HomeMy WebLinkAbout091493 CC AgendaAGENDA
TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
A REGULAR MEETING
TEMECULA COMMUNITY CENTER - 28816 PUJOL STREET
SEPTEMBER 14, 1993 - 7:00 PM
At approximately 9:45 PM, the City Council will
determine which of the remaining agenda items
can be considered and acted upon prior to 10:00
PM and may continue all other items on which
additional time is required until a future meeting.
All meetings are scheduled to end at 10:00 PM
EXECUTIVE SESSION: 5:30 IN - Closed Session of the City Coundl pursuant to
Coyeminent Code Section No. 54956.9[b) in the matter of Zone Change No. PA 93-
0043
Next in Order:
Ordinance: No. 93-17
Resolution: No. 93-7~
CALL TO ORDER:
Mayor J. Sal Mufioz presiding
Invocation
Minister Sofia Sadler, Harvester Church of Temecula
Flag Salute
Councilmember Stone
ROLL CALL:
Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Mur~oz
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
Future 2000 Day
PUBLIC FORUM
This is a portion of the City Council meeting unique to the City of Temecula. At the
meeting held on the second Tuesday of each month, the City Council will devote a
period of time (not to exceed 30 minutes) for the purpose of providing the public with
an opportunity to discuss topics of interest with the Council. The members of the City
Council will respond to questions and may give direction to City staff. The Council is
prohibited, by the provisions of the Brown Act, from taking any official action on any
matter which is not on the agenda. If you desire to speak on any matter which is not
listed on the agenda, a pink 'Request to Speak' form should be filled out and filed with
the City Clerk.
/~ende/OO1493 I O9/01/93
For ell 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.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Reports by the members of the City Council on matters not on the egenda will be
made at this time. A total, not to exceed, ten (10) minutes will be devoted to these
reports.
CONSENTCALENDAR
NOTIC; TO THI: PUBIIC
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.
2
3
Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1
Motion to waive the reading of the text of ell ordinances end resolutions
included in the agenda.
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of AUgust 10, 1993;
2.2 Approve the minutes of August 24, 1993.
Resolution ADDrOving List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
Adopt s resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
Aee~de/OIt413 2 Ol/OI/ll
4
City Treasurer's Reoort
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of July 31, 1993.
5
Resolution Authorizino City Regulation of Rates Charoed for the Basic Tier of Cable
Television Service
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CA,
AUTHORIZING CITY REGULATIONS OF THE RATES CHARGED FOR THE BASIC
TIER OF CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE; AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO DO ALL
THAT IS NECESSARY TO INITIATE RATE REGULATION, INCLUDING WITHOUT
LIMITATION, OBTAINING FCC CERTIFICATION
6 Adootion of Murrieta Creek Area DrainoDe Plan Fees - Amendment No. ~
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ADOPTING AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE MURRIETA CREEK AREA DRAINAGE
AREA PLAN
6.2
Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 93-14
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 90-04 REGARDING MURRIETA CREEK AREA
DRAINAGE PLAN FEES FOR SUBDIVISIONS
7 Enforcement of Decorum at City Council Meetings
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1
Approve a Policy and Procedure to provide for the orderly enforcement
of decorum at City Council Meetings.
,AOalde/O91493 3 09,4;8/93
9
10
11
FY 1993-94 Budget Amendments for Disaster Relief
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Approve a budget amendment in the amount of S159,107 from the
Unreserved General Fund Balance.
"No Parkina" 7one on Rancho California Road West of Front Street
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 The Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommends that the City Council
ado~ a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ESTABLISHING 'NO PARING' ZONE ON RANCHO CALIFORNIA ROAD WEST
OF FRONT STREET
Solicitation of Construction Bids for the Bridoe and Street Imorovements on I iefer Road
at Nicolas Road (PW93-O~)
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1 Approve the construction plans and specifications and authorize the
Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for the
bridge and street improvements on Liefar Road at Nicolas Road (PW93-
02).
Award of Contract for the Rancho Vista Road Sidewalk Improvements (Project No.
PW92-12)
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1
Award a contract for the Rancho Vista Road Sidewalk Improvements,
Project No. PW92-12, to Gosney Construction Backhoe & Equipment for
~26,488.10, and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract;
11.2
Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $2,648.81, which is equal to 10% of the
contract amount.
AQmMa/OI1413 4
12
13
Award of Contract for Jefferson Avenue Rtorm Drain Imorovements at Winchester
Road (PW 93-01)
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1
Award · contract for the Jefferson Avenue Storm Drain Improvements,
Project No. PW93-01, to Accurate Construction Inc. for $61,084.55,
and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract;
12.2
Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $6,108.46, which is equal to 10% of the
contract amount.
Renewal of Annual Street Strioino Contract FY 93-94
RECOMMENDATION:
13.1
Extend the Street Striping Contract with Orange County Striping and
Stenciling, Inc. for a period of one year (September 29, 1994) and
authorize the Mayor to execute contract.
14
15
Comoletion and Acceotance of Mart}arita Road Interim Imorovements - Project No.
PW92-04
RECOMMENDATION:
14.1
Accept the street improvements on Margarita Road from Winchester
Road to Solone Way, Project No. PW92-05, as complete and direct the
City Clerk to:
File the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, and
accept a six (6) month Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10%
of the contract;
Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the
filing of the Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed.
Contract Amendment No. 4 to Community Facilities District 88-12 Engineering
Services Contract with J.F. Davidson Associates. Inc.
RECOMMENDATION:
15.1
Approve Contract Amendment No. 4 to provide additional engineering
services for CFD 88-12 by J.F. Davidson Associates, Inc. in the amount
of $32,676.00.
AOeeda~e1483 6 OMa/8l
16 Substitution of Imorovement Bonds in Tract No. ~3~67-4
RECOMMENDATION:
16.1
Accept substitute Surety Bonds for the improvement of streets,
drainage, sewer and water systems, survey monuments, and for Labor
and Materials as substitutes for bonds submitted to City Council on
December 10, 1991, for Final Revised Vesting Tract No. 232674 and
to direct the City Clerk to release the original bonds.
17 Contract Change Orders for Ynez Road Widening Project. PW9~-05. CFD 88-1
RECOMMENDATION:
17.1
Approve Contract Change Order No. 12, 13, 15 and 16 for Ynez Road
Widening Project, PW92-05 for labor and equipment for various items
of work, in the amount of $39,425.78.
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.
18
ADOeal Of Plannino Commission Denial of Tentative Tract Mao 95338, Amendment No.
I - A 28 Unit Condominium Proiect on ~,56 Acres
RECOMMENDATION:
18.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING
THE APPEAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0. 25338, AMENDMENT NO. 1,
UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 25338, AMENDMENT NO. 1, TO SUBDIVIDE A 2.56 ACRE
PARCEL INTO A 28 UNIT CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-330-050
COUNCIL BUSINESS
19 Soeed Undulations Reoort - Calle Pina Colada
RECOMMENDATION:
19.1 Consider the installation of speed undulations on Calle Pina Colada
between Del Rey Road and La Serena Way.
20 Consideration of a Recycled Products Pur;hasino Policy
RECOMMENDATION:
20.1 Consider a Recycled Products Purchasing Policy and provide direction to
staff.
21
22
Designation of Voting Delegate for the National League of Cities Annual Conqress
RECOMMENDATION:
21.1 Designate a voting representative and an alternate.
Discussion of Aooroval Authority Matrix
RECOMMENDATION:
22.1 Provide direction to staff relative to amendments
ordinance.
to the existing
23
Reoort on the Public Noticing Process for PA93-0089, Conditional Use Permit for an
Arco AM\PM Gas Station and Mini-Mart Located at ~8231 Ynez Road
RECOMMENDATION:
23.1 Receive and file.
24
Status Reoort on the Regulation of VendinQ Carts
RECOMMENDATION:
24.1 Provide direction to staff on the regulation of vending carts.
/~eede/OI1493 7 OI/OI/13
Proposed I ease - Temecula Town Association
(Raced on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Stone)
RECOMMENDATION:
25.1 Refer the proposed lease between the City and the Temecula Town
Association to staff for negotiation and resolution of competing requests
for continued use of the Northwest Sports Park.
CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
Next meeting: September 21, 1993, General Ran Public Hearing, 7:00 PM, Temecula
Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
Next regular meeting: September 28, 1993, 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center,
28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
Agee.lde/Olt493 · OIJOI/l·
TEM;CUI ~ COMMUNITY SFRVICFS DISTRICT MwFTINn - ~o be held st 8:00)
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
PUBLIC COMMENT:
President Patricia H. Birdsall
DIRECTORS:
Muf~oz, Parks, Roberts, Stone, Birdsall
Anyone wishing to address the Board of Directors, should
present a completed pink =Request to Speak" to the City Clerk.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state
your name and address for the record.
CONSENT CALENDAR
I Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of August 10, 1993;
1.2 Approve the minutes of August 24, 1993.
2 Southern California Edison Comoanv Easement for Project No. PW 9~-.~9B -
Community Recreation Center - Phase II
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1
Approve the dedication of an easement to Southern California Edison
Company located at the Community Recreation Center and authorize the
President to sign the easement document;
2.2
Direct the City Clerk to execute and record the easement.
Agentis/OIl413
DISTRICT BUSINESS
3 NaminQ of Community Recreation Center
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Consider, and if desired, approve the official name of the Community
Recreation Center.
I
GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Dixon
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT:
Next regular meeting: September 28, 1993, 8:00 PM, Temecula
Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
/leldel)11413 10 i
TEMECUL~ R;DEVEI OPMENT A~ENCY MEETIN~ '
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL:
Chairperson Ronald J. Parks presiding
AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Mu~oz, Robarts, Stone, Parks
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Anyone wishing to address the Agency, should present a
completed pink 'Recluest 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
I Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1
Approve the minutes of August 10, 1993;
1.2
Approve the minutes of August 24, 1993.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT: Next regular meeting: September 28, 1993, 8:00 PM, Temecula
Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California
Agenele/Og1493 11
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
The City of Tetnecula
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula recognizes the time for economic
change in Southern California is now; and
WHEREAS, the Inland Empire Business Journal, along with CNN News, KCKC and
KNEWS; twenty-six Inland Empire chambers of commerce and five major newspapers will be
offering a business-to-business exposition; and
WHEREAS, this forum will focus on leadership skills, management techniques for the
future, professional selling sldlls and useful ideas to improve self-esteem and self-awareness to
help individuals and companies significantly increase their production, enhance morale and
improve overall productivity; and
WHEREAS, both consumer and business attitudes play a major role when economic
challenges are present; and
WHEREAS, the Inland Empire Chamber of Commerce will host a 'Happy Hour' to kick
off this major event on September 23, 1993 from 5:00 to 7:00 PM,
NOW, THEREFORE, I, J. Sat Mu~oz, on behalf of the City Council of the City of
Temecula, hereby proclaim September 23, 1993
"FUTURE 2000 DAY"
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City
of Temecula to be affixed this 14nd day of September, 1993.
J. Sal Mu~oz, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
r~agust 20, 1993
Mayor J. Sal Munoz
Ci of Temecula
4~74 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Dear Mayor Munoz:
believe that California and the is dead
Attitude is eve ' g,,,if we economy and the g.oo~!_ old .d~_ys are one
we mi ht as w~r~ pack-up and leave. The Inland E. ire Businesi Journal, alon vath CNN NEws -
newspaper. offer "Futur6 ~O0~" Busine, ss-m-Busi~e, ss EYdrav.agl~za. designed to present a sitire lan for
and every business person in Southern California to master his or her future and the F~u~ oFbusLness
Southern California, The nation's five top business authors will a ~ to ether for the first ~ presenting a
prescription for the turn around, development and formation of the ~Istiny ~o~ business and business people.
The time for our economic climate to change is...NOWH I-Iistqry has proven over and over again, for circum-
stances to change...people must chan e. Sfatistics indicate bushleases and consumers attitudes directly reflect
individual and corporate financial pr~uclivity.
As mayor of our city, rm proud to have the opportunity to p~'_.onalllt invite you to the uRc_oming Future 2000
Business-to-i~siness Extravaganza. Enclosed ~s your persofud invitauon to p~u'ticipate in this exciting business
event that will deliver significant value to the Inlahd Empire region.
The Future 2000 - Business to Business Extravaganza will provide several educational forums thai will focus
leadership skills
management techniques for the future
professional selling ~ills
useful ideas to improve serf-esteem and serf-awareness
These acquired skills will help individuals and companies significantly increase their buttom-line results,
enhance company morale and improve overall productivity.
A total of thirty-six chambers of commerce are s.ponsors of this si.g..nif!.'.cant business event, in addition to over
th' colorate and media sponsors. This major business event ~ featm'e 124 booth displ.ays in the Future
2a)(~Pawlion, profiling several Inland Empire companieS,~ roducts and services. AdditionM!y, this event will
be featuring the introduction of the "Corp6rate Tune-Out' gu~ilding displaying a variety of executive .p~._ucts,
adgets, toys, get-a-way destinations, recreational items, spqrtin a paratus, etc. see attached map foi building
Po~aiions). Over 25 restaurants from the Inland Em ire and 36gl~Pa~P~d Empire ~ambers of commerce Will b~
resent to be an of the Inland Empire Chamber of ~mmerce Happy Hour scheduled for September 23rd from
Both consumer and business attitudes pla a major role When economic challen es are present. I encourage
you to partici ate in this .r.r~jor event. ~e Inland Empire region has tremen~go~us potential if we all work
together to m~t~e our area a better place to live and conduct our business affairs.
Please add to the success of this pro _grg!n_ b attending and also by issuin on behalf of the ciW_ of Temecula a
roclamation prochiming Septembe/23, l~j3 as Future 2000 Day/~whi~ will be presented along with those
FmKm other ciues and counties at the event." '
See you at the Future 2000 Business-to-Business Extravaganza!!
Sincerely,
"No one covers Inland Empire business like The Business Journal'
305 Sacramento Place, Ontario, CA 91764 Phone: (909) 391-1015 FAX: (909) 391-3160
ITEM
NO.
ITEM
NO.
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1993
A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order on Tuesday, August 10,
1993, 5:45 PM, at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula,
California, Mayor J. Sal Mur~oz presiding.
PRESENT: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Mut~oz
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Harwood Edvalson,
City Attorney Scott F. Field and Deputy City Clerk Susan Jones.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberrs to recess to
an executive session pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (a), (b) and (c) to
discuss pending litigation at 5:57 PM. The motion was unanimously carried, with
Councilmember Stone absent.
The meeting was reconvened at 7:05 PM with all members present except Councilmember
Stone.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by EIder Greg LeBlanc, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day
Saints.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The audience was led in the pledge of allegiance by Councilmember Parks.
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
None
PUBLIC FORUM
Audrey Hicks, Gramma Audrey's Antiques & Collectibles, 28636 Front Street, #100,
TemecUla, read from her letter to Mr. David Dixon and Mr. Gary Thornhill, regarding the
approval of a wooden cart on Front and Main Streets in Old Town used for street vending.
Ms. Hicks said that the cart is vacant more than occupied, it protrudes into the public right-of-
way, and she feels that the cart will have a negative impact on the retail vendors in Old Town.
She said that she feels the retail space vendors should be allowed first opportunity to place
CCMINOBI10~93 -1- 06/13/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 10, 1993
a street cart in Old Town and the placement of the cart should be approved by the
surrounding property owners. Ms. Hicks said that she is very concerned with the liability of
the City with this cart placed in the public right-of-way end unattended. Ms. Hicks asked
staff to provide her with a copy of the current ordinance and policies pertaining to street
vending. :
Bob Lord, 30120 Pechanga Drive, Temecula, Property Manager of Butterfield Square in Old
Town, said that he was not in opposition to the carts in Old Town as part of the Old Town
Specific Plan, however, he said that he feels that the placement of the carts should be
discretionary and the cart owner should pay rent for the space in Old Town.
Planning Director Gary Thornhill advised the Council that staff will be bring back a report on
this matter on the August 24, 1993 agenda.
Robert Buelna, 31121 El Torito Court, Temecula, advised the Council that his home is directly
behind the tot lot at Lome Linda Park and things are being thrown over the fence into his
backyard on a daily basis. Mr. Buelna said that the park continues to be over-watered end
water is running into his property.
Community Services Director Shawn Nelson advised the Council that he has spoken with Mr.
Buelna about these problems and he will continue to work with him to try and resolve the
matter. Director Nelson said that the City has not taken over maintenance of the park end
he is working with the contractor on the water problems at this time.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Mayor Pro Tem Roberts said that at a recent City Council meeting the City was presented
with a commemorative poster and pin from the 1993 Temecula Balloon and Wine Festival and
later at a reception for the general manager of the festival, he was presented with a check in
the amount of $2,500, as the first= installment on the loan from the City of Temecula to the
Temecula Balloon and Wine Festival.
Councilmember Parks advised that he attended the Murrieta Creek Advisory Committee
meeting last month and the County Flood Control District is proposing a plan to reduce the
quantity of water running through Old Town by using overflow areas, such as part of the
Rancho California Water District acquisition as well as part of the park site the City has
purchased off of Cherry Street.
City Manager David Dixon stated that he was informed of the recommendations of the
committee and he advised there may be some ramifications because taxpayer funds were
used to purchase the park site.
Councilmember Parks said discussions are in the preliminary stage at this time.
CCIdNOW10/93 -2- 06/13/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 10. 1993
Mayor Murioz said that he artended an American Public Transportation conference last week,
which discussed ISTEA, which allows federal highway funds to be used for public
transportation.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Parks registered a "NO" vote on Consent Calendar Item No. 5.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tam Roberts, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to approve
Consent Calendar Items No. I - 8, with Councilmember Parks voting "NO" on Item No. 5.
The motion was carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Robarts, Mur~oz
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of July 13, 1993;
e
Resolution ADDroving List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-67
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
CCMINOW10193 -3- 08/13/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 10; 1993
4,
City Treasurer's Report
RECOMMENDATION:
4.1 Receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of June 30, 1993.
e
Purchase of Stenciline/Graffiti Removal Truck
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1 Approve the acquisition of · street stenciling truck from
Products of Hutchinson, Kansas in the amount of $45,024.
The motion carried with the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Roberts, Mu~oz
NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
Roadline
8
e
Imorovement Fundine Aareement with Leo RoriDauoh and the County of Riverside for
the Improvement of the Santa Gertrudis Creek Channel and Grading of the Rorioauah
Property adjacent to the Channel
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1
Approve the Improvement Funding Agreement with Leo Roripaugh end
the County of Riverside and authorize the Mayor to execute the
Agreement on the City's behalf and the City Clerk to attest to the same.
Release Subdivision Monument Bond for ParCel MaD No. ~3335
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1
Authorize the release of the Subdivision Monument Bond for Parcel Map
No. 23335 and direct the City Clerk to release the bond to the surety.
CCMII08/10/93 -4,- 0Wl 3/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
8. Status Reoort on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Gnatcatcher as a Fed.rally Threatened Soecies -
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1 Receive and file report.
AUGUST 10; 1993
Service Listing of the California
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Rot Ran No. ~49. Amendment No. ~: Variance No. 13 - Temecula Valley Auto Mall
Marouee
Mayor Mur~oz advised that Council that Councilmember Stone has requested that this
item be continued to allow him to participate in the discussion. '
Mayor Pro Tem Roberts said that Councilmember Stone's concerns were with regard
to the funding mechanism and not the design portion of this item.
Planning Director Gary Thornhill presented the staff report.
Mayor Mu~oz re-opened the public hearing at 7:45 P.M.
Mayor Pro Tem Roberts asked for clarification from the Car Dealers Association
regarding the maintenance of the sign.
Dan Atwood, General Manager of Toyota of Temecula, representing the Temecula Car
Dealers Association, said that the association has agreed to insure the sign and pay
for the electricity and insurance.
Gordon Dayton, 39410 Via Montera, Murrieta, representing the Temecula Valley
Astronomers Club, expressed opposition to the proposed sign due to the potential for
light pollution caused by a sign of this magnitude.
Planning Director Gary Thornhill explained that each auto dealer is permitted to place
a sign on their property which has the potential for several signs along the freeway,
however the auto dealers have agreed that in lieu of individual signs they would all
benefit from the proposed sign.
CCMIN08110/93 -6- 0N13/93
CITY COUNCIl MINUTES AUGUST 10~ 1993
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded 'by Councilmember Parks to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-68
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING PLOT PLAN NO. 249, AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONSTRUCT A
SEVENTY-THREE FOOT SIGN WITH AN ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD ON
A PARCEL CONTAINING 5.07 ACRES LOCATED AT 26631 YNEZ ROAD AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-08O-039
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-69
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 13 TO PERMIT A SEVENTY-THREE FOOT HIGH
SIGN IN THE SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL (C-P-6) ZONE LOCATED AT
THE WESTERN PORTION OF 26631 YNEZ ROAD
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsell, Parks, Roberts, Mu~oz
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
Mayor Mur'ioz declared a recess at 8:00 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:45 P.M.
10.
Murrieta Creek Drainaqe Plan Fees
Director of Public Works Tim Serlet presented the staff report.
Mayor Mur~oz opened the public hearing at 8:50 P.M.
There being no requests to speak the public hearing was closed at 8:50 P.M.
CCMNOall 0193 -6- 08/1
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 10~ 1993
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Ron Roberts to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
RECOMMENDATION:
Introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 93-14
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
90-04 REGARDING MURRIETA CREEK AREA DRAINAGE PLAN FEES FOR
SUBDIVISIONS
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Robarts, Mufioz
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
I COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
COUNCIL BUSINESS
11. Designation of Voting Delegate for League Annual Conference
City Manager David Dixon presented the staff report.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to
appoint Mayor J. Sal Mu~oz and Mayor Pro Tam Ron Robarts as voting delegate and
alternate.
