.21
CITY ENVELOPES; LOGO 106.21
CITY ENVELOPES; LOGO 106.21
CITY ENVELOPES; LOGO 106.21
CITY ENVELOPES; LOGO 106.21
CITY ENVELOPES; LOGO 105.66
1 BOX OF 500; BUSINESS CA 26.70
TAX 2.07
ADJUSTMENT/#12113 25.00
000325 IN 62.75
1YR. SUBSCRIPTION 267.22
CA CD AN 60B&60C 2BK z~.85
FUND
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
CHECK DATE
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/1]/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/1]/92
08/13/92
08/1]/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/1]/92
08113192
08/13/92
08113192
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/1]/92
08/13/92
CHECK NO.
11470
11470
11471
11471
11471
11471
11472
11473'
11474
11477
11477
11479
11480
11482
11484
11485
11422
628884
628884
637909
637909
11435
11437
11442
11453
11453
11453
11457
11466
11467
11467
11481
628884
62888/,
637909
637909
11430
11431
11432
11433
114~
11437
11438
CITY OF TEIqECULA
CHECKS BY FUND
VENDOR NAME
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHONE
SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHONE
SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHONE
SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHONE
STATE DEPT. OF TRANSPORTA
USI::N
MAINTENANCE $UPERINTENDEN
AGLOW PHOTOGRAPHY
AGLOU PHOTOGRAPHY
iNLAND UNIFORM
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTING STA
SCCCA
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE 0
CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL STAT
CITY OF TEMECULA
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPIqENT D
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOP!lENT D
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
ALLIED BARRICADE COMPANY,
BENEFIT 'AMERICA
DENTZCARE OF CALIFORNIA
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREMEN
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREMEN
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREMEN
RIGHTWAY
UNITED WAY OF THE INLAND
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
LAND GRANT DEVELOPMENT
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT D
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT D
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
BARRACK, ELIZABETH
RURHING, CHERYL
BETTIS, MIKKI
WAGNER, PENNY
KIRSTEN KING-CLIBY
BENEFIT AMERICA
BSN SPORTS
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
BANK CHARGES JUNE 92 600.65
CREDIT FOR NSF CHARGES 190'21-
PHONE REMOVAL ]5.00
PHONE RENOVAL-PM 35.00
7142927681 73.73
7142927682 73.73
SIGNALS/LIGHTING 89.68
000389 PT RETIR 404.02
MEMBERSHIP DUES 40.00
5 EA. 8 X 10 PORTRAITS OF 112.00
TAX 8.68
LARGE POLICE PATCH 135.01
PURCHASE GASB 20.00
REG. FEE SEPT. 17 50.00
ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP 130.00
LIST OF DIRECT/OVERLAPPIN 350.00
FLEX BENEFIT REIMBURSEMEN 2,500.00
0001~.4 CAIT 1,870.68
000~/,~ SOl 595.01
00028~ FICA/MEO 1,960.27
000283 USIT 8,133.31
FUND 001 TOTAL: 33,062.31
EMERGENCY SIGN SUPPLIES;P 34.48
DEPEND CARE REIMB 250.00
INSUR. PREM SEPT 92 27.90
000246 PER REDE 171.76
000246 PERS RET 1,674.77
000246 SURVIVOR 9.05
PORTABLE TOILET; 1 YEAR 57.39
000325 LR4 8.00
2-SETS OF UNIFORMS; CLEAN 12.50
2-SETS OF UNIFORMS; CLEAN 12.50
DAMAGE TO LANDGRANT ]RR S 450.00
000~ CAIT 332.73
000444 SDI 112.89
000283 FIr. A/NED 354.12
000283 USIT 1,580.z~
FUNO 100 TOTAL: 5,088.55
REFUND SWIM LESSON 20.00
REFUND FOR DAY CAMP 13.50
REFUND SWIM LESSON 30.00
REFUND FOR ANGELES TICKET 16.00
REFUND FOR SWIM LESSON 20.00
DEPEND CARE REINB 594.8/,
NAQ57119; 1902./57u MAPLE 59.25
;UND
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
300
300
300
300
300
300
CHECK DATE
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
o8/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/9Z
08/13/9Z
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
CHECK NO,
11438
11438
11438
11438
11438
11438
11438
11438
11438
11438
11438
11438
11438
11439
114~6
11~6
11zF~,8
11452
11453
11453
11455
11460
11463
11464
1146~
11~6~
11466
11~67
11~?
11~?
11~7
11~6~
11~67
11~
11~
11~76
11~8
62~
63~9
63~09
11441
11453
11453
11462
11466
11483
CITY OF TENECULA
CHECKS BY FUND
VENDOR NAME
BSN SPORTS
BSN SPORTS
BSN SPORTS
BSN SPORTS
BSN SPORTS
BSH SPORTS
BSN SPORTS
BSN SPORTS
BSN SPORTS
BSN SPORTS
BSN SPORTS
BSN SPORTS
BSN SPORTS
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
HANKS HARDWARE
HANKS HARDWARE
JENNACO
NORIL
PENS EMPLOYEES' RETIREMEN
PENS EMPLOYEES' RETIREMEN
PRO LOCK& KEY
SIR SPEEDY
TENECULA VALLEY PIPE
TONARK SPORTS, INC,
TONARK SPORTS, INC.
TOMARK SPORTS, 1NC,
UNITED WAY OF THE INLAND
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
UN]TOG RENTAL SERVICE
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
USCN
H & H CRAFT & FLORAL SUPP
HORIZON MATER
CALIFORNIA GARDEN CENTER
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT D
EHPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT D
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
CARL WARREN & CO.
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREHEN
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREHEN
STRACHOTA INSURANCE
UNITED WAY OF THE INLAND
DALEY & HEFT ATTORNEYS AT
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
NASCRTIP; SCREW IN TIP FO 3.00
NA240/10; PLASTIC BALL TR 13.50
NAZTOXXX; BILLIARD BALL S 83.90
NABRSH 9X; 9" TABLE BRUSH 9.00
NATRPLXX; PLASTIC TRIANGL 11.70
NA222XXX; 9' TABLE COVER 35.60
NACHK122; 12 PIECE CHALK 9.00
MSIGLOSX; IGLOO 5-GAL COO 39.50
PAATOXXX; 48 QT. IGLOO CH 70.00
2214XXXX; KOLD KONPRESS 6~.75
NA8106XX; TABLE TENNIS BA 38.40
FREIGHT 43.75
TAX 33.92
EMA 1707/SADDLEIdOQO SLOPE 674.85
OPEN P.O. TCSD MISC. ITEM 99.59
OPEN P.O. TCSD NISC. ITEM 96.12
TEEN CENTER JANITORIAL 400.00
FUEL CHGS. JUNE 92 212.05
0002~6 PENS NET 2,016.96
0002/,6 SURVIVOR 11.16
OPEN ACCOUNT FOR MISC. 35.00
CITY ENVELOPES; LOGO 106.21
OPEN P.O. MISC. ITEMS; TC 11.88
10525; FIELD GROONER; CAR 325,00
FREIGHT 27.18
TAX 25.19
000325 tN 14.00
RENTAL OF UNIFORMS AND CA 12.50
RENTAL OF UNIFORMS AND CA 12,50
RENTAL OF UNIFORMS AND CA 12,50
RENTAL OF UNIFORMS AND CA 12.50
RENTAL OF UNIFORMS AND CA 12.50
RENTAL OF UNIFORMS AND CA 12.50
000389 PT RETIR 8~3.18
OPEN P,O, RECREATION SUPP 7,15
JULY SERVICE 92 71.33
OPEN ACCOUNT FOR MATERIAL 81.20
0004~ CAIT 455.0~
000/,4,/, SOl 265.86
000283 FICA/MED 7'59.24
000283 USIT 2,463.17
FUND 190 TOTAL: 10,265,97
CLA[HS ADJ. 352.13
000246 PERS RET 92.25
000246 SURVIVOR 0.47
INLAND MARINE ENDORSEMENT 373.00
000325 UlJ 1.25
ATTORNEY SERV. CLAIM t002 Z,699.02
CITY OF TEMECIJLA
CHECKS BY FUMD
FUND
300
300
300
300
310
310
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
320
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
CHECK DATE
08/13/92
08113192
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13/92
08/13192
08/13/92
08/13/92
CHECK: leO.
628884
628884
6379O9
11~61
11461
11436
11zd~5
112~5
112~5
112~5
11445
112~7
11453
11453
11471
11471
11486
628884
6288&G
637909
637909
11453
11453
11466
628882+
628884
637909
637909
VENDOR NAME
EMPLOYMENT OEVELOPtIENT D
EMPLOYMENT OEVELOPMENT D
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
SPEEDY OIL CHANGE
SPEEDY OIL CHANGE
AT & T
GTE
GTE
GTE
GTE
GTE
INLAND CALL AMERICA
PERS EMPLOYEES/ RETIREMEN
PERS EMPLOYEES/ RETIREMEN
SOUTHERN CALZF TELEPHONE
SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHONE
STATE NET
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT D
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT D
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
000~ CAIT 17.73
000~ SOl 8.55
000283 FICA/MED 19.85
000283 USIT 78.71
FUND 300 TOTAL: 3,6~2.96
REPAIR & NAINTENANCE;VEHI
REPAIR & NAINTENANCE;VENI
FUND 310 TOTAL:
26.27
22.49
48.76
71/,6941989/6/30-7/24 505.05
7146941989/JULY 92 1,613.89
7146953539/7/25-8/24 22.40
7146gg0128/7/22-8/21 331.13
7146gg230g/07/25-08/24 20.~8
7146ggB&32/8/4-9/3 16.45
06/18-07/17/92 1,920.00
000246 PERS RET 18].21
000246 SURVIVOR 0.93
A/C/ADAPTER FOR RECHARGI 38.00
TAX 2.9~
INSTALLMENT 48~..50
O00&z,i, CAIT 43.57
0004/~ SDI 16.08
000283 FIr. A/NED 37.30
00028'1 USIT 208.3z,
FUND 320 TOTAL: 5,44~.28
PER$ EMPLOYEES' RETIREMEN 000246 PERS RET 206,80
PERS EMPLOYEES/ RETIREMEN 000246 SURVIVOR 1.86
UNITED WAY OF THE INLAND 000325 LI~ 5.00
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT D O00ZmZmZm CAIT 12.80
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT D O00~mZ~ SD l 17.64
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL 000283 FICA/MED 40.92
SECURITY PACIFIC NATIONAL 000283 USIT 71.77
FUND 330 TOTAL: 356.79
TOTAL:
57,909.62
./---
UND
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
,_~001
~01
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
001
CHECK DATE
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
CHECK NO.
11490
114~0
11490
11490
1149)
11495
11495
11497
11498
11498
11498
11499
11500
11501
11501
11501
11501
11501
115~
115~
115~
115~
115~
11506
115~
11506
115~
11506
115~
11506
11506
115~
11507
11507
11507
11508
11510
11510
11510
11510
11510
11510
11510
11511
11511
11511
11511
11511
CITY OF TENECULA
CHECKSBY FUND
VENDOR NIlE
BURKE MILL]AleS & $ORENSEN
BURKE MILLIllS & SORERSEN
BURKE MILL/IlS & SORENSEN
BURKE MILL/ANS & SORENSEN
BURKE MILLIllS & SORERSEN
EDEN SYSTEIeS, INC.
FORHA
FORHA
FORHA
L & M FERTILIZER
MICRO AGE COMPUTER CENTER
MICRO AGE COffiatJTER CENTER
MICRO AGE COleUTER CENTER
PLANNING CENTER, THE
PLANNING CENTER, THE
ROBERT BEIN, kN FROST & A
SYSTEM SOURCE
SYSTEM SOURCE
SYSTEM SOURCE
SYSTEM SOURCE
SYSTEM SOURCE
MILLDAN ASSOCIATES
MILLDAN ASSOCIATES
MILLDAN ASSOC/ATE$
MILLDAN ASSOC]ATES
MILLDAN ASSOCIATES
LANIER VOICE PRODUCTS
LANIER VOICE PRODUCTS
LAMIER VOICE PRODUCTS
LANIER VOICE PRODUCTS
LANIER VOICE PRODUCTS
LANIER VOICE PRODUCTS
LANIER VOICE PRODUCTS
LANIER VOICE PRODUCTS
LANIER VOICE PRODUCTS
RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF#
RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'
RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'
SIERRA COMPUTER SYSTEMS
CONTROlIX OF HEMET
CONTROlIX OF HEMET
CONTRONIX OF HEMET
CONTRONIX OF HEMET
CONTROlIX OF HEMET
CONTRON]X OF HEMET
CONTROlIX OF HEMET
MOORE BUSINESS FORMS
NiX)RE BUSINESS FORMS
MOORE BUSINESS FORMS
MOORE BUSINESS FORMS
MOORE BUSINESS FORMS
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
RETAINER SERVICES JUNE 9 3,150.00
PRO. SERVICES THROUGH 6/3 24,7'89.32
PRO, SERVICES THROUGH 6/3 1,658,70
PRO, SERV. THROUGH 6/30 80,00
PRO. SERVICES JUNE 92
INSTALLATION,SUPPORT, TRA 7,314.36
PRO. SERVICES APRIL 92 2,711.00
PRO. SERVICES HAY 92 4,815.00
PRO. SERVICES JUNE 92 1,225.56
SHOVEL, BLADES 123.98
EPSON DFX-8000 1066/192 C 4,398.00
EPSON DUAL-BIN PRINTER ST 358.00
TAX 368.60
PRO. SERV. JUNE 92 3,537.36
PRO. SERV. JUNE 92 37,524.98
PRO. SERV. NOV. 91 1,500.00
HAGAZINE RACKS/DIVIDERS 519.36
LFF-3OSA LATERAL FILE;LET 486.00
FREIGHT 40.00
TAX 40.76
CREDIT MEMO 8.62-
TO OFF SET A/R 9'7"51'24-
SERVICE FOR DEC. 91 HARK 9,120.00
SERVICES FOR JAN. 92 HARK 14,/~0.C0
PRO, SERV, JUNE 92 14,611,86
ENG, PLN CK SERV. JUNE 92 690,00
ADVOCATE IV 2,595.00
CARRY CASE 225,00
ADVOCATE TRANSCR]BER 865,00
ONNI & UNI NICS;8 UNI-2 0 750.00
NIC STANDS 150.00
ALLOHANCE BY SALES REP. 585'00-
SERVICE AGREEMENT 475.65
DIFFERENCE IN TAX & SALES 45.34-
TAX 355.34
TEM BIKE PATROL JUNE 92 3,0~3.09
TEN. BIKE PATROL JULY 92 3,500.97
LAM ENFORCERENT FOR JUNE 276,209.03
PERMIT SOFTMARE PACKAGE;M 2,347.55
10 EA. NOBILE RADIOS 9,387.60
INSTALLATION OF RADIOS 1,000.00
4 BASE STATIONS 6,001.28
INSTALLATION OF BASE STAT 1,000.00
6 PORTABLE RADIOS 6,415.20
FCC L]C/COORD/PREP FEE 85.00
TAX 1,689.81
PURCHASE ORDERS;START# 1Z
TAX 34.72
PAYROLL ACCOUNT CHECKS #1 50/,.00
TAX 39.06
GENERAL ACCOUNT CHECKS #1
FUND
001
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
110
110
140
160
190
CHECK DATE
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
CHECK NO.
11511
11491
11491
11691
11691
11691
11491
11691
11491
11491
11691
11491
11491
11497
11497
11497
11497
11503
11503
11503
11503
11503
11503
11503
11503
11514
116~6
11513
11502
11490
11690
CITY OF TENECULA
CHECKS BY FUND
VENDOR NANE
N(X)RE BUSINESS FORNS
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERV]
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERV[
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVZ
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
L & N FERTILIZER
L & N FERTILIZER
L & N FERTILIZER
L & M FERTILIZER
WESTERN HIGNgAY PRODUCTS
WESTERN HIGNMAY PRODUCTS
WESTERN HIGHgAY PRODUCTS
lIESTERN H]GNgAY PRODUCTS
WESTERN HIGNMAY PRODUCTS
WESTERN HIGHWAY PRODUCTS
WESTERN N]GNklAY PRODUCTS
WESTERN HIGHgAY PRODUCTS
STEINY & COMPANY
J.F. DAVIDSON
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES
URBAN DESIGN STtJOZO
BURKE W!LLIANS & SORENSEN
BURKE WlLLIANS & SOMENSEN
DESCRIPTION ANOUNT
TAX 35,19
FUND 001 TOTAL: 447,535.13
4 X 8 BLACKON WHITE; 1,864.00
TAX 144.46
4 X 8 BLACK ON WHITE; 900.00
TAX 69.75
CITY LOGO'S FOR CIP SIGNS 78.00
TAX 6.05
100 COUNT BOX; LOCKING BU 130.11
3/4" BANDING NATERIAL 100 246.48
50 COUNT BOX; FLAIRED BRA 411,72
FREIGHT 25,00
TAX 61,09
IOZ DISCOUNT 78.83-
NISC. ITENS; PUBLIC WORKS 200.74
NISC. ITEHS; PUBLIC tlCIRKS 608.32
TAX 62.70
HlSC. NAINTENANCE SUPPLIE 226.90
PTgOSSA; STRAIGHT ARROt4 284.00
PTgOSCAL; CURVED ARRON 328.00
PT9OLAH; AHEAD 652.00
PT9OLCL; CLEAR 426.00
PT9OLKP; KEEP 384.00
PT9OLST; STOP 1,512.00
PTgOR12; STOP BARS 972.00
TAX 353.25
L~ RETENTION 1,591.49
FUND 100 TOTAL: 11,459.23
PRO. SERV. JUNE-JULY
FIELD DENSITY TESTING/
FUND 110 TOTAL:
3,875.00
1,206.50
5,081.50
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES JUN
FUND 140 TOTAL:
36,628.51
36,428.51
PRO. SERVICES THROUGH 06/
FUND 160 TOTAL:
m,wewwmwww,w,,
3(~. 17
3&&. 17
PRO. SERVOCES THROUGH 6/3 727.70
UND
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
.__190
90
210
210
210
250
250
250
250
250
250
250
320
320
CHECK DATE
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
CHECK NO.
11691
11691
11691
11691
1169/,
1169/,
1169~
1169~
11509
11500
11500
11505
11691
11691
11691
11691
11491
11691
11512
11698
11698
CITY OF TENECULA
CHECKS BY FUND
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERV[
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
FIRST INPRESSIGNS
FIRST IHPRESSIONS
FIRST llqPRESSIONS
FIRST INPRESSIGNS
FIRST INPRESSIGNS
FIRST ]FIPRESSIGNS
FIRST ]I4PRESSIONS
FIRST ]HPRESSIONS
FIRST ]I4PRESSIONS
FIRST ll4PRESSIONS
FIRST ll4PRESSIONS
FIRST ]NPRESSIONS
FIRST IHPRESSIONS
FIRST ]NPRESSIONS
FIRST IHPRESSIONS
FIRST ]NPRESSIGNS
FIRST INPRESSIONS
FIRST INPRESSIONS
FIRST INPRESSIONS
FIRST INPRESSIONS
FIRST INPRESSIONS
FIRST INPRESSIONS
WIND & SHADE
ROBERT BEIN, WN FROST & A
ROBERT BEIN, kN FROST & A
W. DEAN DAVIDSON
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERV]
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERV]
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERV]
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SERVI
WORKS STRIPING & lIARKING
MICRO AGE CONPUTER CENTER
MICRO AGE COMPUTER CENTER
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
SIGN POLES & POSTS FOR PA 670.95
TAX 52.00
PARK SIGNS; 18 X 29 725.56
TAX 56.23
HOODED SWEATSHIRTS 165.00
XXL HOOOED SWEATSHIRTS 88.00
ARTMORK 120.00
TAX 28.91
SATIN AWAROS JACKET 383.50
ARTMORK 64.00
BEEFY T-SHIRTS 61,20
ARTgORK 55.00
TAX 9.01
BEEFY T'S T-SHIRTS 108.80
ARTMORK FOR T-SHIRTS 60.00
SATIN AMARDS JACKETS 356.00
XXL SATIN AWAROS JACKETS 97.50
ARTgORK 57.00
TAX 52.69
HOODED SgEATSHIRTS 15-L; 825.00
XXL HOOOED S14EATSHIRTS 266.25
T-SHIRTS; 15-L; 35-XL 360.00
XXL T-SHIRTS 121.5U
ARTgORK 80.00
TAX 126.56
PROVIDE LABOR & HATRLS TO 2,986.00
FUND 190 TOTAL: 8,716.82
PRO. SERV. NOV. 91
PRO. SERVICES JUNE 92
TEN SENIOR CENTER
FUND 210 TOTAL:
500.00
8~4.62
10,150.00
11,496.62
BIKEMAY SIGN PROJECT. CAR
TAX
BIKEWAY SIGN PROJECT. CAR
TAX
BIKEWAY SIGN PROJECT. CAR
TAX
BIKE WAY CONTRACT
FUND 250 TOTAL:
1,616.60
125.13
12,672.15
982.09
595.70
66.17
12,619.69
28,655.53
NOVELL 3.11 100 USER PREN
TAX
5,299.00
610.68
FUND
320
320
320
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
330
CHECK DATE
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
08/25/92
CHECK NO,
11698
11498
11698
11498
11498
11692
11692
11692
11692
11692
11692
11492
11692
11492
11692
CITY OF TENECULA
CHECKS BY FtJffi)
VENDOR NAME
NICRO AGE CORPUTER CENTER
NICRO AGE CONPUTER CENTER
NICRO AGE CONPt~'ER CENTER
NICRO AGE COMPUTER CENTER
NICRO AGE CONPUTER CENTER
COPY LINE CORPORATION
COPY LINE CORPORATION
COPY LINE CORPORATION
COPY LINE CORPORATION
COPY LINE CORPORATION
COPY LINE CORPORATION
COPY LINE CORPORATION
COPY LINE CORPORATION
COPY LINE CORPORATION
COPY LINE CORPORATION
DESCRIPT/ON AHOUNT
SLAN1225; LANSIGHT SUPPOR 268.00
TAX 19.22
LASER SCANNER NOTOR 310.00
LABOR CHARGE 55.00
TAX 24.03
FUND 320 TOTAL: 6,365.93
SERVICE CONTRACT FOR RICO 1,758.00
TONER; 5000 680.00
TAX 52.70
REPAIR TO FINANCE COPIER 216.20
PH KIT 186.16
CLEANING BLADE 65.35
DFKIT 58942183/58962181 172.29
DFBELT 5894 2171X2 171.30
LABOR 315.00
TAX 62.72
FUND 330 TOTAL: 3,677.70
TOTAL:
ITEM
NO.
3
APPROVAL R~
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
August 25, 1992
City Treasurer's Report as of June 30, 1992
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's
report as of June 30, 1992.
DISCUSSION: Reports to the City Council regarding the City's investment
portfolio and receipts, disbursements and fund balance are required by Government
Code Sections 53646 and 41004 respectively. The City's investment portfolio is in
compliance with the Code Sections as of June 30, 1992.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
ATTACHMENT:
City Treasurer's Report as of June 30, 1992
City of Temecula
City Treasumr's Report
As of June 30, 1992
Cash Activity for the Month of June:
Cash and Investments as of June 1, 1992
Cash Receipts
Cash Disbursements
Cash and Investments as of June 30, 1992
15,801,518
4,471,585
(2,387,432)
17,885,671
Cash and Investments Portfolio:
Type of Investment
Demand Deposits
Treasury Service Shares
Petty Cash
Deferred Comp. Fund
Local Agency Investment Fund
Institution
Security Pacific
Pacific Horizons
N/A
ICMA
State Treasurer
Yield
N/A
3.530%
N/A
N/A
5.323%
Maturity
Date
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Balance
asof
June 30, 1992
(67,630) (1)
0
800
218,428
17,734,073
17,885,671
(1)-This amount includes outstanding checks.
Per Government Code Requirements, this Treasurer's Report is in compliance with
the City of Temecula's Investment Policy and there are adequate funds available
to meet budgeted and actual expenditures for the next thirty days of the City
of Temecula.
Prepared by Carole Serfling, Senior Accountant
z
Z
Z
ITEM
NO.
4
APPROVAL~
T
CI Y ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFIC
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO: City Council
FROM: City Manager
DATE:
August 25, 1992
SUBJECT:
Appointment to Parks and Recreation Commission
PREPARED BY: City Clerk June S. Greek
RECOMMENDATION: Delay appointment until the meeting of October 13, 1992.
BACKGROUND: The present vacancy on the Parks and Recreation Commission is
as a result of the resignation of Commissioner Michael Kirby. Commissioner Kirby's
term expires on October 2, 1992. An appointment at this time would be to serve only
until that expiration date.
Mayor Birdsall and Councilmember Parks, who make up the sub-committee to review
Parks and Recreation Commission applications, have reviewed the applications
submitted and recommend that a decision be delayed until the first meeting in
October. At that time the Council will be making three-year appointments to other
City Commissions and can make this appointment for three years as well.
JSG
ITEM
NO.
5
CITY F~NAGE~ ~
CITY OF TEMECULA
A GENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT.'
City Council
City Manager
August 25, 1992
PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE SOURCE REDUCTION AND
RECYCLING ELEMENT, HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE
ELEMENT, AND PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PREPARED BY:
Joe Hreha, Senior Management Analyst, City Manager's
Office
RECOMMENDATION:
Set a Public Hearing on the preliminary Source Reduction
and Recycling Element (SRRE), the Household Hazardous
Waste Element (HHWE), and proposed Negative Declaration
for October 13, 1992.
Direct the City Clerk to publish the Notice of Public Hearing
DISCUSSION: In compliance with the California Integrated Waste
Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), the City must hold a Public Hearing to review the
preliminary SRRE, the preliminary HHWE, and proposed Negative Declaration. The
purpose of the Public Hearing is to provide for public comment and input to these
documents. These documents have been prepared by City Staff and the City's
consultant, Kleinfelder, and copies have been sent to all required public agencies for
their comments. Upon receiving comments from the required public agencies and the
input from the Public Hearing, the final SRRE, HHWE, and Negative Declaration will
be prepared, another public hearing set, and the City Council will consider the
adoption of the final documents. Copies of the preliminary SRRE, HHWE, and
proposed Negative Declaration will be available for public review in the City Clerk's
Office from August 26, 1992 through October 12, 1992.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of the Public Hearing is limited to the cost
of advertising, which is less than $100.00.
A TTA CHMENT:
Notice of Public Hearing
Notice of Public Hearing
THE CITY OF TEMECULA
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the CITY COUNCIL to consider the matter(s)
described below.
Case No: PH-130
Applicant: City of Temecula
Location: City Wide
Proposal: Preliminary Source Reduction
Hazardous Waste Elements
Environmental
Action:
Negative Declaration
and Recycling and Household
Any person may submit written comments to the City Council before the hearing(s) or may appear and
be heard in support of or opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing. If you
challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice, or in written correspondences delivered to the
City Clerk at, or prior to, the public hearing(s). The proposed project application(s) may be viewed at
the public information counter, Temecula City Clerk's Department, 43 174 Business Park Drive, Monday
through Friday from 9:00 AM until 4:00 PM. Questions concerning the project(s) may be addressed to
Hoe Hreha, City of Ternecula City Manager's Office, (714) 694-1989.
PLACE OF HEARING
DATE OF HEARING
TIME OF HEARING
Temecula Community
28816 Pujol Street
Temecula. California
October 13. 1992
7:00 PM
Center
ITEM NO. 6
APPROVALE~
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
August 14, 1992
Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bond and Material
and Labor Bonds in Tract No. 19872-1
PREPARED BY: )4~bert Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council authorize the release of Faithful Performance Maintenance Bond for
street, water, and sewer systems and Material and Labor Bonds in Tract No. 19872-1, and
direct the City Clerk to so advise the clerk of the Board of Supervisors and the Developer.
BACKGROUND:
On November 5, 1985, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors entered into subdivision
agreements with:
Spanish Oaks Development Company
c/o Richmond American Homes of California
17752 Skypark Circle, Suite 285
Irvine, CA 92714
for the improvement of streets, the installation of water and sewer systems, and setting of
Subdivision Monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were bonds issued
by Developers Insurance Company.
On May 14, 1991, the City Council accepted these improvements and retained the following
secured amounts for a one-year maintenance period:
Street $47,150.00
Water $10,200.00
Sewer $11,700.00
Page I of 2 pwOS\agdrpt%92%0825\19872-1 081792 9:30
On June 25, 1991, the City Council released the Monument Bonds. No maintenance period
is required for this portion of the work.