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Mur~oz
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
12.
Develooment Ac~reement No. 92-1 and Change of Zone No. 21 - Linfield
City Attorney Scott Field presented the staff report.
CCMIN08110/93 -7- 08/13/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 10, 1993
It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1 Adopt a Negative Declaration for Development Agreement No. 92-1 and
Change of Zone No. 21;
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Muf~oz
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
12.2 Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 93-15
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 92-1 BETWEEN THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AND THE LINFIELD SCHOOL FOR A TEN YEAR PERIOD TO
ENSURE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT AS SENIOR HOUSING,
CONGREGATE CARE FACILITY, SKILLED NURSING, PERSONAL CARE, A NINE
HOLE PRIVATE GOLF COURSE AND DEDICATION OF A 2.3 NET ACRE PARCEL
TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR A SENIOR CENTER LOCATED NORTH OF
PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND EAST OF THE
TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES:
3 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Parks, Roberts
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: I COUNCILMEMBERS:
Mu~oz
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
CCMIN06/10/93 -8- 08/I 3/63
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 10. 1993
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
12.3
Read by title only and introduce an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 93-16
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY FOR THE CHANGE OF
ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 21, CHANGING
THE ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) TO R-3 (GENERAL RESIDENTIAL)
ON PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO
VISTA ROAD AND EAST OF THE TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'$ PARCEL NO. 946-070-008
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Mur~oz
ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Stone
CITY MANAGER REPORT
None
.CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
None
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Parks stated that SCAG has prepared a report regarding NAFTA and he
offered to provide a copy of that report to any Councilmember who is interested.
Councilmember Birdsall advised the Council that the INS currently is discussing the closure
of Rainbow Canyon Road at the city limit to assist them in cutting down on traffic of illegal
aliens through the City of Temecula.
CCMIN08/10/93 -9- 0~/13/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 10,' 1993
Mayor Mufioz stated that he met with Sharon Feldner of the Border Patrol to discuss some
of the issues that have been raised and she advised him that she would be available to give
the Council a status report.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Mufioz declared the meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M.
The next meeting of the Temecula City Council will be held on August 17, 1993, 7:00 PM,
a General Ran Public Hearing, at the Tamecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street,
Temecula, California.
The next regular meeting of the Temecula City Council will be held on August 24, 1993, 7:00
PM, at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California.
Mayor J. Sal Muf~oz
ATTEST:
City Clerk June S. Greek
CCMINO8/lO/93 -10- 08/13/e3
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1993
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula City Council was called to order on Tuesday,
August 24, 1993, 5:34 P.M. at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street,
Temecula, California, Mayor J. Sal Mufioz presiding.
Executive Session
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Councilmember Stone to edjoum to
closed session pursuant to Government Code Sections 54956.9 (c) regarding Dawes vs. City
of Temecula end 54956.8 regarding real property negotiation 1 ) Honda of Temecula located
at 27500 Jefferson Avenue/Norm Reeves; 2) Temecula Museum located at 41954 Main
Street/Hampton and Severs; 3) Temecula Auto Mall Sign located at 26631 Ynez
Road/Temecula Auto Dealers Association; end 4) Loma Linda Park/Grubaugh and Sons and
Section 54956.9 (b)
PRESENT: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsell, Perks, Roberts, Stone,
Mufioz
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Herwood T.
Edvalson, City Attorney Scott Field, City Clerk June S. Greek.
The meeting was reconvened in General Session at 7:20 P.M.
Mayor Pro Tem Roberrs led the flag salute.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given by Father Edward Renner, St. Thomas Episcopal Church.
PRESENTATIONS/
PROCLAMATIONS
None
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Frank Spencer, representing the Board of the Old Town Temecula Merchants Association,
advised the Council that the Board has concluded that the policy and regulations pertaining
to street vending need to be studied further. Mr. Spencer said that the Old Town Merchants
met with staff to discuss the concerns and the possibility of establishing criteria for street
CCMIN06/24193 -1 - 8/30/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 94, 1993
vendors. Mr. Spencer said that the Old Town Temecula Merchants Association requests no
additional permits be issued, for street vending in Old Town, until the concerns are resolved.
JoAnn Doren, 39625 Kapalua Way, Temecula, stated that she was concerned that the City
Council was unaware of the Planning Commission's approval of the Arco AM/PM Mini-Mart
and gas station on Rencho California Road and Ynez Road. Ms. Doren said that many citizens
have expressed their concern about the placement of a gas station at this location.
Mayor Pro Tam Robarts and Councilmember Stone said they have received several phone calls
expressing opposition to the placement of the proposed gas station/mini-mart. Mayor Pro
Tam Robarts said he feels all applications requesting the sale of alcohol should be presented
to the City Council.
Ray Calderon, 27645 Ynez Road, Temecula, representing Chili's Restaurants, advised the
Council that Chili's Restaurants is opposed to the placement of this Arco Gas Station and
Mini-Mart. Mr. Calderon advised the Council that he never saw a posting on the property and
he was advised of the proposed project by customers visiting the Chili's restaurant adjacent
to the site.
Jeffrey Smith, 24850 Hancock Avenue, Murriete, advised the Councilmembers of an incident
which took place at the Towne Center parking lot near Edwards Cinemas. Mr. Smith said he
was approached by two individuals whose hands were concealed and who demanded he turn
over his money. Mr. Smith said that he located a sheriff's deputy and advised him of the
incident and told him where the individuals were. Mr. Smith said that the officer offered no
assistance and took no action. Mr. Smith then called the police department and explained the
incident to the watch commander who supported the actions of the deputy patrolling the area.
Council directed staff to investigate this incident.
Dennis Parkinson, 31308 Arabasca Circle, Temecula, expressed his concern to the Council
regarding the proposed Pechanga Indian Casino and Resort.
Philip Hoxsey, 43318 Cielo De Azul, Temecula, presented the City Clerk with a referendum
petition regarding the WaI-Mart zone change.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Parks stated that he believes he made the proper decision regarding the Wal-
Mart zone change and incentive package.
Councilmember Birdsall said she feels some of the tax-payers who signed the petition were
misinformed and when the facts are explained, the proposal will go forward as approved.
Mayor Mufioz advised that he and Mayor Pro Tam Robarts will be meeting with the Pechanga
Indian Tribal Council tomorrow at 4:00 P.M. at the Temecule City Hall Main Conference
Room.
CCMINOe/24193 -2- 8/30/93
CITY COUNCIl MINUTES AUGUST :~4. 1993
CONSENT CALI:NDAR
Councilmember Parks advised that staff has requested Item No. 11 be continued.
Mayor Pro Tern Roberrs stated he will abstain from Item No. 5, due to a conflict of interest,
and requested that Item No. 9 be pulled for discussion.
Councilmember Stone requested Item No. 5 be pulled for discussion.
Mayor Muf~oz requested Item No. 8 be pulled for discussion.
It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve
Consent Calendar Items No. 1 - 4, 6, 7, and 10 - 12.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall,
Mu~ioz
None
None
Parks, Roberts, Stone,
e
Standard Ordinance Adootion Procedure
RECOMMENDATION
1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions
included in the agenda.
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Approve the minutes of July 27, 1993;
2.2 Approve the minutes of August 3, 1993;
Resolution Aoorovino List of Demands
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-70
CCMINOe/24193 -3- 8/30/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUnUST 94. 1993
-A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A
e
Chamber of Commerce Aoreement
RECOMMENDATION: - ·
4.1 Approve the FY 1993-94 agreement with the Chamber of Commerce to provide
services and authorize the Mayor and the City Manager to execute the contract.
ApprOVal Of Contract Award for Plan Review Services
RECOMMENDATION:
6.1 Approve the award of contract to ESGIL Corporation, as the primary plan
review firm to provide complete plan review services to the Building and Safety
Department;
6.2
Approve the retention of VanDorpe/Chou and Associates, Inc. and Melad and
Associates,.to support the plan review needs of the City's Building and Safety
Department.
Amendment to Supplemental Aareement for Use of Community Development Block
Grant Funds
RECOMMENDATION:
7.1 Approve the amendment to the supplemental agreement for the use of
Community Development Block Grant Funds.
10.
Community Facilities District 88-12 - Reimbursement Aareements for Work Performed
Durina the Construction of the Ynez Road Widening Project {PW92-05)
RECOMMENDATION:
10.1
Approve reimbursement agreements with the Rancho California Water District
and Kemper Real Estate Management Company for improvements to be
constructed by the City's Contractor for the Ynez Road Widening Project
PW92o05.
CCMIN08/24193 -4- 8/30/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 94, 1993
11.Adootion of Murrieta Creek Area Drainaoe Plan Fees - Amendment No. ~
(Staff recommends continuing this item to September 14, 1993)
RECOMMENDATION:
11.1
Adopt · resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA.
ADOPTING AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE MURRIETA CREEK AREA DRAINAGE
PLAN
11.2
Adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 93-14
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
90-04 REGARDING MURRIETA CREEK AREA DRAINAGE PLAN FEES FOR
SUBDIVISIONS
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
12.
Second Readinq of Ordinance AoorovinQ Develooment Aoreement No. 92-1 and
Ordinance Aoorovini3 Change of Zone No. 21 - Linfield School
RECOMMENDATION:
12.1
Adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 93-15
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 92-1 BETWEEN THE CITY OF
TEMECULA AND THE LINFIELD SCHOOL FOR A TEN YEAR PERIOD TO
ENSURE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT AS SENIOR HOUSING,
CONGREGATE CARE FACILITY, SKILLED NURSING, PERSONAL CARE, A NINE
HOLE PRIVATE GOLF COURSE AND DEDICATION OF A 2.3 NET ACRE PARCEL
TO THE CITY OF TEMECULA FOR A SENIOR CENTER LOCATED NORTH OF
PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO VISTA ROAD AND EAST OF THE
TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL
12.2 Adopt an ordinance entitled:
CCMINOB/24193 -5-
CITY COUNCIl MINUTES AUGUST 94. '1993 ,~,
ORDINANCE NO. 93-16
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY FOR THE CHANGE OF
ZONE APPLICATION CONTAINED IN CHANGE OF ZONE N0.21, CHANGING
THE ZONE FROM R-R (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) TO R-3 (GENERAL RESIDENTIAL)
ON PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF PAUBA ROAD, SOUTH OF RANCHO
VISTA ROAD AND EAST OF THE TEMECULA VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL AND
KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 946-070..008
e
Service Authority for Abatement of Abandoned Vehicles
City Attorney Scott Field advised that the Service Authority was passed by a majority
of the Cities in the County and approved by the Board of Supervisors. He explained
if the City wishes to participate this year, they must make an election to do so by
September 11, 1993.
Mayor Muf~oz said that he is opposed to the manner in which establishment of this
service authority was accomplished and suggested that the Council send a letter to the
state legislature and the League of California Cities regarding this issue.
Councilmember Parks said that he also is opposed to the fee collection procedure for
the Service Authority and supported the suggestion of a letter protesting this fee
imposition in Cities that choose not to participate in the agreement.
It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Parks to approve
staff recommendation as follows and direct staff to prepare correspondence to both
the state legislature and the League of California Cities:
RECOMMENDATION:
5.1
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-71
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA,
CALIFORNIA, REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH A SERVICE AUTHORITY FOR
ABANDONED VEHICLE ABATEMENT
The motion carried as follows:
AYES:
4 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Parks, Stone, Mufloz
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
CCMIN08/24/93 -6- 8/30~3
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Roberts
AUGUST 94. '1993
Consideration of Additional Funding for Extra Work on PrOject No. CSD 92-03.
Temecula Old Town Senior Center
Mayor Mufioz expressed concern that the City hires professionals to complete a project
and costly items are overlooked in the bid preparation, which later costs the City
additional funds to complete the project.
City Attorney Scott Field advised that there is an arbitration clause in the contract
should the City decide that the contractor has performed negligently.
Chief Building Official Anthony Elmo advised the Council that the Senior Center project
is near completion.
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
RECOMMENDATION:
8.1
Approve an operating transfer of $54,200 from the Development Impact Fund
to the Capital Projects Fund;
8.2
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Appropriate $54,200 to account $210-199-801-5804.
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall,
Mu~ioz
None
None
Parks, Roberts, Stone,
e
CCMINOBI24193
Professional Services Contract Fiscal Year 1993-94 Video Production Services
Mayor Pro Tem Roberrs questioned the additional charges for meetings which run past
10:00 P.M.
Staff indicated that this was a portion of the original contract which should be deleted.
David Lines of Davlin concurred with the amendment to the contract.
-7- wao/ea
CITY COUNCIl MINUTES AUGUST 94, 1993
It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Councilmember Roberrs to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
RECOMMENDATION:
9.1 Award a professional services contract to Davlin for video production services
for fiscal year 1993-94.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsell,
Muftoz
None
None
Parks, Roberrs, Stone,
Mayor Muf~oz declared a recess at 8:10 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:20 P.M.
COUNCIL BUSINESS
13.
Status Report on the Detailed Imolementation Strateav and Reaional Air nualitv
ProQrams
Planning Director Gary Thornhill presented the staff report. Director Thornhill advised
of the following changes to the Preferred Trip Reduction Methods as follows:
- Ridesharing Plans for Employers With 50 - 99 Employees:
Staff recommends not adhering to the 50 - 99 employees.
- Use of Electric Vehicles:
Staff recommends adding alternative fuel vehicles.
- Land Use Intensification Related To Transit (Rail) Systems:
Include as a preferred trip reduction method.
Councilmember Parks asked staff if the program for 50 - 99 employees is deleted, will
all city employers be included.
CCMIN08124193 -8- W30/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
AUGUST 94..1993
Director Thornhill stated that the AQMD's Rideshare Plan is for employers of 1 O0 or
more. By lowering the requirement to employers of 50 - 99 employees, it could have
a detrimental effect on the small business person in terms of preparing a plan.
Councilmember Birdsall stated she feels 50 - 99 employees represents a small business
and the small businesses in the City cannot handle any more financial burdens.
Councilmember Parks questioned why "shuttles" was not included as a preferred
method.
Director Thornhill agreed that shuttles should be included as a preferred method for
Temecula. '
Mayor Pro Tem Roberrs stated that he feels "Enhanced Enforcement For Polluting
Vehicles" should be included. He advised that the AQMD funded a program using the
California Highway Patrol to work specific areas identifying polluting vehicles but that
program has been discontinued.
It was moved by Councilmember Parks, seconded by Mayor Pro Tam Robarts to refer
this item back to staff for additional review on recommendations on how the City will
meet its requirements and determine which of the methods will be considered s priority
based on the value of its impact. This is to be placed on the agenda in sixty (60) days.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Parks, Roberts, Stone,
Mufioz
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
14.
Dial-a-Ride Van Prooram
(Placed on the agenda at the request of Mayor Pro Tem Roberrs)
It was moved by Mayor Pro Tam Robarts, seconded by Councilmember Parks to
continue this item for thirty days.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
Birdsall, Parks, Robarts, Stone,
Mufioz
None
CCMINOB/24193 -g... 8/30/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS:
None
AUGUST 94. 1993
15.
Soeed Undulations
Director of Public Works Tim Serlet presented the staff report.
Councilmember Stone said that he feels Calle Pine Colada would be ideal for testing
a pilot program for speed undulations. Councilmember Stone suggested that the
Council approve reducing the percentage of homeowners signatures required' from
75% to 65%.
Councilmember Parks said he would like to see the pilot program run for approximately
one year to study the repercussions to the City.
Jayme Christian, 30762 Calle Pina Colada, Temecula, expressed support of the speed
undulations and Calle Pine Colada being used for a pilot program.
Roger Johnson, 30702 Calle Pine Colada, Temecula, expressed support for the speed
undulations. Mr. Johnson told the. Council that the main flow of traffic occurs
between 5:00 A.M. end 7:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. and 7:00 P.M.
Councilmember Stone suggested that the police department increase enforcement in
this area during these peak hours.
It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts to
approve staff recommendation to adopt a policy covering the installation of speed
undulations in residential neighborhoods in Temecula as recommended by the
Public/Traffic Safety Commission, with the modification that 65% of residents
signatures will be required for installation or removal requests. The motion was
unanimously carried.
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
None
CITY MANAGER REPORT
None
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
None
CCMIN08/24/93
-10- 6/30/93
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
ADJOURNMENT
AUGUST ~4. 1993
It was moved by Councilmember Stone, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Roberts to adjourn at
9:25 P.M.
The next meeting of the Temecule City Council will be held on August 31, 1993, 6:00 PM,
Workshop on AD159 & AD161, Main Conference Room, Temecula City Hall, 43174 Business
Park Drive, Temecula, California.
Workshop meeting: September, 7, 1993, Workshop on Council Norms, 6:00 PM, Main
Conference Room, Temecula City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecule, California.
Next regular meeting: September 14, 1993, 7:00 PM, Temecula Community Center,
28816 Pujol Street, Temecula, California.
ATTEST:
Mayor J. Sal Muf~oz
CCMIN08/24193 -11- 8130193
ITEM
NO.
3
,,__ RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS
SET FORTH IN E~ H SKII' A
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE,
DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A have been
audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the mount of
$645,493.43
Section 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 14th day of September, 1993.
ATTEST:
I. Sal Mufioz, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[S~AL]
Resos 328 I
STATE OF CALWORNIA)
COUNTY OF.. RIVERSIDE) SS
crn' o~ TEMLa, rLA)
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, hereby do certify that the
foregoing Resolution No. 93- was duly adopted at a regmlnr meeting of the City Council of the
City of Temecula on the '14th day of September, 1993 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: 0
NOE: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCIl-MEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Resos 328 2
08119/93 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
08126/93 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
09/02/93 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
09114j93 TOTAL CHECK RUN:
08/26/93 TOTAL PAYROLL:
CITY OF TEMECULA
LIST OF DEMANDS
TOTAL LIST OF DEMANDS FOR 09114/93 COUNCIL MEETING:
DISBURSEMENTS BY FUND:
CHECKS:
001
100
165
190
191
192
193
210
310
320
330
340
GENERAL
GAS TAX
RDA-LOW/MOD
TCSD
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJ (CIP)
TCSD-CIP
RDA-CIP
SELF-INSURANCE
VEHICLES
INFORMATIONS SYSTEMS
COPY CENTER
FACILITIES
PAYROLL:
191
193
300
3~
330
GENERAL (PAYROLL)
GAS TAX (PAYROLL)
TCSD (PAYROLL)
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A (PAYROLL)
TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C (PAYROLL)
SELF-INSURANCE (PAYROLL)
INFORMATION SYSTEMS (PAYROLL)
COPY CENTER (PAYROLL)
TOTAL BYFUND:
S283,38e.36
$40,832.81
S8,500.00
S47,701.48
$5,864.16
$16,345.20
$30,357.20
$5,682.26
$12,644.77
S378.02
$15,538.25
$5,636.14
S3t),036.01
$83,038.13
$13,464.67
$20,804.40
S427.14
$1 ,elO. 13
S531.10
$1,206.26
$1,438.67
TREPBY ~_,/~
IM~~,FINANCEO~I~
E D~ON, CITY'MANAGER
,HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
$102,590.50
$645,493.43
VOUC~RE2
~/~/~
13:18
C%TY OF TEHECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOIl ALL PER]ODS
PAGE
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
100 GAS TAX FUND
190 COll4UNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
210 CAPITAL ]!4PROVEHENT PROJ FUND
280 REDEVELOPIqENT AGENCY - CIP
320 ZNFORNATION SYSTENS
330 COPY CENTER FUND
~0 FACILITIES
TOTAL
AIIOUNT
9,133.88
718.4~.
3,477.89
511.32
3,792.92
3,959.63
1,409.69
Z, IO0.O0
~.39.26
Z6,3~5.09
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TENECIJLA
08//~'X 13:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEN ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NNqE DESCRIPTION NLIIBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AI(XJNT
11478 08/10/93 000293 STN)IUN PIZZA
PIZZA FOR FLOOD RECIX; L 001-150-~-5265
118.66
118,66
11540 08112193 001014 COUNTRY SIGNS & DESIGNS LOHA L]NDA PARK SIGNS 210-190-134-5804
3,239.63
3,239.63
11567 08/16/93 000418 RIVERSZDE COUNTY CLERK FEES FOR EXEMPTION NOTI 001-161-999-5250
50.00
50,00
11569 08/18/93 001102 NURSERYLAND
PLANTS FOR LOMA LINDA P 190-180-999-5212
587.52
587.52
11608 08/19/93 KNOTT, JOUY TCSD REFUND/KNOTT, JODY 190'18~'4982
80,00
80,00
11609 08/19/93 WAXMAN, LEIGH
OVERPAID FEES/PLANNING 001-2660
6.00
6.00
11610 08/19/93 000102 AHERICAN FENCE COHPANY JULY RENTAL
190-180-999-5238
145,00
145.00
11611 08/19/93 000105 AEI SECURITY, INC. AUGUST/SEPT/OCT 93 190-180-999-5250
105,00
105,00
11612 08/19/93 000114 AT & T
T~206~60:~001 JULY 93 320-1~-~-5208
24.64
24
11613 08/19/93 000127 CALIFORNIAN - LEGAL
11613 08/19/93 000127 CALIFORNIAN - LEGAL
11613 08/19/93 000127 CALIFORNIAN - LEGAL
TRAFFIC/PUBLIC SAFETY C 001-120-999-5256
ONE YEAR SUBSCRIPTION 001-110-999-5228
PUBLIC NOTICE 001-120-999-5256
I 08/19/93 000137 CHEVRON U,S,A, INC, 7920772253 JULY 1993 001-110-999-5262
11614 08/19/93 000137 CHEVRON U.S,A, INC, 7920772253 JULY 1993 001-170-999-5262
11614 08/19/93 000137 CHEVRON U,S,A, INC, 7920772253 JULY 1993 001-140-999-5262
11614 08/19/93 000137 CHEVRON U,S,A, INC, 7920772253 JULY 19993 001-162-999-5263
11614 08/19/93 000137 CHEVRON U,S,A, INC, 7920772253 JULY 1993 001-161-999-5262
55,98
34,07
30.81
39.56
8.78
10,00
13.08
138.05
102,23
11615 08/19/93 000152 CALIFORNIA PARK & RECRE MEMBERSHIP/IRENE ROGERS 190-180-999-5226
100,00
100,00
11616 08/19/93 000162 EGGHEAD DISCOUNT SOFTWA 499400 HP TAX 1 CARTRID 320-199-999-5221
11616 08/19/93 000162 EGGHEAD.DISCOUNT SOFTWA TAX 320-199-999-5221
82,00
6.36
88.36
11617 08/19193 000174 GET PAGED MONTHLY SERVICE CANCELL 190-180-999-5238
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED JULY PAGERS FOR TCSD 190-180-999-5238
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED B&S PAGERS RENTAL 001-162-999-5238
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED TON HAFELI PAGER 320-199-999-5238
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED 5 PAGERS;PUBLIC gORKS D 100-164-999-5238
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED 3 PAGERS FOR POLICE 001-170-999-5242
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED 3 PAGERS FOR POLICE 001-140-999-5250
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED 3 PAGERS FOR POLICE 100-164-999-5238
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED 8 PAGERS FOR TCSD 190-180-999-5238
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED 3 PAGERS FOR B&S 001-162-999-5238
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED TON HAFELI PAGER 320-199-999-5238
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED 5 PAGERS;PUBL[C gORKS D 100-164-999-5238
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED 3 POLICE PAGERS 001-170-999-5242
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED 3 PULICE PAGERS 001-140-999-5250
11617 08/19/93 000174 GET PAGED 3 POLICE PAGERS 100-164-999-5238
11,00-
88,00
33.00
11,00
55,00
18.33
7.33
88,00
33.00
11.00
55. O0
18.33
7.33
429.00
11/" 08/19/93 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT MlSC, OFFICE SUPPLIES; 001-162-999-5220 48,29
1'. 08/19/93 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT MISC OFFICE 001-120-999-5220 379.31
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TBIECULA
08/20/93 13:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEN ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NUMBER NANE DESCRIPTION NU!IER
ITEN
AletiNT
CHECK
MOUNT
11618 00/19/93 000177 GLENNIE$ OFFICE PRODUCT CLASP ENVELOPES 001-120-999-5220
11618 00/19/93 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT NISC, OFFICE SUPPLIES; 001-140-999-5220
11618 00/19/93 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT NISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES; 001-140-999-5220
11618 00/19/93 000177 GLENNZES OFFICE PRODUCT NISC, OFFICE SUPPLIES; 001-140-999-5220
11618 00/19/93 000177 GLENNZES OFFICE PRODUCT OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-161-999-5220
11618 08/19/93 000177 GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT FILE FOLDERS 001-161-999-5220
11618 08/19/93 000177 GLENNZES OFFICE PRODUCT TABSING 001-161-999-5220
22.63
22.39
10.45
31.36
221.28
3.86
14.71
754.28
11619 08/19/93 00018~ GTE
909-699-0128 JULY 93 320-199-999-5208
179.86
11620 08/19/93 000219 NARTIN 1-HOUR PHOTO FILN & DEVELOPflINT 001-163-999-5250
29.50
29.50
11621 08/19/93 000226 NICRO AGE COMPUTER CENT S~LF6T20 NET SAT]SFAXT] 320-1980 575.00
11621 08/19/93 000226 NICRO AGE COMPUTER CENT TAX 320-1980 ~,57
619.57
11622 00/19/93 000238 FINAL TOUCH NARKETING INLAND BUS NAG AD
280-199-999-526~
11623 00/19/93 000243 PAYLESS DRUG STORE SLIDE PROCESSING 190-180-999-5250
10.75
10.75
11624 00/19/93 000249 PETTY CASH CiTY PETTY CASH 001-2170
11624 08/19/93 OOO249 PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH 001-100-999-5260
11624 08/19/93 000249 PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH 001-120-999-5220
11624 08/19/93 000249 PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH 001-150-999-5260
11624 00/19/93 000249 PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH 001-150-999-5265
11624 08/19/93 000249 PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH 001-161-999-5228
11624 08/19/93 000249 PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH 001-162-999-5220
11624 08/19/93 000249 PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH 001-163-999-52&0
11624 08/19/93 000249 PETTY CASH CITY PETTY CASH 100-164-999-5215
50. O0
41 .~8
2.69
4.35
39,59
21.49
50.42
80.88
15.00
305.90
11625 08/19/93 000253 POSTNASTER
OCCUPATION SURVEY/POSTA 280-199-999-5264
500.00
500.00
11626 08/19/93 000254 PRESS ENTERPRISE
CONNISSION VACANCIES Ol 001-120-999-5256
26.0~
26.0~
11627 08/19/93 000262 RANCHO MATER L$CP MATER 193-180-999-5240
894.78
11628 08/19/93 000285 SIR SPEEDY 500/BUS.CARDS; B/M; LAU 001-171-999-5250
11628 08/19/93 000285 SIR SPEEOY 500/SUS.CAROS; GOLO FOI 001-171-999-5250
11628 08/19/93 000285 SIR SPEEOY TAX 001-171-999-5250
27.70
:56.00
4.94
11629 08/19/93 000306 TENECULA VALLEY PIPE 50199 & 7310A9
190-180-999-5212
42.02
42.02
11630 08/19/93 000320 TOtal CENTER STATIONERS OFFICE PAPER
11630 08/19/93 000320 TOMN CENTER STATIONERS RAN SOFT STROKE INK
001-120-999-5220
001-163-999-5220
14.07
5.~
19.95
11631 08/19/93 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE 2 SETS OF UMIFORIqS CLEA 100-164-999-5243
11631 08/19/93 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE STERLING & REED 190-180-999-5243
1163100/19/93 000326 UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE STERLING & REED UNIFORN 190-180-999-5243
12.50
13.60
14.35
40.45
11632 00/19/93 000332 VANDORPE CHOU ASSOCIATI PLAN CHECKS FOR JULY 93 001-162-999-52~8
11633 08/19/93 000339 ~EST PUBLISHING CONPANY CA C!) AN V27-270 3BK 001-120-999-5228
500.66
69.15
5~0~66
i5
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEHECULA
08//"~ 13:18 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEM ACCOUNT
NUMBER DATE NIJleBER NAME DESCRIPTION NUHBER
ITEM
CHECK
AIqOUNT
11636 08/19/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALZF TELEPHON 909-202-6206 JULY i,lE 001-110-999-5208
11636 08/19/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON ~09-202-6752 JULY SIt 190-180-999-5208
1163/, 08/19/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALZF TELEPHON ~-202-6753 JULY BH 1~0-180-~-5208
11634 08/19/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON ~)~-202-6754 JULY KH 1~0-180-~-5206
11634 08/19/~3 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON g09-202-6755 JULY VAN 1~0-180-;-5208
11634 08/19/~3 000375 SOUTHERN CAL[F TELEPNON ;-202-6757 JG JULY 001-120-;-5208
1163~ 08/19/~3 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON ~09-202-6758 JULY RR 001-100-;-5208
11634 08/19/~3 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHOIi ~0~-202-6762 JULY RP 001-100-;-5208
11634 08/19/93 000375 SOUTHERN CAL[F TELEPNON 909-202-67bG JH JULY 001-163-;-5208
11634 08/19/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 90~-202-6765 JULY BB 100-164-;-5208
11634 08/1~/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPNON ~)~-202-6767 GT JULY 001-161-;-5208
116.~ 08/19/93 000375 SOUTHERN CAL[F TELEPHON 909-202-6769 JULY JS 001-100-;-5208
11634 08/1~/93 000375 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON f0~-202-6756 JULY TN
1163~ 08/19/93 000375 SOUTHERN CAL[F TELEPHON ~)~-202-6763 JULY PB 001-100-;-5208
63.~
132.25
53.~
~.~
55.~
~.31
11635 08/19/93 000416 LONGS DRUG STORE
RECEZPT f3938 & 3962 1~0-180-~-5250
31.76
31.76
1.1636 08/19/93 000418 RIVERS[DE COUNTY CLERK PLOT PLAN 269-AUTO HALL 001-161-999-5250
50.00
50.00
11637 08/19/93 000426 RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL TOILET TISSUE 1~0-180-~-5212
11..(~7 08/19/93 000426 RANCHO INDUSTRIAL SUPPL JANITORIAL SUPPLIES;CIT 340-1~-~-5212
1. . 08/19/93 000534 A.F. JOHNSON CO.. INC. 275 BTF 275 AHS XL 100-164-~-5218
11638 08/19/93 000536 A.F. JOHNSON CO., INC. 275 BTF 275 AHS L 100-1&~-~-5218
11638 08/19/93 000536 A.F. JOHNSON CO., INC. 275 BTF 275 AHS XXL 100-1~4-~-5Z18
11638 08/19/93 000536 A.F. JOHNSON CO., INC. TAX 100-166-gf~-5218
61 .~8
103.21
287.5/,
52.28
108.56
36.75
166.59
6833.13
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ED] 06/30-07/31 191-180-999-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CAL[FONNIA ED] 06/30-07/31 191-180-999-5319
11639 08/19/93 00053? SOUTHERN CALIFONN]A ED] 06/30-07/31 191-180-999-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CAL[FONN]A ED] 06/30-07/31 191-180-999-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFONN]A EDI 06130-07131 191-180-999-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 06/30-07/31 191-180-999-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 0&/30-07/31 191-180-~-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 06/'~0-07/31 191-180-~-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 05/31-06/30 191-180-~-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 06/30-07/31 191-180-~-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EOI 06/30-07/31 191-180-~-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ED! 06/30-07/31 191-180-~-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 06/30-07/31 191-180-~-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 06/30-07/31 191-180-~-5319
11639 08/19/93 000537 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI 06/30-07/31 191-180-~-5319
28.66
30.60
31.65
30.82
31.65
31.58
37.68
28.66
27.76
26.75
109.87
26.86
21.15
30.29
20.16
511.32
1164O 08/19/93 00O643 FORTNER HARDWARE MISC HARDUARE 1~)-180-~99-5212
39.56
39.54
11661 08/19/93 000653 LUCKY STORE
SUPPLIES FOR DAY CAIqP 190-183-~-5360
11642 08/19/93 000668 TIIItY D, PRODUCTIONS
1'/` 08/19/93 000680 AMS-THS
PURCHASE & INSTALL PA S 190-180-;-5610
RE SUPPLY POSTAGE ACCOU 330-1~-;-5230
~5.00
2,100.00
~5.00
2,100.00
VOUCHRE2
08120193
13:18
CiTY OF TENECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOG ALL PERIODS
VCIJCHER/
CHECK
UIR
1164~
116zd,
1162~
116zd,
11645
CHECK
DATE
08/19/93
08/19/f~
08/19/9~
08/19/93
08/19/93
MR
000731
000731
000731
000731
000745
VEIlDOG
NAME
NATIONAL SEMINARS GROUP
NATIONAL SEMINARS GROUP
NATIONAL SEMINARS OGOIJP
NATIONAL SEMINARS GROUP
AT & T - CELLULAR
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
ILlS GRAMHER & USAGE SEN
BUS GRNIiR & USAGE SEll
BUS-GRA!IqER & USAGE SEN
BUS GRAIIER & USAGE SEN
619-~87-1828-1 JULY
ACCOUNT
liJI4BER
001 - 161 -~9-5258
001-140-999-5261
190-180-999-5258
001-1(~-999-5261
001-140-9;9-5208
ITEM
MIOUNT
156.813
9.10
CHECK
392.00
9.10
11646
11667
11648
11648
11648
11648
11649
11650
08119193
08119193
08119193
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
000747
000873
00O881
000881
000881
000887
000940
PLANNERS BOOKSTORE
ROeERTS, RONALD H.
OAKRIDGE LANDSCAPE/IRRI
OAKRIDGE LANDSCAPE/IRRI
OAKRIDGE LANDSCAPE/IRRI
OAKRIDGE LANDSCAPE/IRRI
PRECISION PHOTOGRAPHY,
4N6XPERT SYSTEMS
REGUL BARRIERS TO AFFOR 001-161-999-52P.8
REIB/LEAGUE OF CAL COlIF 001-100-999-5258
LONA LINDA PARK MANT 210- 190- 1~-5804
RETENTIOG 210-2035
LOMA LINDA PARK LANDSCA 210-1~)-134-5804
LOHA LINDA PARK LANDSCA 210-2035
REFUND OF LANDSCAPE BON 001-2650
EXPERT AUTOSTATS CONP S 001-170-999-5220
12.00
26.00
680.00
68.00-
320.00
32.00-
2,000.00
494.65
12.00
24.00
720.00
2,000.00
494.65
11651
11651
11651
11652
11653
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11654
11655
11655
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08119/93
08119193
08/19193
08119/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
08/19/93
000~7
000947
000947
000950
000993
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001002
001037
001037
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
RANCHO BELL BLUEPRINT C
CALIFORNIAN - DISPLAY
FREEDOM COFFEE, iNC.
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BARK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK
FALLBROOK LANDSCAPE & N
FALLBRCX)( LANDSCAPE & N
MISt, BLUEPRINT REPRODU 001-1(G-~99-5268
NISC BLUEPRINTS 001-1280
MISC BLUEPRINTS 001-161-999-5220
JULY CLASSIFIED ADS 001-150-~-5254
COFFEE SERVICE; CITY HA 340-1~9-~99-5250
5473666403910024 JULY D
5473666403910024 JULY D
547366(~03910024 JULY D
5473666~03910032.JULY M
54736664039100)2 JULY N
54'736666039100/,0 PB JUL
5473666/,03910065 JULY S
5473666403910073 JULY R
5473666403910073 dULY R
001-110-999-5258
001-100-999-5258
001-110-999-5226
001-140-~-5226
001-140-999-5258
001-100-999-5226
001-100-999-5226
001-100-999-5258
001-100-999-5226
5473666403910081 JULY R 001-100-999-5226
5473666403910081 JULY R 001-100-999-5258
5473666403910099 JULY J 001-100-999-5226
547366~03910107 JULY g 001-110-999-5260
5473666403910107 JULY ~ 001-110-999-5226
5473666403910115 JULY J 001-120-999-5226
54736664039101?3 GT JUL 001-161-999-5258
54736664039101?3 GT JUL 001-161-~-5226
54T".~40~10131 JULY A 001-162-999-5226
547366~409~10131 JULY A 001-162-999-5258
5473666403910149 JULY T 001-165-999-5226
JULY MAINTENANCE
JULY MAINTENANCE
193-180-999-5415
193-180-999-5415
19.31
3.88
16.97
94.28
136.05
437.24
138,33
40.00
40.00
395,68
40.00
28.~
e44.87
40.00
40.00
787.90
40.00
33.28
40.00
40.00
18.66
40.00
40.~
325.00
40.00
279.80
1,565.93
94.28
136.05
3,249.30
PAGE 6
~U/~2 1):18
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
NUHBER DATE NUHBER MANE
CITY OF TENECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION NUNBER
193-180-999-5415
REGIONAL flEETING/AUG 27 001-162-999-5258
SPECIAL EVENT 190-180-999-5238
STANDARD MONTHLY CHARGE 190-180-999-5Z38
11655 08/19/93 001037 FALLBROOK LANDSCAPE & H JULY HAINTENANCE
11656 08/19/93 001054 CALBO
11657 08/19/9) 001076 ~IESTERN I~ASTE
11657 08/19/93 001076 IdESTERN bIASTE
11658 08/19/93 001099 CALIFORNIA STATE CONTRO STATE ANNUAL REPORT & S 001-140-999-5ZZ8
11659 08/19/93 001100 CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCt SEPT 1/PROP 172 NEETIN 001-140-999-5258
TOTAL CHECKS
] TEN
AHOUNT
1,052.41
25. O0
455.00
50.00
50.00
CHECK
AHOUNT
2,898.14
25. O0
551.00
50.00
50.00
26,325.09
VOUCHBE2
08/26/93
12:28
CITY OF TEHECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK. REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
108 GAS TAX FUND
1gO COIIqUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
191 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL A
192 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL B
193 TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
210 CAPITAL ]NPROVE!~NT PROJ FUND
280 REDEVELOP!qENT AGENCY - CIP
3~ INSURANCE FUND
310 VEHICLES FUND
320 ]NFORHATION SYSTENS
330 COPY CENTER FUND
3~0 FACILITIES
TOTAL
AROUNT
89,252.80
9,296.87
12,116.9~.
5,352.84.
16,34.5.20
7,7'97. Z3
500.00
257.11
116.96
3,Z13.96
~6~.13
2~4.53
165,764.28
PAGE 1
12:28
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
11660
11661
11661
11663
2~2~
2~2~
2~2~
2~2~
2~2~
2~2~
2~2~
2~2~
2~2~
2~2~
2~2~
2~2~
2~2~
296293
296293
296293
296293
296293
296293
296293
296293
296293
296293
296293
29629~
296293
296293
296293
296293
11667
11668
11669
11670
11670
1'1
CHECK
DATE
08123193
08/25/93
08/25/93
08/25/9~
08126/93
08126193
08126193
08126193
08/26/93
08126/93
08126193
08126193
08126193
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08126193
08/26/93
VENDOR
NUMBER
000878
000965
000965
000/~4
000~4
000~
000~4
0004~
000444
000444
0004~4
0004~
00044~
O00z~
00~
OOO~
00~
000~
00028S
000283
00028~
00028~
000283
00028~
00028~
000283
00028~
00028~
000283
00028~
000283
000283
000283
000283
000100
000100
000102
NAME
BOYS & GIRLS CL08
LEAGUE OF CAL[FORNIA CI
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA Cl
CALIFORNIA CONTRACT CIT
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX CEDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (EDD)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
FIRSTAX (IRS)
CRIJMP, DEMETRIUS E.
3 DAY BLINDS
DUNCANS CLEANERS
ALLIED BARRICADE CONPAN
ALLIED BARRICADE CONPAN
AMERICAN FENCE COMPANY
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
DIt. AR REQUEST
DINNER, INLAND EMPIRE M
DINNER, INLAND EMPIRE M
FALL SEMINAR
00044~ CAIT
000444 CAIT
000444 CAIT
000444 CAIT
0004~ CAIT
000444 CAXT
00044~ CAIT
000~4 CAIT
0004,~ SOl
000~ SDI
000~44 SDI
00~4 ~) I
O004.f~ SOl
O004~z, SD I
000444 SDI
000444 SDI
00028~ FICA/MED
000283 FICA/MED
00028~ FICA/MED
00028~ FICA/NED
000283 FICA/MED
000285 FICA/MED
00028~ FICA/MED
000283 FICA/MED
00028~ USIT
000283 USIT
00028~ USlT
00028~ USlT
00028~ USIT
000283 USIT
000283 USIT
00028~ USIT
REFUND, CRUNP
3 DAY BLINDS, REFUND BU
DUNCANS CLEANERS/REFUND
2 BACK SUPPORTS FOR NEg
TAX
SPORTS PARK
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-1500
001-100-999-5260
001-110-999-5260
001-100-999-5258
001-2070
100-2070
190-2070
191-2070
193-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
001-2070
100-2070
190-2070
191-2070
193-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
001-2070
100-2070
190-2070
191-2070
193-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
001-2070
100-2070
190-2070
191-2070
193-2070
300-2070
320-2070
330-2070
001-199-4056
001-199-4056
190-18~-499~
100-164-999-5242
100-164-999-5242
190-180-999-5238
ITEIq
AMOUNT
35,240.41
80.00
40.00
230.00
2,356.24
5~8.09
50~.31
20.64
47.51
11.19
56.45
12.78
692.78
140.07
291.50
7.08
26.31
7.~6
20.18
20.43
2,230.09
~87.$6
728.32
15.78
58.72
17.75
45.02
45.58
9,~61.99
2,271.07
2,673.60
81.76
240.84
51 .~6
247.11
76.95
35. O0
35. O0
140.00
55.24
4.28
145.00
CHECK
NI3UNT
35,240.41
120.00
230.00
4,76~.52
18,733.~0
35. O0
35.00
140.00
59.52
145.00
VOUCHRE2 CITY OF TEHECULA
08/26/93 12:28 VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
P.~2
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR ITEH ACCOUNT
NUHBER DATE NUHBER MANE DESCRIPTION NUNBER
11672 08/26/9) 080106 ALFAX CC99 DOtJBLE-TIER CHAIR 190-180-999-5262
11&72 08/26/93 000106 ALFAX TT72 TABLE TRUCK6 FT 3 190-180-999-5262
11672 08/26/93 000106 ALFAX FREIGHT 190-180-999-5262
11672 08/26/9) 000106 ALFAX TAX 190-180-99~-5262
[TEN
678.00
238.00
116.00
55.69
CHECK
ANOIJNT
887.49
11673 08/26/9) 000107 ALHANBRA GROUP RIVERTON PARK 210-190-131-580~
517,73
517,73
11676 08/26/93 000120 BICKNELL TRAVEL CENTER TRAVEL LEAGUE CALIF. CI 001-161-999-5258
133.00
133.00
11675 08/26/93 000129 CAL gEST RENTAL CENTER RENTAL EQUIP.