The one year maintenance period having passed with minor maintenance or repairs required
and completed, staff recommends that the subject warranty-maintenance bond be released
(Bond No. P91-1914, issued by Southern American Insurance Company).
The Developer is also required to post Material and Labor Bonds to ensure payment to
suppliers and workers. These bonds are maintained in effect for a period of time determined
by statute after the Governmental Agency has accepted the public improvements. Since the
Riverside County Transportation Department and City Staff indicate that no liens have been
filed against this project, and a period in excess of the statutory lien period having run, Staff
recommends that these Materials and Labor Bonds also be released (Bond No. 916484S,
issued by Developers Insurance Company).
The affected streets are Dulce Court, Esplendor Court, Esmerado Court, Clavado Court, and
portions of Loma Linda Road and Pala Road.
The Pala Road Bridge issue has not been resolved and the Bond will be held pending final
resolution of the mode of financing and construction.
Attachment:
Vicinity Map
Page 2 of 2 pwO5%agdrpt%92%0825%19872-1 081792 9:30
WC/N/TY ht'/l,D
NO SCAZ~'
P~OJ~CT-- TF, AOT
ITEM NO. 7
APPROVAL~:~
CITY ATTORNEY ~.~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
August 14, 1992
Release Faithful Performance Maintenance Bond and Material
and Labor Bonds in Tract No. 19872-2
PREPARED BY:
~lbert Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council authorize the release of Faithful Performance Maintenance Bond for
street, water, and sewer systems and Material and Labor Bonds in Tract No. 19872-2, and
direct the City Clerk to so advise the clerk of the Board of Supervisors and the Developer.
BACKGROUND:
On November 5, 1985, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors entered into subdivision
agreements with:
Spanish Oaks Development Company
c/o Richmond American Homes of California
17752 Skypark Circle, Suite 285
Irvine, CA 92714
for the improvement of streets, the installation of water and sewer systems, and setting of
Subdivision Monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were bonds issued
by Developers Insurance Company.
On May 14, 1991, the City Council accepted these improvements and retained the following
secured amounts for a one-year maintenance period:
Street $ 51,700.00
Water $9,200.00
Sewer $13,500.00
Page 1 of 1 pwO5\agdrpt\92%0825%19872-2 081792 9:30
On June 25, 1991, the City Council authorized the release of Monument Bonds. No
maintenance period is required for this portion of the work.
The one year maintenance period having passed with minor maintenance or repairs required
and completed, staff recommends that the subject warranty-maintenance bond be released
(Bond No. P91-1915, issued by Southern American Insurance Company).
The Developer is also required to post Material and Labor Bonds to ensure payment to
suppliers and workers. These bonds are maintained in effect for a period of time determined
by statute after the Governmental Agency has accepted the public improvements. Since the
Riverside County Transportation Department and City Staff indicate that no liens have been
filed against this project, and a period in excess of the statutory lien period having run, Staff
recommends that this Material and Labor Bond also be released (Bond No. 916481 S, issued
by Developers Insurance Company).
The affected streets are Via Consuelo, Maskua Court, Comotilo Court, Puas Drive, and
portions of Pala Road, Loma Linda Road, East Loma Linda Road, and Via Gilberto.
Attachment:
Vicinity Map
Page 2 of 2 pwO5%sgdrpt%92~,0825\19872-2 081792 9:30
W C l AI I T Y ,1~,I',41~
NO $CAL~'
ITEM
NO.
8
APPROVAL~~~4'
CITY ATTORNEY .
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
August 14, 1992
Release Faithful Performance Warranty Bond and Material
and Labor Bonds in Tract No. 20848
PREPARED BY:
~Albert Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council authorize the release of Faithful Performance Warranty Bond for street,
water, and sewer systems and Material and Labor Bonds in Tract No. 20848, and direct the
City Clerk to so advise the clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
BACKGROUND:
On August 18, 1987, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors entered into subdivision
agreements with:
Radnor/Sunland/Green Meadows Partnership,
Sunland Housing Group
41877 Enterprise Circle North, Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92390
for the improvement of streets, the installation of water and sewer systems, and survey
monumentation. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds issued by
Federal Insurance Company.
On March 7, 1990, in accordance with Riverside County Ordinance 460, Section 15.1 (I), the
County Road Commissioner accepted these improvements and retained the following secured
amounts for a one (1) year maintenance period.
Street $116,050
Water $23,850
Sewer $30,600
-1 - pwO5%agdrpt%92\0825\20848 081792 9:1S
On December 11, 1990, the City Council authorized the release of the Monument Bonds. No
maintenance period is required for this portion of the work.
The one year maintenance period having passed with minor maintenance or repairs required
and completed, staff recommends that the subject warranty bonds be released.
The Developer is also required to post Material and Labor Bonds to ensure payment to
suppliers and workers. These bonds are maintained in effect for a period of time determined
by statute after the Governmental Agency has accepted the public improvements. Since the
Riverside County Transportation Department and City Staff indicate that no liens have been
filed against this project, and a period in excess of the statutory lien period having run, Staff
recommends that this Material and Labor Bond also be released.
The affected streets are Deer Meadow Road, Tuolomne Court, Armore Court, Vidette Circle,
Benwood Court, Donomore Court, Holden Circle, and a portion of North General Kearny Road
and Via Lobo.
Attachment:
1. Vicinity Map
-2- pwO5\agdrpt%92%0825%20848 081792 9:15
/',~A C__.-'T N-o 208 'f--~
JPROJECT
SITE
VICINITY_-.MAP
NO SCALE
ITEM NO. 9
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY~~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
August 25, 1992
Authorize Reduction in Bond Amounts for Tract Map Nos. 23220
and 24232
PREPARED BY:
A~llbert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council AUTHORIZE the reduction in street, sewer and water Faithful
Performance Bond amounts; APPROVE the Subdivision Improvement Agreements and 18-
month extension of time; ACCEPT the Faithful Performance Bond Riders in the reduced
amounts, all in Tract Nos. 23220 and 24232; and, DIRECT the City Clerk to so notify the
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
BACKGROUND:
On November 21, 1989, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors entered into subdivision
agreements with:
U.S. Home Corporation
11545 W. Bernardo Court, Suite 304
San Diego, CA 92127
for the improvement of streets, the installation of sewer and water systems, and Subdivision
Monumentation in Tract No. 23220. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety,
bonds issued by American Motorists Insurance Company, as follows:
1. Bond No. 3SM 721 415 00 in the amount of $399,500.00 to cover street
improvements.
2. Bond No. 3SM 721 413 00 in the amount of $56,500.00 to cover water
improvements.
-1- pwO5~agdrpt~g2~,O825~tr23220 0817a
3. Bond No. 3SM 721 414 00 in the amount of $49,500.00 to cover sewer
improvements.
Bond No. 3SM 721 415 00, 3SM 721 413 00, and 3SM 721 414 00 in the amounts
of $119,750.00, $28,250.00, $24,750.00 respectively to cover materials and labor.
Bond No. 3SM 721 429 00 in the amount of $9,000.00 to cover subdivision
monumentation.
On September 10, 1981, The City Council epproved Final Tract Map No. 24232, also
submitted by U.S. Home Corporation. The Staff recommended that no additional subdivision
improvement bonding be required as improvements within Tract No. 24232 were currently
under construction, were bonded through neighboring Tract No. 23220, and that existing
bonds were sufficient for work remaining in both tracts.
The current real estate market remains soft and the developer requests a partial, but
substantial, reduction in the Faithful Performance Bond amounts consistent with the work
already performed.
The Staff estimates that approximately $123,000 in street and related improvements remain,
including 10% for warranty purposes. The Eastern Municipal Water District .estimates that
sewer system is 90% completed, so that the work remaining plus the 10% warranty totals
$9,900. The Rancho California Water District estimates that the water system is 90%
completed, so that the work remaining plus the 10% warranty totals $11,320.
Therefore, it is appropriate to reduce the Faithful Performance Bond amounts as follows:
Streets: $276,500
Water System: $44,680
Sewer System: $39,600
The Faithful Performance Bond amounts to be retained in effect are as follows:
Streets: $123,000
Water System: $11,320
Sewer System: $9,900
The Faithful Performance Bond Riders as submitted reflect both the reduced amounts and a
change in obligee from County of Riverside to City of Temecula.
The Material and Labor Bonds will be retained until final acceptance of improvements and the
appropriate lien period has been completed. The Subdivision Monument Bond will remain in
place until Staff has approved the work and recommends that the City Council authorize
release of this bond.
Staff recommends an eighteen (18) month extension of time for completion of improvements.
This period would run to December 1, 1992
Attachments:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Subdivision Improvement Agreements
3. Surety Bond Riders (Endorsements)
-2- pwO5%agdrpt\92%O825%tr23220 0817e
.clio
l...
~cT5 IVo. 2~,z20 f z.,~Z~2
V/C/NIT Y MAP
No7~ ~o 5ca/e
ITEM NO. 10
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY~~~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
/~~epartment of Public Works
August 25, 1992
Vesting Final Tract Map No. 25004-1
PREPARED BY:
Kris Winchak
R ECOMMEN DAT I ON:
That the City Council APPROVE Vesting Final Tract Map
No. 25004-1 subject to the Conditions of Approval.
DISCUSSION:
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004 and Change of Zone No. 5611 were approved
by the City of Temecula Planning Commission on October 15, 1990, and the City of
Temecula City Council on November 13, 1990.
One of the Conditions of Approval for the tentative map required the applicant to
obtain approval from the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission,
(A.L.U.C.) prior to recording the map. The A.L.U.C. denied the project, stating
that the lot sizes were too small (less than two and one half acres each). The City
Council overruled the A. L. U. C. Is denial of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004
and Change of Zone No. 5611 on March 10, 1992.
Change of Zone No. 5611 was a proposal to change the zoning of the subject 59 acres
from R-R 2-1/2 ( Rural Residential), which requires a two and one half acre minimum
lot size, to R-1 (Single-Family Residential), which permits a 7,200 square foot
minimum lot size. The proposed density of 2.3 DU/AC is consistent with the 2-4
DUIAC SWAP designation.
Vesting Final Tract Map No. 25004-1 contains 56 residential lots, one open space lot
and one remander parcel within 59 gross acres. The proposed lot sizes range from
7,200 square feet to 17,825 square feet, with an average lot size of approximately
8,800 square feet. This proposal is consistent with Change of Zone No. 5611. The
tract is located at the northeast corner of Seraphina Road and Rita Way. The site
is currently vacant.
The following fees have been paid (or deferred) for Vesting Final Tract Map No.
25004-1:
* Area Drainage Fees
* Fire Mitigation Fees
* Traffic Signal Mitigation
$17,953.65
$ 22,400.00
$ 8,400.00
The following bonds have been posted for Vesting Final Tract Map No. 25004-1:
Faithful Other Labor and
Performance Bonds Materials
Street and Drainage $ 465,500 233,000
Water 155,500 78,000
Sewer 141,500 71,000
Survey Monuments $ 20,900
SUMMARY:
Staff recommends that the City Council APPROVE Vesting Final Tract Map No. 25004-
1 subject to the Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Development Checklist
Location Map
Copy of Map
Planning Department Staff Reports dated 11-13-90,
10-15-90 S 3-10-92
Conditions of Approval
Fees and Securities Report
ATTACHMENT 1
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CITY OF TEMECULA
DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST
CASE NO.: Tract Map 2500q-1
The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this
project.
Fee
Habitat Conservation Plan
(K-Rat)
Parks and Recreation
( Quimby )
Public Facility
Condition of Approval
Condition No. 23
Paid prior to Building Permits
Per Condition No.
Condition No. 57
Traffic Signal Mitigation
Condition No.
Fire Mitigation
Riverside County Fire Depot
Letter dated September ~, 1990
Flood Control
(ADP)
Condition No. 11
Staff Findings:
Staff finds that the project will be consistent with the City~s General Plan once
adopted.
The project is not a part of a specific plan.
ATTACHMENT 2
LOCATION MAP
V/ClNITY My9 t=
ATTACHMENT 3
COPY OF MAP
IN THE CRY OF T[M[CULA, COUNTY OF RIVERS|DE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
TRACT No. g5004-1
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF ALL OF PARCEL MAP No. 13499, AS SHOIN
BY MAP FILED IN BOOK 78. PACES 83 AND 84, ALL OF PARCEL MAP
NO. 6127. AS SHOWN BY MAP FILED IN BOOK 15. PAGE 39, AND ALL OF
PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP No. 5611. AS SIlOIN BY MAP F]LED IN BOOK
12, PACE 66, ALL OF PARCEL MAPS, ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECOROER OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
C M ENGINEERING ASSOCIATESJNC, MAY, 1991
SHEET 2 OF 7 SHEETS
($E'C. 19, T. 7S.,
2~ S, 8. U,) ,o,mo?
ATTACHMENT 4
PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORTS
DATED 11-13-90.10-15-90 ~ 3-10-92
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
November 13, 1990
Change of Zone No. 5611
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
Mark Rhoades
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
Adopt Negative Declaration
Adopt Ordinance No. 90- Approving Change of
Zone No. 5611
Adopt Resolution No. 90- Approving Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25004
Brent Dix
C-M Engineering
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25004 to subdivide
approximately 59.0 acres into 135 single family lots, and
Change of Zone from R-R to R-1.
Northeast corner of Seraphina Road and Rita Way.
R-R (Rural Residential)
North:
South:
East:
West:
SP (Specific Plan)
R-R (Rural Residential)
R-R-2 1/2, A-A-10
R-R, SP (Rural Residential,
STAFFRPT~VTM25004 I --
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
R-1 (One-Family Dwellings)
Vacant
Specific Plan)
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
BACKGROUND:
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Single Family
West: Vacant
Number of Acres: 42.4
Minimum Proposed Lot Size: 7,200 sq.ft.
Minimum Permitted Lot Size: 7,200 sq.ft.
Proposed Density: 2.3 units/acre gross
SWAP Density: 2-4 units/acre
Zone Change
Change of Zone No. 5611 is a proposal to change
the zoning of the subject 59 acres from R-R (Rural
Residential), which requires a one-acre minimum lot
size, to R-1 (One-Family Residential), which permits
a 7,200 square foot minimum lot size. The proposed
density of 2.3 DU/AC is consistent with the 2°4
DU/AC SWAP designation.
Tentative Tract
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004 proposes to
subdivide the subject 59 acres into 135 single family
residential lots and four (4) remainder parcels. The
proposed lot sizes range from 7,200 square feet to
17,825 square feet, with an average lot size of
approximately 8,800 square feet. This proposal is
consistent with Change of Zone No. 5611.
Change of Zone No. 5611 and Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 25004 were first taken to Planning
Commission on September 17, 1990. The item was
continued because of the Commission concerns with
slopes, design guidelines, and park space.
STAFFRP'I'%VTM25004 2
On October 15, 1990, the Planning Commission
considered the applicant's proposal and approved
Change Zone No. 5611 and Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 25004 by a vote of 3-1.
The Commission's concerns relative to design
guidelines were mitigated by the applicant updating
the submitted guidelines. Slope concerns were
addressed by a slope cross section analysis
submitted by the applicant. The park space issue
was mitigated by the applicant's offer of dedication
of proposed lots 137, 138, 139, and 140. This
totals approximately 18 acres. The applicant will still
be required to pay Quimby Act fees because of the
proposed park space's limited usefulness (MWD,
SCE easement area).
The final issue raised by the commission concerned
airport impact. The project has been conditioned so
that if it is determined that the project within an
airport impact area, potential property owners will be
notified.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the
City Council:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Change
of Zone No. 5611 and Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 25004;
ADOPT Ordinance No. 90- approving
Change of Zone No. 5611, based on the
analysis and findings contained in the Staff
Report; and
ADOPT Resolution No. 90- approving
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004,
based on the analysis and findings contained
in the Staff Report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
MR:ks
STAFFRP'I~VTM25004 3 -~
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Exhibit
Ordinance
Resolution
Conditions of Approval
Planning Commission Staff Reports
(September 17 and October 15, 1990)
Planning Commission Minutes
(September 17 and October 15, 1990)
.-- STAFFRP'I~VTM25004 4
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 17, 1990
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
Case No.: Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25004
Change Zone No. 5611
Recommendation: Approval
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
Pavilion - JLD Ventures #1
C-M Engineering
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25004 to subdivide
approximately 59.0 acres into 135 single family lots, and
Change of Zone from R-R to R-1.
Northeast corner of Seraphina Road and Rita Way.
R-R (Rural Residential)
North: SP (Specific Plan)
South: R-R (Rural Residential)
East: R-R-2 1/2, A-A-10
West: R-R, SP (Rural Residential,
Specific Plan)
R-1 (Residential Agricultural)
Vacant
North: Vacant
South: Vacant
East: Single Family
West: Vacant
STAFFRPT~VTM25004 5 --
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Number of Acres: 42.4
No. of Buildings: 0
Minimum Proposed Lot Size: 7,200 sq.ft.
Minimum Permitted Lot Size: 7,200 sq.ft.
Proposed Density: 2.3 units/acre gross
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This project was originally filed at the Riverside
County Planning Department on September 26,
1989. The file was transferred to the City of
Temecula in May, 1990. Since that time Staff has
met with the applicant on several occasions to
amend the map configuration.
Zone Change
Change of Zone 5611 is a proposal to change the
zone on 59 acres from R-R (Rural Residential) to R-1
(Single Family Residential). The project is
surrounded by A-1-10 (Agricultural, 10 Acre
Minimum) and RoR-2 1/2 to the east, R-R to the
south and west. To the north and northeast are
Specific Plan areas. The Specific Plan areas contain
lot sizes averaging approximately 4,500 to 5,000
square feet. This is substantially lower than the
density of the proposed project. The Specific Plan is
Winchester Properties and is located in the County.
The SWAP identifies this area as residential, 2-4
dwelling units pe~ acre. The proposed Change of
Zone is consistent with this designation.
Tentative Tract
Vesting Tentative .Tract No. 25004 is an application
to subdivide 59 acres into 135 single family lots.
The density of this project is dependent on the
approval of Zone Change No. 5611.
Lot Size
The minimum proposed lot size is 7,200 square feet.
~- STAFFRP~VTM25004 6
The maximum lot size is 18,300 square feet, with an
average lot size of approximately 9,000 square feet.
The minimum lot size in the R-1 zone is 7,200
square feet.
There are 6 lots which will be created as a result of
easement dedications. The largest of which are lots
136, 137, and 138 for the Metropolitan Water
District Aqueduct and Southern California Edison.
Lot 138 also contains a Stephen's Kangaroo Rat
Habitat Preservation area. A total of 16.6 acres are
taken by the easement lots.
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
ACCESS
Access will be provided off of Nicolas Road via
Joseph, Rita, and Seraphina Roads. The applicant
will be required to construct road improvements to
Nicolas Road. Access will also be taken off of
Murrieta Hot Springs Road. Improvements to
Murrieta Hot Springs Road will be constructed by
Assessment District 1 61. All maintenance and slope
areas outside of Lots 1-135 will be maintained by
County Service Area No. 143.
Architecture
Currently there is no product slated for this project.
When the housing product is proposed, a plot plan
will be presented to the City.
Grading
Approximately 380,000 cubic yards on 42.4 are
proposed, with no export. Some substantial 2:1
slopes exist, however, the majority of the slopes are
located on easement lots.
The Land Use Designation exhibit from the
Southwest Area Community Plan targets this area
STAFFRPT~VTM25004 7 --
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
for residential development at 2-4 units per acre.
This map proposes a density of 3.5 units per acre.
The SWAP has been adopted as a policy guide by
the City of Temecula.
The project is consistent with lot standards of the
proposed zone. Probability of consistency with the
City's future General Plan is considered likely by the
Staff. The Planning Commission and the City
Council maintain the authority to determine whether
projects are likely to be consistent with the future
General Plan, and each project considered by these
bodies must be considered on their own merit until
a new General Plan is adopted.
A preliminary environmental assessment was performed by
the County of Riverside Planning Department prior to
transmittal of the case to the City of Temecula. That
assessment was completed by the City Planning Staff. The
following areas of potential impact were reviewed in detail.
Traffic Impacts
A Traffic Study was performed for the project by
Kunzman Associates in October, 1989. The Study
has been accepted by the City and appropriate
mitigation measures included in Conditions.
Biologv
A Biological Study was conducted in August, 1989.
The Study identified the existence of the Stephen's
Kangaroo Rat on a portion of the site. A habitat
conservation area has been preserved on the
tentative map as approved by the United States
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service.
Environmental Conclusion
Staff has concluded that no significant impact on the
environment will occur as a result of site
development, and a Negative Declaration has been
STAFFRPT~VTM25004 8
FINDINGS:
recommended for adoption.
A basic level of us.able and total open space
has been provided on individual lots to meet
the needs of future residents.
There is a reasonable probability that Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 25004 will be consistent
with the City's future General Plan, which will
be completed within a reasonable time in
accordance with State Law.
There is not a likely probability of substantial
detriment to or interference with the future
and adopted General Plan, if the proposed use
or action is ultimately inconsistent with the
plan.
The proposed use or action complies with
State planning and zoning laws.
The site is suitable to accommodate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, circulation
patterns, access, and density.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the public health or
welfare.
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25004 is
compatible with surrounding land uses.
The proposal will not have an adverse affect
on surrounding property, because it does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area·
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the built or natural
STAFFRPT~VTM25004 9 ~-
10.
11.
12.
environment as determined in the Initial Study
for this project.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities. Units
will have significant southern exposure which
allows for passive heating opportunities.
Deciduous landscaping can be utilized to allow
solar penetration in winter and shading in
summer.
The design of the subdivision, the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed projects.
That said findings are supported by minutes,
maps, exhibits, and environmental documents
associated with this application are herein
incorporated by reference·
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 25004 and Change of
Zone No. 5611, based on the analysis and
findings contained in the Initial Study and
Staff Report; and,
APPROVE Change of Zone 5611, based on
the analysis and findings contained in the
Initial Study and Staff Report; and,
APPROVE Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25004,
based on the analysis and findings contained
in the Staff Report, subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval·
.- STAFFRP~VTM25004 10
MR:ks
Attachments
STAFFRP'I'~VTM25004 11
Case No.:
R ecommen dation:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
October 15. 1990
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 2500L~ '
Change Zone No. 5611f
1. Adoption of Negative Decla,:aLion
2. Approval
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCAT ION:
Brent Dix
C-M Engineering
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 2500~ to subdivide
approximately 59.0 acres into 135 single family lots,
and Change of Zone from R-R to R-1.
Northeast corner of Seraphina Road and Rita Way.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
STAFFRPT\VTT2500~
Zone Chancie
Change of Zone 5611 is a proposal to change the
zoning of the subject 59 acres from R-R (Rural
Residential ), which requires a one acre minimum lot
size, to R-1 (Single Family Residential), which
requires a 7,200 square foot minimum lot size. The
project site is surrounded by A-1-10 (Agricultural.
10 Acre Minimum) and R-R-2 112 to the east, and R-
R to the south and west. This project will provide
a buffer zone between the higher County approved
density to the north, and existing lower density R-
R zoning to the south. The Winchester Specific Plan
area, which is to the north and northwest, contains
lot sizes averaging approximately ~,500 to 5,000
square feet. This is substantially higher than the
density of the proposed project.
The SWAP identifies this area as residential, 2-~
dwelling units per acre. The proposed. Change of
Zone is consistent with this designation.
Tentative Tract
Vesting I entative Tract No. 2500~ is an application
to subdivide 59 acres into 135 single family lots.
BACKGROUND:
ANALYSIS:
Four (4) additional remainder lots will be created.
two {2) of which will be considered for park
dedication I Lots 137 and 138). The proposed lot
sizes range from 7,200 square feet to 17,825 square
feet with an average lot size of approximately 8,800
square feet. The approval and density of this
project is dependent on the approval of Zone
Change No. 5611.
At its regular meeting on September 17, 1990, the
Planning Commission continued Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 25082 and Change of Zone No. 5611.
The Commission requested that the applicant submit
additional information regarding grading, design
guidelines and park space.
Subsequent to the Planning Commission hearing
Staff met with the applicantis representatives to
discuss the Commissionis concerns. On September
28, 1990, the applicant submitted the additional
information.
The applicant provided the following information in
response to the Commissionis concerns:
1. · Provide Cross Sections for Slope Analysis:
Pursuant to Staff's recommendation, the
applicant identified three samples. The
samples represent worst case examples of
grading cuts located on site. Staff has
reviewed the cross sections and has identified
the maximum vertical cut to be approximately
30 feet high,
2. Revise Desicon Guidelines:
The revised design guidelines reflect current
lot and tract numbers. No changes were
made to the design criteria as they pertain to
development standards.
3. Park Space Involvincl MWD Easement Area:
Lots 137 and 138 represent 16.~ acres of
unbuiidable land covered by Metropolitan
Water District and Southern California Edison
easements. The applicant has offered to
dedicate this area to the City for future park
space. Currently, Staff is only requiring
dedication and no improvements are
proposed. Hovlever, because the land has
limited usefulness as a park, it is Staffts
recommendation that the proposed offer of
STAFFRPT\VTT2500~ 2
dedication not be credited towards the
Quimby requirements as contained in
Condition of Approval Number 2~.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Department Staff recommends that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 2500~ =and Change of
Zone No. 5611, based on the analysis and
findings contained in the Initial Study and
Staff Report; and,
APPROVE Change of Zone 5611, based on the
analysis and findings contained in the Initial
Study and Staff Report; and,
APPROVE Vesting Tentative Tract No. 2500~,
based on the analysis and findings contained
in the Staff Report, subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
MR: ks
Attachments:
1. Resolutions
2. Conditions of Approval
3. Planning Commission Staff'Report
dated September 17, 1990
~. Planning Commission Minutes of
September 17, 1990
5, Large Scale Plans
STAFFRPT\VTT2500~ 3
.ANN 1 NG COMM [ S,cZ [ ()N ~4 I NIl'{'.'':.~4
SEP'FFJ~qRER L! '1. '! 9'-}t)
V~:S':' fN(l ~'~:N'|'A'P {VE T~A{;'? N(1.
· /.; ~rn..~n.e,a~ t{~ S%lDtl~Vlde 42,4 acres 3nt. o ~'J b S%~Q.Ip ~a~3 IV
Cnanee ~n~ from R-R]/2 to R-1 jn conjunction w3th
VeNal. ha "Cen~i.v~ ~r~d~ No. 25004.
PrnDertV ~s In~.ated at the intersection of N.~cholas and
,TnSe~mh Ro~ds.
Or. TVI~.R MU,11CA oresanted the staff re~ort on this item.
Mr. Muiica stated that Condition No. 22 should be modi(~ed
to rend R., foJ iowa: '°Prior to issuance o{ any =rad~no
permit, the am~i~cant must submit e~ther a letter from
~h~ )1apartment nt F~S~ and W~]d]~te which states that the
identified ~abttat area wilt not be affedted by the
prnpnRed deveJo~ment or ~haj~ o~ta3n a ]0A permit,
subjedt to the a~mrovai of the Piannin~ Director.
COMNISSTON~R ROAGL&ND auestxoned the f~ndlnas of the
environmental impact of this mroject. OLIVSRMUOlCA
stated it was a NeDalive Declaration. CO!4NISSIONER
HOAGL&ND stated that the Resolution indicates that
no env~ronmenta~ Xmpact w~ll occur, when in fact an
environmental impact will occur however, it will be
m~tjqatea. Commissioner Hoaalan~ felt that the
Neaative OeClaration and the Resolution should be
consistent and suqqested that the Resolution state
that an environmental imgact will occur however,
~t w~l] be mjt~aated to the extent that a Neaativ.e
Declaration can be filed. Staff stated that they
wouJd modify the Resolution to be consistent with
the Neqative Declaration.
CONNISSION~R HO&GLAND asked if Condition No. 60 a.
would include siqnals at Nicolas Road or any type
of traffic control.
~ 80R~NTINO, Traffic gnQineer, stated that they
d~d reeu~re this pro~ect to ~nstall a traffic
siqnal as a result of the traffic study.
ItlN.iI1TIH
-12-
9121/~0_,,,
PT.ANN lNfl COMMI SSION N INtrr'E.$ SEPTKJ4RF".R { '/. I qc)0
GArrY K()ON'PT.. C--M B:n~neer~nn As.enc~ates, 43593 WInchester
Roa~. 't,~mm~c|lla. stated that Ftsn an~ Wikd~l~e has
r.nu~t;n that the anDa~c~nt not d~sturb th~s arPa
ano that. they (once it o((. Me stated that the aoolicant
i~ w~l l)n~ to ann a cond~t~nn that )ors ]38 and ]39 wllJ
he tented on toe north and south boundarxes as aDoroved
bY SCE and MWD. a~ we.el as the landscaDin~ of lots 140
and 14L. He ~tated that the applicant concurs wlth the
Cond3t~nn~ of ADDrOV~J set torth bv staff.
COMMISaXONER FORD asked iE Lot 137 would also be included
~n the coDd.ition to fence off the easements. GARY KOONTZ
stated that they would aqree to include Lot 137.
COMMISSIONER FORD suaqested that the apDlicant miaht
submit a request to SCE and MWD for the open areas to
be used as oarks.
GARY DIX. aDDJicant. 25342 Bzrch Drive, Dana Point,
stated that as owner they would be very happy to deed over
the')aDd to the c~tV to be used iora Dark.
BXE. L ANDRFJdS, 39515 Lielet Road, TemecuLa. stated that
he owned property a)onq the east s~de of.these easements
and preferred that they not be improved.
D)AHA WA~TER, 42681 Loma Portola, Temecula, stated that
she also owned Dro~erty alonq these easements and
Dre~erre~ to see them Qated at both ends.
CART THORNHILL indicated that due to the small amount of
]and that would ultimately be dedicated, it miaht be in
the city's best interest to accept the fees in lieu of
the land.
COHI41281ONE~ CNINIAEFF suggested conditioning the map
to Vet an irrevocable o~er of dedication and the city
could deternt~ne if they wanted to use the land for park
space. GaRY THORNHILL stated i~ the city accepted the
land, then the applicant could be reimbursed for the
~'~ MIX. 9117190 - 13- 9/21190
Pr,ANNIN(I Cr)MM1 ,~,.~I(1N M
990
CONM1SSIONER HOAGLAND auestioned the aesiqn.au3ae~=nes
enctosed ~n their ~ac~aqes as ~hef relate ~0 the Droiec~,
· ne Comml~51on indicated ~here ~ere inconsistencies 3n
what they received and what was =resented,
CONNISSIONER P~M~r/moved to not close the uubllc hearina
and continue Vesttna Tentative Tract No. 25004 and Zone
Chanae ot 5611 to the Plannina Commission meeting ot
October [5, 1990. G&RY KOONTZ asked what issues staff
would be addressing. GIL~Y THORNHILL stated that they
wotltd be looking at the following issues: use of the
eaRements, the auide}3ne standards ~hich relate to the
maD, the dedication of easements, look at Lot Z37 as park
~=ace, as well as Lot ]38, ehec~ the cons3stencV ot the
verbage for the tandsca~e ~or toe front yards and the
maintenance with what is =ro=osed ~n the Condj~3ons ot
.A~eroval, the wail ~roDosed between Lot ~49 and Lot 150
and obta3nina a section grade tor the Commission to
=evtew. COi4XtSSIONER fORD seconded the motion ~hich
ca==3ed unanimouslY.
AYES: 5
CONNISSIONERS:
Blair,. Pahey,
Ford, Hoagland,
Chiniaett
NOES: 0
CO!414ISSIONERS:
None
NIl. 91171 ~0
-14-
91211N~,
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 17, 1990
Prepared By: Mark Rhoades
Case No.: Vesting Tentative Tract No. 2500~
Change Zone No. 5611
Recommendation: Approval
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PROPOSAL:
LOCAT I ON:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZON I N G:
EXISTING LAND USE:
SURROUNDING LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS:
Pavilion - JLD Ventures #1
C-M Engineering
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 2500~ to subdivide
approximately 59.0 acres into 135 single family lots,
and Change of Zone from R-R to R-1.
Northeast corner of Seraphina Road and Rite Way.
R -R I Rural Residential )
North:
South:
East:
West:
SP I Specific Plan )
R-R [ Rural Residential )
R-R-~ 112, A-A-10
R-R, SP I Rural Residential,
Specific Plan)
R-1 ( Residential Agricultural)
Vacant
North: Vacant
S<.Jth: Vacant
East: Single Family
Wast: V~.ant
Number'of Acres:
No. of Buildings:
Minimum Proposed Lot Size:
Minimum Permitted Lot Size:
Proposed Density:
~2.~
0
7,200 sq.ft.
7,200 sq. ft.
2.3 units/acre gross
STAFFRPT\VTT2500~
BACKGROUND:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
This project was originally filed at the Riverside
County Planning Department on September 26, 1989.
The file was transferred to the City of Temecula in
May, 1990. Since that time Staff has met with the
applicant on several occasions to amend the map
configuration.
Z6'ne Chanae
Change of Zone 5611 is a proposal to change the
zone on 59 acres from R-R I Rural Residential ) to R-
1 {Single Family Residential). The project is
surrounded by A-1-10 IAgricultural, 10 Acre
Minimum) and R-R-2 1/2 to the east, R-R to the
south and west. To the north and northeast are
Specific Pian areas. The Specific Plan areas contain
lot sizes averaging approximately ~,500 to 5,000
square feet. This is substantially. lower than the
density of the proposed project. The Specific Plan
is Winchester Properties and is located in the
County.
The SWAP identifies this area as residential, 2-~
dwelling units per acre. The proposed Change of
Zone .is consistent with this designation.
Tentative Tract
Vesting Tentative ~i'act No. 2500&l is an application
to subdivide 59 acres into 135 single family lots.
The density of this project is dependent on the
approval of Zone Change No. 5611.
Lot Size
The minimum proposed lot size is 7,200 square feat.
The maximum lot size is 18,300 square feet, 'with an
average lot size of approximately 9,000 square feet.
The minimum lot size in the R-1 zone is 7,200 square
feet.
There are 6 lots which will be created as a result of
easement dedications. The largest of which are lots
136, 137, and 138 for the Metropolitan Water District
Aqueduct and Southern California Edison. Lot 138
also contains a Stephen's Kangaroo Rat Habitat
Preservation area. A total of 16.6 acres are taken
by the easement lots.
STAFFRPT\VTT2S00~
2
GENERAL PLAN AND
SWAP CONSISTENCY:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMI NATION:
ACCESS
~ccess will be provided off of Nicelee Road via
Joseph, Rite, and Seraphina Roads. The applicant
will be required to construct road improvements to
Nicelee Road. Access will also be taken off of
Murrieta Hot Springs Road. improvements to
Murrieta Hot Springs Road will be constructed by
Assessment District 161. All maintenance and slope
areas outside of Lots 1-135 will be maintained by
County Service Area No. 1~3.
Architecture
Currently there is no product slated for this
project. When the housing product is proposed, a
plot plan will be presented to the City.
Grading
Approximately 380,000 cubic yards on ~2.Q are
proposed, with no export. Some substantial 2: 1
slopes exist, however, the majority of the slopes are
located on easement lots.
The Land Use Designation exhibit from the
Southwest Area Community Plan targets this area
for residential development at 2-q units per acre.
This map proposes a density of 3.5 units per acre.
The SWAP has been adopted as a policy guide by the
City of Temecule.
The project is consistent with lot standards of the
proposed zone, Probability of consistency with the
City~s future General Plan is considered .likely by
the Staff, The Planning Commission and the City
Council maintain the authority to determine whether
projects are likely to be consistent with the future
General Plan, and each project considered by these
bodies must be considered on their own maria until
· new General Plan is adopted.
A preliminary environmental assessment was
performed by the County of Riverside Planning
Department prior to transmittel of the case to the
City of Temecula, That assessment was completed
by the City Planning Staff, The following areas of
potential impact were reviewed in detail,
~TAFFRPT~VTT2500q
3
FINDINGS:
STAFFRPT\VTT25004
Traffic Impacts
A Traffic Study was performed for the project by
Kunzman Associates in October, 1989. The StuCb(
has been accepted by the City and appropri
mitigation measures included in Conditions.
Bi~locly
A Biological Study was conducted in August, 1989.
The Study identified the existence of the Stephents
Kangaroo Rat on a portion of the site. A habitat
conservation ·re· has ben preserved on the
tentative map as approved by the United States
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service·
Environmental Conclusion
Staff has concluded that no significant impact on the
environment will occur as a result of site
development, and · Negative Declaration has been
recommended for adoption.
A basic level of us·able and total open space
has been provided on individual lots to meet
the needs of future residents.
There is a reasonable probability that Vest:
Tentative Tract No. 2500~ will be consistent
with the City~s future General Plan, which
will be completed within a reasonable time in
accordance with State Law.
There is not · likely probability of
substantial detriment to or interference with
the future and adopted General Plan, if the
proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan.
The proposed use or action complies with
State planning and zoning Daws.
The site js suitable to eccommoclate the
proposed land use in terms of the size and
shape of the lot configurations, circulation
patterns, access, and density.
10.
11.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the public health or
welfare.
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 2500~4 is
compatible with surrounding land uses.
The proposal will not have an adverse affect
on surrounding property, because it does not
represent a significant change to the present
or planned land use of the area.
The project as designed and conditioned will
not adversely affect the built or natural
environment as determined in the Initial
Study for this project.
The design of the subdivision is consistent
with the State Map Act in regard to future
passive energy control opportunities. Units
will have significant southern exposure which
allows for passive heating opportunities.
Deciduous landscaping can be utilized to allow
solar penetration in winter and shading in
summer.
The design of the subdivision. the type of
improvements and the resulting street layout
are such that they are not in conflict with
easements for access through or use of the
property within the proposed projects.
That said findings are supported by minutes.
maps. exhibits. and environmental documents
associated with this application are herein
incorporated by reference.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Department Staff rsc~,,,.&nds that the
Planning Commission:
ADOPT the Negative Declaration for Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 2500ti and Change of
Zone No. 5611. based on the analysis and
findings contained in the Initial Study and
Staff Report: and.
APPROVE Change of Zone 5611. based on the
analysis and findings contained in the Initial
Study and Staff Report: and,
STAFFRPT\VTT2500~
APPROVE Vesting Tentative Tract No. 2500L~,
based on the analysis and findings contained
in the Staff Report, subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval.
MR: ks
Attachments
STAFFRPT\VTT2500q
APPROVAL
CITY ATI'ORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO-'
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planning Department
March 10, 1992
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004 and Change of Zone No. 5611,
Overruling of Airport Land Use Commission Denial
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
OVERRULE The Riverside County Airport Land Use
Commission's denial of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.
25004 and Change of Zone No. 5611.
BACKGROUND:
On October 15, 1990, the Planning Commission considered the applicant's proposal and
approved Change of Zone No. 5611 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004 by a vote
of 3-1.
On November 13, 1990, the Change of Zone and Vesting Tentative Map were considered by
the City Council. The only discussion at that hearing pertained to slope maintenance and
Quimby Act requirements. The project was approved by a Council vote of 5-0.
One of the Conditions of Approval for the tentative map required the applicant to garner
approval from the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission, (A.L.U.C.) prior to
recording the map. The A.L.U.C. denied the project, stating that the lot sizes were too small
(less than two and one half acres each).
DISCUSSION
Zone ChanQe
Change of Zone No. 5611 was a proposal to change the zoning of the subject 59 acres from
R-R 2~ (Rural Residential), which requires a two and one half acre minimum lot size, to R-1
(Single-Family Residential), which permits a 7,200 square foot minimum lot size. The
proposed density of 2.3 DU/AC is consistent with the 2-4 DU/AC SWAP designation.
S~ST~VTM.CC 1
Tentative Tract
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004 proposes to subdivide the subject 59 acres into 135
single family residential lots and four (4) remainder parcels. The proposed lot sizes range from
7,200 square feet to 17,825 square feet, with an average lot size of approximately 8,800
square feet. This proposal is consistent with Change of Zone No. 5611.
Senate Bill 255
Senate Bill 255 established a mandatory framework for counties in the State of California to
formulate specific land use policies for airport areas, and to review those projects within
airport influence boundaries. The County has not yet finished its own plan. In the interim
the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission has adopted the State Airport Land Use
guidelines which include a two mile radius requirement for project review. The radius of the
influence area only allows residential lots with a minimum size of 2½ acres. Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25004 proposing 7,200 square foot lot sizes is located 1 ~-2 miles
from the airport. Riverside County A.L.U.C. denied the project on July 18, 1991 based on
S.B. 255 and the findings required for that action. Section 21675 of the Public Utilities Code
allows that if the A.L.U.C. disapproves an application, the City may overrule the A.L.U.C. by
a two thirds vote if it makes findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes
of the Public Utilities Code pursuant to A.L.U.C. provisions. As pointed out by the City
Attorney, if the City is not the operator of the airport, the operator becomes immune from
liability for damages to property or personal injury for the City's decision to proceed with the
particular project. The City Council must make specific findings in order to overrule the
A.L.U.C. decision. Pursuant to the Airport Land Use Commission's recommendation for this
project, two different airport analyses have been completed. In addition, a third airport
consultant has expressed concurrence with the studies.
Height Obstruction
According to the studies prepared for this report, no height obstruction problems are
anticipated to occur if typical residential units are built on the site. Staff concurs with the
assessment that structures on the sitb will not intrude into the flight surfaces, because
development will be residential construction with a maximum height of thirty-five feet.
Safety/Accident Probability
According to the studies, the safety impacts relating to an analysis of crash and accident
probabilities from flight operations at the airport are "considered quite low" and well within
acceptable levels. Staff has no reason to doubt or question the accident probability results
in the study.
Noise
The study has shown that the proposed project is located well outside of the 65 Community
Noise Equivalent Value Area (C.N.E.L.) which the County of Riverside and the State of
California Division of Aeronautics use as a standard for minimum outside noise levels in a
residential area. The outside C.N.E.L. range for the project is 50-54 dB. Standard residential
construction techniques will reduce the noise levels well below the Environmental Protection
Agency standard of 45 dB for interior noise levels.
S~TAFFem2SOO4VTM.CC 2
Future runway or airport expansion will not increase the previously mentioned figures. Both
of the studies were conducted using ultimate airport expansion figures.
Staff is in concurrence with the recommendations set forth in the airport studies which were
submitted. In addition, based on the findings and data contained in the studies conducted by
J.J. Van Houten and Associates and Aviation, Systems Associates Inc. as well as the
recommendation from airport consultant Gerald M. Dallas, Staff is of the opinion that the
proposed project will not be adversely impacted by the French Valley Airport. In addition, the
project will not restrict the future expansion of the airport.
FUTURE RESIDENT DISCLOSURE
As a result of the projects proximity to the airport, public disclosure will be required to be
given to future property owners within the subject tentative tract. The standard requirement
for issues such as this is a disclosure statement in a "WHITE" report which is required by the
State Department of Real Estate. In addition, the applicant has voluntarily formulated a
notification which would be handed to prospective home buyers. This handout would further
ensure proper notification.
ENVIRONMENTAL
A negative declaration was adopted at the time the project was initially approved. No further
environmental determination is required at this time. The proposed action is exempt from the
CEQA guidelines.
FINDINGS
The Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission is making substantial progress
toward the completion of the French Valley Airport Land Use Plan required by State
Law.
There is reasonable probability that the Change of Zone No. 5611 and Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25004 will be consistent with the plan being considered by
the Airport Land Use Commission, because the airport studies prepared for the site
indicate that airport related impacts would be negligible, and meet the requirements
of all Federal, State and Local Laws.
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the
Future Adopted Airport Land Use Plan if the action, regulation, or permit is ultimately
inconsistent with the Future Adopted Plan, because of the existing, previously
approved and expanding nature of residential development which lie between the
project site and the airport facility.
According to studies prepared for the site, the residents of this proposed residential
subdivision will not be exposed to excessive noise because expected noise impacts
from operations at the French Valley Airport will not exceed generally accepted noise
standards applicable to residential uses in the vicinity of airports.
S'~STAFFRPI'~SOO4.VTM. CC 3
The subject property is a relatively small site which is part of a larger area that has
already been approved for and is being developed for residential uses similar to this
proposed residential subdivision. Because of the significant amount of residential
development which has already been approved and which is taking place in the vicinity
of the project site, the subject project cannot reasonably be expected to impact the
orderly expansion of the French Valley Airport.
The orderly expansion of the French Valley Airport and the interests of the prospective
purchasers of homes within the proposed residential subdivision will be further
protected by burdening the subject property with an avigation easement for the benefit
.of the French Valley Airport.
The proposed residential subdivision will not result in the construction of structures
which would interfere with navigable airspace·
According to studies prepared for the site, the probability of an aircraft operation at the
French Valley Airport resulting in the collision of an aircraft with any portion of the
proposed residential subdivision is so remote as to be insignificant in terms of risk to
the public health, safety or welfare.
The City Council, having considered the appeal of Dix Development, Inc., with respect
to the Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission decision denying Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 25004, and having considered all the evidence offered with
respect to the appeal, finds and determines that good cause exists for overruling the
decision of the Airport Land Use Commission. The City Council further finds and
determines that overruling the decision of the Airport Land Use Commission is
consistent with the purposes of Article 3.5 (commencing with Section 21670) of
Chapter 4 of Part 1 of Division 9 of the Public Utilities Code.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution - page 5
Sample Disclosure Statement- page 9
Summaries of Airport Studies - page10
Airport Land Use Commission Letter denying Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 25004 - page 11
Minutes from November 13, 1990 City Council - page 12
Staff Report for Tract 25004 and Change of Zone No. 5611 -
page 13
S~STAFFRFr~5OO4VTM.CC 4
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION
$~$TA~6004V'rM.CC 5
ATTACHMENT NO. I
RESOLUTION NO, 92-._
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA OVERRULING THE AIRPORT LAND USE
COMMISSION DECISION DENYING VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 25004 TO SUBDIVIDE 59.0 ACRES INTO 135
RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5611·
GENERAL LOCATION OF SAID MAP BEING THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF RITA WAY AND SERAPHINA ROAD.
WHEREAS, Dix Development, Inc. filed an Appeal of the Airport Land Use
Commission decision denying Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004;
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 21675.1 of the Public Utilities Code, the
City Council considered said Appeal on March 10, 1992, at which time interested persons had
an opportunity to testify either in support or opposition;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the City Council hearing, the Council overruled
the decision of the Airport Land Use Commission;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
findings
That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following findings in overruling the Airport
Land Use Commission decision denying Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25004.
The Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission is making substantial progress
toward the completion of the French Valley Airport Land Use Plan required by State
Law.
e
There is reasonable probability that the Change of Zone No. 5611 and Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 25004 will be consistent with the plan being considered by
the Airport Land Use Commission, because the airport studies prepared for the site
indicate that airport related impacts would be negligible, and meet the requirements
of all Federal, State and Local Laws.
e
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the
Future Adopted Airport Land Use Plan if the action, regulation, or permit is ultimately
inconsistent with the Future Adopted Plan, because of the existing~ previously
approved and expanding nature of residential development which lie between the
project site and the airport facility·
4. According to studies prepared for the site which portion of said studies are
S~STAFFRFT'~SOO4VTM. CC 6
incorporated herein by reference, and attached hereto, the residents of this proposed
residential subdivision will not be exposed to excessive noise because expected noise
impacts from operations at the French Valley Airport will not exceed generally
accepted noise standards applicable to residential uses in the vicinity of airports.
e
The subject property is a relatively small site which is part of a larger area that has
already been approved for and is being developed for residential uses similar to this
proposed residential subdivision. Because of the significant amount of residential
development which has already been approved and which is taking place in the vicinity
of the project site, the subject project cannot reasonably be expected to impact the
orderly expansion of the French Valley Airport.
The orderly expansion of the French Valley Airport and the interests of the prospective
purchasers of homes within the proposed residential subdivision will be further
protected by burdening the subject property with an avigation easement for the benefit
of the French Valley Airport.
The proposed residential subdivision will not result in the construction of structures
which would interfere with navigable airspace.
According to studies prepared for the site which portion of said studies are
incorporated herein by reference, and attached hereto, the probability of an aircraft
operation at the French Valley Airport resulting in the collision of an aircraft with any
portion of the proposed residential subdivision is so remote as to be insignificant in
terms of risk to the public health, safety or welfare.
The City Council, having considered the appeal of Dix Development, Inc., with respect
to the Riverside County Airport Land Uses Commission decision relative to Vesting
Tentative Tract No. 25004, and having considered all the evidence offered with
respect to the appeal, finds and determines that good cause exists for overruling the
decision of the Airport Land Use Commission. The City Council further finds and
determines that overruling the decision of the Airport Land Use Commission is
consistent with the purposes of Article 3.5 (commencing with Section 21670) of
Chapter 4 of Part I of Division 9 of the Public. Utilities Code.
SECTION 2.
Environmental Compliance.
A negative declaration was adopted at the time the project was initially approved. No further
environmental determination is required at this time. The proposed action is exempt from the
CEQA guidelines.
SECTION 3.
S%STAFFRPT~S004VTM. CC 7
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of March, 1992.
PATRICIA H. BIRDSALL
MAYOR
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the
City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 10th day of March, 1992, by the
following vote of the Council:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS
S~STAFFRPI'~6{X)4VTM.CC 8
ATTACHMENT 5
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CITY OF TEMECULA
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 shall 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 approved by the
Planning Director as to form, and shall advise of potential airport impacts, and
the potential requirement of an avigation easement.
vgw
STAFFRPT~VTM25004 12 --
CITY OF TEMECULA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Vesting Tentative Tract No. 25004
Council Approval Date:
Expiration Date:
November 13, 1990
November 13, 1992
Planning Del~artment
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·
This conditionally approved tentative map will expire two years after the City
Council 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 Map Act and Ordinance
460.
-The subdivider shall submit one copy of a soils report to the Riverside County
Surveyor's Office and two copies to the Department of Building and Safety.
The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site.
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 County maintained road.
All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall
continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers·
All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the City
Engineer. Street names shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities, etc.,
shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division
boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted and
recorded as directed by the City Engineer.
,_ STAFFRPT~VTM25004 13
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
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.
The applicant shall comply with the environmental health recommendations
outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated May 23, 1990,
a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the flood control recommendations outlined in
the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated April 11, 1990, a
copy of which is attached. If the project lies within an adopted flood control
drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of City of Temecula Land Division
Ordinance 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities
shall be collected by the City prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits.
The applicant shall comply with the fire improvement recommendations outlined
in the County Fire Department's letter dated September 4, 1990, a copy of
which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Building
and Safety Department: Land Use Section's transmittal dated April 13, 1990,
a copy of which is attached.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Building
and Safety Department: Grading Section's .transmittal dated May 1, 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.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations outlined in the Eastern
Municipal Water District transmittal dated May 9, 1990, 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-1 (Single Family) zone.
STAFFRPT~VTM25004 14
18.
19.
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 the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the following conditions shall be
satisfied:
(1)
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.
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
Murrieta Hot Springs 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.
_ STAFFRP~VTM25004 15
20.
21.
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.
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:
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 (9100) per lot/unit shall be deposited
with the City as mitigation for public library development.
Prior to the submittal of building plans to the Department of 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.
STAFFRP'I~VTM25004 16
22.
23.
24.
All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed
and constructed with fire retardant (Class A) roofs as approved by the
Fire Marshal.
Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall not be permitted within the
subdivision, however solar equipment or any other energy saving devices
shall be permitted with Planning Department approval.
Roof-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding
property.
Building separation between all buildings including fireplaces shall not be
less than ten (10) feet.
i. All street side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet.
j. All front yards shall be provided with landscaping and automatic
irrigation.
Applicant shall obtain necessary clearances from the County of Riverside
Airport Land Use Commission. If necessary, the applicant shall file a
White Report with the Department of Real Estate advising future
property owners of potential airport impact. (As amended by P.C. on
10-15-90.)
Lots 137, 138, 139, and 140 shall be dedicated to the City as
unimproved park space. (As amended by P.C. on 10-15-90.)
Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the applicant must submit either a letter
from the Department of Fish and Game which states that the identified habitat
area will not be affected by the proposed development, subject to the approval
of the Planning Director.
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 issuance of building permits, applicant shall be required to pay
applicable Quimby Fees in accordance with Section 10.35 of Ordinance 460.
~_ STAFFRPT~VTM25004 17
25.
Final landscape plans shall substantially conform to the design guidelines
submitted April, 1990.
26.
Prior to issuance of building permits applicant shall comply with agency letters
identified and dated:
County Health Department, May 23, 1990
County Flood Control, April 11, 1990
EMWD, May 9, 1990
County Geologist, March 30, 1990
County Fire Department, September 4, 1990
County Road Department, April 24, 1990.
27.
Prior to issuance of any occupancy permits, the applicant shall obtain approval
from the Planning Director, the Temecula Valley Unified School District, and the
City Engineer, of a safe walking path between the subject tract and Nicolas
School. (As amended by P.C. on 10-15-90.)
28.
Any and all signage and/or sign maintenance proposed for this tract shall be by
separate permit, subject to the approval of the Planning Director. (As amended
by P.C. on 10-15-90.)
29.
Prior to issuance of any occupancy permits, maintenance for Lot No. 1 41 shall
be conveyed to the homeowners association or offered for dedication to the
TCSD, subject to the City Attorney's approval of the CC&R's to ensure Lot No.
41 is properly maintained. (As amended by P.C. on 10-15-90.)
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.
30.
The Developer shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act,
and all applicable City Ordinances and Resolutions.
STAFFRPT%VTM25004 18 ~
PRIOR TO FINAL MAP APPROVAL:
31. 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; and
CATV Franchise.
32.
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.
33.
All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by
a homeowners association or other means acceptable to the City. Such proof
of this maintenance shall be submitted to the Planning and Engineering
Department.
34.
Murrieta Hot Springs Road shall be improved within the dedicated right-of-way
in accordance with Riverside County Standard No. 1 O0 (86'/110').
35.
In the event that Murrieta Hot Springs Road is not constructed by Assessment
District 1 61 prior to final map recordation, the developer shall construct/bond,
for the improvements to provide for improvements per Riverside County
Standard No. 1 O0 (86'/110').
36.
B, C, D, and E Streets, "H" Court, and Sandpiper Lane shall be improved within
the dedicated right-of-way in accordance with Riverside County Standard No.
104, Section A (40'/60).
37.
"F" and "G" Streets shall be improved within the dedicated right-of-way in
accordance with Riverside County Standard No. 103, Section A (44'/66').
38.
Seraphina Road shall be improved with 32 feet of asphalt concrete pavement
within a 36 foot dedicated right-of-way measured from the west tract boundary
line, in accordance with Riverside County Standard No. 103, Section A
(44'/66).
_ STAFFR PT~VTM 25004 19
39.
40.
"A" Street shall be improved with 32 feet of asphalt concrete pavement within
a 60 foot full width dedicated right-of-way in accordance with modified County
Standard No. 104, Section A (40/60).
The subdivider shall construct or post security guaranteeing the construction
of the following public improvements in conformance with applicable City
standards.
41.
42.
43.
45.
46.
Street improvements, including, but not limited to: pavement, curb and
gutter, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights, signing, striping, and
traffic control devices as appropriate.
b. Storm drain facilities.
c. Landscaping (street and parks).
d. Sewer and domestic water systems.
The subdivider shall provide bonds and agreement clearances from all applicable
agencies and pay all fees prior to the approval of the map.
The street design and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated
with adjoining developments.
Street lights shall be provided along streets adjoining the subject site in
accordance with the standards of Ordinance No. 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 established per lot as mitigation for a
traffic signal impact.
Should the developer choose to defer the time of payment of traffic signal
mitigation fee, he may enter into a written agreement with the City deferring
said payment to the time of issuance of a building permit.
The subdivider shall submit four copies of a soils report to the Engineering
Department. The report shall address the soils stability and geological
conditions of the site.
STAFF R P'I'~V'I'M 25004 20 ~
47.
In the event road or off-site right-of-way are required to comply with these
conditions, such easements shall be obtained by the developer; or, in the event
the City is required to condemn the easement right-of-way, as provided in the
Subdivision Map Act, the developer shall enter into an agreement with the City
for the acquisition of such easement at the developer's cost pursuant to
Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall be at no cost to the City.
48.
A hydrology study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer.
All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.
49.
Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and
an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office, in
addition to any other permits required.
50.
Street improvement plans including parkway trees and street lights prepared by
a Registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer shall be required
for all public streets prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. Final plans
and profiles shall show the location of existing utility facilities within the right-
of-way.
51.
The subdivider shall notify the City's CATV Franchises of the Intent to Develop.
Conduit shall be installed to CATV Standards prior to issuance of Certificates
of Occupancy.