190-180-999-5238
67.88
11676 08/26/9) 000131 CARL UARREN & CO.
NDTIVATIONAL SYSTEN$ 300-199-999-5205
)6,38
11677 08/26/9) 000136 CHESHERS' lUSTON ENBROI GOLF HATS/TOURNAHENT 001-2172
3~0.00
390.00
11678 08/26/93 000177 GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT NISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES; GO1-140-999-5220
11678 08/26/93 000177 GLENHIES OFFICE PRODUCT OFFICE SUPPLIES 001-160-999-5220
123,64
8.60
132.2~
1167~ 08/26/93 000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO 168]T SVGA CARD V/1HB M 320-199-999-5221
1167~ 08/26/93 000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO IDE ]/0 CARD 2S/1P/1G 320-199-999-5221
1167~ 08/26/93 000178 COLDEN STATE TRADING CO FREIGHT 320-199-999-5221
11679 08/26/93 000178 GOLDEN STATE TRADING CO TAX 320-199-999-5221
11680 08/26/93 000184 GTE 909-699-2675 100-164-999-5208
280.00
80,00
10.00
27.90
17.86
17,86
11681 08126193 00019~ ZCNA RETIREMENT 000196 DEF CONP GO1-2080
11681 08/26/93 000194 ICNA RETIRENENT 000194 DEF COHP 100-2080
11681 08/26/93 000196 ICHA RETIRENENT 000196 DEF CONP 190-2080
11681 08/26/93 000194 ICHA RETIREHENT 000196 DEF COHP 191-2080
11681 08/26/93 000194 ICNA RETIRENENT 00019~ DEF CONP 193-2080
1168108/26/93 000196 ]CNA RETZRENENT 000196 DEF CONP 300-2080
11681 08/26/93 000194 ICNA RETIREHENT 000196 DEF COHP 330-2080
11682 08/26/93 000201 JENNACO PROVIDE NAINTENANCE OF 190-181-999-5212
11683 08/26/93 000216 LUNCH & STUFF CATERING OPEN P.O. CC DINNERS 001-100-999-5260
2,622.78
564.15
578.77
3Z,.09
61.65
3.75
50.00
600.00
80.00
3,687.11
600.00
80.00
11684 08/26/93 000219 HARTIN 1-HOUR PHOTO PHOTO DEVELOPING AUTHOR 001-163-999-5250
11685 08/26/93 000228 MOBIL FUEL 001-161-999-5262
11685 08/26/93 000228 MOBIL FUEL 100-164-999-526X
11685 08/26/93 000228 NOBIL FUEL 001-162-999-5263
11685 08/26/93 000228 NOBIL FUEL 190-180-999-5263
11685 08/26/93 000228 NOBIL FUEL 001-110-999-5262
11686 08/26/93 000261 ORANGE SPORTING GOODS DEBEER TC12 SOFTBALL 190-183-999-5380
11686 08/26/93 000241 ORANGE SPORTING G(X)DS TAX 190-183-999-5380
11687 08/26/9) 000266 PERS EHPLOYEES' RETIREN 000266 PER REDE 001-2130
11687 08/26/93 000266 PERS EHPLOYEE$' RETIREN 000266 PER REDE 100-2130
11687 08/26/93 0002/,6 PERS ENPLOYEES' RETIREN 000266 PERS RET 001-2390
13.18
20.~
11.93
33.68
&0.08
237.00
18.37
107.35
107.35
10,896.08
139.56
255.37
VOUCHRE2 PAGE 3
08/~"*""' '~ 12: 28
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
11~87
1
11687
11687
11687
11687
11687
11687
11~87
11~87
11687
116,87
11(d7
11487
11(,87
11(,88
11689
11689
11691
11691
11691
11691
11691
11691
11691
11691
11691
11692
11693
11694
11694
11694
11695
11695
11695
11695
11695
11696
CHECK
DATE
08/26/9S
08/26193
08/26193
08126193
08126193
08126193
08126193
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08126193
08126193
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08126193
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08126193
VENDOR
NLJNBER
O002~&
0002/,6
000266
000246
000266
000246
00026~
000246
0002/,6
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000246
000253
000262
000262
000291
000291
000303
000303
000303
000303
000303
000303
000303
000303
000303
000305
000307
000325
000325
000325
000326
000326
000326
000326
000326
000340
VENDOR
WANE
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREN
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM
PER$ EMPLOYEES' RETIREM
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM
PER$ EMPLOYEES' RETIREM
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETZREM
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETZREM
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETZREM
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREH
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM
PERS EMPLOYEES' RETIREM
POSTRASTER
RANCHO WATER
RANCHO ~ATER
SPEE DEE OIL CHANGE & T
SPEE DEE OIL CHANGE & T
SYSTEM 2/90
SYSTEM 2/90
SYSTEM 2/90
SYSTEM 2/90
SYSTEM 2/90
SYSTEM 2/90
SYSTEM 2/90
SYSTEM 2/90
SYSTEM 2/90
TARGET STORE
TENECULA TROPHY
UNITED WAY OF THE ]NLAN
UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN
UNITED WAY OF THE INLAN
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
UNZTOG RENTAL SERVICE
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
WHITE CAP
CITY OF TENECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
0002/,6 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
0002~6 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000266 PERS RET
0002/,6 PERS RET
000246 PERS RET
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000266 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
000246 SURVIVOR
POSTAGE
01-06-29600-0 6/21-7/12
6/22-7/27
REPAIR & RAINT. CITY VE
REPAIR & HAINT. CITY VE
2 X 8A NAHEPLATE; RARTY
FRE l GHT
TAX
1/2'" LETTERS ON MESSAGE
COPY; TIM McDERMOTT
FREIGHT
FRE l GHT
TAX
TAX
RECREATION SUPPLIES
AWARDS
000325 LN
000325 UU
000325 UU
FLOOR RAT SERVICES; CIT
FLOOR NAT SERVICES; CIT
2 SETS OF UNIFORMS CLEA
OPEN PURCHASE ORDER FOR
FLOOR NAT SERVICES; CIT
HAND GRINDER, GRINDING
ACCOUNT
NIJNBER
191-2300
193-Z~90
300-2300
320-2390
330-23~0
001-2390
100-2390
191-2390
300-2390
320-2390
330-2390
280-199-999-5264
190-180-999-5240
193-180- 999- 5240
310-164-999-5214
310-180-999-5214
001-163-999-5220
001-163-999-5220
001 - 163-999-5220
340-199-999-5262
001 - 140-999-5220
001 - 160-999-5220
340-199-999-5242
340-199-999-5242
001 - 140-999-5220
100-182-999-5301
190-182-999-5301
001-2120
190-2120
300-2120
340-199-999-5250
340-199-999-5250
100-164-999-5243
190-180-999-5243
340-199-999-5250
100-164-999-5242
ITEM
ANOUIIT
2,197.15
1,962.58
75.77
274.16
90.79
232.35
224.03
51.17
9.75
11.16
1./~
.93
1.86
500.00
6.96
7,097.66
21.60
1.00
1.67
27.09
7.56
.82
.82
2.42
.63
80.19
40.43
86.50
17.50
.50
32.50
2.00
12.50
13.60
34.50
101.78
CHE~
16,242.80
500.00
7,106.62
116.96
63.61
80.19
40.43
10~.50
95.10
101.78
1 08/26/93 000341 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES PLAN CK DRC PROJ 001-2030 28,476.31
V(XJCHRE2
08126193
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUNER
11697
11698
11699
11700
11701
11701
11701
11701
11701
11702
11702
11703
117Q~
11705
11705
11705
11706
11707
11708
11709
11709
11709
11709
11709
11709
11709
11709
11709
11710
11711
11711
11711
11711
11711
11711
11711
11711
12:28
CHECK
DATE
08126193
08/26/93
08/26/93
08126193
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08126193
08126193
08126/93
08126193
08126193
08126193
08/26/93
08126/93
VENDOR
I~ER
00034,1
000343
000346
0003/,9
000374
000374
000374
000374
000374
000375
000375
000380
000386
000389
000389
000389
0O0405
000408
000428
000431
000431
000431
000431
000431
000431
000431
000431
000431
000470
000537
000537
000337
000537
000537
000537
000537
00053?
HILLDAN ASSOCIATES
HINDSOR CONSTRUCTION
YATES, GRANT
ZIMMERLE, STEVE
SOUTHERN CAL/F EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON
SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON
LAIDLAH TRANSIT
LANIER VOICE PRODUCTS
USCM/PEBSCO, COBRA)
USCN/PEBSCO, COBRA)
USCH/PEBSCO, COBRA)
SMITH, PHILLIP
AGRICREDIT ACCEPTANCE C
HORIZON HATER
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH,
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH,
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH,
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH,
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH,
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH,
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH,
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH,
NATIONAL DENTAL HEALTH,
GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFZ
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ED[
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ED[
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI
CITY OF TENECtJLA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
CREDIT NENO
REPAIR ENTRY DOORS
MliASC CONF. REIll.
TUITION REFUICD
7/07-8/09
5/06-6/07
6/07-7/07
7/07-8109
4127-5106
9092024751-JULY
909-202-4760
BUS TRANSPORTATION TO C
MAINTENANCE
000389 PT RETIR
000389 PT RETIR
000389 PT RETIR
TgO DAY SEMINAR
TRACTOR LEASE - SEPT.
AUG, HATER CHG.
PREMIUM AUGUST
PREMIUM AUGUST
PREMIUM AUGUST
PREMIUM AUGUST
PREMIUM AUGUST
PREMIUM AUGUST
PREMIUM AUGUST
PREMIUM AUGUST
PREMIUM AUGUST
NEMBERSH]P
6/30-7/31
6/30-7/31
6,/30-?/31
7/01-7/31
6/30-7/31
6/02-6/30
7/01-7/31
6/30 - ?/31
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
001-2030
340-199-999-5212
001-160-999-5262
001-150-999-5259
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
100-16~-999-5208
190-180-999-5208
190-183-999-5340
001 - 120-999- 5250
001-2160
100-2160
190-2160
001 - 162-999-5258
190-180-999-5239
190-182-999-5240
001-2340
100-2340
190-2..~,0
191-2340
193-23~0
300-2340
330-2340
001-1180
001-150-999-5250
001-140-999-5226
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
192-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
I TEN
AMOUNT
9,989.29-
145.20
84.56
400.00
243.68
58.32
54.8O
55.58
21.42
81.49
207.99
342.00
516.60
17.28
42,00
832.~4
32.42
8/,9.55
84.00
601.27
121.86
130.00
7.31
8.94
8.12
32.50
15.00
175.00
32.05
16.62
20.4~
8.76
28,35
9.77
15,668.04
30.53
PAGE
CHECK
AMOUNT
18,487.02
145.20
8~.56
400.00
4]3.80
289..48
342.00
516.60
891.72
32.42
849.55
84.00
97'5.75
175.00
VOUCHRE2
oB/r--..~
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUNBER
11711
11711
11711
11711
11712
11713
11714
11714
11716
11715
11715
11715
11715
11716
11716
11718
11718
11719
11719
11720
11721
11721
11722
11722
11722
11722
11722
11723
11723
11723
11724
11725
11725
12:28
CHECK
DATE
08/26/9~
08/26/9~
08/26/9~
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
08/26/93
VENDOR
NUMBER
000537
000537
000537
000537
000560
000603
000618
000618
000618
00070~
000704
000704
000704
000724
000724
000833
000881
000881
00088~
000883
001002
001030
001030
001065
001065
001065
001065
001065
001070
001070
001070
001104
001105
001105
001106
VENDOR
NAME
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDI
G. NEIL CORPANIES
CABLE & WIRELESS CONNUN
TRXGG INDUSTRIES WEST,
TRIGG INDUSTRIES tIEST,
TRZGG INDUSTRIES 15ST,
CITY OF TEMECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
10/13-?/31
6/30-?/31
6/30-?/31
6/30-?/31
PUBLICATIONS
JULY 16-AUG 15
NO. 1101 1/6" X 2 1/2"
FRE l GHT
TAX
SKS, INC,/INLAND OIL FUEL
SKS, INC,/INLAND OIL FUEL
SKS, INC./INLAND OIL FUEL
SKS, INC,/ZNLAND OIL FUEL
A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI
A & R CUSTOM SCREEN PRI
NATIONAL LAW CENTER, TH
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
OAKRIDGE LANDSCAPE/IRRI
OAKRIDGE LANDSCAPE/IRRI
MONTELEONE EXCAVATING
MORTELEONE EXCAVATING
FIRST INTERSTATE BANK -
MINI"GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, I
MINI-GRAPHIC SYSTEMS, I
BUTTON DOWN JERSEYS
TAX
191-180-999-5319
191-180-999-5319
192-180-999-5319
192-180-999-5319
001-150-999-5228
320-199-999-5208
100-164-999-5218
100-164-999-5218
100-164-999-5218
001-110-999-5263
190-180-999-5263
100-164-999-5263
001-162-999-526~
190-183-999-5380
190-183-999-5~80
REGISTRATIOR/HO~ICIDE R 001-170-999-5261
PROVIDE LABOR, MATERIAL 210'190-17~-5804
RETENTION 210'2035
CLEAN & EXCAVATE APPROX 100-164-999-5601
SHOULDER GRADING AND WE 100-164-999-540Z
ANNUAL FEE 190-180-999-5226
FUJI FILM 16NN x 100 FT 001-120-999-5250
TAX 001-120-999-5250
USCM/PEBSCO (DEF. CORP. 001065 DEF CORP 001-2080
USCM/PEBSCO (DEF. CONP. 001065 DEF COMP 100-2080
USCN/PEBSCO (DEF. CONP. 001065 DEF CORP 190-2080
USCN/PEBSCO (DEF. CORP. 001065 DEF CORP 300-2080
USCN/PEBSCO (DEF. CONP. 001065 DEF CORP 320-2080
TRANS-TECH ASSOCIATES,
TRANS-TECH ASSOCIATES,
TRANS-TECH ASSOCIATES,
ARNA ASSOCIATION
DORANGO DEVELOPMENT CO.
DORANGO DEVELOPMENT CO.
NATIONAL PRESS PUBLZCAT
GK 5000 BATTERY
FREIGHT
TAX
100-164-999-5218
100-164-999-5218
100-164-999-5218
SEMINAR SEPT. 1
001-120-999-5260
APPLICATION REFUND
APPLICATION REFUND
001-161-410~
001-16~-4~88
TRAINING BOOKS
001-120-999-5228
ITEM
AMOUNT
6,5O6.48
23,39
3~0.32
3O6.84
5.97
1,901.50
82.50
6.39
24.94
279.8~
145.59
43.18
264.00
20 .~6
650.00
320.00
32.00-
990.00
985.00
40.00
145.00
11.24
2,430.05
222.98
236.32
28.75
312.50
68.25
3.85
5.29
32.00
137.00
11.00
29.90
PAGE 5
CHECK
ANOIJNT
21,021,39
5.97
1,901.50
93.28
493.55
28~ .46
650. O0
288. O0
1,975.00
40.00
156.24
3,230.60
77.39
32.00
148.00
29.90
VOUCHRE2
08/2619) 12:28
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR
NI. NBER DATE ltI.14BER
11727 081261r~ 001107
11728 08126193 001108
HYATT REGENCY
TOI,N & COUNTRY HOTEL
CITY OF TEHECtJLA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
HOTEL/CLE INTERNATIONAL
HOTEL/MORKSHOP
ACCOUNT
NUHBER
001-100-999-5258
OD1-170-~-5261
ITEM
N4OUNT
280.0O
159.1~,
CHECK
AMOUNT
280.00
159, 14
TOTAL CHECKS
1~,5,7~,.28
VOUCHRE2
o9//'~'~
08:55
CITY OF TENECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
100 GAS TAX FUND
190 COIqlqUNITY SERV]CES DISTRICT
210 CAP]TAL IIqPROVENENT PROJ FUND
250 CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD
280 REDEVELOPRENT AGENCY - CIP
300 INSURANCE FUND
310 VEHICLES FUND
320 INFORHATION SYSTENS
330 COPY CENTER FUND
340 FACILITIES
TOTAL
ANOUNT
13,376.22
2,261.26
2,604.4.5
1,708.70
7,000.00
5 O0. O0
28~.g5
76.89
3,072.01
38,552,22
VOUCHRE2
09/02/93 08:55
CiTY OF TEHECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
PAGE
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR
NUMBER DATE NUI4BER
11729 08/26/93 001110
VENDOR ITEM ACCDIJNT ITEM
NAME DESCRIPTION NUMBER N~OUNT
NATIONAL LAU ENFORCEMEN
REGISTRATION/2 DETECTIV
001-1/0-999-5261
650.00
CHE~
N~)IJNT
650.00
11730 08/30/93 001109
11730 08/30/93 001109
11735 09/02/93
SMITH TRACTON SERVICE
SMITH TRACTON SERVICE
t/EED NIATENENT
liEEl) ARATEMENT
001-162-999-5/,/,0
001-162-999-5~0
BRANCH, GARY BRANCH, GARY REFUND 190'183'/,973
2,100.00
2,681.61
25.00
/*,781.61
25.00
11736 09/02/93
CATALAMO, DONALD
CATALANO REFUND
001-199-6056
35. O0
35. O0
11737 09/02/93
DISTEFANO, MITZI
DISTEFANO, REFUND
190-183-6975
35. O0
35.00
11738 09/02/93 DODGE, JANETTE DODGE, REFUND 190-183-4975
25. O0
25.00
11739 09/02/93
SORENSEN, JOYCE
SOIENSEN, REFUND
190-183-/.975
25. O0
25. O0
117/*0 09/02/9~
THE CONEY CART
CONEY CART, REFUND 001'199'6056
35.00
35.00
117/,1 09/02/93
FILARDI, HARY BETH **CLAIM 50, FILARDI 300'199-999-5207
72,38
117/.2 09/02/93 KIRSCH, RALPH **CLAIM 76 KIRSCH 300-199-999-5207
117/,3 09/02/93 FILI~K[, SHARON F]LIPOWSKI, REFUND 190-183-/.975
217.57
35.00
217.57
117z~ 09/02/93 000101 APPLE ONE
TEMPORARY SERVICES IN F 001-1/*0-999-5118
718.21
718.21
117/.5 09/02/93 000138
117/.5 09/02/93 000138
117/.5 09/02/93 000138
117/.6 09/02/93 000162
117/.6 09/0Z/93 000162
CITICORP NORTH AMERICA
CITICORP NORTH AMERICA
CITICONP NORTH AMERICA
LT CHG 320-199-999-5250
SEPT PAYMENT 320-2800
SEPT PAYMENT 320-199-99~-5391
EGGHEAD DISCOUNT SOFTWA 467397 HP TAX I FONT
EGGHEAD DISCOUNT SOFTWA TAX
320-199-999-5221
320-199-999-5221
1/,2.66
1,084.90
3~2.67
130.00
10.08
1,570.23
1/.0.08
11747 09/02/9~ 000177
117/.7 09/02/93 000177
117/.7 09/02/93 000177
11747 09/02/93 000177
11747 09/02/93 000177
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PROOUCT
GLENNIES OFFICE PRODUCT
SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OPEN PO FOR SUPPLIES
NISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES;
OFFICE SUPPLIES
001-161-999-5220
001-1/*0-999-5220
001-161-999-5220
001-162-999-5220
001-162-999-5220
192.98
88.36
2.63
20.86
34,5.33
117/.8 09/02/93 000184
117/.8 09/02/93 000184
117A8 09/02/93 000184
117/.8 09/02/93 000184
117/.9 09/02/93 000202
11750 09/02/93 000206
11750 09/02/93 000206
11750 09/02/9~ 000206
11750 09/02/93 000206
11750 09/02/93 000206
11750 09/02/93 000206
GTE
GTE
GTE
GTE
J.F. DAV|DSON
KINKO'S COPIES
KINKO'S COPIES
KINKO'S COPIES
KINKO'S COPIES
KINKO'S COPIES
KINKO'S COPIES
909-69/*-1989 AUG
909-699-2309 AUG
909-695-3539 AUG
909-699-0128AUG
PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL EN
INVOICE PAID TWICE
COPIES
LAMINATION & STATIONARY
LAMINATION FEE NOT CHAR
PRINTING SERVICES
MISC, PRINTING SERVICES
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
320-199-999-5208
100-164-999-52/.8
001-161-999-5222
330-199-999-5220
330-199-999-5220
330-199-999-5220
330-199-999-5220
330-199-999-5220
2,055.76
19.61
23.45
856.98
425.00
86.85-
2.10
7.37
1.02
39.65
51.92
2,955.80
/*25.00
VOUCHRE2 PAGE 2
09it""" 08:55
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUNBER
11751
11751
11752
11753
11753
11753
11753
11754
11755
11755
11756
11756
11756
11756
11756
11756
1.,/-'--
1,
11756
11756
11756
11757
11757
11758
11759
11760
11761
11761
11761
11762
11762
11763
11764
11765
1r""
CHECK
DATE
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
09/02/93
VENDOR
NUNBER
000209
000209
000214
000228
000228
000228
000228
000239
000248
000248
000249
000249
000249
000249
000249
000249
000249
000249
000249
000249
000249
000266
000266
000276
000291
000308
000322
000322
000322
000326
000326
000329
000342
000345
000374
VENDOR
NAME
L & M FERTILIZER
L & M FERTILIZER
LUNCH & STUFF CATERING
MOBIL
MOBIL
MOBIL
IIL
OLSTEN TENPOPARY SERVIC
PETROLANE
PETROLANE
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
PETTY CASH
RIGHTWAY
RIGHTWAY
PURK/SS ROSE
SPEE DEE OIL CHANGE & T
TEMECULA TiE ASSOCIAT
UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TR
UNIGLOBE BUTTERFIELD TR
UNIGLORE BUTTERFIELD TR
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
UNITOG RENTAL SERVICE
URBAN DESIGN STUDIO
WINDSOR PARTNERS - RANC
XEROX CORPORATION BILL!