52.
Corner cutbacks, in conformance with City Standard No. 805, shall be offered
for dedication and shown on the final map.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT:
53.
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.
54.
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.
55.
All lot drainage shall be to the street by side yard drainage swales independent
of any other lot.
56.
A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its
right-of-way.
~-_ STAFFRP~VTM25004 21
PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY:
57.
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 the 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 the 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.
58.
Construct full street improvements including but not limited to, curb and gutter,
A.C. pavement, sidewalk, drive approaches, parkway trees and street lights.
59.
All street improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
60.
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 Engineerincj
PRIOR TO RECORDATION:
61.
A signing and striping plan shall be designed by a registered traffic engineer,
and approved by the City Engineer for all streets 66/44 or wider and shall be
included in the street improvement plans.
62.
Prior to designing any of the above plans, contact Transportation Engineering
for the design criteria.
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMITS:
63.
All signing and striping shall be installed per the City standards and the
approved signing and striping plan.
64.
Left turn pocket on Murrieta Hot Springs Road, for Street "G", shall provide for
100' of storage capacity, if not included with Assessment District No. 161
improvements.
STAFFRPT~VTM25004 22
65.
Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, if the ultimate circulation system has
not been constructed (with Vesting Tentative Tract No. 23428), this
development will be responsible for the following:
Widen Nicolas Road to accommodate a 200' minimum, centered, left
turn pocket for Joseph Road or for Primary access point.
.,._ STAFFRPT~VTM25004 23
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
FIRE DEPARTMENT
IN COOPERATION WITH THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
AND FIRE PROTECTION
GLEN J. NEWMAN
FIRE CHIEF
Sept. 4, 1990
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
46-209 OASIS STREET, SUITE 405
INDIO, CA 92201
(619) 342-8886
TO:
CITY OF TEMCULA
/.- C,I, MFORkt4
PLANNING & ENGINEERING
3760 IZTH STREET
RIVERSIDE. CA 92501
(7143 275-4777
ATTN:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: TRACT 25004 - AMENDED #2
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:
FIRE PROTECTION
Schedule "A"fira protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2i") 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.
Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the '-
Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to fire hydrant types, locatio.
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 the Riverside County Fire
Dept."
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.
HAZARDOUS FIRE AREA
The land division is located in the "Hazardous Fire Area" of Riverside County
as shown on a map on file with the Clerk of the Board ~f Supervisors. Any
building constructed on lots created by this land division shall comply with
the special construction provisions contained in Riverside County Ordinance
546.
RE: TR 25004 Page 2
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.
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 mitigation
for fire protection 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.
All questions regarding the meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the
Fire Department Planning and Engineering staff.
RAYMOND H. REGIS
Chief Fire Department Planner
By " -
Laura Cabral, Fire Safety Specialist
ml
OFFICE OF ROAD COMMISSIONER & COUNTY SURVEYOR
ROAD I~sARTMEifI'D
Ivan E Termant
ACTING ROAD COMMISSIONER i COUNTY SURVEYOR
April 24, 1990
COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER
MAILING ADDRESS:
EO. BOX
RIVERSIDE CALIEORNIA 92502
(714) Z75-6880
Riverside County Planning Commission
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92501
Ladies and Gentlemen:
TR 25004 - Amend #2
Change of Zone 5611
Schedule A - Team i - SMD #9
AP #111-111-000-9
The Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the traffic
study submitted by Kunzman Associates for the above mentioned
project. The study has been prepared in accordance with accepted
traffic engineering standards and practices, utilizing County
approved guidelines. We generally concur with the findings
relative to ~raffic impacts.
The study indicates a projected Level of Service "C" at
adJacenU locations. The Comprehensive General Plan circulation
policies relative to Categor~ II Land Uses states that a minimum
of Level of Service "C" is necessary for any new Category II land
use. As such, the proposed project is consistent with this
General Plan poli~.
With respect . to the conditions of approval for the
referenced tentative land' division map, the Transportation.
Department reco~nends that the land~ivider provide the following
s~reet improvements, s~reet 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 resubmitted for further
consideration. These Ordinances and the following conditions are
essential par~s and a requirement occurring in ONE is as binding
as though occurring in all. They are intended to be
complemenVary and to describe the conditions for a complete
design of ~he improvement. All questions regarding the true
meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Transportation
Planning and DeveloI~nent Review Division Engineer's Office.
COUNTY ADMINISTRAT!¥[ Ct:NTT:R · 4080 LDION STR[[T * RIV~RRDE, CALIFORNIA 92501
TR 25004 - Amend ~2 - Change of Zone 56il
April 24, 1990
Page 2
The landdivider shell protect downstream properties from
damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns,
i.e., concentration of diversion of flow· Protection shell
be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities
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 fills
are allowed". The protection shall be as approved by
Transportation Department.
The landdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all
offsite drainage flowing onto or Titrough the si:e. In ~he
event the Transportation Planning and Development Review
Division Engineer permits the use of streets for drainage
purposes, the provisions of Article XI of Ordinance No. 460
will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street
capacity or the use of streets be prohibited for drainage
purposes, the subdivider shall provide adequate drainage
lfacilities as approved by the Transportation Department.
"B", "C", "D", "E", "F" and "G" Streets, "H" Court and
Sandpiper Lane shall be improved within the dedicated right
of way in accordance with County Standard No. 104, Section
A. (40'/60')
SeraphinaRoad shall be improved with 32 feet of asphalt
concrete pavement within a 45 foot part width dedicated
right of way in accordance with County Standard No. 104,
Sec:ion A. (20'/30')
"A" Street shall be improved with 32 feet of asphalt
concrete pavement within a 60 foot full width dedicated
right of way in. accordance with modified County Standard
No. 104, Section A. (20'/30') as approved by the
Transportation Planning and Development Review Division
Engineer.
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 mipimumof 300 feet beyond the project
houndaries at a grade and alignment as approved by the
Riverside County Transportation Planning and Development
Review Division Engineer. Completion of road improvements
does not imply acceptance for maintenance by County.
The developer/owner shall submit a detailed soils investi-
gation report addressing the construction requirements
within the road right of way.
TR 25U04 - Amend #2 - Chang,
April 24, 1990
Page 3
f Zone 56il
lOe
12.
13.
7.
19.
Standard knuckles and offset cul-de-sacs shall be
constructed throughout the landdivision.
Aspbaltic emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less
than fourteen days following placement of the asphalt
surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per
square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Section 37,
39 and 94 of the State Standard Specifications.
The landdivider will provide a left turn lane on Murrieta
Hot Springs Road at the intersection with "G" Street as
approved by the Transportation Department.
The landdivider
Eastern Municipal
of the final map.
shall provide
Water District
utility clearance from~
prior to the recordation
The landdivider sball post a deposit and execute an
agreement with the Metropolitan Water District prior to the
recordetion of the map.
Tb~ maximum centerline gradient and the minimum centerline
radii shall be in conformance with County Standard #114 of
Ordinance 461.
All centerline intersections shall be at 90° with a minimum
50' tangent measured from flow line or as approved by the
Transportation Planning and Development Review Division
Engineer.
Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed throughout the
landdivision in accordance with County Standard No. 400 and
401 (curb sidewalks).
The minimum 10t frontages along the cul-de-sacs and
knuckles shall be 35 feet.
All driveways shall conform to the applicable Riverside
County Standards. A minimum of four feet of full height
curb shall be constructed between driveways.
The minimum garage sethack 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
secondary access roads to a paved and maintained road.
Said access roads shall be constructed in accordance with
County Standard No. 106, Section B. (32'/60') at a grade
and alignment approved by the Transportation Planning and
Development Review Division Engineer.
TR 25U04 - Amend #2 - Chang,
April 24, 1990
Page 4
f Zone 5611
20a.
20b.
20c.
21.
22.
3.
24.
25.
26.
Said offsite access road (primary) shall be the southerly
extension of Seraphina Road to Rita Way, then westerly on
Rita Way to Joseph Road, then southerly on Joseph Road to
Nicolas Road or as approved by the Transportation Planning
and Development Review Division Engineer.
Said offsite access road for Lots 120, 121, 122, 123, 124,
125 and 126 shall be the westerly extension of Sandpiper
Lane to Seraphina Road, then southerly on Seraphina Road to
the proposed part width on Seraphina Road. This access
road will be coordinated with Tentative Tract 23428.
Said offsite access road (secondary) shell be the westerly
extension of Murrieta Hot Springs Road to State Highway 79
(Winchester Road) or as approved by the Transportation
Planning and Development Review Division Engineer.
Electrical and co~nunicattons trenches shall be provided in
accordance with Ordinance 461, Standard 817.
Lot access shall be restricted on Murrieta Hot Springs Road
and so noted on the final map.
Landdivisions creating cut or fill slopes adjacent to the
streets shall provide erosion control and sight distance
control as approvedby the Transportation Department.
The street design and improvement concept of this project
shall be coordinated with Specific Plan 213, Specific Plan
241, Specific Plan 184, PM 78/83-84, PM 15/39, PM 99/11-12,
PM 61/81-82, PM 1/44-46, PM 29/60-61, PM 17/09, PM 99/1-2,
PM 154/97-103, PM 25/59, R/S 74/46-50 and Tentative TR
23428.
Street lighting shell be required in accordance with
Ordinance 460 and 461 throughout the subdivision. The
County Service Area (CSA) Administrator determines whether
this proposal qualifies under an existing assessment
district or not. If not, the land owner shell file, after
rece{ving tentative q~rov..1, for an application with LAFCO
for annexation into or creation of a "Lighting Assessment
District" in accordance with Governmental Code Section
56000. PRIOR TO ~CO~DATION, the landowner shell receive
and provide a Certificate of Completion from LAFCO.
All private and public entrances and/or intersections
opposite this project shall be coordinated with this
project and shown on the street improvement plans.
TR 25eo4 - Amend #2 - Change ~f Zone 5611
April 24, 1990
Page 5
27.
28.
9.
30.
A striping plan is required for Murrieta Hot Springs Road.
The removal of the existing striping shall be the
respons/bility of applicant. Traffic signing and striping
shall be done by County forces with all incurred costs
borne by the applicant.
Any landscaping within public road righns of way shall
c~mply with Transportation Department standards and require
approval by the Transportation Planning and Development
Review Division Engineer and assurance of continuing
maintenance through the establishment of a landscape
maintenance district/maintenance agreement or similar
mechanism as approved by the Transportation Planning and
Development Review Division Engineer. Landscape plans shall
be submitted on standard County Plan sheet format (24" x
36"). Landscape plans shall be submitted with the street
improvement plans and shall depict Only such landscaping,
irrigation and related facilities as are to be placed
within the public road rights-of-way.
Pursuant to Section 66493 of the Subdivision Map Act any
subdivision which is part of an existing Assessment
District must comply with the requirements of said Section.
Prior =o recordation of the final map,
within the proposed rights of way will
demolished.
all structures
be removed or
Sincerely,
Division Engineer
LAT'.Jw
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
APN S:
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT
GRADING SECTION
PLANNING / SUNG KEY MA
TONY HARMON~
May 1, 1990 '
V TR 25004 AMENDMENT #2
MaY 0 3 {990
k| ,~c.r,o,,.Jc COUNTY
PLUS CORRECTI~J,+AJ'WI~)NG DEPARTMENT
914-260-010, 13, 16, 37, 38
The "Grading Section" has reviewed a conceptual grading plan for this site.
The plan is acceptable. Consequently, the "Grading Section" recommends
approval of this project if the following conditions are included.
Prior to commencing any grading in excess of 50 cubic yards, the
applicant shall obtain a grading permit and approval to construct from
the Building and Safety Department.
All grading shall conform to the 1988 Uniform Building Code and
Ordinance 457.
Prior to issuance of any building permit, the'property owner shall
obtain a grading permit and approval to construct from the Building and
Safety Department.
Plant and irrigate fill slopes greater than or equal to 3' and/or cut
slopes greater than or equal to 5' in vertical height with grass or
ground cover. Slopes that exceed 15' in vertical height are to be
provided with shrubs and/or trees per count Ordinance 457, see form 284-
47.
Landscape plans are to be signed by a registered landscape architect and
bonded per the requirements of Ordinance 457, see Form 284.47.
Grading in excess of 199 cubic yards will require performance security
to be posted with the Building and Safety department.
In instances where a grading plan involves import or export, prior to
obtaining a grading permit, the applicant shall have obtained approval
for the import/export location from the Building and Safety Department-
this may require a written clearance from the Planning Department.
A notarized letter of permission, from the affected property owners, is
required for any proposed offsite grading.
Observe slope setbacks per Section 2907, Figure 29-1, Section 7011, and
figure 70-1 of the Uniform Building Code.
Provide drainage facilities and terracing in conformance with Section
7012 of the Uniform Building Code.
cDepa Eme. E ud a .g a.c/
Administrative Office · 1777 Atlanta Avenue
Riverside, CA 92507
April 13, 1990
RiVerside County Planning Department
Attention: Sung Key Ma
County Administrative Center
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92501
RE: Vesting Tract 25004, Amended Map No. 2
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The Land Use Division of the Department of Building and Safety
has the following comments and conditions:
Prior to issuance of grading or building permits, the applicant
shall remove all mobile homes and mobile home accessories
from the property.
Prior to issuance of grading or building permit, the applicant
shall'obtain all necessary permits required by the Department
of Building and Safety for the relocation or demolition of the
existing structures.
The developer shall obtain Planning Department approval for
all on-site and off~site signage advertising the sale of
the parcel map/subdivision pursuant to section 19.5/19.6 of
Ordinance 348.
Engineered plans are required for any walls or fences over six
feet in height. An approved setback adjustment from the Planning
Department is required for walls or fences over six feet in height
found in required setback areas.
Fireplaces may encroach 1' into required minimum 5' side yard
setback.
Mechanical equipment may not be located in required minimum 5'
side yard setback.
Sincerely,
Vaughn (a~rkisian
Land Use Technician
tt/vs
(714) 682-8840 · (7'14) 275-1820 · Fax (714) 369-4084
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
COUNTY CIRCLE DR. RIVERSIDE, CA. 925034065 (Mailing Address - P.O. Box 760092513-7600:
AMENDED N0.
May 3:3. 1990
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLANN!N6 DEPT.
4080 Lemon Street
Rlverszde. CA 92502
ATTN: Sunq Key Ma
RE: Tract MaD 25004: Parcels 1 and 2 of P.M. 78/83 Parcels
1. 2. 3 and 4 of P.M. 15/39. and Parcel 2 of P.M. 12/8e
Parcel MaPs Recorded in the office of the County Recorder.
County of Rlverszde. State of CalZfornla
(115 lots)
Dear Gentlemen:
The Department of Public Health has revzewed Tract MaD No.
25004. and recommends that:
A water system shall be xnstalled accordEnD to
plans and soeclfzcatzon as aDDroved by the water
comPanY and the Health Department. Permanent
orlnts of the plans of the water system shall
be submitted in triplicate. wlth a m~nzmum scale
not less than one znch e~uais 200 feet. alonQ wZth
the orzQznal drawlnQ to the County Surveyor.
The Dr~nts shall show the lnternal DiDe d~ameter.
location of.valves and fire hydrants: DiDe and
no~nt sDeclf~catzons, and the szze of the maln
at the 3unctzon of the new system to the
eelsrinD system. The DEans shall comolv ~n all
resDects with Dlv. 5, Part 1. Chapter 7 of the
California Health and Safety Code, CalifornZa
Administrative Code. Tzt~e 22, ChaDtit 16. and General
Order No. 103 of the PubleD Utllztles Commission of the
State of Calzfornza. when a'DD!~cable. The plans shall
be slQned by a reQzstered ehqlneer and water comDany
with the foliowin0 certlfzcatlon: "I certify that the
deszQn of the water system in Tract Map 25004 zs in
accordance wzth the water system expansion Dlans of the
Eastern Municipal Water D1strzct and that the water
service, storaQe and dzstrzbutzon system w~ll be
adequate to Drovzde water service to such tract.
CINOflA ROWELL. S.SJe., M.E.A. J.M. leARNING. R,E.H.S.. M.P.A. H.C. !HOLK. D,V-M.. M.P.H. E.R. COYlie.
01nuT'f O~ECTOR OF NEALTH DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HEALTH E,,J. GALLAGHER, M,D.. M,II,,H., M.A. DIPt,ITY DNCTOR OF HEALTH DEPUTY DeflECTOR OF HEALTH
P~RSONAL HEALTH SIRVICES ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES 01RECTOR OF I.~"ISALTI.H SPECIAL SIRVICES AOMIN, · SUPP*ORT EERVICES '
HEALTH CENTERS
EARRING 3OSS RAMSEY ETREET - IanmnE. CA aEE~'0 I 8LYTNE EE3 NORTH IROADWAY o ElyIN, CA IEEES I CAEA 8LANCA 7140 MARGUERITA · Rst, efseOo, CA
CORONA sOS SOVTH BUENA VISTA - COweRS. CA EtTE0 · HlUET el0 NORTH STATE STREET - Remit. CA S!3dl3 · INOlO 4i-20'i OASIS STREET · InOIO. CA E220~
LAKE EL SINORE 30 ~E$ FRASER OR. ' Lime ElsieDee. CA Ii330 · PALM SPRINGS 311 I TAHOUITZ-M~CAI. LUM - Plies Eorings, CA 922E2 · PERfIE :w3~ NORTH '~' ST. -
PERfie. CA IE3~0 · RIVERSIDE IS:0 LINDEN ET. * RIversiDe. CA gESO7 · RUSIDOUX Ell· MISSKIN 8LVD. - Rive,me. CA SESOE
Riverside County F!annln~ DePt.
ATTN: $un~ Key Ma
May 23. 1990
This certification does not constitute a uuarantee
that it will supply water to such tract mad at any
specific quantities, flows or pressures for flre
orotectlon or any other PUrPOSe" Thls certification
snail be sioned by a responsible official of ~he water
company. !b3.__q3_a~.~__must b~__~j, Xh~.k~ted to._~he County
~.~..kh~..._Le&L~_~j__LQr _..tJ3~_~e_~_~..r~.~_~f_~b_e__.Lkn~ maD.
This subdivision has a statement from Eastern Municipal
Water Distr~ct aureelnu to serve domestic water to each
and every lot in the subdivision on demand Drovldlng
satlsfactorv financial arranuements are completed with the
subdivider. It will be necessary for financial arrangement~
to be made Dr~or to the recordatlon of the final maD.
This subdivision is within the Eastern Municipal Water
Dzstrlct and shall be connected to the sewers of the
DIstrict, The sewer system shall be installed accordlno to
plans and specifications as aDproved by the District, the
County Surveyor and the Health Department. Permanent prints
of the plant of the sewer system shall be submitted in
triplicate, alonu with the original drawinq, to the County
Surveyor, The prints shall show the internal DIDe
diameter, location of manholes, complete profiles, Pipe
and .3olnt specifications and the size of the sewers at
the aunctlon of the new system to the exlstlnq system.
A slnqle plat Indicating location of sewer lines and
water lines shall be a portion of the sewage plans and
proflies. The plans shall be sluned by a reolstered
enolneer and the sewer district wlth the followinu
certification: "I certify that the deslqn of the ~ewer
system in Tract Map 25004 is in accordance with the
sever system expansion plan~ of the Eastern MuniciPal Water
District and that the waste disposal system is adequate at
thls time to treat the anticipated wastes from the Drooosed
tract maD.
RIverside County Plann~nu Dept.
Fa~e Three
ATTN: Sunu Key Ma
May 23, 1990
The olans must be submitted to the CountZ_~.~y~2~.Ci.s
O.[.f..~_~_~.._lp review at least two week~:~p~+r to th~ -
It wxll be necessary for f~nanc~al arrangements to be
comoletelv fln&l=zed Dr~or to recordatlon of the f~nal
maD.
S~ncerelv.
~'am Mart H.S. IV
Environmental Health Services
SM: wd I
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
CHIEF ENGINEER
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND
WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92502
April 11, 1990
1395 MARK~=T ST',RrET
P,O. BOX 1033
TELEPHONE (714) 787-2015
FAX NO, (714) 788-9965
Riverside County
Planning Department
COunty Administrative Center
Riverside, California
Attention:
Regional Team No. 1
Sung Key Ma
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Re:
Vesting Tract 25004
Amended No. 2
This is a proposal to divide 59 acres for residential use in the
Murrieta Hot Springs area- The site is located east of Seraphina
Road and south of Murrieta Hot Springs Road.
The topography of this site consists of well defined ridges and
natural watercourses- Offsite storm flows tributary to the
northeastern portion of the site are proposed to be collected and
conveyed through the site in two storm drain systems. The storm
drain systems are proposed to connect to a storm drain system
proposed by Vesting Tract 23428 located west of this site. If
Vesting Tract 23428 has not begun construction prior to the grad-
ing of this site,. these storm drain outlets will need to be
designed to properly discharge the flows-
Onsite flows from the center portion of this property are pro-
posed to be collected in a storm drain system and discharged west
of Seraphina Road- All flows tributary to the rear of the lots
should be accepted and safely conveyed to an adequate outlet. A
collector ditch may be placed east of the proposed block wall to
collect the flows and convey them to Street "E" with a drain
between lots or some other acceptable mechanism-
Onsite flows from the southern portion of the site are proposed
to be collected and conveyed to Santa Gertrudis Creek by a pro-
posed storm drain system. Flows tributary to the southeast
corner of Lot 35 should either be collected and conveyed to the
proposed drain in Street "A" or an easement for the release of
these flows should be obtain from the affected property owner.
All of the proposed storm drains should be designed to District
standards- Adequate access for maintenance purposes should be
provided to the inlet and outlet structures- Appropriate ease-
ments will need to be obtained from the affected property owners
for the proposed offsite grading and storm drain systems.
Riverside County
Planning Department
Re: Vesting Trac~ 25004
Amended No. 2
-2-
April 11, 1990
Following are the District's reco~unendations:
This tract is located within the limits of the Murrieta
Creek/Santa Gertrudis Valley Area Drainage Plan for which
drainage fees have been adopted by the Board- Drainage
fees shall be paid as set forth under the provisions of
the "Rules and Regulations for Administration of Area
Drainage Plans", amended February 16, 1988:
Drainage fees shall be paid to the Road Commissioner
as part of the filing for record of the subdivision
final map or parcel map, or if the recording of a
final parcel map is waived, drainage fees shall be
paid as.a condition of the waiver prior to recording
a certificate of compliance evidencing the waiver of
the parcel map; or
At the option of the land divider, upon filing a re-
quired affidavit requesting deferment 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 ded-
icated drainage easements obtained from the affected
property owners. The documents should be recorded 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.
Riverside County
Planning Department
Re: Vesting Tract 25004
Amended No. 2
-3-
April 11, 1990
10.
11.
13.
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-
Drainage facilities outletting sump conditions should be
designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows.
Additional emergency escape should also be provided.
Flows tributary to the southeast corner of Lot 35 should
either be collected and conveyed to the proposed drain in
Street "A" or an easement for the release of these flows
should be obtain from the affected property owner.
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.
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
and outlet points.
An encroachment permit should be obtained for any work on
District facilities or within District right of way. The
encroachment permit application should be processed and
approved concurrently with the improvement plans.
If the tract is built in phases, each phase shall be pro-
tected from the 1 in 100 year tributary storm flows.
Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented
immediately following rough grading to prevent deposition
of debris onto downstream properties or drainage
facilities-
Development of this property should be coordinated with
the development of adjacent properties to ensure that
watercourses remain unobstructed and stormwaters are not
diverted from one watershed to another. This may require
the construction of temporary drainage facilities or
offsite construction and grading.
Riverside County
Planning Department
Vesting Tract 25004
Amended No. 2
-4-
April 11, 1990
14.
Inspection and maintenance of the storm drain system to
be built with this tract must be performed by either the
County Road Department or the Flood Control District.
The engineer (owner) must request (in writing) that one
of these agencies accept the proposed storm drain system.
The request should note the tract number, location, and
briefly describe the system (sizes and lengths). Request
to the District should be addressed to Kenneth L. Ed-
wards, Chief Engineer, Attn: Frank Peaits, Planning En-
gineer. If the District is willing to accept the system,
an agreement between the owner and the District must be
executed. A request to draw up an agreement must be sent
to the District to the attention of Michael Rawson.
5e
All flood control facilities should be constructed to
District standards. All facilities that the District
will assume for maintenance will require the payment of a
one time maintenance charge equal to the "present worth"
of maintenance costs from the time of acceptance through
1998.
Adequate access for maintenance purposes should be pro-
vided for the inlet and outlet structures. Appropriate
easements will need to be obtain from the affected prop-
erty owners for the proposed offsite grading and storm
drain systems. A copy of the recorded drainage and grad-
ing easements should be submitted to the District for
review prior to the recordation of the final map.
17.
A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final
map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic cal-
culations should be submitted to the District via the
Road Department for review and approval prior to recorda-
tion of the final map. Grading plans should be approved
prior to issuance of grading permits.
Questions concerning this matter may be referred to Zully Smith
of this office at 714/787-2704-
c: CM Engineering Associates
ZS:mcy
ORDINANCE NO. 90-22
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECL~A, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING
THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF SAm CITY IN
THE CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION
CONTAINED IN DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 5611,
CHANGING THE ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL
RESIDENTIAL) TO R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL) ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF SERAPHINA ROAD AND
RITA WAY.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TERECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Public hearings have been held before the Planning Commission and City Council
of the City of Temecula, State of California, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning law of the
State of California, and the City Code of the City of Temecula. The application land use district
as shown on the attached exhibit is hereby approved and ratified as part of the Official Land Use
map for the City of Temecula as adopted by the City and as may be mended hereafter from
time to time by the City Council of the City of Temecula, and the City of Temecula Official
Zoning Map is amended by placing in affect the zone or zones as described in Change of Zone
No. 5611 and in the above rifle, and as shown on zoning map attached hereto and incorporated
therein.
SECTION 2. Notice of Adoption. Within I0 days after the adoption hereof, the City Clerk
of the City of Temecuh shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be posted
in at least three public places in the City.
SECTION 3. Taking Effect. This ordinance shall take effect 30 days after the date of its
adoption.
PASSED, APPROVIH~ AND ADOPTRB this 27th day of November, 1990.
Ronald I. Parks, Mayor
ATTEST:
1une $'. Greek, Deputy City Clerk
[SnAIl
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Tcmecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 90-22 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 13th day of November, 1990 and that thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 2?th day
of November, 1990 by the following vote, to wit;
AYES: 5
COlINCH,MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Moore, Lindemans,
Mmioz, Parks
NOES:
0 COUNC~ERS: None
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
S. Greek, Deputy City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 6
FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT
CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT
TRACT MAP N0. 25004-1
DATE: June 17, 1992
IMPROVEMENTS
Streets and Drainaqe
Water
Sewer
TOTAL
FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE
SECURITY
$ 465,500.00
$ 155,500.00
$ 141,500.00
$ 762,500.00
MATERIAL F, LABOR
SECURITY
$ 233,000.00
$ 78,000.00
$ 71,000.00
$ 382,000.00
*llatntenance lIftaff. t~n (101; for ~ne 3~ar)
*(or Bonds if t~rk is c..pletad)
$ 76,250.00
Monument Security
City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs
Fire Mitigation Fee
RCFC Drainage Fee Due
Signalization Mitigation Fee - SMD #9
Road and Bridge Benefit Fee
Other Developer Fees ( Quimby )
20,900.00
-0-
22,400.00
17,953.65
8,400.00
-0-
65,700.00
Planning Department Fee
Comprehensive Transportation Plan Fee
Plan Check Fee
Inspection Fee
Monument Inspection Fee
$
$
$
$
$
158.00
8.00
31,686.00
25,816.00
1045.00
Total Inspection/Plan Check Fees
Less Fees Paid To Date (Credit)
Total Inspection/Plan Check Fees Due
$
$
$
58,713.00
58,713.00
-0-
AGENDAS/TR 2500~-1
ITEM
NO.
11
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
August 25, 1992
Advance for Construction of Margarita Road Extension Interim
Improvements (Project No. PW92-04)
_
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve an advance of $562,650 from
the General Fund Revolving Fund to the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) for the
construction of Margarita Road Extension Interim Improvements.
DISCUSSION: In order to fund the construction of the Margarita Road
Extension Interim Improvements, it is necessary to make an advance of $562,650
from the General Fund Revolving Fund to the Redevelopment Agency. This advance
will be repaid from RDA bond proceeds.