SOUTHERN CALIF EDISON
CITY OF TEMEOULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
MISC SUPPLIES
MEED EATER SUPPLIES
CC DINNERS
FUEL B&S
FUEL ENG.
FUEL PLAN
FUEL TCSO
TEMPORARY SERVICES TO P
FUEL TCSD
FUEL TCSO
PETTY CASH CITY
PETTY CASH CITY
PETTY CASH CITY
PETTY CASH CITY
PETTY CASH CITY
PETTY CASH CITY
PETTY CASH CITY
PETTY CASH CITY
PETTY CASH CITY
PETTY CASH CITY
PETTY CASH CITY
PURCHASE BELL BOXES
PINER BOX/ADAPTOR/CORD/
DEVELOPMENT OF MASTER p
REPAIR & NAINT. CITY VE
SET UP & CLEANING DRUG
AIRLINE TICKETS/R.R.
TRAVEL UESCON 93
TRAVEL/LEAGUE CA CITIES
2 SETS OF UNIFORMS CLEA
UNIFORM RENTAL
RETENTION HELD
SEPT. RENT
LEASE AGREEMENT; 5100 C
7/26-8/26
ACCOUNT
NLllER
190-180-999-5242
100-164-999-5218
001-100-999-5260
001-162-999-5263
100-164-999-5263
001-161-999-5262
190-180-999-5263
100-164-999-5118
190-180-999-526.S
190-180-999-5263
001-163-999-5220
001-16S-999-5260
001-150-999-5260
001-150-999-5262
001-140-999-5258
001-110-999-5258
001-110-999-5258
310-164-999-5214
320-199-999-5242
001-110-999-52~8
320-199-999-5215
190-180-999-5212
190-180-999-5238
190-180-999-5248
310-162-999-5214
001-170-999-5292
001-100-999-5258
001-110-999-5258
001-100-999-5258
100-164-999-5243
190-180-999-5243
001-2035
~.0-199-999-52..~
330-199-999-5239
340 - 199- 999- 5240
[TEN
AMOUNT
18.89
6.32
80. O0
24.51
127.28
29.57
~4.30
539.52
31.15
82.21
8.8~
125.68
12.55
12.00
16.30
22.4~
10.10
55.90
4.07
14.88
19.10
474.10
660.00
~6.54
20.99
141.00
38,00
133.00
12.50
13.60
5,238.14
30,0~8.32
2,969.95
8,503.90
CHECK
ANOIJI/T
25.21
80.00
225.66
539.52
113.36
301.86
1,134.10
96..~,
20.99
48. O0
312.00
26.10
5,238.14
30,0~8.32
2,969.95
8,503,90
VOUCHRE2
09/02/93 08:55
VOUCHER/
CHECK CHECK VENDOR VENDOR
NUHBER DATE NUNBER NANE
CITY OF TENECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERZOOS
ITEH ACCOUNT
DESCRIPTION NUI4BER
001-100-999-5206
210-166-627-5804
ROOT PRUNE 2-PEPPER TRE 100-1&4-999-5402
001-120-999-5260
320-199-999-5209
001-120-~;~-5258
O01-163-f~j~-5226
250-1~0-129-5804
100-164-;-52~4
11767 0g/02/93 000315 SOUTHERN CALIF TELEPHON 90~-202-4761SH
11768 09/02/~ 000/,13 CALIFORNIA DEPARTNENT 0 REVIEM & PROCESS FEE
11769 09/02/~J 000/,74 ARBOR-PRO TREE SERVICE
11770 09/02/93 0004~ SCCCA SEPT 17, SJ, JG
11771 0~/02/~ 000558 ADVANCED NOBILCOll FEB SERV.
11772 0~/02/93 O005W~ LEAGUE OF CA CITIES/LAF REGISTRATION
11773 0~/02/~ 000644 ASCE NEIIERSHIP/SH
11774 0~/02/~ 000712 FORD, STEVEN J. JULY SERVICES
11775 09/02/93 000724 A & R CUSTON SCREEN PRI VESTS & T SHIRTS Pg
11776 09/02/93 000937 C.N. ENGINEERING
ENGINEERING FOR PROFESS 210-190-119-5802
11777 09/02/93 000980 COAST IRRIGATION SUPPLY IRRIGATION SUPPLIES 190-180-999-5212
11778 09/02/9:5 001019 TENErA ADVERTISING
11778 09/02/93 001019 TENErA ADVERTISING
11778 09/02/93 001019 TENErA ADVERTISING
11778 09/02/93 001019 TENErA ADVERTISING
11778 09/02/93 001019 TENEKA ADVERTISING
ONE TINE ART PRODUCTION 210-190-13~-5804
PRODUCE AND INSTALL 14" 210-199-801-580~
PRODUCE AND INSTALL 14" 210-190-134-5804
TAX 210-190-134-5804
TAX 210-199-801-580~
11T/~ 09/02/93 001047 BOAT TECH NARINE & SKI REPAIRS HOTORBIKE
001-170-~-5214
11780 09/02/93 001071 SOURCE AND REFERENCE CEO PREF
001-110-~-5228
11781 09/02/95 001015 GENPLER'S
11781 09/02/93 001075 GENPLER'S
11781 09/02/9] 001075 GENPLER'S
11781 09/02/9] 001075 GEMPLER'S
6 DOZ NO. 135 B LEATHER 100-1~4-~-5242
2 OOZ NO. ~qO COg HIDE 100-164-~-5242
2 BOXES 89 NX DISPOSABL 100-1(~-~-5242
FREIGHT 100-164-999-5242
11782 0~/02/93 001094 ALL STATE CELLULAR
11782 0~/02/~3 001094 ALL STATE CELLULAR
11782 09/02/93 001094 ALL STATE CELLULAR
11782 09/02/93 001094 ALL STATE CELLULAR
DPC550 NOTOROLA CELLULA 320-1~-~-5208
NOTONOLA IIJICKCHARGE CO 320-1~-~-5208
NOTOROLA LIGHTER ADAPTE 320-1~-~-5208
TAX 320-1~-~-5208
1178) 09/02/93 001111 WSTA
CONFERENCE/NJ
001-140-~-5258
1178/, 09/02/9] 001112 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNZ SENINAR, BH &ICH
1~0-180-~-5258
11785 09/02/93 001113 TENECULA-14URRIETA ECONO 1/2 BOOTH AT IEEP SHOMC 280-199-999-5264
11786 09/02/93 001114 FAHILY FURNITURE
FURNITURE SENIOR CTR. 190-180-999-5242
TOTAL CHECKS
ITEN
AI~IJNT
152.31
662. O0
800. O0
50.00
1~5.30
1~5.00
~5.00
7,000.00
500.00
38.31
245. O0
140.00
140.00
15.91
5.7V
155.60
70.00
120.24
132.00
14.50
8.90
300. O0
49. O0
32.40
225. O0
50.00
500.00
~50.35
CHE~
152.31.
662.00
800.00
50.~
195.30
1~.00
~.~
7,000.00
75.00
5~.~
546.70
155.~
70.00
275.~
450.40
225.00
50. O0
500.00
950-~
74,776.68
PAGE 6
OV~/~.~Z 09=~1
CITY OF TEHECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
FUND TITLE
001 GENERAL FUND
100 GAS TAX FUND
165 RDA DEV- L(X,//NOD SET ASIDE
190 COHHUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
19~ TCSD SERVICE LEVEL C
210 CAPITAL INPROVENENT PROJ FUND
250 CAPITAL PROJECTS - TCSD
280 REDEVELOPHENT AGENCY - CIP
300 INSURANCE FUND
310 VEHICLES FUND
320 INFORNATION SYSTENS
TOTAL
AleOUNT
171,606./,6
28,556.Q4.
9,SQO.Q()
29,502.20
18,767.05
18,815.31
1,~82.28
10,235.08
1,181.02
184.17
6,00?.27
,/--
VOUCHRE2
09/02/93
09:41
CITY OF TENECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERZOOS
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NLNBER
CHECK
DATE
VENDOR
NUIIER
VENDOR
MANE
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT
NUMBER
ITEM
AMOUNT
CHECK
AMOUNT
11790
11790
11790
11790
11790
11790
11790
11791
117~1
11791
11791
11791
11792
11792
11792
1 !792
11792
11792
11792
11792
11792
11792
11792
11792
11792
11792
11792
11792
11793
11793
11793
117~4
11795
11795
11795
11795
11795
11795
11795
11795
11795
11795
11795
11796
09114193
09114193
09/14193
09/14193
09114193
09114193
09/14193
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09114193
09114193
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
0~/14/93
09/14/93
0~/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
000123
000123
000123
000123
000123
000123
000123
000126
000126
000126
000126
000126
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000135
000155
000155
000155
000166
000180
000180
000180
000180
000180
000180
000180
000180
000180
000180
000180
000207
BURKE WILLIAHS & SOltENS
BURKE WILLlAMB & SOltENS
BURKE WILLlAMB & SORENS
BURKE WILLINiS & SOREMS
BURICE ~ILLIANS & SOREMS
BURKE WILLIAHS & SOREMS
BURKE WILLIAHS & SORENS
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES S]ON SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
CENTRAL CITIES SIGN SEA
DAVLIN
DAVLIN
DAVLIN
ESGXL CORPORATION
GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
GRAY BAR ELECTRIC
KLEINFELDER
LEGAL BERV JULY
LEGAL SERV. JULY
LEGAL SERV. JULY
LEGAL SERV. JULY
LEGAL SERV, JULY
LEGAL SERV. JULY
LEGAL SERV, JULY
EXTRA IK)RK EVA 1883
EXTRA MO~K EMA 1882
BACKHOE & OPERATOR.. PR
INCREASE THE NI3UNT OF
AUGlIST HAINT.
PUBLIC UORKS SIGNS; VEH
BUILD/NG & SAFETY SIGNS
COHHUN/TY SERVICES; VEH
FREIGHT
FREIGHT
FREIGHT
TAX
TAX
TAX
25MPH SIGNS
PUBLIC
U S L
W 6 (153
UOODEN POST
TAX
2 SPECIAL SIGNS FOR CIT
AUG. 10 MEETING
AUG 17 MEETING
AUG 26 MEETING
JULY PLAN CHECKS
SIEMOR S66N2-SIJ PREWIRE
SIEHON S-BgO BRACKET
SIEMON SA-12TERM BRIDG
LEVITON &PGC/8PBC 106TY
GENERAL CABLE CAT 2 - 2
AT&T CABLE CAT 4 - 6-IC
FREIGHT
TAX
ALLEN TEL OPGC SINGLE J
FREIGHT
TAX
CC&R RECEIVABLE
001-130-999-5266
001-130-9~9-52~6
300-199-999-5205
001-1280
190-180-999-52~6
001-130-999-5266
001-130-999-5266
193-180-999-5615
190-180-999-5250
190-180-999-5250
190-180-999-5250
190-180-999-5250
310-164-g99-5216
310-162-~99-5216
310-180-999-5216
310-164-999-5216
310-162-999-5216
310-180-999-5216
310-180-999-5216
310-162-999-5216
310-164-999-5216
100-164-999-5244
100-164-999-5244
100-164-999-5244
100-164-999-5244
100-164-999-5244
100-164-999-5244
100-164-999-52~
001-100-~-5250
001-100-~-5250
001-100-~-5250
001-162-999-5268
250-190-129-5806
250-190-129-5804
250-190-129-5806
250-190-129-580~
250-190-129-5804
250-190-129-5804
250-190-129-5804
250-190-129-580~
250-190-129-5804
250-190-129-5804
250-190-129-580/,
001-1360
3,150.00
Z3,680.69
1,181.02
1,016.34
6,1/,8.75
3,032.39
2,555.63
633.94
1,017.34
260.00
282.00
3,762.53
56. O0
56.00
56.00
1.05
1.05
1.05
4.34
6.34
92.55
1,341.69
171.80
123.60
194.80
37.99
1~8.56
696.23
510.88
709.16
2,328.76
323.04
5.76
4.20
96.77
184.50
896.20
.01
116.76
52.68
2.30
6.08
1,500.00
~8,762.62
5,755.81
1,916.27
2,328.76
1,682.28
1,5
VOUCHRE2
09/''~ -,
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUMBER
11797
11797
11798
11799
11800
11801
11801
11801
11801
11802
11802
11802
11803
11805
11805
11805
11805
11805
11805
11805
11805
11805
11805
11805
11806
11807
11808
11809
11809
11810
11810
11810
11810
09:41
CHECK
DATE
09114193
09114193
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09114193
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
, 09/14/93
09/14/93
VENDOR
NUHBER
000217
000217
000230
000231
000232
0007.38
000238
000238
0002~8
000251
000251
000251
000267
000271
000271
000285
000285
000285
000285
000285
000285
000285
000285
000285
000285
000285
000354
000406
000655
O00B4
000754
000820
000820
000820
000820
000822
000822
VENDOR
leAHE
NARGARITA OFFICIALS ASS
MARGARITA OFFICIALS ASS
MUNI FINANC]AL SERVICES
NBS/LOWRY
JOHN P. NEET, MAI
FINAL TOUCH MARKETING
FINAL TOUCH MARKETING
FINAL TOUCH MARKETING
FINAL TOUCH MARKETING
PLANNING CENTER, THE
PLANNING CENTER, THE
PLANNING CENTER, THE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE D
ROBERT BEIN, ~ FROST &
ROBERT BEIN, 14 FROST &
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
SIR SPEEDY
RIVERSIDE COUNTY HEALTH
RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIF
CITY OF TENECULA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FOR ALL PERIODS
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
ADULT SOFTBALL GAMES,
ADULT SOFTBALL GAHES,
NEg CONTRACT FOR ASSESS
CIVIL DESIGN & SURVEY F
RE-APPRAISAL OF TEHECUL
ACCOUNT
mER
190-183-999-5380
190-183-999-5380
190-180-999-5370
210-166-627-58(X
280-199-808-5808
MARKETING PROSRNq CONTR 280-199-gg9-526~
FY 93-94'; MARKETING PR 280-199-99~-5264
FY 93-W,'; MARKETING PR 280-199-99~-5264
FY 93'94'; MARKETING PR 280-199-~'52&G
DEVELOPMENT CODE PROCES
DEVELOPMENT CODE PROCES
DEVELOPt4ENT CODE PROCES
001-161-~-5248
001-161-999-5248
001-161-~-5268
SERVICES 4/1-6/30/93 001-171-999-5251
APR]L SERVICES 210-2030
JUNE SERV]CES 210-2030
5000 SHEETS; GRAFFITI R
TAX
BOX OF 500 FOIL BUSINES
BOX OF 500 B/W BUSINESS
500 B/W BUSINESS CARDS
BOX OF 500 FOIL BUSINES
TAX
500/BUSINESS CARDS; GOL
TAX
SURVEY MAIL-OUT PRINTIN
TAX
001-170-999-5222
001-170-99~-5222
001-163-~-5220
001-163-9~-5220
001-163-~-5220
001-163-999-5220
001-163-~-5220
320-1~-~-5220
320-1~9-9~-5220
280-1~-~-5264
280-199-999-526~.
ANIMAL CONTROL JUNE 1~ 001-172-~-5255
CAL-ID 93/94
001-170-~-5284
MENTONE TURF SUPPLY RETENTION 210-2035
ELL!OTT GROUP, THE
ELLIOTT GROUP, THE
MINCHAK, KRIS
WlNCHAK, KRIS
WlNCHAK, KRXS
WlNCHAK, KRXS
DWIGHT FRENCH & ASSOCIA
DWIGHT FRENCH & ASSUCIA
PALDHA DEL SOL PARK LAN 190-180-99~-5250
PLAN CHECK SERVICES 193-180-999-5250
KRIS WINCHAK NAP CHECKI
KRIS WlNCHAK MAP CHECKI
KRIS WlNCHAK MAP CHECKI
SERV. 7/26-8/17
001-1(:3-999-5249
001-1d3-99~-5249
O01-1d3-99f-5249
001-1280
JUNE PROF SERVICES 100-164-999-5402
PROFESSIONAL ENERGENCY 100-16~-999-5402
ITEM
ANOUNT
2,552.00
2,508.00
1,502.58
1,750.00
3,500.00
2,666.67
65.43
1,748.47
500.00
1,873.02
1,247.05
1,630.60
96,217.8~
5,958.50
3,372.00
215.00
16.67
36. O0
27.70
27.70
7,6.00
9.88
36.00
2.79
1,628.31
126.20
7,246.27
22,120.00
4,177.81
1,125.00
2,610.00
350.00
250.00
775.00
350.00
6,864.00
680.00
PAGE 2
CHECK
AIIXINT
5,060.00
1,502 · 58
1,750.00
3,500.00
4,980.57
4,750.67
96,217.89
9,330.50
2,162.25
7,246.27
22,120.00
4,177.81
3,735.00
1,725.00
7,54J,.00
VOUCHRE2
VOUCHER/
CHECK
NUIIER
11812
11813
11813
11813
11813
11813
11813
11813
11813
1181A
11815
11816
11816
11816
11816
11816
11816
11817
11818
11819
11819
11820
09:41
CHECK
DATE
09/14193
09/1A/93
09/14193
09/14/93
09114193
09114193
09/1~/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
09114193
09114193
09/14/93
09/14/93
09/14/93
VENDOR
NUNBER
0O0843
000883
000883
000883
000883
000883
000883
000883
000883
001007
001037
001037
001037
001037
001037
001037
001039
001056
001058
001058
001091
VEND(X~
NAHE
NcDANIEL ENGINEERING CO
II)NTELEONE EXCAVATING
HONTELEONE EXCAVATING
HONTELEONE EXCAVATING
140NTELEONE EXCAVATING
140NTELEONE EXCAVATING
NONTELEONE EXCAVATING
HONTELEONE EXCAVATING
NONTELEONE EXCAVATING
LARUE PAINTING
NELSON PAVING &SEAL]NG
FALLBROOK LANDSCAPE
FALLBROOK LANDSCAPE
FALLBROOK LANDSCAPE
FALLBROOK LANDSCAPE
FALLBROOK LANDSCAPE
FALLBROOK LANDSCAPE
SOFTDESK ]NC.
EXCEL LANDSCAPE
ACCURATE LANDSCAPE
ACCURATE LANDSCAPE
KEYSERHARSTON ASSOC/ATE
CITY OF TENEIJJLA
VOUCHER/CHECK REGISTER
FON ALL PERICOS
ITEH
DESCRIPTION
BRIDGE ABATENENT DESIGN
SHOULDER GRADE & BACKFI
GRADE AND REHOVE SPOILS
ON RANCHOCA. RD & RIES
REPAIRS TO BE MADE UNDE
END DtJHP FOR 8 HRS, i $
6 LOADS CONCRETE TO COP
NISC.
EIqERGENCY END-DUNP NEED
GRAFFITI RENOVAL FOR JU
1. RENOVE DIRT AND DEB
AUGIJST
AUGUST
AUGUST
ANNUAL LANDSCAPE NAINTE
SPRAY-SELECTIVE HERBICI
PRE-EHERGENT APPLICATIO
MISC SOFTWARE
LANDSCAPE NAINT.
JULY LANDSCAPE NAINTENA
ANNUAL LANDSCAPE HAINTE
BOND DEFAULT/RANCHO WST
ACCOUNT
NUNBER
210-166-627-580~
100-164-~-5402
100-164-~-5402
100-1~4-~-5402
100-164-~-5402
100-164-999-540Z
100-164-~-5402
100-164-~-5402
100-164-~-5402
100-164-~-5402
100-164-~-5401
.193-180-~-5415
1~3-180-~-5415
193-180-~-5415
lf3-180-~-5415
193-180-~-5415
lg3-180-~-5415
320-1980
lf3-180-~-5415
lg0-180-~-5250
1~0-180-~-5250
165-1~-~-5250
[TEN
3,557.00
2,~50.00
950.00
2,200.00
3,750.00
520.00
450.00
97.00
1,7~6.75
4,497.50
1,700.00
1,052.41
27~.80
1,565.95
550.25
372.30
600.18
5,968.48
11,302.2A
6,172.00
6,172.00
9,500.00
PAGE 3
CHE~
AN(MeT
3,557.00
12,663.75
1,700.00
4,42~a~7
5,9. ~
11,302.24
12,3~.00
9,500.00
TOTAL CHECKS
ITEM
NO.
zl-
TO:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY .~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
FROM: Mary Jane McLarney, Finance Officer
DATE: September 14, 1993
SUBJECT: City Treasurer's Report as of July 31, 1993
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's
report as of July 31, 1993.
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 July 31, 1993.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENT: City Treasurer's Report as of July 31, 1993
City of Temecula
City Treasurer's Report
As of July 31, 1993
Cash Activity for the Month of July:
Cash and Investments as of July 1, 1993
Cash Receipts
Cash Disbursements
Cash and Investments as of July 31, 1993
$
$
41,649,290
1,981,223
(1,926,982)
41,703,631
Cash and Investments Portfolio:
Type of Investment
Petty Cash
General Checking
Beneffi demand deposits
Local Agency Investment Fund
Deferred Comp. Fund
Trust accounts-TCSD bonds
Trust accounts-RDA bonds
Institution
City Hall
First Interstate
First Interstate
State Treasurer
ICMA
Bank of America
Bank of Amedca
Yield
4.438%
2.742%
2.742%
Balance
800
206,556
8,043
19,052,295
367,921
4,447,502
17,620,514
41,703,631
(1)
(.t)
(1)-This amount includes outstanding checks.