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM:
Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer
DATE:
August 25, 1992
SUBJECT:
Advance for Construction of Margarita Road Extension Interim
Improvements (Project No. PW92-04)
RECOMMENDATION: The City Council find that:
The extension of Margarita Road will benefit the redevelopment project area,
and the immediate neighborhood in which the road extension is located and;
there are no other reasonable means of financing the road extension.
Approve an advance of $562,650 from the General Fund Revolving Fund to the
Redevelopment Agency (RDA) for the construction of Margarita Road Extension
Interim Improvements·
DISCUSSION: In order for the Redevelopment Agency to fund the
construction of the Margarita Road Extension Interim Improvements, it is necessary
that City Council find that the Improvement will benefit the Project Area and that no
other funding mechanism is reasonably available and to make an advance of
$562,650 from the General Fund Revolving Fund to the Redevelopment Agency· This
advance will be repaid from RDA bond proceeds.
A map of the Project Area is attached. Margarita Road is the eastern boundary of the
Project Area. Extending Margarita Road will relieve traffic from Ynez Road and
improve traffic circulation throughout Subarea 4 of the Project Area.
No other reasonable
Development Impact
Program.
means are available to finance Margarita Road because
Fees are otherwise committed in the Capital Improvement
ll
TEMECULA
Subarea Map
In an effort to provide more clarit
related to existing land uses on esc~
arcel, the !ar · Project area has
~>~en suhdivide~ into four separate
subareas. This map shows each of t~e
subareas and their relationships to
one another for ease in evaluating Me
following 'Existing Land Use Maps'.
/%
./
\\
%,
ITEM NO.
12
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJP~T:
PREPARN-D BY:
APPROV ·
CITY ATFORNEY~~
FINANCE OFFIC
CITY MANAG
CITY OF TEIVIECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Anthony Eimo, Chief Building Official
August 25, 1992
Abatement of HaTnrdous Vegetation from Vacant Lots or Parcels as per
Ordinance 91-18, Chapter 6.16
Fire Captain Howard Windsor, Fire Prevention Officer
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council hold a public hearing to confirm the cost of hazardous
vegetation abatement and adopt Resolution No. 92-_ and order that cost to the County Recorder
as a lien on the respective property as listed in Exhibit A.
BACKGROUND:
On May 28, 1991 Ordinance 91-18, Chapter 6.16 was added and adopted to the Temecula
Municipal Code. The contents of the Ordinance made provisions to expedite the abatement of
hazardous vegetation from vacant lots or parcels.
DISCUSSION:
During the period of August 1, 1991 through August 14, 1991, the posting of vacant properties
was perfonned. The legal owners were sent a notice to abate on August 16, 1991, giving them
thirty (30) days to clear hazardous conditions. All information on the appeals process was
provided on the notice to abate.
On September 17, 1991, reinspections of the posted properties were made to identify those
properties not in compliance. No appeals were received.
Agenda Report
August 25, 1992
Page 2
On September 23, 1991, a contractor was obtained from the County to begin clearing those
vacant properties in violation within the City of Temecula. Attached is a listing of properties,
by Assessor parcel number, that were cleared with the amount of assessment against the said
property (Exhibit A).
Duringthe period of May 5, 1992 through May 20, 1992, the posting of vacant properties was
again performed. The legal owners were then sent a notice to abate on June 9, 1992 giving
them thirty (30) days to clear the pwperty. All appeals information was stated on the notice
to abate.
On July 7, 1992, re-inspections of the posted properties were made to identify those properties
not in compliance. No appeals were received.
On July 10, 1992, a contractor was again obtained from the County to begin clearing those
vacant properties in violation within the City of Temeeula. Attached is a listing of prope~es
by Assessor parcel number with the mount of assessment against the said property. (Exhibit
A).
The need to abate the vacant properties late in 1991 was primarily due to the amount of hazard
complaints received and the fare bnTards that existed until a sufficient amount of rain was
received. Other means of abatement through the local Fire Ordinance still left numerous vacant
properties in need of clearing.
Normally the time period for clearing will fall into the schedule outlined in 1992, and should
only require clearing once a year.
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOL~ON OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMF_,CULA ORDERING CONFIRMATION OF
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AGAINST PARCELS OF LAND
WITraN THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR COSTS OF
ABATEM~-NT AND REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS WEEDS.
WHEREAS, following a hearing held on April 23, 1991, the City Council of the City
of Temecula adopted Ordinance No. 91-18 which became effective on June 28, 1991 and which
provides for expedited abatement of hazardous vegetation from vacant lots and parcels, and;
WHEREAS, all required notices have been issued in accordance with the provisions of
Ordinance No. 91-18 and all required appeals procedures followed; and
WHEREAS, said abatement of hazardous weeds not been completed on each of the
parcels as described in the attached list of parcels (Exhibit "A"), at a cost equal to the costs of
abatement and removal of hazardous weeds on each such parcel; and
NOW THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES
RESOLVE, DETER_MINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Temecula, State of California, in
regular session assembled on July 28, 1992, resolves that the list of parcels and costs of
abatement and removal of hazardous weeds for each parcel is hereby confirmed and that said
costs shall constitute special assessments against the respective parcels of land, and are a lien
on said land in the amount of the respective assessments.
Section 2. Such liens shall attach upon recordation in the Office of the County
Recorder of the' COunty of Riverside of a certified copy of this Resolution, and that the City
Clerk is hereby directed to make such recordation.
Section 3. A copy of this Resolution shall be transmitted to the Treasurer-Tax
CoLlector who shall enter the amounts of the respective assessments against the respective parcels
of land as they appear on the current assessment roll, and shall collect said assessments at the
same time in the same manner as ordinary municipal ad valorera taxes as provided by
Government Code 39577.
Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
3~,e~m/268 -1- 07115192
PASSEB, APPROV!~ AND ADOPTED this 28th day of July, 1992.
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
CITY OF TEMECULA )
SS
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Resolution No. 92- was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the 28th day of July, 1992,. by the following roll call vote.
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek,
City Clerk
3/P,.os/'268 -2- 07/15/92
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE
CITY OF TEMECULA FIRE SERVICES
VACANT PROPERTY WEED ABATEMENT
1991
919043003
919071003
919100008
919100009
91 9170013
919210003
919292010
921111002
921140013
921163007
921180003
921180004
921192003
921 211001
921300005
921300006
921 310011
921370002
921370003
945020016
94503001 0
945060019
950020001
950020002
950020003
950020009
950030008
950040007
950040009
950040011
950040015
950100010
950100011
TOTAL
r~3.oo
~8o.oo
$255..oo
$13o.oo
$105.00
$105.00
$,55.00
$80.00
$130..00
$2.80.00
$155.00
$55.00
$110.00
$3,225.00
SPECIAL ASSESMENT WILL INCLUDE
ADMIN. FEE OF $170.00 PLUS
AN INTEREST RATE FACTOR
OF .0398 TO BE ADDED TO DISC COST.
EXHIBIT A
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE
CITY OF TEMECULA FIRE SERVICES
VACANT PROPERTY WEED ABATEMENT
1992
909-252-013
909-252-01 4
909-270-023
909-282-01 0
909-282-011
91 0-201-004
914-260-010
9 'j ;4-260-039
914-260-040
914-260-041
91 4-260-042
914-260-085
91 4-280-058
91 4-300-049
91 4-300-075
91 4.470-01 0
91 4-470-011
91 4-480-005
91 4-500-004
914-500-009
,~14-643-018
91 9-051-004
91 9-051-01 2
~19-072-008
919-100-009
919-100-014
919,-122-001
919-170-013
91 9-210-001
91 9-210-008
91 9-221-001
91 9-281-01 5
919-281-01 7
91 9-291-003
91 9-292-01 0
91 9-292-013
91 9-323-009
I I
I
$155.00
$105.00
$130.00
,,.oo I
$130.00
$~3o.oo I
$30.001
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE
CITY OF TEMECULA FIRE SERVICES
VACANT PROPERTY WEED ABATEMENT
1992
921-020-060 $105.00
921-020-067 $80.00
921-020-068 $130.00
921-030.-014 $30.00
921-030.015 $30.00
921-030-016 ,$30.00
921-030-017 $30.00
921-040-027 $130.00
921-080-054 $80.00
921-111-002 $30.00
921-120-012 $30.00
921-130-007 $30.00
921-140-01 3 $30.00
921-180-004 $30.00
921-211-001 $30.00
921-211-002 $30.00
921-242-007 $30.00
921-290-003 $230.00
921-290-006 $180.00
921-330-005 $130.00
921-330-007 $55.00
921-330-008 $30.00
921-330-009 $30.00
921-330-010 $55.00
921-330-024 $30.00
921-330-025 $30.00
921-3,30-026 $,30.00
921-330-027 $30.00
921-370-002 $180.00
921-370-003 $180.00
922-100-006 $130.00
922-100-021 $30.00
922-100-022 $55.00
922-110-014 $80.00
922-110-018 $30.00
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE
CITY OF TEMECULA FIRE SERVICES
VACANT PROPERTY WEED ABATEMENT
1992
922-.110-01 9 $30.00
922-160-010 $80.00
922-160-015 $80.00
922-170-001 $80.00
922-190-008 $55.00
922-190-023 $80.00
945-060-(X)6 $105.00
945-060-019 $130.00
945-080-005 $55.00
945-140-010 $55.00
945-180-008 $55.00
946-050-003 $180.00
946-100-01 7 $130.00
946-100-018 $130.00
950-050-016 $130.00
950-100-001 $180.00
950-100-01 0 $80.05
950-100-011 $55.05
950-100-01 2 $80.00
950-100-01 3 $105.00
950-100-015 $80.05
950-452-001 $30.00
950-452-002 $30.00
950-452-003 $30.00
950-452-004 $30.00
950-452-005 $30.00
950-452-006 $30.00
950-452-007 $30.00
950-452-008 $30.00
950-453-010 $30.05
950-453-011 $30.00
TOTAL $7,800.00
EXHIBIT A
ORDINANCE NO. 91-18
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING
CHAPTER 6.14 AND ADDING CHAPTER 6.16 TO
THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE
FOR EXPEDITED ABATEMENT OF HAZARDOUS
VEGETATION FROM VACANT LOTS OR PARCELS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 6.14 002(h) of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby mended
to read as follows:
'6.14.002...(h) Except as provided in Chapter 6.16, any overgrown, dead,
decayed or hazardous vegetation which:
(1) May harbor rats, vermin, or other disease carriers;
(2)
Is maintained so as to cause an obstruction to the vision of motorists, or
a hazardous condition to pedestrians or vehicle traffic;
(3) Constitutes an unsightly appearance;
(4) Creates a danger or attractive nuisance to the public."
SECTION 2. Section 6.14.002(m) of the Temecuh Municipal Code is hereby mended
to read as follows:
'6.14.002...(m) Abandoned, broken or neglected equipment and machinery,
pooh, ponds, excavations, abandoned wells, shafts, basements, or other holes,
abandoned refrigerators or other appliances, abandoned moWr vehicles, any
unsound structures, skateboard ramps, or accumulated lumber, trash, garbage,
debris or vegetation (not otherwise subject to the provisions of Chapter 6.16)
which may reasonably attract children to such abandoned or neglected
conditions;'
SECTION 3. Section 6.14.002(r) of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby mended
to read as follows:
'6.14.002...(r) Any condition of vegetation overgrowth, (except that regulated by
Chapter 6.16 hereof), which encroaches into, over, or upon any public right-of-
3/Ords 91-18 -1-
way including but not limited to, streets, alleys, or sidewalks, so as to constitute
either a danger to public safety or property or any impediment to public travel;'
SECTION 4. Section 6.14,002(v) of the Temecula Municipal Code is hereby added to
read as follows:
"6.14.002..(v) Any viohtion of the Temecuh Municipal Code, any Code adopted
by reference by the City, or any uncodi~ed City Ordinance."
SECTION 5. Chapter 6.16 *Expedited Abatement of Hazardous Vegetation From
Vacant Lots and Parcels,' is hereby added to the Temecula Municipal Code to read as follows:
'CHAPTI:-R 6.16
F. XPI:.r~IT~.r3 ABAT~.lVlF-~ OF HAT. ARDOUS
VEGRTATION FROM VACANT 1' OTS AND PARCF:.Y-~
Sections:
6.16.010
6.16.020
6.16.030
6.16.040
6.16.050
6.16.060
6.16.070
6.16.080
6.16.090
6.16.100
6.16.110
Definitions.
Duty to Abate Hnnrdous Vegetntion From Vacant Lots or Parcels
F. nforcement of Chapter by Fire Chief or Desi~nce.
Notice to Remove and Abate.
ApF~! of Abntement Notice.
Removnl of HnTnrdous VeVetation from Vncant Iots or Parcels by
City_.
Payment for Removal. Cost Accounting. Notification.
Assessment ~ -ien.
City Council Action Followinif Assessment Hearinl/.
Procedure for Refund of Payment.
Enforcement. Violations. Penalties.
6.16.919 DI:.~INITIONS. For purposes of this.Chapter, the following terms shall have
the meanings set forth below:
(a) 'Appeals'shall mean that body designated by the City Council pursuant to this
Chapter and consisting of one (1) officer selected by the City Fire Chief which such officer shall
not be the officer issuing the order to abate and two (2) persons selected by the City Council.
Said Appeals Board shall hear any and all appeals regarding the determination by the City that
hnz~rdous vegetation exists on any vacant land or vacant parcel in the City.
(b) 'Hazardous Vegetation' shall mean all dry grass, stubble, Russian thisfie
(ramble weeds), brush, weeds, rank grow, sagebrush, chapanal, or other vegetation which
constitute a fire hazard. I-l~'nrdous vegetation shall also mean weeds which when mature bear
3/Ords 91-18 -2-
wingy or downy seeds, which will attain such a large growth as to become a fife menace when
dry, or which are otherwise noxious or dangerous.
(c) 'Hazard Reduction Office' shall mean that physical location where the "Notice
to Remove and Abate" is generated.
(d) 'Hazard Reduction Officer' shall mean the designee of the City Fire Chief
vested with the authority to enforce this chapter.
(e) 'Vacant Lot' and 'Vacant Parcel' shall mean any lot or parcel larger than one-
quarter (1/4) acre which does not have an improved, habitable building or structure on it.
6.16.020 DUTY TO ARATE HAT. ARDOUS VI:;-GRTATION. It shall be the duty of
every owner or person in control of any real property or interest therein which constitutes a
'Vacant Lot' or 'Vacant Parcel' punuant to Section 6.16.018(e) above to abate therefrom, and
from all sidewalks and parkways, except for those roads accepted into the City Maintained
System, all 'Hazardous Vegetation' or other flammable vegetation, that constitutes a fire hazard
which may endanger or damage neighboring property.
(a) In the case of any parcel or contiguous parcels of real property under the same
ownership consisting of five (5) or less areas upon which vegetation exists which may constitute
a fire hazard, the requirements of this Section shall be satisfied if the vegetation is removed by
disking or mowing the entire acreage.
Co) Where the acreage consists of more than five (5) contiguous acres, the
requirements of this Section shall be satisfied ff there is cleared, a one hundred (100) foot wide
strip of land at the boundaries of such real property, and through such land so that there shall
not be any pertion of the real property larger than two and one-half(2 1/2) acres which is not
enclosed by itself within such a strip, which shall be a firebreak. The City Fire Chief may
require firebreaks exceeding this one hundred (100) foot width or disking or larger than five (5)
acre parcels if larger breaks or disking is deemed necessary by him/her for the protection of the
public safety and welfare.
(c) Where the parcel is improved or terrain is such that it cannot be disked or
mowed, the City Fire Chief may require, or authorize, that other means of removal be used, and
that specific standards be met as set forth in Temecula Municipal Code, Public Resources Code,
or other recognized Fire Codes.
6.16.030 ENFORCF. MENT OF CHAPTER BY FIRE CHIEF OR DESIGNI.E. For
purposes of enforcing the provisions of this Chapter, the City Fire Chief may designate any
person or persons as his/her deputy in the performance of the duties vested upon the City Fire
Chief by the provisions of this Chapter.
6.6.040 NOTICE TO RF-MOVE AND ABATE. It shall be the duty of the City Fire
S/Ords 9i-18 -3-
Chief, or designee of the Chief, whenever such officer deems it necessary to enforce the
provisions of Section 6.16.020 hereof, to issue a 'Notice to Remove and Abate' by either of the
following methods:
(a) By mailing to the owner as much real property as shown on the last equalized
tax rolls and by personal service thereon; or
Co) By mailing to the owner as shown on the last equalized tax rolls and by
posting the real property.
The 'Notice to Remove' shall be in substantially the form set forth below:
'NOTICE TO REMOVE AND ABATE
Date:
By virtue of Section 6.16.020 of the Temecuh Municipal Code
YOUR AREItIMEBY NOTIk'I ~:n AND REQUII~ED TO ABATE from
your prolxa ty described
[Legal Description]
taken from the Riverside County Assessor's Records which lists
of
[Address, City, State, Zip]
specific mentioned items described as combustible matter
and
If said combustible matter is not removed within thirty (30) calendar days,
the City Fire Chief, or other duly designated officer(s), may order said matter
removed by public employees, private contractor, or other persons, and the cost
of said removal shall be levied with an added Administration Fee, and assessed
against the property as a Special Assessment Lien, or billed direc~y to the
3lOrds 91-18 -4- ,_~
property owner.
An appeal from this order may be taken by presenting a written appeal to the
Hazard Reduction Office at (Phone:
) within twenty (20) calendar days of the
postmark on the Notice to Abate. The HnTard Reduction Officer shall set the
same for hearing before the Board of Appeals, and shall notify the Applicant, in
writing, of the hearing date.
Name of Issuing Officer
Title of Issuing Officer
6. 16.0~0 APP~-AL OF ABA'rF, M~.NT NOTICE.
(a) Appeals Procedure. Any person who is adversely affected by the
determination contained in the Notice set forth in Section 6.16,040, may appeal to the Board of
Appeals within the twenty (20) calendar days of the postmark on the Notice to Remove and
Abate by filing a written appeal with the Hazard Reduction Officer. An appeal, timely filed and
in proper form, shall stay any further action for removal or abatement until the date set for
heating. The Hazard Reduction Office shall set the matter for hearing before the Board of
Appeals and shall notify the person appealing by mail of the date set for such heating, at least
fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date. If the person appealing resides outside the County,
the above period of notice by mail before the hearing shall be at least twenty-five (2S) days.
The person appealing shall have the right to appear in person or by an agent, designated in
writing, at the hearing, and present oral, written, and/or photographic evidence. The Board of
Appeals shall decide the appeal and shall issue its decision, which shall be in writing.
Co) Appeals Board. The Board of Appeals is hereby established with the
membership as set forth in Section 6.16.010 (a). Members shall serve at the pleasure of the
appending authority.
6.16.060 REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS VRGRTATION BY CITY. If, at the end of
the time allowed for compliance in the original notice, or as extended in cases of appeal, or as
specified by the Board of Appeals, compliance has not been accomplished, the officer issuing
the notice or the agency of which he is an officer, may order the 'Hazardous Vegetation' to be
removed by public officers or by employees of said agency, or may cause the removal to be
carried out by a private contractor selected by the County Purchasing Agency in Accordance
with applicable statutes and in the manner and under the terms specified by the City Council.
The Cost of such removal accompanied by a reasonable administrative change may be imposed
as a Special Assessment upon the pwpeny, and such property shall be subject to a Special
Assessment Lien for said purpose. The costs so assessed shall be limited to the actual costs
,.._ 3lOrds 91-18 -5-
incurred by the City of Temecula in enforcing abatement upon the parcels, including payment
to the contractor, costs of investigation, boundary determination, measurement, clerical,
personnel, consultant, and an administrative cost to be set by Resolution adopted by the City
Council on those parcels where such weeds have not been- removed by the property owner at his
or her own expense.
6.16,070 PAYMR':NT FOR IIF. MOVAI ..' COST ACCOUNTING. NOTIFICATION.
The City shall recover from the property owner the full costs, including administrative and legal
costs of abating 'Hazardous Vegetation' from any 'Vacant Lot' or 'Vacant Parcel' in the City
in accordance with the procedures set for in Section 6.15.012 of this Code.
6.16.080 ASSK~SlVI~NT l-rl~-N. The total costs of abatement of the 'Hazardous
Vegetation' abated pursuant to this Chapter shall constitute an assessment and lien against any
vacant lot or vacant parcel from which 'I4nnrdous Vegetation' was abated by the City. The
assessment shall be levied and the lien imposed by the City in accordance with the provisions
of Section 6.14.013 of this Code. The 'Notice of Lien' set forth in said Section shall be
modified to reelect 'Chapter 6.16' in lieu of 'Chapter 6.14.'
6.16,090 CITY COUNCIl. ACTION FOIJ.OW1NG ASSI::-qSlVIF. NT HEARING, At
the conclusion of the hearing required above, the City Council shall do one of the following:
(a) Confirm the costs of the abatement and order the costs to recorder as lien on
the property;
(b) Modify the costs of the abatement and order this new figure to be recorder
as a lien on the property; or
(c) Cancel all or any portion of any such Special Assessment, penalty, or costs
heretofore entered, and shall order that the same be carweled by the County Auditor-Controller
if uncollected, or, except in the case provided for in subsection (5) below , refunded by the
County Treasurer-Tax Collector, if collected, if the charges were charged or paid:
(1) More than once;
(2) Through clerical error;
(3) Through the error or mistake of the Board of Appeals, or of the
officer, Board or Commission designed by them to give notice, in respect to any material fact,
including the case where the cost report rendered and confirmed, as hereinbefore provided,
shows the County abated the 'Hazardous Vegetation' but such is not the actual fact;
(4) Illegally; or
(5) On property acquired after the lien date by the Slate or by any county,
3lOrds 91-18 -6-
city, school district, special district, or other political subdivision, and because of this public
ownership, is not subject to sale for delinquent taxes.
6.16.100 PROCEDURF. FOR RI:.FUND OF PAYMENT. No order for refund under
the foregoing Section shall be made except on a written claim:
(a) Verified by the person who paid the Special Assessment, his guardian,
executor or administrator; and
(b) Filed with one (1) year after making the payment sought to be refunded.
6.16.110 F. NFORCF~MF. NT. VIOT~ATIONS. PI:.NAI.TIF-~. It shall be unlawful, subject
to punishment in accor~ce with Sections 1.01.200 to 1.01.240 of this Code, for any person--
natural or corporate--owing, possessing, occupying, or controlling any lands or premises subject
to the provisions of this Chapter to fail to perform the duty set forth in Section 6.16.020 of this
Chapter, or to fail to comply with the requirements in the 'Notice to Remove and Abate' as
specified in Section 6.16.040 of this Chapter or to interfere with the performance of the duties
herein specified for any of the officers designated in this Chapter or their deputies, or to refuse
to allow any such officer or their deputies or employees, or approved private contractors, to
enter upon any premises for the purpose of inspecting and/or removing any 'Hazardous
Vegetation' hereinbefore described, or to interfere in any manner whatever with said officers
of contractors in the work of inspections and removal herein provided. Said penalties are in
addition to any civil or equitable remedies available to the City to enforce the provisions of this
Chapter. ~
SECTION 6. S~VI:-RABILITY. The City Council hereby declares that the provisions
of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason a court of competent jurisdiction shall hold
any sentence, paxagraph, or section of this Ordinance to be invalid, such decision shall not affect
the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
SECTION 7. I:.FFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect
thirty (30) days after its passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance
and cause copies of this Ordinance to be posted in three designated posting places.
SECTION 8. A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper published
and ~irculated in said City at least five (5) days prior to the City Council meeting at which the
proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full text of the proposed Ordinance
shall be posted at City Hall. Within fifteen (15) days after adoption of the Ordinance, the
summary with the names of those City Council members voting for and against the Ordinance
shall be published again, and the City Clerk shnll post a certified copy of the full text of such
adopted Ordinance.
3/Ords 91-18 -7-
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOFrED this 28th day of May, 1991.
Ronald J. Parks, Mayor
ATTEST:
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEIVIECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 91-18 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 23rd day of April, 1991, and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 28th day of May,
1991, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: 5
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Mufioz,
Parks
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
~~ne S. Greek, City Clerk
3/Otds 91-IS -8- _,,
ITEM NO. 13
APPROV
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFIC
CITY MANAG~~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
August 25, 1992
Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council continue Change of Zone
No. 5631 and Vesting Tentalive Tract Map No. 25320 to
September 8, 1992.
ANALYSIS
Change of Zone No. 5631 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 25320 were previously before
the City Council on October 8, 1991, November 12, 1991, December 10, 1991, January 14,
1992, March 10, 1992, April 14, 1992, June 9, 1992 and August 11, 1992. These items were
continued at the applicants' request. The item is once again being continued to September 8,
1992.
vgw
ITEM NO.
14
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT.'
CITY OF TEMECULA
A GENDA REPORT
City Council
City Manager
August 25, 1992
EA GI.E MOUNTAIN LANDFI~,L PROJECT
PREPARED B~
RECOMMENDATION:
Joe Hreha, Senior Management Analyst, City Manager's
Office
That the City Council recommend, through its Western
Riverside Council of Government's Executive Committee
representative, support of an Eagle Mountain condition that
the revenues to the County from the Eagle Mountain
project be distributed 100% between the County and all of
its cities based upon population or another fair and
equitable distribution be developed to the satisfaction of
Riverside County and all of its cities.
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
A GENDA REPORT
TO:
City Council
FROM:
City Manager
DATE:
August 25, 1992
SUBJECT.'
EAGLE MOUNTAIN LANDFILL PROJECT
PREPARED BY:
Joe Hreha, Senior Management Analyst, City Manager's
Office
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council recommend, through its Western
Riverside Council of Government's Executive Committee
representative, support of an Eagle Mountain condition that
the revenues to the County from the Eagle Mountain
project be distributed 100% between the County and all of
its cities based upon population.
DISCUSSION: This Agenda Report is not soliciting support for or opposition
to the Eagle Mountain Project. This Report focuses on one condition of the project
that will be finalized at an upcoming meeting of the Executive Committee of the
Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) on August 31, 1992. By
reviewing the attachment, WRCOG arrived at the recommended conditions via their
Planning Director's Committee; This item was not referred to the WRCOG's Solid
Waste Technical Committee. The final condition agreed to by the committee will
become a formal recommendation to the Board of Supervisors who will consider the
approval or disapproval of the Eagle Mountain Project in September.
As stated in the Eagle Mountain Project description, the
County "will receive an estimated $489 million -- $25 million per year average -- in
new tax and fee revenues associated with Eagle Mountain's operations in the first 20
years." Cities in the County will receive no direct monies associated with the Eagle
Mountain operations in the first 20 years.
The Eagle Mountain Landfill will be a model waste-by-rail
system, where each day's trains will replace the equivalent of up to 800 trash trucks.
Trains will carry approximately 140 sealed and locked containers of refuse to Eagle
Mountain. At full operation, Eagle Mountain will accommodate approximately 20,000
tons of waste per day, with 2,000 tons per day reserved for Riverside County and its
cities and 18,000 tons per day reserved for out-of-county waste importation. In other
words, Eagle Mountain Landfill will service Eastern Riverside County and El Sobrante,
Badlands, and Lamb Canyon landfills will service Western Riverside County. As stated
by the County's Waste Management Department, with the County's increased
capacity from the Eagle Mountain Project, the Western Riverside County landfills,
Mead Valley and others, will be closed. All of Temecula's waste currently is landfilled
at Mead Valley Landfill in Perris. If Mead Valley is closed, we would be forced to
transport our waste to the more distant El Sobrante Landfill. To quantify the impact
of this action on the City of Temecula, its businesses, and citizens, rate increases
resulting from transporting our refuse to El Sobrante versus Mead Valley was
estimated:
LANDFILL
RESIDENTIAL RATE
COMMERCIAL RATE
Mead Valley $13.26 $64.41
El Sobrante $13.72 $68.75
Annual citywide impact
of Mead Valley versus
El Sobrante based upon
8,000 single family
detached homes and 3,600
commercial 3 cubic yard
bin pickups once each week
$44,160 $187,488
Another issue to consider is landfill rate stabilization, i.e.,
Riverside County charges the same landfill fees to customers no matter what landfill
is used. Currently, the landfill fee is $31.50 at all landfills operated in the County.
A new sophisticated regional landfill (El Sobrante expansion) and a waste-by-rail
project (Eagle Mountain) are more expensive than the traditional sanitary landfill. The
expansion of El Sobrante and the Eagle Mountain Project have to comply with the new
Environmental Protection Agency's new landfill construction standards. Therefore,
new and expanded landfills require higher construction, operation, and closure costs.
In other words, new or expanded landfills, coupled with landfill rate stabilization, will
cause the landfill tipping fees to increase, which will raise Riverside County and all city
rates charged to customers. To exactly quantify this impact is beyond the capabilities
of City Staff. However, any landfill increase is a pro-rata pass through to City of
Temecula businesses and citizens. Our current rate schedule requires a residential
increase of $0.21 per $1.00/ton landfill increase, less the diversion rate, per month.
For example, an $8.00 landfill increase with a 25% diversion rate would equal a
$1.26 per month per homeowner residential rate increase. Using an 8,000 home
estimate, Temecula citizens would experience an annual citywide residential rate
increase of over $120,960. Our current rate schedule requires a commercial increase
of $0.91 per $1.00/ton landfill increase, less the diversion rate, per month. For
example, an $8.00 landfill increase with a 25% diversion rate would equal a $5.46
per month per customer commercial rate increase. Using a 3,600 3 cubic yard bin
pickups once each week estimate, Temecula businesses would experience an annual
citywide commercial rate increase of over $235,872.
The Eagle Mountain Project benefits and impacts not only
the County of Riverside; but, all Riverside County cities as well. If a regional landfill
is built in Riverside County that will accept out-of-county refuse at some expense to
Riverside County cities with all tax and fee revenues from the project being retained
by the County of Riverside is not appropriate. As demonstrated above, even though
the Eagle Mountain Project is located in Eastern Riverside County and that Western
Riverside County cities would probably not use the Eagle Mountain Landfill, by its
approval, Riverside County and all of its cities will be impacted. Haulers and cities
who perform their own hauling will experience increased transportation costs and
increased landfill rates that will be passed on to all customers in Riverside County.
Assuming an average $25 million per year average tax and
fee revenues generated by the Eagle Mountain Project, a Riverside County population
of 1.18 million, and a City of Temecula population of 36,000, the Agenda Report
recommendation, if approved, would provide to the City of Temecula approximately
$762,840 per year average revenues. Assuming that the Eagle Mountain Project is
approved, the impacts addressed above are not mitigated, landfill fees are increased
a modest $8.00 per ton, the number of residents and commercial bins are assumed
as stated previously, and our hauler is required to transport all refuse to the El
Sobrante Landfill due to the closure of the Mead Valley Landfill, Temecula businesses
and citizens would experience an estimated annual refuse increase of $588,480. It
also requires clarification that this example is an average based upon many
assumptions. The revenues from the Eagle Mountain Project will continue to modestly
increase due to a built in cost of living provision. If our population grows at a faster
pace then the rest of the County, our revenues will again increase accordingly.
However, refuse rates for Temecula businesses and citizens also have a built in cost
of living adjustment that will continue to modestly increase their refuse rates.
Furthermore, the example in this Report only analyzed one meek landfill increase of
$8.00 a ton. From December 31, 1990 until January 1, 1992 (366 days), landfill
fees increased from $16.00 to their present rate of $31.50 a ton, an increase of
$15.50 a ton. If landfill fee increases continue at their current level and frequency,
refuse rates for Temecula businesses and citizens will steadily out pace the revenues
received from the Eagle Mountain Project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
If the Eagle Mountain Project and the condition
recommended herein are approved, the fiscal impact could
potentially increase revenues by an estimated $762,840
average per fiscal year during the first 20 years. These
revenues could be used to help offset the impacts
associated with the Eagle Mountain Project that will
increase refuse rates for Temecula businesses and citizens.
A TTA CHMENT:
Western Riverside Council of Governments Executive
Committee Agenda Item on the subject project
Date: AUGUST 3, 1992
Agenda Item: rr.B.
WESTERN RSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNM F, NTS
STAFF TRANSM1TTAL
TO: EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
FR: AJ. WILSON
BY: DAVE GUNDERMAN
RE: EAGLE MOUNTAIN LANDFILL
I~[(IMEEI-i CONTINUED TO THE EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE'S AUGUST 31, 1992
MEETING FROM 4PM TO 6PM AT
0REN0 VALLEY COUNCIL CHAMBE .
ISSUE: The County is proposing to establish a new landfill in the Eagle Mountain
area. The Board of Supervisors will consider the matter in September.
BACKGROUND: The County is presently reviewing a request by Mine
Reclamation Corporation to develop a municipal solid waste landfill in an unused
open pit at Eagle Mountain. The landfill will accomodate approximately 20,000
tons of waste per day at full operation. The pbnning Director's Committee
reviewed the request and e~pressed some concerns relative to its operation. Most
specifically those concerns dealt with the affect on traffic and rail service due to
the movement of the waste from western county to the site. Also, the committee
felt that the majority of the host fees to be collected by the operation of the facility
should be used to improve and satisfy the needs of the Countywide solid waste
system. ,
Similarly, the TAC reviewed the request and recommended that the revenues from
the operation of the site should be distributed 50% to the Coachella Valley with
the other 50 % to be expended by the County throughout the county based on the
need for services and facilities.The committee also recommended that funds be set
aside or that the project be conditioned to improve the grade separations in the
Banning area which would be impacted by traffic to Eagle Mountain.
REC OM1VIENDATION: THAT THE EXECUTIVE COM1VIITTEE ENDORSE
THE EAGLE MOUNTAIN LANDFILL WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
1. THAT THE REVENUES TO THE COUNTY FROM EAGLE MOUNTAIN
BE DISTRIBUTED B0% TO THE COACHELLA VALLEY FOR USE AS
THEY SEE FIT, WITH TI-HE OTHER 50% TO BE EXPENDED
THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY BASED UPON THE NEED FOR SERVICES
AND FACILITIES.
2. THAT THERE BE FUNDS SET ASIDE TO I~IPROVE THE GRADE
SEPARATIONS IN THE TH~ BANNING AREA WHICH WOULD BE
I~IPACTED BY TRAFFIC TO EAGLE IVIOUNTAIN. THESE
EXPENDITURES SHOULD BE A DIRECT MTIGATION EXPENSE TO
THE LANDFILL DEVELOPERS.
ITEM NO. 15
APPROVAL%
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFIC
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM: City Clerk
DATE:
August 25, 1992
SUBJECT:
Designation of Voting Delegate for League Annual Conference
RECOMMENDATION: Appoint a voting delegate and an alternate to represent the
City of Temecula at the Annual League of California Cities Conference Business
Meeting.
BACKGROUND: The League of California Cities holds its annual conference
each year in October. This year's conference will take place October 10-13, 1992 in
Los Angeles. The League has requested that to expedite the conduct of business at
the Business Session on Tuesday, October 13, each City Council designate a voting
representative and alternate who will be entitled to one vote in matters affecting
municipal or League policy.
ATTACHMENT:
Letter from League of California Cities
Executive Director dated July 13, 1992.
maw League of California Cities
libBL 1400 K STREET · SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 · (916) 444-5790
Cahfornta Cities
wo~ ro~ether July 14, 1992
The Honorable 'Mayor and City Council
From:
Don Bcnninghovcn, Executive Director
Re:
Designation of Voting Delegate for League Annual Conference
This year's League Annual Conference is scheduled for Saturday, October 10 through Tuesday,
October 13 in Los Angeles. One very important aspect of the Annual Conference is the
General Business Meeting when the membership takes action on conference resolutions.
Annual Conference resolutions guide cities and the League in our efforts to improve the
quality, responsiveness and vitality of local government in California. It is important that all
cities be represented at the Business Meeting on Tuesday, October 13, at 1:30 p.m. in the
Petree D Room in the Los Angeles Convention Center.
To expedite the conduct of business at this important policy-making meeting, each City Council
should designate a voting representative and an alternate who will be present at the Business
Meeting. The League Bylaws provide that each city is entitled to one vote in matters affecting
municipal or League policy. A voting card will be given to the city official designated by the
City Council on the enclosed "Voting Delegate Form." If the Mayor or a member of the City
Council is in attendance at the Conference, it is expected that one of these officials will be
designated as the voting delegate. However, if the City Council will not have a registered
delegate at the Conference but will be represented by other city officials, one of these officials
should be dcsiguated the voting delegate or alternate.
Please forward the enclosed "Voting Delegate Form" to the Sacramento office of the League at
the carllest possible time (not later than Friday, September 18, 1992), so that proper records
may be established for the Conference. The voting delegate may pick up l the city's voting card
at the designated Voting Card Table located in the League Registration Area.
If neither the voting delegate nor alternate is able to attend the Business Meeting, the voting
delegate or alternate may pass the voting card to another official from the same city by
appearing in person before a representative of the Credentials Committee to make the
exchange. Prior to the Business Meeting, the card may be exchanged at the "Voting Card" table
in the League registration area. At the Business Meeting, the "Voting Card" table, where the
Credentials Committee will be seated, will be located in the front of the meeting room.
The voting procedures that will be followed at this conference are printed on the reverse side of
this memo. It is suggested that the Mayor and all Council Members from each city sit together
at the Business Meeting so that if amendments are considered there may be an opportunity to
exchange points of view and arrive at a consensus before each city's vote is cast.
Your help in returning the attached "Voting Delegate Form" as soon as possible is appreciated.
League of California Cities
Annual Conference Voting Procedures
Each member city has a fight to cast one vote on matters pertaining fo League policy.
To cast the city's vote a city official must have in his or her possession the city's voting
card and be registered with the Credentials Committee.
Prior to the Annual Conference, each city should designate a voting delegate and an
alternate and return the Voting Delegate Fonn to the League for use by the Credentials
Committee.
The voting delegate or alternate may pick up the city's voting card at the voting card
desk in the conference registration area.
Free exchange of the voting card between the voting delegate and alternate is permitted.
If neither the voting delegate nor alternate is able to attend the Business Session, the
voting delegate or alternate may pass the voting card to another official from the same
city by appearing in person before a representative of the Credentials Committee to
make the exchange. Prior to the Business Meeting, exchanges my be made at the
"Voting Card" table in the League Registration Area. At the Business Meeting,
exchanges may be made at the "Voting Card' table in the front of the meeting room.
Qualification of an initiative resolution is judged in pan by the validity of signatures.
Only the signatures of city officials, who, according to the records of the Credentials
Committee, are authorized to use the city's voting card and who have. left a sample of
their signature on the Credentials Committee register will be approved.
In case of dispute, the Credentials Committee will determine the right of a city official to
vote at the Business Meeting.
· VOTING DELEGATE:
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES
1992 ANNUAL CONFERENCE
VOTING DEI.EGATE FORM
VOTING ALTERNATE:
(NAME)
(TffLE)
(NAME)
Please Return To:
League of California Cities
1400 K Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
FAX: 916/444-8671
Not I ~ter Thnn Friday. September 18. 1997
10
(NAME)
(TIT~
H:XpubXjl\acres\votde192.sav
ITEM NO. 16
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBYECT:
APPROV,
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning/"
August 25, 1992
Appointments to Development Code Advisory Committee
RECOMMENDATION: It is requested that the City Council:
APPOINT a representative from the City Council and five
members- at-large to the Development Code Advisory Committee.
DISCUSSION:
As part of the work program for the General Plan, The Planning Center has begun work on the
City's Development Code (zoning ordinance). To assist in the preparation of the Code staff is
recommending the City Council appoint an Advisory Committee to review and provide direction
on the Development Code. The purpose of the advisory committee is to provide input on the
procedures, standards and regulations contained within the proposed code. Staff feels the
advisory committee will play an important role in assuring the Code is easy to use, implements
the goals and policies of the General Plan, and protects the community's public health, safety
and weftare.
Staff proposes the advisory committee include an appointee by each Councilmember, as well as
a representative from the Council and Commission. Planning Department Staff and the City
Attorney wffi also serve on the Committee. The advisory committee should include
representatives from the community, including perhaps a local planner, architect, landscape
architect, developer or representative from a local community group.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The appmved budget for FY 92-93 has allocated $30,000 under Account No. 100-161-999-5248.
S\DEVCODI!~ADVCOMM. RIC
ITEM
17
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATFORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
August 25, 1992
General Plan Contract Amendment for Completion of Development Code
RECOMMENDATION: It is requested that the City Council:
AMEND the General Plan ConWaet by $26,405 for the completion
of the Development Code.
DISCUSSION:
As part of the work program for the General Plan, The Planning Center CFPC) has begun work
on the City's Development Code (zoning ordinance). It is recommended that the work program
be expanded. The majority of the expanded program consists of four meetings with a
Development Code Advisory Committee. The committee will serve to review and provide
direction on various aspects of the Development Code. Although this was not included in the
original proposal, staff believes the advisory committee is a critical element in the preparation
of the City's first Development Code. In addition, the new work program includes the
consultant's participation at joint meetings between the Council and Commission, two public
hearings before each body. This had been removed from the original proposal as a cost-savings
consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The approved budget for FY 92-93 has allocated $30,000 under Account No. 100-161-999-5248
for completion of the Development Code.
Attachment: Development Code Expanded Work Program.
S\DEVCODEE~,AUGBUDGT.RIC
City of Temecula Development Code
Budget Augmentation Request
Meeting and Citizen Involvement Program
The following describes the additional work tasks and meetings that are anticipated as part of
the preparation of the Development Cede.
Development Code Advisory Committee
A Development Code Advisory Committee should be appointed by the City Council. This
advisory committee should include representatives from the community, including perhaps a
local land planner or architect, a developer, representatives from citizens groups or
environmental interests, a member of the Planning Commission, a member of the City Council.
In addition, the committee should include participation by the Planning Department Staff and the
City Attorney.
It is anticipated that this committee will meet four times during the process with The Planning
Center to review and provide input on various aspects of the Development Cede.
Joint Workshops with the City Council and Planning Commition
At two points in the process, the draft Development Cede should be discussed at joint workshops
with the City Council and the Planning Commission.
These should be scheduled at the following times:
Workshop #1 should occur early in the process after the Development Cede Advisory
Committee is organized. The purpose of this meeting is to review the preliminary work
that has been completed and to provide for general direction for the remaining work.
Workshop #2 would be held following the completion of the preliminary draft ordinance
and prior to the beginning of the Public Hearings on the Draft Ordinance. This will
include a preliminary review of the draft zoning map.
Planning Commission Public Hearings
The Planning Center will attend and participate in two public hearings before the Planning
Commission.
City Council Public Hearing
The Planning Center will attend and participate in two public hearings before the City Council.
Requested Total Budget Augment
Cost:
$26,405 (The costs are itemized on the attached chart.)
S\DEVCOD!~XAUOMI~N.REQ
m
3')9~89~8 S:31,~f OE:SI 26, E8 9D~
Except from Original Scope of Work
Work Program
Draft Document Review
The completed screencheck draft documents will be submitted to the
City for review and comment. A meeting will be held with the Key City
Staff. The draft documents will also be reviewed by the Technical
Subcommittee(s). Following this review process, the draft documents
will be submitted to the City CounciVPlanning Commission for comment
and recommendation. Following review and analysis by the City staff,
relevant modffications will be made to the draft documents in
preparation for the public hearing process,
Product:
Project Monitoring Meeting
Technical Subcommittee Meeting(s)
Joint Planning Commission/City Council Meeting
One camera-ready copy of Draft General Plan/EIR
Volumes I and II
Draft General Plan, Volume I
Draft EIR/Technical Report Volume II
Color Display Maps with Acetate overlays (3)
Computer Disc Versions of Draft Volumes I and II
Phase
6.1
6.2
Draft Zoning Ordinance
The Planning Center will prepare a Zoning Ordinance and a Zoning
Map concurrently with the preparation of the General Plan. The
preparation of the Zoning Ordinance is predicated on the data
collection, land use altemetive analysis and selection of the preferred
plan.
Dett, hdnation of Format
The Planning Center will prepare outlines of possible format and
content options for the Zoning Ordinance and will meet with the City to
determine the formet most suitable for the City's needs and ease of
use.
Product:
Two Format Option Outlines
Ident~)cy Zone Designations and Development
Standards
Areas which are problems under me current zoning regutatory
mechanism, and areas which are inconsistent with the General Plan will
be identified, Land use zone classification and allowable uses will be
Work Program
6.3
6.4
6.5
established by zone in matrix formal Supporting development
standards for each zone will be prepared.
Identif'~ Administrative Procedures
The Planning Center will prepare the sections of the Zoning Code
related to specific proceclures (including site plan review, specffic plans,
conditional use permits, variances, development agreements, non-
conforming use agreements, non-conforming use abatement
procedures, hearing and appeal procedures, etc.) This task also
involves the preparation of sections addressing definitions, applicability,
fee and fine setting procedures, and other administrative functions of
the zoning cocle. Preliminary clrafts of this section will be submitted to
the City staff for review and comment.
Product:
Preliminary Draft Zoning Ordinance
Draft Zoning Ordinance
A draft of the Zoning Ordinance will be completed, and the zoning map
prepared which implements the General Plan and ensures consistency
with the General Plan land use designations.
Products:
Draft Zoning Ordinance
Draft Zoning Map
Draft Environmental Guidelines
Environmental Guidelines to implement CEQA will be prepared. The
guidelines will be used by the City to apply CEQA requirements to
proposecl public and pdvate development projects. The Guidelines will
include matrices, charts, and illustrations to promote an understanding
of the environmental process.
Product:
Draft Environmental Guidelines
Phase 7
Z1
Public Hearings and Approvals
Public Hearing Attendance
The Planning Center and the consultant team anticipate attendance at
two Planning Commission and two City Council Hearings, for review
and adoption of the General PlarVEIR.
59
Z
e_
e~
eem:x:,mV ?
tiP. mS JnqllM .
/&Jilt SgN i w~
I
'1:1 blueIS
i!
i,
i
i
I
ITEM NO. 18
APPROVAL~
CITY ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT.'
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDA T/ON:
CITY OF TEMECULA
A GENDA REPORT
City Council
City Manager
August 25, 1992
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PRESENTATION
Joe Hreha, Senior Management Analyst, City Manager's
Office
Receive and file.
DISCUSSION:
This Agenda Item will be a verbal presentation by the City
Manager to the City Council; therefore, no Staff Report
discussion is provided.
FISCAL IMPACT.'
None.
A TTA CHMENT.'
Copy of the overhead transparencies that will be used in
conjunction with the verbal presentation by the City
Manager.
Z
Z
Z
Z
(D
N
0
>..~'
OZ
zO
"'0
0
I I I I I
·
0
0
0,,, .m
_m
O
Z
Z
Z ~
~Z
Z
I I I I
I I I I
Z
0
Z
0
Z
Z
ZZ
mZ
I I
I I
>-
COl:l:
ZO
0~-
LUw
~,,0
Z
Z
Z
r~
Z;
Z
Z
Z
Z
~ Z
Z
Z
Z~
o Z<
Z
Z~
Z
I I I
I I I
Z
Z
Z
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Anthony Elmo, Chief Building Official
August 25, 1992
Building and Safety July Activity Report
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and File
DISCUSSION:
Building permit activity in July experienced another increase over permit activity for
June. Building related permits totaled 658 as compared to 575 in June representing
building construction valuation of approximately $15,201,746. New housing starts
for the month totaled 109. The Department collected revenue totaling $130,601.
The cleanup of Pujol Public Nuisance has commenced, hazardous material is being
removed and the vehicles towed away.
The following is an update of projects of special note that staff is currently involved
with and/or recently completed:
New Construction
Percent Completed
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems
Hungry Hunter Restaurant
Spectrum Industrial Park
5 warehouse/office - Diaz Road
Creekside Gas & Food Mart
South Front Street
Rancho California Water District Headquarters
Tamura Corporation
Danny's Carwash
Chili's Restaurant
Lyndie Lane Apartments
Claim Jumper Restaurant
100%
100%
100%
100%
10%
50%
25%
Grading underway
85%
Inquiry made
This Month
~ PLANS
.~esi den Cial 10
Co~anercial 6
Indus . /Wrehse
OChers 1
TOTAL: 17
Pw~NTTS
B DILD IIR; 195
Value 15,201,746
Fees 89, 069
mT-m'C/'P~CAL 19~
Fees 13,480
PLUBB33X; 133
Fees 19, 182
~~ 131
Fees 8,870
~ ~: 658
~ ~: ~30, ~0~
S~.~
D~.n 0
~ -F~= 0
~US~'~ 1
D~a~/D~ 0
~ ~ 11
SI~ 5
~ 50
~/~D
~ ~~ar. 3
~ ~ 0
~: 1~ 5
Be~ ~T~
This Fiscal Yer ~o ~Ce:
,s= [iscal Yer
DEPAJtTNENTOF BUILDI2fGAN~SAFETy
MOnPh?y AcriviCyReporC For: ~, 1992
~sC MOn~ This
Fiscal Fiscal ~l~r
Y~r Yr/Da~e Yr/Da=e
6 10 7 20
I1 6 8 82
1 1 5
9 i 28
27 17 16 135
This
Calandar
Yr/Da Ce
40
58
2
114
214
2 O0 195 170 1076 9 75
1i, 795,003 15,201,746 7,570,758 66, 825,128 55,453,065
75,395 89,069 42,700 286,617 313,133
146 199 88 803- 802
17,674 13,480 6, 551 42,747 63,350
118 133 72 605 545
16, 313 19,182 12,650 55,255 72,240
111 131 58 648 540
7,642 8,870 6, 615 25,323 35,282
575 658 388 3,132 2,862
117,024 130,601 68,516 409,942 484,005
NO/UNITS PLAN CM~CE PElt[IT TOTAL FE~S VALD3TION
FZSCAL YR FKNS FEES
109 12,388 101,746 114,134. O0 10,334,738
0 0 0 0.00 0
0 0 0 0.00 0
9 11,510 19,079 30,589 4,239,137
1 902 1,882 2,784 . 00 283,530
0 0 0 0.00 0
11 1,120 2,567 3,687. O0 127,585
5 135 375 510 · O0 9,937
50 1,847 2,854 4,701 . 00 117,514
1,966.00
7 640 1,326 81,154
3 128 272 400.00 8,151
0 0 0 0.00 0
195 28,670 130,101 158,771 15,201,746
15,201,746
7,570,758
This Calendar Year Co DaCe:
LasC Calendar Year Co DaCe:
55,453,065
66,825,128
APPROVAL
C1TY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER ~
CITY MANAGER ,.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
August 25, 1992
Monthly Report
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and File
Discussion:
The following is a summary of the PIning Department' s caseload
and project activity for the month of July, 1992:
Caseload Activity:
The department received applications for 21 administrative cases and 10 public hearing
cases. The foilowing is a breakdown of case type for public hearing items:
* Conditional Use Permit 2
* Public Use Permit 3
* Extension of Time 1
* Variance 1
* Plot Plans 3
Ongoing PrOjects:
General Hnn: Based upon direction given by the Council and Commission at the
June 17, 1992, joint meeting, the consultants have finished work on the
circulation, air quality and noise elements. A draft General Plan has therefore
been distributed for review and comment by the Technical Subcommittees. The
draft EIR has been sent to the State Office of Planning and Research for its 45
day review period.
S\MONTRLY.RIq~I~J2XAUG.~2
Old Town MEter Plan: Urban Design Studio (1UDS) is ~nalizing the
background report for the Specific Plan. The next Old Town Specific Plan
meeting is presently being scheduled for mid-late August. A public
workshop/townhall meeting is scheduled for Monday August 31, 1992 at 7:00
p.m. The meeting will be held at the Temecula Public Library. A joint meeting
between the City Council and Planning Commission is scheduled for Thursday
September 3, 1992 at 7:00 p.m.
French Valley Airport: The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) consultant
is finalizing the draft Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan (CLUP).
Temecula Regional Center Specific Plan and l=.nvironmental Impact R~port: This
Specific Plan was presented at a Planning Commission Workshop on May 4,
1992. The Commissioners gave direction to applicant and staff. This Specific
Plan is scheduled for the September 14th Commission hearing.
Winchester Hills and Canlpos Verdes Specific Plan and F-nvironmental Impact
Report: These Specific Plans were discussed as a Workshop for the Planning
Commissioners May 4, 1992. The Planning Commissioners gave direction to the
applicant and staff. The Notice of Completion for the Campos Verdes EIR went
to State Clearinghouse July 10, 1992. Both of these Specific Plans are scheduled
for the September 14th Commission hearing.
Roripaugh Hills Specific Plan: This Specific Plan has not yet been filed with the
Planning Department. The plan proposes to develop 800 acres at an overall
density of 3 units per acre and will contain approximately 30 acres of open space,
neighborhood commercial and two elementary schools. A pre-application
workshop on this Specific Plan was held at the July 6, 1992 Planning Commission
meeting.
Murdy Ranch Specific Plan and Environmental Iml~ct Report: TMs Specific Plan
was presented to the Planning Commission at a Workshop on April 6, 1992. The
Commission provided Staff and the applicant direction relative to design issues.
The applicant has incorporated these changes into the Specific Plan. This Specific
Plan is tentatively scheduled for an October Planning Commission meeting.
Johnson Ranch Specific Plan: The Johnson Ranch Specific Plan is a mix of
residential land uses and a mixed-use "resort village" core area on 1,765 acres
located adjacent to Anza Road and Borel Road, north of Rancho California Road.
This Specific Plan was submiRed in early March. The Notice of Preparation was
submitted to State Clearinghouse on April 17, 1992. A DRC meeting was held
for this Specific Plan on May 14, 1992. A subsequent DRC date has not yet been
set.
vgw
S\MON'I'I-~Y.RFI~I~)2'~AUG.9'2 2
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
,/f'.'~ Department of Public Works
August 25, 1992
Public Works Monthly Activity Report (July)
PREPARED BY: Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
Attached for City Council's review and filing is the Monthly Activity Report for July for the
Department of Public Works.
p~Ol~agdrpt~92~Og2S~tnoaet~t.07
~l~z
w ~ 0 ~
~ o o o o~ o~ o ~ ~o
~ o o ~ ~ o~ ~ ~ ~
oo o o o ~ ~ ~o ~o~o
0
0
0
~ z
O~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ wm~ ~w
Z W
~ ~ o 5o ~ = w w o=w
¢ m z z z m z 0 ~ Ow
-- --
TEMECULA COMMUNITY
SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA
ITEM
NO.
1
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL~..~~
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER
AUGUST 25, 1992
POOL LEASE WITH TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT
PREPARED BY: ~
HERMAN D. PARKER, RECREATION SUPERINTENDENT
RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors:
Approve agreement with the Temecula Valley Unified School District to lease the pool
and bath house facility at Temecula Elementary School through September 30, 1994.
DISCUSSION: Last summer, the City leased the swimming pool facility at
Temecula Elementary School for a four month period to provide a summer aquatics
program. The City was responsible for paying for the maintenance associated with
the pool during the summer which was approximately $10,000. Recently, the school
district determined that the use of the swimming pool facility was not needed with the
operation of an elementary school program and therefore, would no longer be
maintaining the pool facility.
Therefore, the school district requested that the City lease the pool on an annual basis
at no cost if the City would provide for the operation, maintenance, and repair costs
associated with this facility. The additional costs associated with maintaining the pool
on an annual basis is estimated at $4,000 bringing the total estimated maintenance
costs to $14,000.
Since the usage of this pool facility is integral with the City's summer recreation
program, it is recommended that the attached lease agreement be approved through
September 30, 1994. A two (2) year renewal option has also been included in the
lease agreement.
The attached lease agreement was approved by the Temecula Valley Unified School
District's Governing Board on July 14, 1992, and the Parks and Recreation
Commission on August 10, 1992.
FISCAL IMPACT: Costs associated with the maintenance, chemicals, and
utilities of the pool facility is estimated at $14,000. These monies have been included
in the FY 1992-93 TCSD Budget - account #190-180-999-5212.
POOL I-~-ASE AGR~-~,IENT BETW~-~-N TEMECULA VAI .l.~.y
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AND
CITY OF TEMEC~
THIS I.I=.A~SE is made this __ day of , 1992, by and between TEMECULA VALLEY
UNIFr~-r~ SCHOOL DISTRICT (heroin called "Lessor") and the City of Temecula (heroin called "Lessee"),
pursuant to California Education Code Sections 39500 et seq.
TIlE PARTIF_,S HERETO DO I-FRI~RRy 1VIUTUAIJ-Y COVENANT AND AGR~-~ AS FOLLOWS:
1. PREMISES
1.1 Premises. Lessor hereby leases to Lessee and Lessee leases fwm Lessor for the term, at
the rental, and upon all of the conditions set forth herein, that portion of the property located at 41951 Moraga
Road, Temecuh, California (known as the Temecuh Elementary School Pool), as described in Exhibit "A"
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference ("leasehold improvements"). Said leasehold improvements
shall include the pool, bath house and locker room and shall be referred to collectively as "the Pool."