Per Govemment Code Requirements, this Treasurer's Report is in compliance with
the City of Temecula's Investment Policy and them are adequate funds available
to meet budgeted and actual expenditures for the next thirty days of the City
of Temecula.
Prepared by Tim McDermott, Senior Accountant
i
Z
'
ITEM
5
APPROVAL ~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICE
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Harwood T. Edvalson, Assistant City Manager
September 14, 1993
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE CITY REGULATION OF
THE RATES CHARGED FOR THE BASIC TIER OF CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt the following Resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 93- :
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, CA, TO
AUTHORIZE CITY REGULATION OF THE RATES CHARGED FOR THE BASIC
TIER OF CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE; AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO DO ALL
THAT IS NECESSARY TO INITIATE RATE REGULATION, INCLUDING WITHOUT
LIMITATION, OBTAINING FCC CERTIFICATION
BACKGROUND:
The City has a franchise with Inland Valley Cablevision to provide cable television service to
subscribers within the City.
On and after September 1, 1993, pursuant to recent regulations of the Federal
Communication Commission ("FCC") and the Federal Cable Television Consumer Protection
and Competition Act of 1992, the City has the legal authority to regulate rates the cable
operator charges for basic tier cable television service.
Basic tier rate regulation by the City is optional and is not required by the above law. If the
City elects to regulate, upon certification by the FCC, the City may review the cable
operator's schedule of rates charged to subscribers for the basic tier of cable television
service. If such rates are higher than the FCC's benchmark rate, the City may order a rate
reduction to the FCC benchmark rate, or 10% whichever results in a smaller reduction in
rates.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is a fiscal impact to initiating and administering rate regulation. The City may incur
administrative expenses in becoming certified by the FCC and in conducting the review of the
cable operator's basic tier cable television rates. The amount of administrative expense
incurred by the City will vary depending on the extent to which the cable operator challenges
the City's regulation of its rates.
The administrative expense will be funded through the franchise fee collected annually from
the cable operator (5% of the cable operator's gross revenues).
The National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors
An affiliate ~ the National League oF Cities
CABLE REGULATION BEGINS
SEPTEMBER I
FCC CERTIFICATION FORM ATI'A CHED
Attention aIi'NATOA Jurisdictions:
We are writing to alert you to a recent change in tlxe effective date of cable rate regulation
adopted in the last several weeks by the Federal Communications Commission (I=CC), and to
a misleading campaign being waged by the cable television industry.
The FC~ h-. ~dv.n~! the effective d~te of ~hle r. te rqul~fion by one month. from
October 1 to S~tember 1. 1993. Thus, beginning September 1, franchiing authorities may
file with the FCC F~rm 328 which will enable local governments to regulate basic cable
rates on a local level. Also on September 1, franchising authorities may initiate the procm
by which the FCC will addre= non-basic cable rates. At the same time, the FCC hu
maintained the November 1~, 1993 date of expiration for the federal cable ram *fn:eze*.
As these changes are underway, you should be alerted that the cable tel=wi~on industry in
many regions of the country is embarl~ng on an organized can~aign to discourage local
governments from filing for FCC certification to regulate basic cable rates. Many ~ and
rnis]e~cllng claims and arguments are being put forth by the industry. At NATOA, we axe
urging all locol governments:
Without rate regulation ccrtifi~:a~on, your community will be without adequal~ tools to
prevent unwarranted incrm.w,s in basic cable rates aftgr the rate freeze cxpixu on November
15th, and may be unable to adequately respond to both citizens and the FCC on compl-lnts
regarding non-basic cable rates in your community. The types of 'informal' understandings
or 'side-agreements' being urged by the cable industry are unenforceable. as the FCC has
publicly stated. Despite cable company assertions to the contrary, the certification process is
simple and painless, the regulation process is not difficult to understand or implement, and
the primary burden of compliance with federal standards remains on the operator--not the
franchising authority.
A copy of the FCC certification form is ached. NATOA will have available for sale at the
Orlando conference (or by mail) a Cablc Act implcmentation kit that will include copies of
FCC forms, sample local roles, advice on implementation questions, and other materials
designed to enable local governments promptly and fairly to exercise their regulatory rights
under the Cable Act.
NATOA is u~in~, all members to file the FCC certification form on September 1 in order to
send a strong message to cable consumers and the cable industry. 'Following that filing, local
governments will have to take these steps:
1) Adopt a local regulation confirming local compliance with FCC guidelines;
and
2) Notify their cable operator(s) by certified marl that certification has
occurred and necessary rules have been adopted.
You may also file a complaint with the FCC on Form 329 if rates for the enhanced tier of
services exceed the benchmark.
NATOA's Cable Act implementation kit includes materials for all of these steps.
We look forward to seeing you in Orlando at the annual conference, where there will be an
abundance of instructive sessions and ample opportunity to exchange information on all cable
and telecommunications issues. - : .... :-
Sincerely, = ~,
NATOA Board of DirecWrs
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA, CA, AUTHORIZING CITY REGUI~TION OF THE RATES
CHARGED FOR THE BASIC TIER OF CABLE TEL~irISION SERVICE;
AND AUTHORIZING STAFF TO DO ALL THAT IS NECESSARY TO
INITIATE RATE REGULATION, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION,
OBTAINING FCC CERTWICATION
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMLr'ULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
declare that:
The City Council of the City of Temecuh does hereby find, determine and
A. Pursuant to the legal authority vested in the City by Government Code Section
53066, the City has issued a franchise to Inland Valley Cablevision ("Franchisee") to provide
cable television service to subscribers within the City; and
B. The City has the legal authority to reguhte rates for the pwvision of cable television
on the basic service tier offered by Franchisee, consistent with the rate regulations prescribed
by the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") at 47 C.F.R. Part 76 pursuant to Section
623 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended by the Cable Act of 1992 (42 U.3.C. S
543) (collectively, the "Act"); and
C. The City desires to become certified by the FCC to regulate the rates charged by
Franchisee to subscribers within the City for the pwvision of the basic tier of cable television
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Temecula hereby resolves as follows:
A. The City shall regulate the rates charged by Franchisee to subscribers within the City
for the provision of the basic tier of cable television service, subject to certification by the FCC.
B. In regulating the basic tier rates charged by Franchisee, the City will abide by the
regulations established by the FCC, including without limitation those pwmulgated at 47 C.F.R.
Part 76, and will abide by the Act.
C. The City has the legal authority to adopt, and the personnel to administer, such
regulations.
D. The City will comply with the FCC's procedural rules applicable to rate reguh~on
proceedings and will provide a reasonable opportunity for consideration of the views of
interested parties.
reinS318
Section J. The City Clerk shall file a FCC Form 328 with the FCC and serve a
certified copy of the same upon the Franchisee as soon as possible but in no event sooner than
September 1, 1993.
Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSRT~, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Temecula
at a regular meeting on the 14th day of September, 1993.
J. Sal Mmioz, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 93-__ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of ,1993, by the following vote:
COUNCH,MEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCrLM~-MBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCH-MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN:
COUNCn-MEM~ERS:
June S. Greek
City Clerk
11o~318
ITEM NO.
APPROV/a~,~~
CITY ATTORN
FINANCE OFFH R
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
September 14, 1993
Adoption of Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan Fees-Amendment No. 2
PREPARED BY: Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
1. Adopt a Resolution Entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE MURRIETA CREEK AREA DRAINAGE AREA PLAN.
2. Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled:
ORDINANCE NO. 93-14
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 90-04
REGARDING MURRIETA CREEK AREA DRAINAGE PLAN FEES FOR SUBDIVISIONS.
3. Approve the Notice of Exemption from the provisions of the Environmental Quality Act,
as amended, for the Adoption of an Amendment to an Ordinance to collect drainage fees for
subdivisions.
BACKGROUND:
On August 10, 1993 the City Council read by title and introduced Ordinance No. 93-14
amending Ordinance No 90-04 regarding Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan Fees for
subdivisions.
The periodic adoption of these County determined and adopted fees is established under
"Rules and Regulations for the Administration of Area Drainage Plans" pursuant to County
Board Resolution No. 90-059. The Board adopts both a resolution adopting Amendments to
the Area Drainage Plans and amendments to Ordinance No. 460 (Section 10.25 (J)).
1 ~AGDRFT~3~O9 14'tMCADP.RES
Under the "Rules and Regulations" the cities are then to adopt these amendments, both plan
and fees, thereby permitting the County to exact those fees for projects within the City
boundary and' for City participation in fees collected within the unincorporsted county areas
within the Sub-watersheds of the pertinent Area Drainage Plans.
The resolution, as submitted, is to adopt the amendment (Amendment No. 2) to the Murrieta
Creek Area Drainage Plan. The ordinance adopts the amended fees and was introduced at the
August 10, 1993 Council meeting.
The Notice of Exemption has been filed with the County Recorders office in accordance with
Public Resources Code Section 21152 and 14 California Code Regulations 1507. The Planning
Director has determined that the fee structure has already been adopted and the current action
only increases these fees.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution No. 93-
Ordinance No. 93-14
Notice of Exemption
Exhibit A-1: Riverside County Board of Supervisors
Resolution No. 93-100
Exhibit A-2: Amendment No. 2 to Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Ran
Exhibit A-3: ADP Cost Summary
Exhibit A-4: Revised Drainage Fees
Exhibit B: Previous ADP Cost Summary
Exhibit C: Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan Map
2 ~AGDRPT%93M)914MVlCADP.RES
RESOLUTION NO. 93-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF EMECIJLA ADOPTING AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE
MURRIETA CREEK AREA DRAINAGE PLAN
WItEREAS, on Ianuary 8, 1991, by Resolution No. 91-02, the City Council adopted
the Mur~eta Creek Area Drainage Plan and Fee Update which implements area-wide 'flood
control and Fee update which implements area-wide flood control projects directly bene~tting
the City of Temecula; and
WHEREAS, on April 6, 1993, the County of Riverside, with Resolution No. 93-100,
adopted Amendment No. 2 to the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and revised drainage fees
for the five subwatersheds within the drainage area of the plan; and
WHEREAS, a noticed public hearing has been held by the City Council at which time
all interested persons had the opportunity to appear and be heard on the matter of adopting the
revised schedule of drainage fees;
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The project is exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act and a Notice of Exemption has been prepared.
Section 2. Subdivision and development of property within the planned local
drainage area will require the construction of the facilities described in the Murrieta Creek Area
Drainage Plan.
Section 3. The revised estimated cost of the facilities and the recommended
revised drainage fees are correct, necessary and fairly apportioned within the drainage area, both
on the basis of the need for drainage facilities created by the proposed subdivision and
development of all properties within the drainage area.
Section 4. The City of Temecula hereby adopts Exhibits "A-1 through A4"
attached hereto as Amendment No. 2 to the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan and revised
drainage fees for the five subwatersheds within the drainage area of the plan.
5\resosL322 I
Section ~. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution and
shall cause the same to be posted as required by law.
I. Sal Mufioz, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
5Xr~sosX322 2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
Resolution No. 93-__ was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of
Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on the _ day of ,1993, by the following vote:
COUNCH,MEMB~:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
5\resos~322 3
ORDINANCE NO. 93-14
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY 'OF TEMECULA AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. 90-04 REGARDING MURI~P~-TA CREEK AREA
DRAINAGE PLAN FEES FOR SUBDMSIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES I-II~REBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Subsection J (10) of Section 10.25 of Riverside County Ordinance No. 460
adopted by reference by City of Temecula Ordinance No. 90-04, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
A. Murrieta Creek ADP
1. Wildomar Subwatershed $4,952 per acre
2. Murrieta Valley Subwatershed $3,985 per acre
3. Temecula Valley Subwatershed $2,291 per acre
4. Santa Gertrudis Valley
Subwatershed $1,179 per acre
5. Warm Springs Valley Subwatershed $ 677 per acre
Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect sixty (60) days after its
passage. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause copies of this
Ordinance to be posted and published as required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, this 14th day of September, 1993.
ATTEST:
J. Sal Mu~oz, Mayor
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
CITY OF TEMEEULA)
SS
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California, do hereby certify that
the foregoing Ordinance No. 93-14 was duly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the 10th day of August, 1993, and that thereafter, said
Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Temecula on the 14th day of September, 1993 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
COUNCILlVrF~MBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
City of Temecula
4~174 Eiu.S~rlll,l Ptfi¢ Dnvl · Tern/cult.
August 13, 1993
Richard Haworth
Couz~ of Riverskl
P.O. Box 751
Riverside, CA 92501-.0751
SUBJECT: Fili._~ of a Notice of Exemption for the Murriets Creek Area Drainage Plan
Fees
Dear Mr. Haworth:
Enclosed is the Notice of'Exemption for the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan Fees. In
addition, pursuant to Assembly Bffi 3158 (Chapter 1706) please find a check in the amount of
$50.00, for the $50.00 Count~ Adrninisu'ative fee to enable the City to f~e the Notice of
Exemption r~qui. r~! under Public R=sourccs Code S~lion 21152 and 14 C..alifomis Code
Regulations 1507.
If you have any questions regarding this matter please contac~ the Planning Deparnnent at (909)
694:-6400.
Sinr..mrely,
Gary Thomt~
Director of Planning
F. nclosur~
R:',IIIQ",MUI!C!!IIC. NOi 1~!3193 q~
City'of Temecula
Planning Deparhxmnt
County Clerk sad Recorders Office
County of Riverside
P.O. Box 751
Rivex~id~, CA 9250141751
FROM:
Projea Title:
Description of Project:
Notice of Exemptior-
Planning Department
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive '
Temecula, CA 92590
MulTieta CrP, ek Ax~a Dina~ plan
Adoption of an Amendment to an Ordinance to collect drainage fees for
subdivisions
Project Location:
City Wide, in the City of Texnecula, County of Riverside, California.
Project Applicant/Proponent: City of Temecuh
The __ Planning Commission X. City Council approved the above described project on August 24, 1993, 'and
found that the project is exempt from the provisions of the Ca/ifomia Bnvironmental Quality Act, as mended.
Exempt Stares: (check one)
Ministerial (See. 21080(o)(1); Se~. 15268);
Declared Emergency (Sec. 21080(0)(3); Sec. 15269(a));
Emergency Project (See, 21080(0)(4); Sec. 15269C0)(c));
Statutory Exemptions (Section Number.
Categorical Exemption: Class (Seaion Number )
Other: Section 15061(0)(3)
Statement of Reasons Supporting the Finding that the Project is Bxcmpt:
The project will clearly have no impacts on the environment since the fees are already adopted and they are only being
increased. -
·
Signature: /~
Phone Number:. (909) 694-6400
,r/
R:XSXPLANNINGXMURCltFa,~C.NOE S/13/93
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
15
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26.
27 I
28!
EXHIBIT A 1
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
RESO3'.UTION NO. 93-100
AMENDING THE MURRIETA CREEK AREA DRAINAGE PLAN
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 86-29, adopted by this Board on May
6, 1986, implementing the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan,
directs the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District to review the plan at least every two years and to
prepare an update of the plan that reflects changed conditions
and any required changes in facility cost estimates and drainage
fees; and,
WHEREAS, the Riverside County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District has recommended the adoption of an ame
ment to the plan increasing the amount of the drainage fee in
order to reflect inflationary trends in construction and right of
way costs; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED, FOUND AND DETERMINED by the Board of Super-
visors of the County of Riverside, State of California, in
regular session assembled on April 6, 1993, that;
1. The project is exempt from the provisions of the Cali-
fornia Environmental Quality Act and a Notice of Exemption has
been prepared.
4
5
6
8,
9 ~
10
1!
12
14 ~
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
25
26
27
2. The revised estimated cost of the facilities and the
recommended revised drainage fee are correct, necessary and
fairly apportioned within the drainage area, both on the basis of
benefit conferred on properties that are proposed for subdivision
and on the need for drainage facilities that is created by the
proposed subdivision and development of all properties within the
drainage area.
3. Amendment No. 2 to the Murrieta Creek Area Drainage Plan
dated April 6, 1993, and on file in the office of the Clerk of
this Board, is adopted and the drainage fee for the five
subwatersheds within the drainage area is fixed in the amount of
$4,952 per acre (Wildomar Valley); $4,139 per acre (Murrieta
Valley); $2,291 per acre (Temecula Valley); $1,179 per acre
(Santa Gertrudis Valley); $677 per acre (Warm Springs Valley).
4. This resolution supersedes Resolution No. 90-059 adopted.
on January 23, 1990.
ZS:mcv
resf92m
-2-
EXHIBIT A2
AHENDHENT NO. 2
TO
HURRZETA CREEK AREA DRAINAGE PLAN
Adopted April 6, 1993
Resolution No. 93-100
Updatinq Requirement - This amendment is prepared in accordance with Riverside
County Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 86-29 "Adopting Hurrieta Creek Area
Drainage Plan", which states in part:
'that the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
is directed to prepare an update of this plan at least every two years to
reflect changed conditions, inflationary or deflationary trends, revised
general or specific plans, and approved development and drainage plans
which will require changes in facility configuration cost estimates and
.drainage fees.'
Facility Chanqes - No changes have been made on the facilities since the
adoption of Amendment No. 1 in January 1990.
New Facilities - Murrieta Line F-3, Santa Gertrudis Channel, Wildomar Lateral
A are all 100= complete. Warm Springs Channel, Murrieta Line F-l, Wildomar
Channel and Wildomar Lateral C are all partially constructed.
Future Facilities - Lines F, O and E are presently being designed.
Recommendations - It is the District'~ recommendation that the Board revise
the drainage fees for the five subwatersheds to reflect tnflationary trends in
construction and right of way cost. The increase in construction cost is
based upon new costing quantities using 1992 unit prices. Right of way cost
are based upon the recommendations of the County's Real Property Management
Division.
EXHIBIT A3
Facility
MURRIETA
AMENDMENT 2
TABLE I
CREEK AREA DRAINAGE
COST SUMMARY
PLAN
Santa Warm
Wlldomar Murrieta Temecula Gertrudis Springs
Valley Valley Valley Valley Valley
'Total Cost To=a1 Cost Total Cost Total Cost Total Cost
6,412,213
M,W Murrieta
Creek Channel
M Santa Gert. Ch
M Warm Springs Ch.
M Line A
M Line C
M Line C-1
M Line D
M Line D-1
M Line E
M Line E-1
M Line E-2
M Line E-3
M Line E-4
M Line E-5
H Line F
M Line F-1
M Line F-2
M Line F-3
~_.M Line G
~ Line H
.{ Line J
M Line K
M Line L
M Line L-1
M Line M
M Line M-1
M Line N
M
2,291,877
668,804
604,644
312,225
2,237,497
303,424
17,688
600,122
27,221
255,229
495,152
Line P
M Mwy 79 Crossing
MR3 Crossing
W Wildomar Ch.
W Lateral A
W Lateral B
W Lateral B-1
W Lateral C
W Lateral C-1
W Line D
W Lateral E
W Lateral E-1
W Wildomar Ch.
Debris Basin
W Lateral A
Debris Basin
26,387,069
2,975,792
403,635
2,587,109
283,451
536,366
114,376
288,803
84,884
4,134,481
1,720,108
110,171
591,012
1,412,416
486,549
1,611,457
675,847
759,655
60,787
176,591
94,869
610,736
583,306
$46,689,471
Subarea
Totals
10,003,869
169,902
152,473
104,513
$14,226,096
11,065,'186
10,869,639
7,132,924
2,164,081
408,538
793,407
$10,430,757 $18,991,517 $13,442,258
Grand To~al
Area
Drainage
Plan
Total Cost
64,737,976
7,132,924
2,164,081
169,902
152,473
104,513
2,975,792
403,635
2,587,109
283,451
536,366
114,376
288,803
84,884
4,134,481
1,720,108
110,171
591,012
1,412,416
486,549
1,611,457
675,847
759,655
60,787
176,591
94,869
610,736
583,306
408,538
793,407
2,291,877
668,804
604,644
312,225
2,237,497
303,424
17,688
600,122
27,221
255,229
495,152
$103,780,099
EXHIBIT A4
AMENDMENT. NO, 2
MURRIETA CREEK
AREA DRAINAGE PLAN
REVISED DRAINAGE FEES
The current drainage fees for the five sub-watersheds are:
Sub-Watershed
Fee
Wildomar Valley
Murrieta Valley
Temecula Valley
Santa Gertrudis Valley
warm Springs valley
$4952/acre
$4139/acre
$2291/acre
$1179/acre
$ 677/acre
*H.C. = Murrieta Creek Channel
,S.G. = Santa Gertrudis Channel
*W.S. = Warm Springs Channel
Percentage Applied Toward
Local Hajor
Facilities Facilities
*H.C. *S.G.
54.93% 45.07% 0
43.48% 56.52% 0
4.09% 95.91% 0
4.18% 58.26% 37.56%
3.04% 80.86% 0
*W.S.
0
0
0
0
16.10%
ZS:mcv
adp7a
=_XHIi]IT '!~
ITEM
NO.
7
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
City Manager/City Council
FROM:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
DATE:
September 14, 1993
SUBJECT:
Enforcement of Decorum at City Council Meetings
RECOMMENDATION: Approve a Policy and Procedure to provide for the orderly
enforcement of decorum at City Council Meetings
BACKGROUND: In a continuing attempt to develop standard policies and procedures to
address possible situations before they occur, the staff has researched and prepared the
attached Administrative Policy and Procedure to define the duties of the Bailiff at City Council
meetings.