2. TERM
2.1 Term. The term of this lease shall commence on August 25, 1992 (hereinafter
"Commencement Date"), and end on September 30, 1994, with a two (2) year renewal option, unless sooner
terminated pursuant to any provision hereof.
3. RENT
3.1 Rent. In lieu of rent, and as good and valuable consideration for the promises, covenants
and conditions specified herein, Lessee shall be responsible for community use and the upkeep and maintenance
of the pool. Any further reference to rent in this Agreement shall mean any such consideration W be furnished
pursuant to this Section.
4. USE
4.1 Use- The premises shall at all times be used, at least in part, for public swimming and
recreation purposes together with any other hwful purposes.
4O|contracfiSvvfmpoot con I 063092
or contribute to the expense of same.
4.2 Condition of Premises. Lessee accepts the Pool "as is" in the condition existing as of
the Lease commencement date or the date that Lessee takes possession of the Premises and acknowledges that
neither Lessor nor Lessor's agent has made any warranties in regard to workmanship or material of the Pool ---
4.3 Compliance with Law. Lessee shall, at Lessee's expense, promptly comply with all
applicable statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations, orders, covenants and restrictions of record and in effect
during the term or any pan of the term hereof, regulating the use of the Pool in any manner that wffi tend to
create waste or a nuisance.
5. MAINTF~ANCE. REPAIRS AND ALTERATION
5.1 Lessee' s Obli~,afions. Le~see's obligation hereunder shall include all normal day to day
maintenance activities for the Pool and normal janitorial services for the Pool which comprise a portion thereof,
including cleaning, repair, and all usual and normal supplies. Lessor shall be responsible for maint:~ining the
parking lot shown on Exhibit "A" .
5.2 Surrender. On the last day of the term hereof, or on any sooner termination, Lessee shall
surrender the Pool to Lessor in the same condition as when received, ordinary wear and tear excepted,
and free of debris. Lessee shall repair any damage to the Pool occasioned by the installation or removal of
Lessee's trade fixtures, furnishings and equipment.
5.3 Ri~,hts on Nonperformance. If Lessee fails to perform Lessee's obligation under this
Paragraph 5, or under any other paragraph of this Lease, Lessor may at its option (but shall not be requkexl
to) enter upon the Premises after ten (10) days prior written notice to Lessee (except in the case of any
emergency, in which case no notice shall be required), perform such obligations on Lessee's behalf and put
the same in good order, condition and repair, and the cost thereof together with interest thereon at the
maximum rate then allowable by law shall become due and payable.
5.4 Repairs. Alterations and Additions.
(a) Lessor shall not be required to make any improvements or alterations to the Pool
4DIconttactlSwimpool. con 2 063092
(b) Lessee shall not, without Lessor's prior written consent make any repairs,
permanent alterations, improvements, or additions on or about the Pool, except for repairs, alterations totaling
- less than ONE THOUSAND DOLI-~v,S ($1,000.00) in costs during the ten of this lease pwvidexl that Lessor
shall grant all reasonable requests for same. As a condition to granting it reasonable requests for same. As
a condition to granting it consent, Lessor may require that Lessee remove any or all of said alterations,
improvements, or additions at the expiration of the term, and restore the Pool to its prior condition. Should
Lessee make any penanent alterations, impwvements, or additions without the prior appwval of Lessor,
Lessor may require that Lessee remove any or all of the same.
(c) Any repairs, alterations, impwvements or additions on or about the Pool that
Lessee shall desire to make and which require the consent of the Lessor shall be presented to Lessor in written
form, with proposed detailed plans. If Lessor shall give its consent, the consent shall be deemed conditioned
upon Lessee acquiring any necessary permit to do so from appropriate governmental agencies, the furnishing
of a copy thereof to Lessor prior to the commencement of the work and the compliance by Lessee of all
-- , conditions of said permit in a pwmpt and expeditious manner.
(d) Lessee shall pay, when due, all claims for labor or materials furnished or alleged
to have been furnished to or for Lessee at or for use in the Premises.
(e) ' All repairs, alterations, improvements, and additions which may be made on the
Premises shall become the property of Lessor and remain upon and be surrendered with the Premises at the
expiration of the tenn.
(f) The term "Lessee" as used in this Paragraph shall include any sublessee of Lessee
appwved pursuant to Paragraph 9.1 hereof.
6. INSURANCE, INDEMNIFY
6.1 Indemnity. Lessee shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Lessor from and against
any and all claims arising from Lessee's use of the Pool, or from any activity, work or things done, permitted
--~ or suffered by Lessee in or about the Pool or elsewhere and shall further indemnify and hold harmless Lessor
4DicontractiSwirn~ooL con 3 063092
from and against any and all claims arising from any breach or default in the performance of any obligation
on Lessee' s part to be performed under the terms of this Lease, or arising from any negligence of the Lessee,
or any of Lessee' s agents, contractors, or employees, and from and against all costs, attorneys' fees, expenses--
and liabilities incurred in the defense of any such claim or any action or proceeding brought thereon; and in
case any action or proceeding be brought against Lessor by reason of any such cl_alrn, upon notice from
Lessor, Lessee shall defend the same at Lessee's expense.
6.2 Indemnity. Lessor shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Lessee from and against
any and all claims arising from any breach or default in the performance of any obligation on Lessor' s part to
be performed under the terms of this Lease, or arising from any negligence of the Lessor, or any of Lessor's
agents, contractors, or employees, and from and against all costs, attorneys' fees, expenses and liabilities
incurred in the defense of any such claim or any action or proceeding brought thereon; and in case any action
or proceexlhg be brought against Lessee by reason of any such claim, upon notice from Lessee, Lessor shall
defend the same at Lessor's expense.
6.3 Insurance. Lessee shall carry and maintain, during the entire term hereof, at Lessee's~-,
sole cost and expense, comprehensive general liability insurance with an insurance company in good standing
in the State of California, with limits of liability for personal injury of at least Five Hundred Thousand Dollars
($500,000) per person and One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence, and limit of liability for property
damage of at least One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000), naming Lessor as an adch'tional insured with
respect to the Pool. Lessee shall furnish Lessor with a certificate from such insurer evidencing such insurance.
Lessees also agrees to provide, or cause its insurer to pwvide, Lessor with a notice of insurance cancellation
at least thirty (30 days prior to the cancellation of such insurance. Lessee, at its option, may elect to combine
the insurance required under this Agreement with any other coverage maintained by Lessee, or Lessee may
elect to self insure in whole or in part for the insurance required under this Agreement.
7. DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION: OBLIGATION TO IH~RUILD
7.1 DamaVe or Destruction: Obliration to Rebuild. In the event the impwvements on the PooL-.
4DIcontractlSwimpool. con 4 0W,9092
require major repairs due to fn-e, earthquake or other casualty, Lessor shall have the right, but not the
obligation, to rebuild the Pool to its condition existing prior to such damage or destruction. There shall be an
abatement of rent during said reconstruction period. If Lessor elects not to rebuild the improvements, this
Lease shall then and there cease.
8. U'III2FI~ AND TAXES
8.1 Utilities and Taxes. Lessee shall pay for all water, heat, light, telephone services, power,
and other utilities supplied to the Pool, together with any taxes thereon for the term of this agreement, and shall
pay for natural gas in excess of $250 per month during the period of June 15 through August 31 of each year.
9. ASSIGNlV~NT AND SUBI:FrlIlI~G
9.1 Assignment of Interest. Except as provided in 9.2, Lessee shall not voluntarily or by
operation of hw assign, transfer, mortgage, sublet or otherwise transfer or encumber all or any part of Lessee' s
interest in this Lease or in the Pool without the written consent of Lessor. Any attempted assignment, transfer,
mortgage, encumbrance or sublet without the written consent of Lessor shall be void, and shall constitute a
breach of this Lease.
9.2
Subletting. Notwithstanding 9.1, Lessee may sublet the Pool for an amount not to exceed
the facility's operational costs without obtaining Lessor's prior written consent.
10. DEFAULTS:
10.1 Defaults by Lessee. The occurrence of any one or more of the following events shall
constitute a material default and breach of this Lease by Lessee:
(a) The vacating or abandonment of the Pool by Lessee.
(b) The failure by Lessee to pe~orm any obligation pursuant to Paragraph 3 above
or make any other payment required to be made by Lessee hereunder, as and when due, where such failure
shall continue for a period of three days after written notice thereof from Lessor to Lessee. In the event that
Lessor serves Lessee with a Notice to Pay Rent or Quit pursuant to applicable unlawful detainer statutes such
Notice to Pay Rent or Quit shall also constitute the notice required by this subparagraph.
4DlconttacrlSwimpool. con 5 063092
(c) The failure by Lessee to observe or perform any of the covenants, conditions or
provisions of this Lease to be observed or performed by Lessee, other than described in Paragraph (b) above,
where such failure shall continue for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice thereof from Lessor to"
Lessee; provided, however, that if the nature of Lessee's default is such that more than thirty (30) days are
reasonably required for its cure, than Lessee shall not be deemed to be in default if Lessee commenced such
cure within said 30-day period and thereafter diligently prosecutes such cure to completion.
10.2 Lessor' s Remedies. In the event of any such material default or breach by Lessee, Lessor
may, at any time thereafter, with or without notice or demand and without limiting Lessor in the exercise of
any right or remedy which Lessor may have by reason of such default or breach:
(a) Terminate Lessee's right to possession of the Pool by any lawful means, in which
case this Lease shall terminate and Less~ shall immediately surrender possession of the Pool to Lessor. In
such event, Lessor shall be enti~ed to recover from Lessee all damages incurred by Lessor by reason of Lessee'
default including, but not limited to, the cost of recove~g possession of the Pool; expenses of reletting,
including reasonable attomcy's fees, and any real estate commission actually paid.
(b) Maintain Lessee' s right to possession in which case this Lease shall continue in
effect whether or not Lessee shall have abandoned the Pool. In such event, Lessor shall be enti~ed to enforce
all the Lessor' s rights and remedies under this Lease.
(c) Pursue any other remedy now or hereafter available to Lessor under the hws or
judicial decisions of the State wherein the Pool is located. Unpaid monetary obligations of Lessee under the
terms of this Lease shall bear interest from the date due at the maximum rate than allowable by hw.
10.3 Default by Lessor. Lessor shall not be in default unless Lessor fails to perform
obligations required of Lessor within a reasonable time, but in no event later than thirty (30) days after written
notice by Lessee to Lessor specifying wherein Lessor has failed to pe~onn such obligation; provided, however,
that if the nature of Lessor's commences performance with such 30-day period and thereafter diligen~y
prosecutes the same to completion. '-
4DlconrractlBwimpool, con 6 063092
10.4. Lessee' s Remedies. In the event of any such material default or breach by Lessor, Lessee
may at any time thereafter, with or without further notice or demand, and without limiting Lessee in the
exercise of any right or remedy which Lessee may have by reason of such default or breach, pursue any other
remedy now or hereafter available to Lessee under the laws or judicial decisions of the State wherein the Pool
is located. Any unpaid monetary obligations of Lessor under the terms of this Lease shall bear interest from
the date due at the maximum rate allowable by law.
ll. VOLUNTARY TERMINATION
11.1 Voluntary Termination. In addition to any right of termination as may exist pursuant to
any other provision of this Lease, either Lessor or Lessee shall have the right to terminate this Lease at any
time during the original term, or any extension thereof, upon the giving of not less than a ninety-day (90)
advance written notice of such termination to the other party to this agreement. Said termination shall be
deemed effective at midnight on the date specified in said notice. Said termination date shall be used as the
beginning data of any following subsequent lease if executed within three (3) years.
Nothing contained in this Paragraph shall be deemed to affect the rights of the parties as set forth
in Paragraph 5.4 (f) or Paragraph 7 of this Lease.
12. Severability
12.1 Severability. The invalidity of any provision of this Lease, as determined by a court of
competent jurisdiction, shall in no way affect the validity of any other provision hereof.
13. TIME OF ESSENCE
13.1 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence.
14. INCORPORATION OF PRIOR AGI~I~-I~IENTS: AMENDMENTS
14.1 Incorporation of Prior Agreements: Amendments. This Lease contains all agreements of
the parties with respect to any mater mentioned herein. No prior agreement or understanding pertaining to any
such matter shall be effective. This Lease may be modified in writing only, signed by the parties in interest
at the time of modification. Except as otherwise stated in this Lease, Lessee hereby acknowledges that neither
4D Iconuactl Swimpool. con 7 063092
the Lessor nor any of its employees or agents has made any oral or written warranties or representations to
Lessee relative to the condition or use by Lessee of said Pool and Lessee acknowledges that Lessee assumes
all responsibility regarding the Occupational Safety Health Act, the legal use and adaptability of the Pool and--
the compliance thereof with all applicable hws and reguhtions in effect during the term of this Lease except
as otherwise specifically stated in this Lease.
15. NOTICF. S
15.1 Notices. Any notice required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and
may be given by personal delivery or by certified mail and, if given personally or by mail, shall be deemed
sufficiently given if addressed to Lessee or to Lessor at the address noted below:
TO LESSOR: IIilMP_,CUI. A V.AI.II:~Y UNIF~-B SCHOOL DISTRICT
31350 Raneho Vista Road
Temecuh, CA 92592
Attn: Superintendent of Schools
TO LP_SS~-: CITY OF TEMF. CUI~
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Attn: City Manager '-
Either party may, be notice to the other, specify a different address for notice purposes. A copy
of all notices required or permitted to be given to Lessor hereunder shall be concurrently transmitted to such
party or parties at such addresses as Lessor may, from time to time, hereafter designate by notice to Lessee.
16. WAIVF, RS
16.1 WaiVers. No waiver by Lessor of any provision hereof shall be deemed a waiver of any
other provision hereof or of any subsequent breach by Lessee of the same or any other provision. Lessor's
consent to, or approval of, any act shall not be deemed to render unnecessary the obtaining of Lessor' s consent
to or approval of any subsequent act by Lessee. The acceptance of Lessee's in-lieu rent obligations hereunder
by Lessor shall not be a waiver of any preceding breach by Lessee of any provision hereof, regardless of
Lessor's knowledge of such preceding breach at the time of acceptance of such in-lieu rent obligations.
17. HOLDING OVER
4D|centracfiSwimpool. con 8 063092
17.1 Holding Over. If Lessee, with Lessor's consent, remains in possession of the Pool or any
part thereof after the expiration of the term, hereof, such occupancy shall be a tenancy from month to month
upon all the provisions of this Lease pertaining to the obligations of Lessee, but all options and fights of first
refusal, if any, granted under the terms of this Lease shall be deemed terminated and be of no further effect
during said month to month tenancy.
18. CUMULATIVE REIVlm~IES
18.1 Cumulative Remedies. No remedy or election hemunder shall be deemed exclusive but
shall, wherever possible, be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity.
19. COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS
19.1 Covenant and Conditions. Each provision of this Lease performable by Lessee shall be
deemed beth a covenant and a condition.
20. BINDING EFFECT: CHOICE OF LAW
20.1 Binding Effect: Choice of Law. Subject to any provision hereof restricting assignment or
subletting by Lessee and' subject to the provisions of Paragraph 12, this Lease shall bind the parties, their
personal representatives, successors and assigns. This Lease shall be governed by the hws of the State wherein
the Pool is located.
21. LESSOR'S ACCESS
21.1 Lessor's Access. Lessor and Lessor's agents shall have the fight to enter the Pool at
reasonable times for the purpose of inspecting the same, showing the same to prospective purchasers, lenders,
or lessees, and making such alternations, repairs, improvements or additions to the Pool not inconsistent with
Lessee's quiet possession and use thereof, as Lessor may deem necessary to desirable.
22. QUIET POSSESSION
22.1 Ouiet Possession. Upon Lessee's paying the rent for the Pool and observing and
performing all of the covenants, conditions and provisions on Lessee's part to be observed and performed
hereunder, Lessee shall have quiet possession of the Pool for the entire term hereof subject to all of the
4O lco nrra ct l Swimpool. con 9 063092
provisions of this Lease. The individuals executing this Lease on behalf of Lessor r~present aria warrant to
Lessee that they are fully authorized and legally capable of executing this Lease ou behalf of Lessor and that
such execution is binding upon all parties holding an ownership interest in the Pool.
IN WITNESS W~EREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Lease the day and year first above
written.
ATYEST:
By:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: .~,~1:~ ~
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
TEMECULA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
Ti~e: Clerk of the Board
CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
JO~conuacTiSwimpool, con
10
06309,
ITEM
NO.
2
CITY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM:
DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER
DATE:
AUGUST 25, 1992
SUBJECT:
DESIGN SERVICES - PALA ROAD PARK PROJECT
PREPARED BY: ~
RECOMMENDATION:
SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
That the Board of Directors:
Award contract to Wimmer Yamada Associates (WYA) to provide conceptual
schematic design drawings, construction documents, and project administration
for the Pala Road Park Project which consists of developing a community park
on approximately 28.6 acres.
2. Request $185,400 from the Community Facilities District 88-12 and
appropriate $185,400 to account//250-199-120-5802.
Appoint two (2) members from the Board of Directors to serve on the Project
Committee for the Pala Road Park Project.
DISCUSSION: A Request For Qualifications (RFQ) was released by the City
to landscape architectural firms to provide schematic design drawings, construction
documents, and project administration services for the Pala Road Park Project. A
Selection Committee was formed consisting of Sal Munoz and Peg Moore from the
City Council; Dee Hillen and Jeff Nimeshein-from the Parks and Recreation
Commission; Gary King, Grant Yates, Gary Thornhill, and myself from City staff·
The Selection Committee reviewed and evaluated each firm's qualifications and invited
the final top firms for a formal interview process. After interviewing the final top
firms, the Selection Committee ranked the firms based on their qualifications. It was
recommended by the Selection Committee that the City enter into negotiations with
the top ranked firm, WYA, to determine a final scope of work and cost.
City staff then negotiated a final scope of work with a not to exceed amount for each
phase of the design services. As a result of this process, the Selection Committee
recommends WYA to provide the design services for the Pala Road Park Project based
on their qualifications and cost effective proposal.
Enclosed is the agreement with WYA for your review.
FISCAL IMPACT: Cost to provide these services will not exceed $185,400.
These funds are requested from the Community Facilities District 88-12 and
appropriated to account//250-199-120-5802.
AGRI=.I=.M~.g
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGR~EMF~NT, made and entered into this 25th day of August, 1992, between
the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, heroinafter referred to as 'City' and Wiremet
Yamada Associates, hereinafter referred to as 'Consultant'.
The parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
SERVICES. 'Consultant shall perform the tasks set forth in Exhibit A attached
hereto. Consultant shall complete the tasks according to the schedule set forth
in Exhibit A.
P~.RFORMANC~.. Consultant shall at all times, faithfully, industrially and to
the best of his ability, experience and talent, perform all tasks described
herein.
s
PAYMENT. The City agrees to pay Consultant monthly, at the hourly rates
set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto, based upon actual time spent on the
above tasks. This mount will not exceed $185,400.00 for the total term of
the Agreement unless additional payment is approved by the City Council;
provided that the City Manager may approve additional payments not to
exceed ten percent (10%) of the Agreement, but in no event more than
$10,000.00.
Consultant will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed.
Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month,
for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within
approximately thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice. Invoices must be
submitted to:
City of Temecula
Accounts Payable
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, California 92590
SUSPENSION. TERMINATION OR ABANDONMENT OF AGREEMRNT.
The City may, at any time, suspend, terminate or abandon this Agreement, or
any portion hereof, by serving upon the Consultant at least ten (10) days prior
written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the Consultant shall immediately
cease all work under this Agreement, unless the notice provides otherwise.
Within thirty-five (35) days after rec~ving an invoice from the Consultant, the
City shall pay Consultant for work done through the date that work is to be
ceased pursuant to this section.
If the City suspends, terminates or abandons a portion of this Agreement such
suspension, termination or abandonment shall not make void or invalidate the
remainder of this Agreement.
2/fotm~AGR-04 I
BREACH OF CONTRACT. In the event that Consultant is in default for
cause under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall have no obligation or
duty to continue compensating Consultant for any woric performed after the
date of default. Default shall include not performing the tasks described
herein to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Manager of the City. Failure
by the Consultant to ~ progress in the performance of work hereunder, if
such failure arises out of causes beyond his control, and without fault or
negligence of the Consultant, shall not be considered a default.
ff the City Manager or his delegate determines that the Consultant defaults in
the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, it shall
serve the Consultant with written notice of the default. The Consultant shall
have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the
default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the
Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, the City shall
have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to
terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any
other remedy to which it may be enti~ed at hw, in equity or under this
Agreement.
TERM. This Agreement shall commence on August 25, 1992, and shall
remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in
no event later than June 30, 1993.
Any disputes regarding performance, default or other matters in dispute
between the City and the Consultant arising out of this Agreement or breech
thereof, shall be resolved by arbitration. The arbitraWr's decision shall be
final.
Consultant shall select an arbitrator from a list provided by the City of three
retired judges of the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. The
arbitration hearing shall be conducted according to California Code of Civil
Procedure Section 1280, et see_. City and Consultant shall share the cost of
the arbitration equally.
OWN~.~ OF r~OCUMP. NTS. Upon satisfactory completion of, or in the
event of termination, suspension or abandonment of this AgTeement, all
original documents, designs, drawings and notes prepared in the course of
providing the services to be performed pursuant to this Agreement shall
become the sole property of the City and may be used, reused or otherwise
disposed of by the City without the permission of the Consultant.
2/fonna/AGR-~. 2 "
10.
11.
INDI:-PENDENT CONTRACTOR. The Consultant is and shnll at all times
remain as to the City a wholly independent contractor. Neither the City nor
any of its officers, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of
the Consultant or any of the Consultant's officers, employees or agents, except
as herein set forth. The Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner
represent that it or any of its officers, employees or agents are in any manner
officers, employees or agents of the City.
No employee benefits shall be available to Consultant in connection with the
performance of this Agreement. Except as provided in the Agreement, City
shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to Consultant for
performing services hereunder for City. City shall not be liable for
compensation or indemnification to Consultant for injury or sickness arising
out of performing services hereunder.
LEGAL RESPONSIBU-rI~-~. The Consultant shall keep itself informed of
State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those
employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to
this Agreement. The Consultant shall at all times observe and comply with all
such laws and regulations. The City, and its officers and employees, shall not
be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the Consultant to comply
with this section.
NOTICE. Whenever it shall be necessary for either party to serve notice on
the other respecting this Agreement, such notice shall be served by certified
mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the City Manager
of the City of Temecula, located at 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
California 92590 and the Consultant at Wimmer Yamada Associates, 27720
Jefferson Avenue, Suite 102, Temecula, California 92590 unless and until
different addresses may be furnished in writing by either party to the other.
Notice shall be deemed to have been served seventy-two (72) hours after the
same has been deposited in the United States Postal Services. This shall be
valid and sufficient service of notice for all purposes.
ASSIGNMI:.NT. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this
Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without the
prior wriUen consent of the City.
Upon termination of this Agreement, Consultant's sole compensation shall be
the value to the City of the services rendered.
~ 2/fo~/AGR-04 3
1JABII .1TY INSURANCE. The Consultant shall maintain insurance
acceptable to the City in full force an effect throughout the term of this
contract, against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which
may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder
by the Consultant, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors.
Insurance is to, be placed with insurer with a Bests' rating of no less than
A:VII. The costs of such insurance shall be included in the Contnctor's bid.
The Consultant shall provide the following scope and limits of insurance:
Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shah be at least as broad as:
Insurance Services Office form Number GL 0002 (Ed. 1/73) covering
Comprehensive General Liability and Insurance Services Office form
number GL 0404 covering Broad Form Comprehensive General
Liability; or Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability
coverage ("occurrence" form C6 0001).
Insurance Serv'ict. s Office form no. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering
Automobile Liability, code 1 "any auto" and endorsement CA 0025.
Workers' Compensation insurance as required by Labor Code of the
State of California an Employers' Liability insurance.
4. Errors and Omissions insurance.
Minimum l .iraits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits of insurance
no less than:
General Liability $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for
bodily injury and property damage.
Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for
bodily injury and property damage.
Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers'
compensation as required by the Labor Code of the State of California
and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident.
4. Errors and Omissions Insurance. $1,000,000. per occurrence.
Deductibles nnd Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible in excess of $1,000
must be declared to and approved by the City.
2/fonns/AGR-0dl 4 ~
Other Insurance Provisions. Insurance policies required by this contract shall
contain or be endorsed to contain the following provisions:
All Policies. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be
endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled
by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30)
days' prior written notice to the City via United States First Class Mail.
General Liability nnd Automobile 1 .inhllity coverage. The City of
Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be
covered as insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities
performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed
operations of the Consultant; premises owned, occupied or used by the
Consultant, or automobiles owned, lease, hired or borrowed by the
Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the
scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials,
employees or volunteers.
With regard to claims arising from the Consultant's performance of the
work described in this contract, the Consultant's insurance coverage
shall be primary insurance as respects the City of Temecula, its
officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-
insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or
volunteers shall apply in excess of, and not contribute with, the
Consultant's insurance.
Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies shall
not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers officials,
employees or volunteers.
The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to
the limits of the insurer's liability.
Worker's Compensation nnd l:.mployers l .inbili~ Covern~e. The
insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City of
Temecula, its officers, officinls, employees and volunteers for losses
arising from work performed by the Consultant for the City.
~ 2/fotma/AGR-04 5
13.
14.
Verification of Covernge. Contractor shall furnish the City with
certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by this clause. The
certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person
authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The
certificates are to be on forms provided by the City and are to be
received and approved by the City before work commences. The City
reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required
insurance policies, at any time.
ConsUltant shall include all subconsultants as insureds under its policies
or shall furnish separate certificates for each subcontractor. All
coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements
stated herein.
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and
approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the insurer
shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self insured retentions as
respects the City, its officers, officials and employees; or the Consultant
shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related
investigations, claim administration and defense expenses.
LICENSR~. The Consultant and subconsultant shall obtain all necessary
licenses, including but not fimited to City Business License.
]NI~~CATION. The Consultant agrees to indemnify and save harmless
the City of Temecula, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from
and against any and nil claims, demands, losses, defense cost, or liability of
any kind or nature which the City, its officers, agents and employees may
sustain or incur or which may be imposed upon them for injury to or death of
persons, or damage to property arising out of Consultant's negligent
performance under the terms of this Agreement, excepting only liability arising
out of the sole negligence of the City.
15.
ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement and any documents or instrument
attached hereto or referred to herein integrate all terms and conditions
mentioned herein or incidental hereto supersede all negotiations and prior
writing in respect to the subject matter hereof.
In the event of conflict between the terms, conditions, or provisions of this
Agreement and any such document or instrument, the terms and conditions of this Agreement
shall prevail.
EFFECTIVE r~AT!:. AND I:X!:CUTION: This Agreement shall be effective from
and after the date it is signed by the representatives of the City. This Agreement may be
executed in counterparts.
2/fmms/AOR-04 6
IN WITNESS WI~F, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
CONSULTANT
CITY OF TEMECI~A
By: By
Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
ATFEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
2/21/92
2/fonm/AGR-O0 7
EXHIBIT A
WIMMER'YAMADA
Landscape Archltec[ure · Land Planning
June 10. 1992
Mr. Shawn Nelson
Director of Community Service
City of Temecula
43172 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Project: PalaRoad C~ 4L7 Park
Re: Revised Scope of Services/Fee Proposal and Schedule
Dear Shawn,
The foliowinE revised fee proposal is provided for your review. As a result of
our meeting on June 4, 1992· and subsequent discussion with our consultants, we
have revised our fee schedule in alignment with the City's desired goals. The
revised fees and scope of services describes a design program which will
encompass programming, master planning, and bid documents prepared for a
community park with a targeted budget of $2 million. As requested, we have
separated the design fees by phase along with a maximum allowance for
supplemental costs (reimbursable expenses)
If the revised fee schedule meets with your approval, we will complete tasks as
assigned to enter into a formal agreement with the City.
Again as previously mentioned. please feel free to contact me should you have
y further questions.