Attached you will find copies of the relevant provisions of law. Section 2.04,030 of the
Municipal Code Ordinance No. 90-02 provides that the presiding officer may designate e
member of the Police Department as Sergeant at Arms [bailiff] who shall carry out the
directions of the presiding officer to include making arrests as directed by the presiding
officer. Any person who fails to comply with a direction given by the presiding officer may
be removed.
Also attached is a copy of California Government Code Section 54957.9, part of the Brown
Act, which is also incorporated into the Council's Rules of Procedure. This is probably the
statute which you are most familiar with since it covers the conduct of public meetings and
"closed sessions." This statute specifically authorizes city councils and similar bodies to clear
a meeting room where the meeting is willfully interrupted by a group of persons. The Council
may then readmit those persons who are not disruptive.
The attached copy of Penal Code Section 403 establishes a willful disturbance of a public
meeting as a misdemeanor.
The copy of a portion of Section 60 of Robert's Rules of Order (1990 edition) is included just
to show that regulations and laws which authorize ouster of unruly people from legislative
meetings are a generally accepted provision in parliamentary procedures.
JSG
R:~Oetda.rpt%Beiiff. Pto I
Pro. # ADlVlN-006
Date 9/14/93
Dept. City Council
CITY OF TEMECULA
Policies and Procedures
Orderly Enforcement of Decorum at City Council
Meetings
PURI~SE:
This policy will address the enforcement of decorum at city council meetings and the duties of
the Bailiff.
POHCY:
The BailifFs duties are to maintain order during the meetings. This procedure becomes
necessary when a speaker becomes highly disruptive or verbally attacks an individual on a
personal basis. The City Council discourages personal verbal attacks from citizens and should
the time come when the Presiding Officer, usually the Mayor, requests the Bailiff to remove a
speaker from the podium or from the audience, the Bailiff will do the following.
PROCEDURE:
Listen to each speaker. The Bailiff will be required to document the event from
the beginning up to the point when requested to remove the speaker.
Note the disruption.
Note how long it lasted.
What impact did it have on the meeting?
Who was prevented from speaking/hearing?
Did the Presiding Officer (Mayor) warn the speaker to stop?
What was the speaker's response?
Absent any physical confrontation, do not take action unless verbally instructed
to do so by the Presiding Officer.
The Bailiff will then escort the disruptive party from the meeting and inform them
they are not to return.
ShouM the disruptive party refuse to be voluntarily escorted from the meeting, the
Presiding Officer will ORDER the Bailiff to remove the offending party. This
action will be considered a request for a citizen's arrest by the Presiding Officer
issuing the order for removal.
I 08/27/93
CITY OF TEMECULA
Policies and Procedures - ADMN.006
September 14, 1993
Page 2
The Bailiff will then forcibly remove the disruptive party from the meeting. A
citizens arrest form shall be secured from the party ordering the removal at a
appropriate time after the meeting or during a break.
Whenever possible, cite release the offender. If it appears the offense may
continue, have the offender booked into jail.
· Write a very detailed report.
Obtain the cassette tape from the City Clerk as evidence. As soon as possible
the next day have a copy made for the City Clerk.
· Contact the Watch Commander as soon as possible.
The most applicable code sections are Penal Code Section 403 and Municipal Code Section
2.04.030. They both set the penalty for this offense as a misdemeanor. The conduct required
to violate PC 403 or section 2.04.030 must be close to outrageous. Iris important to understand
that the public speaking session is intended to allow citizens to exercise their freedom of speech.
You need to keep this in mind when attending these functions.
R:~u°l~c~°~)MN'006 2 08/27/93
§ 403 CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
§ 403. Disturbance of public assemb|y or meeting"
Every person who, without authority og law. willfully clismrbs or breaks up
any assemb|y or meeting, not unlawful in its character, other than such as is
mentioned in Section 302 of the Penal Code and Section 29440 of the
Elections Code, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(Enacted 1872. Amended by Stars. 1949, c. 1202, p. 2119, § 1; Stats.1967, c. 138, p.
1193, § 4; Stats. 1976, c. 1192, p. 5448, § 22.5.)
Htstortea!No~
The 1949 amendment referred to "Section The 1967 amendment substituted *Section
302 of the Penal Code end Section ~ of the 12046' for "Section
Elections Code' instead of "Sections $9 and The 1976 amendment referred to Elections
302 '.
Code § 29440 instead of § 12046.
AdvertisinZ for employees while u'mte Hisirate is in protein, see Labor Code §§ 973, 974.
Arrest for threatened breach of peace, see § 703.
Disruptive persons, denial of access to schools, mee § 626,8,
Disturbance of religions meetinSs, mee § 302,
Judicial proceedings dislurimnce, see § 1~; Code of Civil ProceHure § 1209.
Justifiable homicide in pr-~*rvin~ the peace, mee §~ 196, 197.
LeSislative sesion disturbance, see Government Code § 9051.
Le~,'s!~_~on, privilege against civil process during legislative mession, ~ee Const. Art, 4, § 14.
Misdemeanor,
Defined, see § 17.
Punishment, see §§ 19, 19a.
Molestation of person in atteud~nce at adult courmes, see § 647b.
Power of siam to imprison so prosect the public see Government
Refusal to aid officers in prevention. of breach o~c~e0 see § I.~}. Code 202.
State capitol, disruption of conduct of official business, see § 171f.
Wilhrully, defined, see § 403.
Breach of the peace in California. (1974) 26 turbance of public mee~ (1~49) 23
Hast. LJ. 290. Work of the 1949 California legislator,
LR. 1.
Disturbance of Public Assemblage emI to 3.
Cj.S. Disturbance of Public Meetings § Iet
seq.
Freedom of speech 3
Knowledge 1
Public meeting 2
This section providing that every person will-
fully disturbing or breaking up any assembly
WESTLAW Electronic !t~Mareh
See WESTLAW Electronic Research Guide following the Preface.
Nots of Decisions
governance of meetin~ of w~ he knew, or
as a removable unto should have known.
re Kay (1970) 83 Cal.Rlxr. 686, 4~4 P.2d 142, 1
C.3d 930.
2. Public meeting
A complaint charging that defendant without
or meeting is guilty of misdemeanor requires, authority of law wi!ifull and unlawfully dis-
for conviction, showing that defendant sub- turbed a certain assembly and meeting of the
stantiaily impaired conduct of meeting by in- irrigation committee of the farm bureau of the
606
PUBL:
.nmty,
characre
· other
§ 29440
public
an offe.
Superio,
(1919) 1
3. Free
When
§ 403
The re
nixed gc
fion, b:
a riot.
~ace ¢
camp.
isvati.on:
, Riot
Crlm|qa~
Justlfiab
Sberlff's
Suppr~
sff/ORDl1001(010390-7)
10:00 p.m., subject to an adopted motion to extend the
meeting. Regular meetings shall be conducted at the
Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street. If a regular
meeting falls on a holiday, the regular meeting shall be
held on the next business day. (Gov. Code Section 36808.)
(b) The City Council may, by resolution, designate
another date, time and location for a meeting.
2.04.030 Improper conduct at meetind.
(a) All persons shall comply with the meeting
procedures announced by resolution of the City Council and
no person shall interfere with or interrupt a City Council
meeting.
(b) The presiding officcer may designate a member
of the County Sheriff's Department as Sergeant at Arms who
shall carry out the directions of the presiding officer to
include making arrests as directed by the presiding
officer. Any person who fails to comply with a direction
given by the presiding officer may be removed.
(c) Any person using profane, vulgar, loud or
boisterous language at any meeting or otherwise interrupting
the proceedings who refuses to be seated or keep quiet when
ordered to do s~ by the Mayor or other presiding officer of
the council, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
2.04,040 Adoption Of PrOcedures. The City
Council may, by resolution, adopt rules of procedure and
regulations pertaining thereto to govern the conduct of its
meetings and any of its other functions and activities.
2.04.050 Compensation.
(a) Each CouncilmemBer shall be entitled to a
salary in the amount of $300.00 per month. (Gov't. Code
Section 36516.)
(b) Upon the submission of an itemized'account,
any Councilmember may be reimbursed for the actual and
necessary expenses incurred in the performance of official
duty. (Gov't. Code Section 36514.5.)
2.04.060 Commission appointments. Unless
otherwise specifically provided in this Code or by State
law, all City board and commission appointments, except for
ex officio members where applicable, shall be made by the
City Council. -
-17 -
§ 54957.9. Disorderly conduct of genera/publio during meeting;
clearing Of room
In the event that any meeting is willfully interrupted by a. group
or groups of persons So as to render the orderly conduct of such
meeting unfeasible and order cannot be restored by the removal of in-
dividuals who are willfully interrupting the meeting, the members of
the legislative body conducting the meeting may order the meeting
room cleared and continue in session. Only matters appearing on the
agenda may be considered' in such a session. Representatives of the
press or other news media, except those participating in the distur-
bance, shall be allowed to attend any session held pursuant to this
section. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the leKislative body
from establishing a procedure for readmitting an individual or indi-
viduals not responsible for willfully disturbing the orderly conduct of
the meeting.
(.Added by Stars.1970, e. 1610, p. 3S86, § 2. Amended by Stars.1981, e. 968,
§
Historical Note
See,ion 3 ot Stats.1970, e. 1610, p. ~ hem of the general public hays been ex-
provided that: cluded by reason of a willful disturbance*"
'"the Legislature finds that it is in the. The 1983. amendment, at the beginning
public interest to allow duly accredited d the third sentence, deleted "Duly
representatives of the press or other news crodited',
media to attend sessions from which mere*
United States Code Annotated
Open meetings, see 5 U.S.C.A. t 552b.
i
ITEM
NO.
8
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY:
APPROV~T.
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane McLarney, Finance Officer
September 14, 1993
FY 1993-94 Budget Amendments for Disaster Relief
Luci Romero, Financial Services Administrator
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve a budget amendment in the
amount of $159, 107 from the Unreserved General Fund Balance.
DISCUSSION: The Fiscal Year 1992-93 Budget included an appropriation of
$1,411,400 for Disaster Relief. The fiscal year ending expenditures and
encumbrances totaled $1,237,123. In accordance with year-end procedures, the
unencumbered appropriations returned to the fund balance. Expenditures related to
the flooding have continued to be incurred in the current fiscal year. Therefore, an
appropriation for these expenditures is being requested. Exhibit "A" itemizes the
expenditures and encumbrances.
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds will be allocated from the Unreserved General Fund Balance.
It should be noted that 93.75% of these funds will be reimbursed by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency and the State of California Office of Emergency
Services per approved Damage Survey Reports.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
EXHIJIT nan
MEMORANDUM
Mary Jane McLarney, Finance Officer
Raymond A. Casey, Principal Engineer - Land Development
September 2, 1993
Budget Amendment Account #166
PROJECT
1. Channels
(De Portola/J. Smith)
2. Commerce Center Road
at Overland Channel
3. Calle De Valado
4. Joseph Road Crossing
8. Remove Fence
b. Install Fence
c. Remove/Replace Concrete
5. Sports Park Slope
6. Saddlewood Access Road
7. Channels in Parks
SUB TOTAL
ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURES
Ambulance Services
Prior Year Encumbrances
TOTAL
DSR # DSR i
91451 $ 4,522.00
91457 2,959.10
96051 375.00
96043 162.00
96042 720.00
96044 32,264.60
91879 6,513.88
91874 9,463.00
91873 46,132.00
103,111.58
1,140.00
54,855.00
$ 159,106.58
* NOTE: The hazard mitigation items were not included in this summary
CC:
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent, Public Works
Bruce Hartley, Maintenance Superintendent, TCSD
Jim Faul, Engineering Technician
pwl 5XfeulXmemXOgO2g3
.ITEM
NO.
9
APPROVAL i~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
September 14, 1993
"No Parking" Zone on Rancho California Road West of Front Street
PREPARED BY: Martin C. Lauber, Traffic Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
The Public/Traffic Safety Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution
entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TEMECULA ESTABLISHING "NO PARKING" ZONE ON RANCHO
CALIFORNIA ROAD WEST OF FRONT STREET.
BACKGROUND:
Traffic Division staff has recently completed upgrading the striping on Rancho California Road
west of Vincent Moraga Drive to its ultimate configuration. The through lanes adjacent to the
curbs were striped to a width of fourteen feet to match the striping east of Vincent Moraga
Drive.
Staff has observed vehicles parking in the newly created through lanes. Staff feels that a
mechanism is required to inform motorists about the unsafe situation created by parking along
this portion of Rancho California Road. The proposed parking restriction would not only
inform motorists but would assist the Police Department's enforcement efforts to improve
safety.
At the August 26, 1993 Public/Traffic Safety Commission meeting, the Commission
recommended that the City Council approve the "'No Parking" zones on both sides of Rancho
California Road from Front Street to the western City limits as shown on Exhibit "A".
- 1 - pw 15\agdrpt\93\0914\0914b .lau
FISCAL IMPACT
FY 93-94: Paint 3970 feet of red curb (3970 ft @ $0.58/L.F. = $2300). Funds are available
in the Public Works stenciling and striping Account No. 100-164-999-5410.
Attachments: Resolution No. 93-
Exhibit "A"
-2- pwl 5%egdrpt%93%0914%0914b.leu
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TEMF, CULA ESTABLIRITING *NO PARKING* ZONE
ON RANClIO. CALIFORNIA ROAD WEST OF FRONT
STIII~':T.
The City Council of the City of Temecula does resolve, determine and order as follows:
Section 1. Pursuant to Section 12.08.216 of Ordinance No. 91-16, which theCityhas
adopted by reference, the following *No Parking* zone is hereby established in the City of
Temecula:
*No Parking* on both sides of Rancho California Road from Front Street
to the we, stem City limits as shown on Exhibit *A *.
Section 2.
The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this
Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOlrff~r~, by the City Council of the City of Temecula
at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of September, 1993.
J. Sal Mu~oz, Mayor
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
-3- pw 15%egdfpt%93%0914%0914b .ieu
#1
I
Vlu~-I' k,,ao-,,~e.z,. oR~ J lI"' J ~ !~B~f"as ~ Df=~,
ITEM NO. 10
APPROV~T..
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PREPARED BY:
City Manager/City Council
,~Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
September 14, 1993
Solicitation of Construction Bids for the Bridge and Street Improvements
on Liefar Road at Nicolas Road (PW93-02)
(~Raymond A. Casey, Principal Engineer - Land Development
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve the construction plans and specifications and authorize the
Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids for the bridge and street
improvements on Liefar Road at Nicolas Road (PW93-02).
BACKGROUND:
On May 11, 1993, the City Council awarded 'professional services contracts for civil
engineering, land surveying, structural engineering, and soils testing for Liefar Road Crossing
(PW93-02), for the design of the bridge and street improvements on Liefar Road at Nicolas
Road. The project will include a 39' wide by 60' long bridge allowing for two lanes of traffic,
28' curb to curb and a sidewalk on one side. It will provide a permanent crossing over the
Santa Gertrudis Creek to replace the temporary concrete dip section that provides access to
approximately fifty-nine (59) parcels. Also, this project will be removing excess silt deposits
placed in Santa Gertrudis Creek by the January 1993 storms in the vicinity of the project.
The plans, specifications and contract documents are prepared and the project is ready to be
advertised for construction bids. Staff is presently in the process of obtaining the requisite
Section 1601 Fish and Game Permit and the temporary construction easement documents
necessary. The construction will also provide an alternative access route during the bridge
construction.
pwO5%aOd;t%93%0914%lielet
FISCAL IMPACT:
Costs will be advanced by the Development Impact Fund. However, up to 93.75% of the
project cost will be reimbursed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the State
of California Office of Emergency Services per Damage Survey Report number 97284. The
remaining cost should be deferred to the proposed Zone R Assessment for Liefer Road.
Attachments:
1. Preliminary Project Schedule
2. DSR No. 97284
3. Preliminary Construction Estimate
4. Site Plan
5. Site Pictures
pw0E~egcl~pt%93%0914%iiefer
II
U
U
U ·
U
40
mO
mO
iI:O E'
B:O ·
E'
1t. AGENCY ;.~:E
/
PART ill - ;:i..OC)DPe...AIN MANAGgklINT/HAZ, ARD Mrl~G.,,~"T1ON REVIEW
PART IV - IN3R FEMA U~ ONlY
~l, ,aakIQI, JNT =_I,JG L Z~, EI~GIaeL,,I I 30, ~IeECIAL CI:}NSIOEIqAT'IQM i31, Isl,,.0GOPe,,,,klN REVIEW
,., vssv IIllllllll
I Mf'T~4ENT REQUIRED I~ o G - Peleee'e~. S
: Cam I ~ ·
, ~ ~--"~i~IIklENT'~'~_t-iANG
;=,~AA earr~ ,aQ*Sl, F=_~ 91
Item
No.
A.
B.
C.
1.
2.
3.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
UEFER ROAD BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
(60-FOOT SPAN BRIDGE)
ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE COST
September 8, 1993
Description
Design & Review' (Incl. Fish & Game)
Survey & Inspection
Construction
Mobilization
Clearing and Grubbing
Demolition (Conc. & Fencing)
Asphalt Concrete (Type B), 3" Thick
Aggregate Base, Class 2, 6" Thick
Asphalt Concrete Dike (Type A)
Rock Slope Protection (1 Ton)
Filter Fabric
Concrete Barrier (Bridge), Type 25
Concrete Barrier (Bridge), Type 26
Deck Units (Bridge)
Topping Concrete (Bridge)
Abutments/Wing Walls
Bar Reinforcing Steel (Bridge)
0.1' A.C. Overlay
A.C. Oversized Drain
6" PCC Over Comp. Native
Hydroseed Slopes
Traffic Control
Joint Seal
Tubular Hand Railing
Earth Work
Conc. Trap Channel Under Bridge
(AIt. Bid Item)
Estimated Unit of Unit Price Total {$)
Quantity Measure (N
I LS $19,000 ~19,000
I LS 5,000.00 5,000
I LS 1,000.00 1,000
I LS 1,500.00 1,500
80 TON 40.00 3,200
82 CY 20.00 1,640
93 LF 3.00 279
750 CY 45.00 33,750
80 SY 1.50 120
72 LF 40.00 2,880
72 LF 60.00 4,320
I LS 20,650 20,650
36 CY 240.00 8,640
82 CY 300.00 24,600
15,425 LF 0.60 9,255
23 TONS 35.00 805
I EA 850.00 850
630 SF 3.50 2,205
500 SF 1.00 500
I LS 1000.00 1000
78 LF 20.00 1,560
72 LF 25.00 1,800
1,800 CY 3.00 5,400
4,570 SF 5.00 (22,850)
DESIGN & CONST. GRAND TOTAL:
;I149,954
pwOb'~dieeetor~n1993%liefer.br2 090893
ITEM NO. I 1
APPROVAL F~~'~~
CiTY
ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICE
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works\City Engineer
September 14, 1993
Award of Contract for the Rancho Vista Road Sidewalk Improvements
(Project No. PW92-12)
PREPARED BY:
Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
Award a contract for the Rancho Vista Road Sidewalk Improvements, Project No.
PW92-12, to Gosney Construction Backhoe & Equipment for $26,488.10, and
authorize the Mayor to execute the contract and;
Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency
amount of $2,648.81, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
BACKGROUND:
On July 13, 1993, the City Council approved the construction plans and specifications, and
authorized the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids. This includes
installation of sidewalk to link the three public facilities on Rancho Vista Rd. The engineer's
estimate for this project was $33,000.
Two bids for the project were publicly opened on August 26, 1993. The bids received were
as follows:
1. Gosney Construction ............. $26,488.10
2. West Coast Construction .......... $27,620.00
The bid proposal included an additive bid to compare the price between installing a new 6'
wood fence and relocating the existing fence. The cost to construct a new fence opposed
to relocating was $450 more, therefore the additive bid amount was not included in the prices
above·
-1 - pwO4\agdrpt\93\0914~pw92-12.awd 0907
Gosney Construction Backhoe & Equipment has not performed any work for the City but has
performed well in other areas of Riverside County based on comments from references of
previous work:
The construction schedule is for 30 working days, with work expected to begin at the end of
September and be completed in mid November.
A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This project is a Capital Improvement Project and is being funded from Development Impact
Fees and will be receiving 918,000 in SB 821 funds which are administrated by the Riverside
County of Transportation Commission. The Development Impact account will therefore be
reimbursed a total 918,000. The total project amount of 929,136.91 includes the Contract
amount of 926,488.10 plus the 10% contingency of 92,648.81. This amount will be
transferred from the Development Impact Fees to the Capital Project fund and appropriated
in account number 210-165-629-5804.
-2- pwO4\agdrpt~93\O914~pw92-12.awd 0907
CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CONTRACT
FOR
PROJECT NO. PW 92-12
RANCHO VISTA ROAD
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the day of o 19 , by
and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and
, hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR."
WITNESSETH:
That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as
follows:
1.8.
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents,
to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and
Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW 92-12 RANCHO VISTA
ROAD SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS, Insurance Forms, this Contract, and all modifications
and amendments thereto, the State of California Department of Transportation Standard
Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically referenced in the Plans and Technical
Specifications, and the latest version of the Standard Soecifications for Public Works
Construction, including all supplements as written and promulgated by the Joint
Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the American Associated
General Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard Specifications") as amended by
the General Specifications, Special Provisions, and Technical Specifications for PROJECT
NO. PW 92-12 RANCHO VISTA ROAD SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS. Copies of these
Standard Specifications are available from the publisher:
Building News, Incorporated
3055 Overland Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90034
(213) 202-7775
The Standard Specifications will control the general provisions, construction materials, and
construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the Plans and Specifications
of this Contract.