· n-.erel "
PC/j1
JOSEPH Y. YAMADA. FASLA AND KE, ITH D. SIMON. ASLA, PRINCIPALS
516 FIFTH AVENUE , SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101 · 619/232-'1004
CA REG. #528 AND #2549 · FAX 619/232-06al0
CITY OF TMMEC~LA
PALA ROAD ~ PA~K
BMVISMD FEE SCheDULE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
JUNE 10, 1992
SCOPE DEFINITION AND CONSULTANT TEAM
Our scope of services are based on a design program for a 24.5 acre park
site with amenities including: Play fields, tot lot. pedestrian pathways,
vehicular access and parking, picnic area, small multi-purpose building
(less than 1,000 s.f.) including restrooms. maintenance area and concession
stand. Wildlife habitat preservation and enhancement (as required by
adopted agreement) lighting for parking, security, and sport activities.
Landscape and irrigation development for entire park site and related site
furnishings (trash cans, picnic tables, benches, etc.). The master plan is
based on a maximum construction budget of $2 million.
The fees as described include work for all areas of expertise as handled by
our consultant team. The following is a list of our consultants and their
associated areas of expertise:
o
O
WYA- Landscape Architect - Prim Consultant
Delawie Wilkes Rodrigues Barker and Bretton - Architect -
Architectural Design - concession/restroom/maintenance building
Grayner Rogers Fagineerin~ - Civil Engineer - Survey, grading/drainage
and hydrolo~y design
ACI - Irrigation Consultant - Water management and irrigation design
David Smith & Associates - Environmental Consultant - Wildlife habitat
analysis
J-RAD Engineering- Electrical Engineers - Site lighting design,
ballfield lighting (1)
II. SCOPE OF SERVICES
Our approach will consist of three (3) main phases of work with sub-phases
identified for further description of specific tasks. Each work task is
designed to include coordination between members of the design team, the
project committee (consisting of City staff, the public, City Council and
Parks Committee members), City Planning staff, and the Park and Recreation
Department.
Page Two
Pala Road Community Park - Revised
June 10, 1992
PHASE I: PROGRAMMING AND MASTER FLAN
A. Project Orientation and Program Development
o Task 1
o Task 2
o Task 3
Meet with City staff to identify key issues and
cOnCerns.
Meet with the Project Committee to identify key
issues and concerns (workshop #1)
Refine work plan.
Environmental Resource Inventory and Engineering Inventory Analysis
(Concurrent with Program Development)
o Taskl
o Task2
o Task 3
o Task 4
o Task 5
o Task 6
Meet with appropriate government agencies to
review and confirm design criteria as identified
as part of adopted agreement between City of
Temecula and Fish and Wildlife Service.
Prepare aerial topographic survey and boundaries
map for base plan preparation. (Modification of
existing. )
Prepare hydrologic study. (Modification of
existing)
Review existing geotechnical study and complete
updated soils report to ensure compatibility for
needs of this project. (Geotechnical Engineer to
be contracted directly to City)
Conduct existing utility study for both on-site
and off-site conditions and anticipated
surrounding develo~nent plans.
Conduct on-site field test for agricultural
suitability end horticultural analysis.
C. Schematic Concept Plsns
o Tsskl
o Task2
o Task 3
o Task 4
o Task5
Apply planning criteria to opportunities and
constraints for specific park site.
Develop schematic concept plan alternatives.
Develop range of cost (magnitude) for schematic
concept plan alternatives.
City staff review including revisions and
modification prior to Project Committee workshop
#2.
Conduct workshop #2 with Project Committee to
review concept alternatives.
Page Three
Pala Road Community Park - Revised
June 10, 1992
Prepare Fins/Master Plan
o Task 1
o Task 2
o Task 3
o Task 4
o Task 5
o Task 6
o Task 7
o Task 8
Consider City staff and Project Committee review
c ~nment s.
Conduct workshop with City staff on final design
criteria and potentis/phasing description.
Develop draft master plan.
Develop detailed cost estimate and construction
phasing plan.
Conduct workshop #3 with Project Committee to
review draft master plan.
Present to joint City Council/Park Committee for
fins/consensus.
Design refinenent and fins/graphics. Fins/master
plan will be a color rendered and norated plan
graphic at 1"=50'-00" scale with appropriate
section, elevations, and character photos to
convey design intent.
Present fins/master plan to following groups:
o
o
o
Park and Recreation Committee for formal approval.
City Council for formal approval.
City Planning Commission for courtesy review only.
PHASE 2: DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
o Task I
o Task 2
o Task 3
Task
Task
Task
Task 7
o Task8
Workshop meeting with City staff on bid document
guidelines, cost analysis, phasing criteria and
remaining schedule.
Prepare fins/soils and grading/drainage studies.
Construction drawings and specification
prepafar ion.
50~ construction drawing submittal.
City review meeting plan check and revision.
90Z construction dra~ing submittal including cost
analysis with specific unit pricing.
Final City review meeting for plan check and
revision for all bid documents and specifications.
Submission of final bid document set with final
cost analysis to City for bid phase.
Page Four
Pala Road Community Park - Revised
June 10, 1992
PHASE 3:
Proj act Bidding
o Tsskl
o Task 2
o Task 3
o Task 4
Advertise formal bids.
Conduct pre-bid meeting at project site.
Issue addenda.
Assist City with award of contract.
B. Construction Administration
o Task 1
o Task 2
o Task 3
o Task 4
o Task 5
o Task 6
Notice to Proceed.
Review material submittal.
Conduct job site meetings with City staff and
contractor (schedule based on needs of
construction schedule and general contractor).
Provide on-site observation with City Inspector
(s) for assurance and conformance to design
intent.
Conduct pre-final and final walk-throughs to
develop punch list items for correction by
contractor prior to final acceptance by City.
Prepere maintenance guidelines for City Park and
Recreation staff.
III.
FEE SCHEDULE
Phase I - ProgrA--~ing and Master Plan
A. Design Fee - Lump sum
B. Supplemental Cost Allowance
o Printing Photo Reproduction
o Soils Tests, A~ricultural Suitability
Suppleaental Cost To~al
$ 41,500.00
3,500.00
750 .oo
$ 4, 250.00
Page Five
Pala Road Community Park - Revised
June 10, 1992
Phase II - Design Development and Construction Documents
A. Design fee - lump sum $ 98,750.00
B. Supplemental cost allowance
o Printing, Photo, Reproduction $ 7,500.00
Phase III- Contract Administration
A Design fee - lump sum $ 30,900.00
B. Supplemental Cost Allowance
Printing, Photo, Reproduction,
As -built s
$ 2,500.00
SUMMARY - FEE SCHEDULE
Phase I -
Phase II -
Phase III-
Master Plan
Design Development/Construction
Documents
Contact Administration
DESIC~FEMTOTAL
$ 41,500.00
$ 98,750.00
$ 30.900. O0
$17 1,15 o. o0
SUPPLEMENTAL OOST TOTAL (ALLOWANCE)
14,250.00
To comply with the insurance requirements as described within the draft
agreement, WYA will purchase a project insurance policy to cover WYA and
all of its sub-consultants. The coverage limits will meet all City
requirements. As specified, the cost for this specific policy has been
factored into the overall fee schedule.
The following conditions are included to further define our scope of
services relative to specific tasks. If circumstances chanSe based upon
program criteria, existing site conditions, or other unforeseeable factors
WYA will consult with City staff to establish expanded scope of services
and associated fees if necessary.
Page Six
Pala Road Community Park - Revised
June 10, 1992
Boundary and topographic survey costs are based upon the assumption
that monuments for Tract 21067 are in place, or that sufficient
control to define the site boundaries is readily available. The
project areas has been heavily disturbed since the last map was
recorded on the property in 1977, and additional work may be required
to establish survey control.
All efforts beyond the use of the existing adopted agreement
associated with permit requirements of Army Corps of Engineers, U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service, California Deparment of Fish & Game, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, and Riverside County Flood Control &
Water Conservation District are beyoDd the scope of this proposal.
Construction of subdivision improvements for Tract 21067, including
grading, drainage, street improvements and utilities are assumed to
precede the construction of park improvements. Any work required for
tenporary or permanent access, drainage structures or utilities beyond
the limits of the park propart7 are not included.
Design of any retaining walls, bridges, non-standard drainage
structures or other structural features not associated with design of
park but may be required are not included.
Hydrology study and hydraulic analysis of drainage structures and main
stream of Temecula Creek were sufficient to pass subdivision approval
process, and are probably adequate for design of the park. We have
included an allowance for design of modifications to the subdivision
drainage works to suit ~he park development, and we do not anticipate
any need to revise the hydrology. Additional work could be required
if regulatory agencies demand a new analysis of the Temecula Creed
flood plain, of if the park design results in significant changes in
previously-approved calculations.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORT
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER ~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER
AUGUST 25, 1992
DEPARTMENTAL REPORT
PREPARED BY: (~ SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
The CRC Project has been divided into two construction phases: 1 ) Mass Grading and
2) Construction of the CRC, Pool, and Amphitheater. The development of
construction documents for the mass grading is completed, and the City is currently
advertising for public bids. Staff is working diligently to award this contract in
September and begin construction in .October.
Staff has completed the lease agreement with the Temecula Valley Unified School
District for the pool facility at Temecula Elementary School. The school will lease the
facility to the City at no cost, and the City will be responsible for the maintenance and
repairs associated with the facility. This item will be considered by the Board of
Directors on August 25.
Bikeway and No Parking signs have been installed along most of the Initial Bikeway
Route. The striping of the bike lanes for the Initial Bike Way Project should be
completed by the end of August.
Staff has negotiated a scope of work and final price with the top ranked landscape
architectural firm for providing the design services for the Park Site on Pala Road.
Staff will bring this item to the Board of Directors for consideration on August 25.
A meeting with the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Committee was held on
Thursday, August 13 at City Hall to review and comment on the draft of the Parks
and Recreation Master Plan. This committee is comprised of Pat Birdsall and Sal
Munoz from the Board of Directors; Jeff Nimeshein from the Parks and Recreation
Commission; and Bill Perlett, Barbara Pearson, Lettie Boggs, and Laverne Stafford
from the community. As a result of this meeting, important comments were
incorporated into the Master Plan. A follow up meeting will be held by this committee
towards the end of September. The Master Plan will then be reviewed by the Parks
and Recreation Commission, Planning Commission, and Traffic and Transportation
Commission, before final consideration by the Board of Directors.
Staff is in the process of receiving bids from landscape construction companies to
install irrigation and grass to an approximate 2.9 acre section of parkland adjacent to
Loma Linda Road in the Rainbow Canyon area and a 3 acre section of parkland on
Riverton Road, north of Calle Medusa Road. These two park projects will be
considered by the City Council during the updating of the Capital Improvement
Program.
Staff has met with our landscape contractor concerning the maintenance of Sports
Park, as well as all of the City's parks. With the exception of some minor irrigation
improvements and adjusting of the watering schedule, the overall condition of the
parks are good. Staff will continue to monitor the situation on a daily basis to ensure
a high level of maintenance service to all of our parks.
The Parks and Recreation Commission has appointed Commissioner Jeff Nimeshein
as a liaison to other public agencies to receive information concerning non-smoking
policies of other Cities. Commissioner Nimeshein will present any new information
concerning this issue to the Commission.
The Parks and Recreation Commission will also be providing staff with input
concerning the operations of the new Senior Center and Community Recreation
Center.
Practice has already begun for Youth Soccer and Pop Warner. Season is scheduled
to begin in September. Staff will be working with the School District and the Sports
Council to coordinate the scheduling of these youth sports programs.
TEMECULA REDVELOPMENT
AGENCY AGENDA
ITEM
NO.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
Board, Redevelopment Agency
Department of Public Works
August 25, 1992
Award of Contract for the Construction of Margarita Road Extension
Interim Improvements (Project No. PW92-04)
PREPARED BY:
Michael D. Wolff, Sr. Public Works Inspector
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board:
Approve the award of contract for construction of Margarita Road Extension Interim
Improvements (Project No. PW92-04) to R.J. Noble Company for $511,500 and
authorize the Chairperson of the Redevelopment Agency ("RDA") and the City Clerk
to execute said contract.
2. Advance $562,650 from the General Fund Revolving Fund to the RDA.
Transfer $562,650 (bid amount plus 10% to allow for possible change orders) from
the RDA fund to the Capital Projects fund and appropriate $562,650 to Account No.
021-165-606-5804.
4. Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA DECLARING CERTAIN FINDINGS REGARDING CITY
EXPENDITURES IN CONNECTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
MARGARITA ROAD EXTENSION INTERIM IMPROVEMENTS AS REQUIRED BY
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY REGULATIONS (SECTION
1.103-18)
-1- pwO1\egdrpt~92~0825\PW92-O4.awd 0817b
BACKGROUND:
On June 23, 1992, the City Council authorized the Public Works Department to advertise the
Notice Inviting Bids for construction of Margarita Road Extension Interim Improvements. Bids
for this project were publicly opened and read on August 13, 1992 at 3:30 p.m. The bids
received were as follows:
1. R.J. Noble Company (apparent low bidder) $511,500.03
2. Lee & Stires, Inc. 525,612.33
3. Riverside Construction, Inc. 603,316.55
4. Matich Corporation 609,638.75
5. Varner Construction, Inc. 633,844.41
6. E.L. Yeager Construction 662,014.45
7. Vance Corporation 669,264.60
8. Buck Kemmis Equipment, Inc. 673,4373.4
9. Excel Paving Company 693,633.25
10. American Contracting, Inc. 714,779.68
The Engineer's Estimate for this project is $1,200,000. R.J. Noble Company's bid of
$511,500.00 is $688,500.00 below the Engineer's Estimate.
The difference between the low bidder and high bidder (total of ten bids) was $203,279.68.
It should be noted that the difference between the three lowest bidders was $91,816.55.
However, there was a difference of $14,112.33 between the lowest bidder and the second
lowest bidder.
A review of the bids indicated that R.J. Noble was able to achieve low bid by lowering cost
in specific areas of unclassified excavation and fill, crushed aggregate base, A.C. pavement,
A.C. Dike, and concrete products. R.J. Noble Company owns their own aggregate quarry and
batch plant, therefore allowing for a lower unit price in the above areas, which are the major
quantities of work to be performed on this project.
A pre-construction meeting will be held in the second week of September (thus allowing for
time to award contracts and complete contract agreements) at which time a Notice to Proceed
will be issued to R.J. Noble Company. Therefore, Staff expects work to begin on or before
October 5, 1992 with a 90-working day (approximately 4.5 months) completion time frame.
DISCUSSION:
Staff recommendation is to award the contract to R.J. Noble Company for the total sum of
$511,500 with a completion time of 90 working days. Liquidated damages for this contract
are $1,000.00 per calendar day beyond the completion date of the contract.
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is necessary to advance $562,650 from the General Fund Revolving Fund to the RDA,
transfer $562,650 (bid amount plus 10% to allow for possible change orders) from the RDA
fund to the Capital Projects fund, and appropriate $562,650 to Account No.
021 - 165-606-5804.
-2- pwO1%agdrpt%92%O825\PW92-O4.awd 0817b
RESOLUTION NO. RDA 92-
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING CERTAIN
FINDINGS REGARDING CITY EXPENDITURES IN
CONNECTION WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
MARGARITA ROAD EXTENSION INTERIM
IMPROVF_,IVIF~NTS AS REQUIRED BY UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY REGULATIONS
(SECTION 1.103-18)
WHEREAS, on January 27, 1992, the United States Department of the Treasury (the
"Treasury") issued final regulations (Section 1.103-18) relating to the use of bond proceeds for
the reimbursement of expenditures made prior to the date of issuance of bonds (the
"Reimbursement Regulations"); and
WHEREAS, under the Reimbursement Regulations, in general, if specified requirements
are satisfied, the proceeds used for reimbursement are deemed to be spent on the date of
reimbursement; and
WHEREAS,if such requirements are not satisfied, then proceeds used for reimbursement
will remain subject to the rebate, arbitrage and other rules relating to tax-exemption until
ultimately spent; and
WHEREAS, the Reimbursement Regulations apply to tax-exempt obligations issued after
March 2, 1992, except that the Reimbursement Regulations do not apply to expenditures before
such date if such expenditures were made after September 8, 1989, and if there was objective
evidence at the time of the expenditures that the issuer reasonably expected to reimburse the
expenditure with bond proceeds; and
WHEREAS, the Temecula Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") desires to construct the
Margarita Road Extension Interim Improvements from Winchester Road to Solana Way at a total
cost of $700,000.00. The Agency further intends to reimburse itself for the purchase price of
the project from the proceeds of Redevelopment Bonds the agency intends to issue
("Obligations"). Agency intends to make expenditures relating to the purchase and development
of the property in anticipation of issuance of the obligations collectively referred to as the
("Expenditure"); and
WHEREAS, in order to comply with the Reimbursement Regulations, the public interest
and convenience require that the agency officially declare its intent that the agency reasonably
expects to reimburse the Expenditure with proceeds of the Obligations;
~ 2/h~.a, RDA 92-01 I
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, DETERMINED AND
DECLARED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula as follows:
Section 1. The foregoing recitals axe true and correct.
Section 2. The agency reasonably expects to reimburse the Expenditure with proceeds
from the Obligations. The reimbursement of the Expenditure is consistent with the agency's
established budgetary and financial circumstances. There are no funds or sources of money of
the Agency, or any related person or commonly controlled entity, that have been, or reasonable
expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis or otherwise set aside to pay costs of
the property to be paid or reimbursed out of proceeds of the Certificates.
Section 3. This Resolution is a declaration of Agency's official intent under the
Reimbursement Regulations.
Section 4. The maximum principal amount of the Obligations for which the Expenditure
is made is reasonably expected to be $20,000,000.00
Section 5. The proceeds from the Obligations axe to be used for the Project.
Section 6. The City Clerk/Agency Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution
and thenceforth and thereafter same shall be in full force and effect.
PASSED, APPROVEr} AND ADOFrED this 14th day of April, 1992.
ATrF. ST:
J. Sal Mu~oz, Chairperson
June S. Greek, City Clerk/
Redevelopment Agency Secretary
[SEAL]
2/R~ss RDA 92-01
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk/Redevelopment Agency Secretary of the City of Temecula,
HEREBY DO CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. RDA 92- was duly adopted at a
regular meeting of the Re, development Agency of the City of Temecula on the 14th day of April,
1992, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: 5
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Moore, Lindemans, Mufioz,
Parks
NOES:
0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
June S. Greek, City Clerk/
Redevelopment Agency Secretary
~ ~ RDA 92-01 3
ITEM
NO.
2
CITY MANAGER /~~
TEMECULA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Board, Redevelopment Agency
Department of Public Works
August 25, 1992
Construction Cost Participation for Storm Drain
Front St.ll-15 with PM22515 and CUP No. 5
Improvements on
PREPARED BY:
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board approve participation in the construction of a major storm drain under Front
Street in conjunction with the developers of PM22515 and CUP No. 5 in an amount not to
exceed $34,000, direct General Counsel to prepare the necessary agreement on behalf of the
Redevelopment Agency, and authorize the Chairperson to sign the agreement.
BACKGROUND:
The developer of Parcel Map No. 22515, Mr. Keith L. McCann, Jr., along with the developer
of Conditional Use Permit No. 5, Mr. Lou Kashmere, is requesting that the City participate
with them in the cost of constructing a storm drain under Front Street. The two development
projects are located on the east side (McCann, PM22515) and the west side (Kashmere,
CUP No. 5) of the south end of Front Street. The storm system was designed and is currently
being constructed as a condition of development on both projects. The storm drain picks up
storm water that has been conveyed from the Vallejo Channel under I-15 through two 8'x5'
reinforced concrete box culverts and transmits it to Murrieta Creek.
The developers of the projects desire to install all of the required improvements, including the
street improvements, as soon as possible. The elevations associated with the storm drain and
street grades have required the two developers to work together to install the entire street
improvements as a unit. The constraint placed on the design and construction of the storm
drain and street improvements by the existing topography has caused the cost of installing
those improvements to escalate to a point where the developers cannot afford to complete
the project without financial assistance from the City. Parcel Map No. 22515 has not
-1 - pwOl\egdrpt\92~0825~pm22515c.up5 0817
recorded and will expire on November 3, 1992. However, the developer has posted
construction bonds for his share of the storm drain.
The City expended $12,000 during the last rainy season to clear mud and debris from this
portion of Front Street. Additionally, representatives of Del Rio Plaza informed the Public
Works Dept. that approximately $5,000 had been spent to clear their parking lot of mud. The
participation cost of $34,000 represents two years of maintenance costs. Construction of
the storm drain will eliminate the majority of the problem. If the City were to construct
minimal storm drain improvements to convey the existing flows under Front Street with an
open channel on each side, the construction and design cost would exceed $50,000. The
portion of the costs associated with Del Rio Plaza will be discussed with the owner of Del Rio
Plaza in anticipation of negotiating a solution that will eliminate the cross-gutter in front of the
Plaza and allow a storm drain to be constructed through the Plaza parking lot to Murrieta
Creek.
The $34,000 cost represents 14% of the required bonding amount of $239,000 for the
construction of the storm drain. Participation by the City will enable the project to proceed
and eliminate the constant maintenance costs associated with this section of Front Street.
Copies of letters from Mr. Larry Markham and Mr. Keith McCann are attached for your review.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The $34,000 cost will be charged to RDA Acquisition (160-199-801-5808).
ATTACHMENT:
Letters from Mr. Larry Markham and Mr. Keith McCann
-2- pw01\agdrpt\92~O825~pm22515c.up5 0817
MARKHAM & ASSOCIATES
Development Consultants
June 2, 1992
Tim Serlet
City Engineer
City of Temecula
43174 Business Center Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Subject:
Kashmere/McCann - Front St./I-15 Street Improvements
City of Temecula - Cost Participation
Dear Mr. Serlet:
I am in agreement with the proposal by the City of Temecula to
share in the improvements costs in the amount of $34,000.00, or two
years of pavement repair and closure costs in exchange for the
immediate construction of the improvement, which has been
initiated.
I look forward to the successful completion of this process at
the earliest available City Council hearing.
Sincerely,
MARKHAM & ASSOCIATES
Markham
Prlncxpal
41750 Winchesmr Road, Suit: N · Temecula, California 92590 · (714) 676-6672 · FAX (714) 699-1848
MARKHAM & ASSOCIATES
Dcvclopmcnt Consultants
Mr. Dave Dixon
City Manager
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
April 6, 1992
Subject; PM 22515 and CUP 5
Storm Drain and Street Improvements
Front Street
Dear Dave,
This communication comes as a prelude to the meeting that I have
requested to discuss the concept of cost sharing and timing of the
subject improvements. Attached you will find Mr. McCanns letter
outlining a proposal put forth by McCann and Kashmere relative to
an initial cost sharing plan. I would like to expand on what I feel
are additional pertinent facts important to the McCann/Kashmere
proposal.
I will summarize these as briefly as possible;
-This' area floods with every rainfall, no matter how brief or
intense, with a resulting closure of Front Street and the
Southbound offramp. This presents an ongoing health and safety
problem with the need for police officers to effect the closure and
enforce it for the duration of the closure. Upon re-opening the
street maintenance crews are required to remove the silt and other
debris to insure a safe driving surface.
-The pavement has deteriorated during the past two years as result
of the constant saturation of the subsurface. In the very near
future this area of Front Street will require resurfacing in order
to rehabilitate the driving surface.
-These closures, potholed pavement and general unsightly conditions
are detrimental to the attraction of business to Old Town Temecula
and the south Front Street area.
-The City is currently spending.._substantial maintenance dollars on
the upstream tributary t~ this very same'water course through the
Los Ranchitos area. Thi~ work consists primarily of regrading
earthen swales and little in the way of permanent improvements.
-A brief comment is in order relative to the extent of the required
improvements, from a drainage standpoint. These properties generate
very little in the way of drainage area and yet they are the last
parcels at the extreme downstream end of the drainage course
adjacent to the main Murrieta Creek channel. Thus, their percentage
contribution to the drainage structure size is very small.
Furthermore, within the confines of the Murrieta Creek master plan
the~ oarcels do not aualifv for credits or reimbursements.
41750 Winchester Road, Suite N · Temccula, California 92590 · (714) 676-6672 · FAX (714) 699-1848
-Timing plays an important part in these projects. CUP 5 could be
constructed and would only be required to have improvements
complete prior to occupancy. PM 22515 could record as late as
November 1992 and bond for the improvements for typically 18 months
prior to bond renewal or construction being required.
-These owners have come together to jointly construct the subject
improvements in order to relieve each individual from the crushing
cost impact of improving each site separately. Additionally, the
street design mandates that the entire street be constructed as a
unit in order to meet the required grades with no viable phasing
alternative. The need for this type of cooperation has been lacking
in the past and that factor coupled with the high costs involved,
individually, are the reason that this is the last freeway
interchange to be developed in the City.
-The previous owner of PM 22515 and the two adjacent restaurants is
currently in Chapter 7 bankruptcy, due in no small part to his
inability to deal with these issues in a timely and cost effective
manner.
-The construction of CUP 5 will result in increased assessed
property valuation and sales tax revenues. Additionally, the near
term completion of the improvements for PM 22515 will expedite the
development of three valuable parcels that have freeway visiability
and will also result in the same property tax and sales tax
increases.
The developers have desired to proceed as quickly as possible, but
numerous unforeseen plan check and field problems have resulted in
the cost escalation outlined in Mr. Mc Canns letter and forced the
reevaluation of project scheduling. To proceed immediately requires
assistance in some form, from the City, otherwise delay will. be
required on all or part of the improvements to await a better
economic environment.
These developers wish to form a partnership of cooperation with the
City to eliminate constant maintenahce, safety problems and
business image concerns in exchange for assistance as deemed
appropriate by your offica.
I hope this communication sheds further light on this request and
we look forward to reaching a mutually beneficial resolution of
this situation in the immediate future!
Apri 15, 1992
Keith L. McCann, Jr.
~3121Margarita Road
Temecula, CA. 92592
71~-676-7~8~
Mr. Dave Dixon
Temecula City Manager
~317~ Business Park Drive
Tomerule, CA. 92590
Re: Tentative Map No. 22515
Dear Mr. Dixon:
As you know, the south end of Front Street continues to be a
blighted and unsafe area. It is unsafe for vehicular traffic
because of a ~isintegrating asphalt roadway and because with every
rain flooding occurs, which in turn prompts the closing of the
street. Businesses are then made to suffer because of the
attendant hardship placed upon them by a lack of access to their
properties.
The solutions to these problems are tied to the development
of the adjacent properties. Conditions of approval require the
construction of storm drains, street replacement, curb and gutter
installation, etc.
I am an owner of the land identified as Parcel 22515, and my
neighbor, Lou Kashmere, owns the land described as C.U.P. No. 5.
Together, we share the burden of constructing improvements which
should solve the current unsafe conditions and inure to the benefit
of countless unknown parties, by virtue of safely transferring
storm drain run-off across our properties, the origin of which
covers a vast area of Temecula. Also, by constructing streets
which will facilitate the safe passage of vehicular and peOes;rian
traffic hereafter. The cost of these improvements will 'exceed
$ 400,000.
Engineering
Permits and Fees
Storm Drain
Street improvements
30,000
35,000
220,00~
120,000
$ 405,0G0
Undertaking the necessary improvement plans in areaaration of
construction, as required by the Conditions of Approval, have
revealed certain complications which have substantially enhanced
the cost of construction of the prescribed improvements. Of major
importance is the fact that there is not ~ncugh room under Front
Street to construct the necessar:/s:orm areins.
A modified system of structures that will accomplish the task
result in additional costs of approximately $ 100,000.
I and Lou Kashmere have, in the past, been prepared to 9o
forward with the needed improvements, however, in light of these
added costs we are now placed in the position of putting off the
required improvements because of the added financial burden placed
before us, and not of our doing.
If, however, the City of Temecula will participate with
financial assistance we are prepared to proceed with the necessary
improvements. The specific assistance that we request is
identified as follows:
1)
That the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency would
participate in the cost of constructing the storm
drain t~ the extent of documented additional costs
relative to the modified storm drain structure, as
required under Front Street,
2)
That the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency incur
the specific costs of permits and inspection fees
imposed by the City of Temecula for the storm drain
structure,
3)
And, that the City of Temecula would prescribe a
modified bonding procedure so that specified bonding
amounts be set aside for payment of improvements,
however, that those funds specifically be utilized
for the actual payment of improvements.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. As you may
know, other previous property owners have attempted to develop the
subject properties, however, without success because of the
significant attached costs.
Sincerely.
Ke i th L
· C
redev