In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents,
the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over and be used in lieu of such
conflicting portions.
Where the Plans or Specifications describe portions of the work in general terms, but not
in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed
CONTRACT CA-1 pwOS%cip~projects%pw92-12%prebid%bidpkg 073093
e
and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used.' Unless otherwise~-~
specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, ant
incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract.
The Contract Documents are complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as
binding as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract
Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract.
SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall
provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all
utility and transportation services required for the following:
PROJECT NO. PW 92-12
RANCHO VISTA ROAD
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS
All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance
with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents
hereinabove enumerated and adopted by CITY.
CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished
and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision and subject to the
approval of CITY or its authorized representatives.
CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE. CITY agrees to pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to
accept in full payment for the work above-agreed to be done, the sum of: Twenty-seven
thousand nine hundred and thirty-~re DOLLARS and ten CENTS ($27,933.10), the total
amount of the base bid.
CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed thirty (30) working
days, commencing with delivery of Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not
commence until bonds and insurance are approved by CITY.
CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that
the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order,
changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as
established by the City Council.
PAYMENTS. On or about the thirtieth (30th) day of the month next following the
commencement of the work, there shall be paid to the CONTRACTOR a sum equal to
ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed since the commencement of the
work. Thereafter, on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the
work progresses, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid such sum as will bring the payments
each month up to ninety percent (90%) of the previous payments, provided that the
CONTRACTOR submits his request for payment prior to the last day of each preceding
month. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be
made sixty (60) days after CITY acceptance of the work and the CONTRACTOR filing a
one-year warranty with the CITY on a warranty form provided by the CITY. Payments shal
be made on demands drawn in the manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate
CONTRACT CA-2 Pw05%ciP~orojecte%Pw92-12'~prebid~,bidpkg 073093
e
signed by the City Manager, stating that the Work for which payment is demanded has
been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated
in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments on the Contract
price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work.
WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is
recorded, the CITY shall retain a portion of the Contract award price, to assure warranty
performance and correction of construction deficiencies according to the following
schedule:
CONTRACT AMOUNT
625,000- 675,000
675,000- 6500,000
Over 6500,000
RETENTION PERIOD RETENTION PERCENTAGE
180 days 3%
180 days 2%
One Year 1%
10.
Failure by the CONTRACTOR to take corrective action within twenty-four (24) hours after
personal or telephonic notice by the CITY on items affecting use of facility, safety, or
deficiencies will result in the CITY taking whatever corrective 'action it deems necessary.
All costs resulting from such action by the CITY will be deducted from the retention. The
amount of retention provided for her.in shall not be deemed a limitation upon the
responsibility of the CONTRACTOR to carry out the terms of the Contract Documents.
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code
Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of One
Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond
the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted
from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be
deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR
will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for
unforeseeable delays beyond the control of and without the fault or negligence of the
CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly
notify CITY of any such delay.
WAIVER OF CLAIMS. Unless a shorter time is specified elsewhere in this Contract, on or
before making final request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall
submit to CITY, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Contract;
the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all
claims against CITY under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in
writing and request for payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit,
release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment.
PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the
State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem
wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft,
classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of
the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies
may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. CONTRACTOR shall post
CONTRACT CA-3 pwOS\cip%projects%pw92-12%prebid\bidpkg 073093
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates
as · minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775.
1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code.
Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the
CITY, as a penalty, the sum of 925.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each
laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any
work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of
the provisions of the Contract.
LIABILITY INSURANCE. CONTRACTOR, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies:
"1 am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every
employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or undertake self-
insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such
provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract."
TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract.
INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or
in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone.
CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers,
employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons
(CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly
out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by ~"
CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active
negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY.
CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that
exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in
the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary
independent examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations
or reports prepared by CITY for purposes of letting this Contract out to bid will be accepted
as an excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the CONTRACTOR to fulfill in every
detail all requirements of this Contract. Nor will such reasons be accepted as a basis for
any claims whatsoever for extra compensation or for an extension of time.
GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or
representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees,
agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable
treatment with respect thereto.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage
relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee,
or any architect, engineer, or other puerperal of the Drawings and Specifications for this
project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in his/her employ has been
employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids.
CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this
Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all
CONTRACT CA-4 pwOS~cip~projects\pw92-12~prebid~bidpkg 073093
18.
19.
20.
21.
workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon
the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims o.utstanding against the
Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an
affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been
filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California.
SIGNATURE OF 'CONTRACTOR
COrPorations:
The signature must contain the name of the. corporation, must be signed by the President
and Secretary or Assistant Secretary, and the corporate seal must be affixed. Other
persons may sign for the corporation in lieu of the above if a certified copy of a resolution
of the corporate board of directors so authorizing them to do so is on file in the City Clerk's
office.
Partnerships:
The names of all persons comprising the partnership or co-partnership must be stated. The
bid must be signed by all partners comprising the partnership unless proof in the form of
a certified copy of a certificate of partnership acknowledging'the signer to be a general
partner is presented to the City Clerk, in which case the general partner may sign.
Joint Ventures:
Bids submitted as joint ventures must so state and be signed by each joint venturer.
Individuals:
Bids submitted by individuals must be signed by the bidder, unless an up-to-date power of
attorney is on file in the City Cierk's office, in which case said person may sign for the
individual.
The above rules also apply in the case of the use of a fictitious firm name. In addition,
however, where the fictitious name is used, it must be so indicated in the signature.
SUBSTITUTED SECURITY. In accordance with Section 22300 of the Public Contracts
Code, CONTRACTOR may substitute securities for any monies withheld by the CITY to
ensure performance under the Contract. At the request and expense of the CONTRACTOR,
securities equivalent to the amount withheld shall be deposited with the CITY or with a
State or Federally chartered bank or an escrow agent who shall pay such monies to the
CONTRACTOR upon notification by CITY of CONTRACTOR's satisfactory completion of the
Contract. The type of securities deposited and the method of release shall be approved by
the City Attorney's office.
RESOLUTION OF CLAIMS. Any dispute or claim arising out of this Contract shall be
arbitrated pursuant to Section 10240 of the California Public Contracts Code.
NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any
actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of
CONTRACT CA-5 pwOS\eip~projeets~pw92-12\prebid\bidpkg 073093
22.
23.
24.
25.
the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant
information with respect thereto, to CITY.
BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records, and plans or such part thereof
as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be
subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY.
UTILITY LOCATION. CITY acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility
facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215.
REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. CONTRACTOR agrees to contact the appropriate
regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4216.2.
TRENCH PROTECTION AND EXCAVATION. CONTRACTOR shall submit its detailed plan
for worker protection during the excavation of trenches required by the scope of the work
in accordance with Labor Code Section 6705.
CONTRACTOR shall, without disturbing the condition, notify CITY in writing as soon
as CONTRACTOR, or any of CONTRACTOR's subcontractors, agents, or employees
have knowledge and reporting is possible, of the discovery of any of the following
conditions:
The presence of any material that the CONTRACTOR believes is hazardous
waste, as defined in Section 25117 of the Health and Safety Code;
ii.
Subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site differing from those
indicated in the specifications; or
iii.
Unknown physical conditions at the site of any unusual nature, different
materially for those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as
inherent in work of the character provided for in this Contract.
Pending a determination by the CITY of appropriate action to be taken,
CONTRACTOR shall provide security measures (e.g., fences) adequate to prevent
the hazardous waste or physical conditions from causing bodily injury to any person.
CITY shall promptly investigate the reported conditions. If CITY, through, and in the
exercise of its sole discretion, determines that the conditions do materially differ, or
do involve hazardous waste, and will cause a decrease or increase in the
CONTRACTOR's cost of, or time required for, performance of any part of the work,
then CITY shall issue a change order.
In the event of a dispute between CITY and CONTRACTOR as to whether the
conditions materially differ, or involve hazardous waste, or cause a decrease or
increase in the CONTRACTOR's cost of, or time required for, performance of any
part of the work, CONTRACTOR shall not be excused from any scheduled
completion date, and shall proceed with all work to be performed under the contract.
CONTRACTOR shall retain any and all rights which pertain to the resolution of
disputes and protests between the parties.
CONTRACT CA-6 pwOS~cip\projects\pw92-12\prebid~bidpkg 073093
26.
INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its
authorized representatives during manufacture and construction and all other times and
places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers.
CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and
convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as
to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance
notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be
made within a reasonable time after completion of the work.
27.
DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not,
discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin,
color, sex, age, or handicap. "
28.
29.
GOVERNING LAW. This Contract and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed by
the law of the State of California.
WRITTEN NOTICE. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract
Documents shall be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid,
directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, and
to the CITY addressed as follows:
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590-3606
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date
first above written.
DATED:
CONTRACTOR
By:
Print or type NAME
Print or type TITLE
DATED:
CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
J. Sal Mu~oz, Mayor
CONTRACT CA-7 pwO5%cip~projects%pw92-12\prebid~bidpkg 073093
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
CONTRACT CA-8 pwOS%cip%projects%pw92-12%prebid%bidpkg 073093
ITEM NO. 12
APPROVAl
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
Tim D. Serlet, Director of PUblic Works\City Engineer
September 14, 1993
Award of Contract for the Jefferson Avenue Storm Drain Improvements
at Winchester Road (Project PW93-01)
PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council:
1. Award a contract for the Jefferson Avenue Storm Drain Improvements, Project No.
PW93-01, to Accurate Construction Inc. for $61,084.55, and authorize the Mayor to
execute the contract and;
2. Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the contingency
amount of $6,108.46, which is equal to 10% of the contract amount.
BACKGROUND:
On July 13, 1993, the City Council approved the construction plans and specifications, end
authorized the Department of Public Works to solicit public construction bids. The project
includes installation of underground storm drain pipes to convey water across the east side
of the Jefferson/Winchester intersection to reduce the flooding during storm periods. The
engineer's estimate for this project is $50,000.
Four bids for the project were publicly opened on August 26, 1993. The bids received were
as follows:
1. Accurate Construction Inc ............. $61,084.55
2. B.K. Baker Co ..................... $64,547.00
3. Kershaw Construction Co. Inc .......... $64,770.00
4. Genesis Construction ................ $83,645.00
-1 - pwO4%agdrpt%93%0914%pw93-01 .awd 0902
The bid amounts listed provide for all work listed in the base bid including performing all storm
drain work at night excluding the remedial paving since batch plants will not remain open at
night for such a small quantity of asphalt. The bid amount is slightly higher than the amount
estimated by the engineer due to most of the work being performed at night.
Accurate Construction has not performed any work for the City but has performed well in
other areas of southern California based on comments from references of previous work.
The construction schedule is for 30 working days, with work expected to begin at the end of
September and be completed in mid November.
A copy of the bid summary is available for review in the City Engineer's office.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This project is a Capital Improvement Project and is being funded from Measure A. The total
project amount of $67,193.01 includes the contract amount of $61,084.55 plus the 10%
contingency of $6,108.46. This amount will be transferred from the Measure A account to
the Capital Project fund and appropriated in account number 210-165-630-5804.
-2- pwO4\agdrpt~93~0914\pw93-01 .awd 0902
CITY OF TEMECULA, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CONTRACT
FOR
PROJECT NO. PW93-O 1
JEFFERSON AVENUE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS
A T WINCHESTER ROAD
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into the day of ,19 , by
and between the City of Temecula, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and
· hereinafter referred to as "CONTRACTOR."
WITNESSETH:
That CITY and CONTRACTOR, for the consideration hereinafter named, mutually agree as
follows:
1.8.
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The complete Contract includes all of the Contract Documents,
to wit: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Proposal, Performance Bond, Labor and
Materials Bond, Plans and Specifications entitled PROJECT NO. PW93-01, Insurance Forms,
this Contract, and all modifications and amendments thereto, the State of California
Department of Transportation Standard Specifications (1992 Ed.) where specifically
references in the Plans and .Specifications, and the latest version of the Standard
Specifications for Public Works Construction, including all supplements as written and
promulgated by the Joint Cooperative Committee of the Southern California Chapter of the
American Associated General Contractors of California (hereinafter, "Standard
Specifications") as amended by the General Specifications, and Special Provisions, for
PROJECT NO. PW93-01. Copies of these Standard Specifications are available from the
publisher:
Building News, Incorporated
3055 Overland Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90034
(213) 202-7775
The Standard Specifications will COntrol the general provisions, construction materials, and
construction methods for this Contract except as amended by the Plans and Specifications
of this Contract.
In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and the other Contract Documents,
the other Contract Documents shall take precedence over and be used in lieu of such
conflicting portions.
Where the Plans or Specifications describe portions of the work in general terms, but not
in complete detail, it is understood that the item is to be furnished and installed completed
and in place and that only the best general practice is to be used. Unless otherwise
CONTRACT CA-1 pwO5%cip%,orojects%pw93-01%bidpkg Rev: 07-07-93
e
specified, the CONTRACTOR shall furnish all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and--,
incidentals, and do all the work involved in executing the Contract.
The Contract Documents are complementary, and what is called for by anyone shall be as
binding as if called for by all. Any conflict between this Contract and any other Contract
Document shall be resolved in favor of this Contract.
SCOPE OF WORK. CONTRACTOR shall perform everything required to be performed, shall
provide and furnish all the labor, materials, necessary tools, expendable equipment, and all
utility and transportation services required for the following:
PROJECT NO. PW93-01
JEFFERSON AVENUE STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS
AT WINCHESTER ROAD
All of said work to be performed and materials to be furnished shall be in strict accordance
with the Drawings and Specifications and the provisions of the Contract Documents
hereinabove enumerated and adopted by CITY.
CITY APPROVAL. All labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished
and work performed and completed under the direction and supervision and subject to the
approval of CITY or its authorized representatives.
CONTRACT AMOUNT AND SCHEDULE. CITY agrees to pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to
accept in full payment for the work above-agreed to be done, the sum of: Sixty-one
thousand and eighty-four DOLLARS and fifty-five CENTS ($61,01M.55), the total amount
of the base bid.
CONTRACTOR agrees to complete the work in a period not to exceed thirty (30) working
days, commencing with delivery of Notice to Proceed by CITY. Construction shall not
commence until bonds and insurance are approved by CITY.
CHANGE ORDERS. All change orders shall be approved by the City Council, except that
the City Manager is hereby authorized by the City Council to make, by written order,
changes or additions to the work in an amount not to exceed the contingency as
established by the City Council.
PAYMENTS. On or about the thirtieth (30th) day of the month next following the
commencement of the work, there shall be paid to the CONTRACTOR a sum equal to
ninety percent (90%) of the value of the work completed since the commencement of the
work. Thereafter, on or about the thirtieth (30th) day of each successive month as the
work progresses, the CONTRACTOR shall be paid such sum as will bring the payments
each month up to ninety percent (90%) of the previous payments, provided that the
CONTRACTOR submits his request for payment prior to the last day of each preceding
month. The final payment, if unencumbered, or any part thereof unencumbered, shall be
made sixty (60) days after CITY acceptance of the work and the CONTRACTOR filing a
one-year warranty with the CITY on a warranty form provided by the CITY. Payments shall
be made on demands drawn int he manner required by law, accompanied by a certificate
signed by the City Manager, stating that the work for which payment is demanded has
been performed in accordance with the terms of the Contract, and that the amount stated
CONTRACT CA-2 pwOS~cip~projects~pw93-Ol~bidpkg Rev: O7-07-93
in the certificate is due under the terms of the Contract. Partial payments \on the Contract
price shall not be considered as an acceptance of any part of the work.
WARRANTY RETENTION. Commencing with the date the Notice of Completion is
recorded, the CITY shall retain a portion of the Contract award price, to assure warranty
performance and correction of construction deficiencies according to the following
schedule:
CONTRACT AMOUNT
$25,000- $75,000
$75,000- $500,000
Over$500,000
RETENTION PERIOD RETENTION PERCENTAGE
180 days 3%
180 days 2%
One Year 1%
10.
Failure by the CONTRACTOR to take corrective action within twenty-four (24) hours after
personal or telephonic notice by the CITY on .items affecting use of facility, safety, or
deficiencies will result in the CITY taking whatever corrective action it deems necessary.
All costs resulting from such action by the CITY will be deducted from the retention. The
amount of retention provided for herein shall not be deemed a limitation upon the
responsibility of the CONTRACTOR to carry out the terms of the Contract Documents
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: EXTENSION OF TIME. In accordance with Government Code
Section 53069.85, CONTRACTOR agrees to forfeit and pay to CITY the sum of One
Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) per day for each calendar day completion is delayed beyond
the time allowed pursuant to Paragraph 4 of this Contract. Such sum shall be deducted
from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. Such sum shall be
deducted from any payments due to or to become due to CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR
will be granted an extension of time and will not be assessed liquidated damages for
unforeseeable delays beyond the control of and without the fault or negligence of the
CONTRACTOR including delays caused by CITY. CONTRACTOR is required to promptly
notify CITY of any such delay.
WAIVER OF CLAIMS. Unless a shorter time is specified elsewhere in this Contract, on or
before making final request for payment under Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR shall
submit to CITY, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Contract;
the acceptance by CONTRACTOR of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all
claims against CITY under or arising out of this Contract except those previously made in
writing and request for payment. CONTRACTOR shall be required to execute an affidavit,
release and indemnify agreement with each claim for payment.
PREVAILING WAGES. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the
State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem
wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft,
classification, or type of workman needed to execute this Contract, from the Director of
the Department of Industrial Relations. These rates are on file with the City Clerk. Copies
may be obtained at cost at the City Clerk's office of Temecula. CONTRACTOR shall post
a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates
CONTRACT CA-3 pwO5%cip~rojects%pw93-O1%bidpkg Rev: 07-O7-93
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
as a minimum. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1775,
1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1813 of the Labor Code.
Pursuant to the provisions of 1775 of the Labor Code, CONTRACTOR shall forfeit to the
CITY, as a penalty, the sum of $25.00 for each calendar day, or portion thereof, for each
laborer, worker, or mechanic employed, paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any
work done under this Contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of
the provisions of the Contract.
LIABILITY INSURANCE. CONTRACTOR, by executing this Agreement, hereby certifies:
"1 am aware of the provision of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which requires every-
employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or undertake self-
insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such
provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract."
TIME OF THE ESSENCE. Time is of the essence in this Contract.
INDEMNIFICATION. All work covered by this Contract done at the site of construction or
in preparing or delivering materials to the site shall be at the risk of CONTRACTOR alone.
CONTRACTOR agrees to save, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY, its officers,
employees, and agents, against any and all liability, injuries, or death of persons
(CONTRACTOR's employees included) and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly
out of the obligations herein undertaken or out of the operations conducted by
CONTRACTOR, save and except claims or litigations arising through the sole active
negligence or sole willful misconduct of the CITY.
CONTRACTOR'S INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION. No plea of ignorance of conditions that
exist or that may hereafter exist or of conditions of difficulties that may be encountered in
the execution of the work under this Contract, as a result of failure to make the necessary
independent examinations and investigations, and no plea of reliance on initial investigations
or reports prepared by CITY for purposes of letting this Contract out to bid will be accepted
as an excuse for any failure or omission on the part of the CONTRACTOR to fulfill in every
detail all requirements of this Contract. Nor will such reasons be accepted as a basis for
any claims whatsoever for extra compensation or for an extension of time.
GRATUITIES. CONTRACTOR warrants that neither it nor any of its employees, agents, or
representatives has offered or given any gratuities or promises to CITY's employees,
agents, or representatives with a view toward securing this Contract or securing favorable
treatment with respect thereto.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CONTRACTOR warrants that he has no blood or marriage
relationship, and that he is not in any way associated with any City officer or employee,
or any architect, engineer, or other puerperal of the Drawings and Specifications for this
project. CONTRACTOR further warrants that no person in his/her employ has been
employed by the CITY within one year of the date of the Notice Inviting Bids.
CONTRACTOR'S AFFIDAVIT. After the completion of the work contemplated by this
Contract, CONTRACTOR shall file with the City Manager his affidavit stating that all
workmen and persons employed, all firms supplying materials, and all subcontractors upon
CONTRACT CA-4 pwOS\cip~projects\pw93-O 1 \bidpkg Rev: 07-07-93
18.
19.
20.
21.
the Project have been paid in full, and that there are no claims outstanding against the
Project for either labor or materials, except certain items, if any, to be set forth in an
affidavit covering disputed claims or items in connection with a Stop Notice which has been
filed under the provisions of the laws of the State of California.
SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTOR
Corporations:
The signature must contain the name of the corporation, must be signed by the President
and Secretary or Assistant Secretary, and the corporate seal must be affixed. Other
persons may sign for the corporation in lieu of the above if a certified copy of a resolution
of the corporate board of directors so authorizing them to do so is on file in the City Clerk's
office.
Partnerships:
The names of all persons comprising the partnership or co-partnership must be stated. The
bid must be signed by all partners comprising the partnership unless proof in the form of
a certified copy of a certificate of partnership acknowledging the signer to be a general
partner is presented to the City Clerk, in which case the general partner may sign.
Joint Ventures:
Bids submitted as joint ventures must so state and be signed by each joint venturer.
Individuals:
Bids submitted by individuals must be signed by the bidder, unless an up-to-date power of
attorney is on file in the City Clerk's office, in which case said person may sign for the
individual.
The above rules also apply in the case of the use of a fictitious firm name. In addition,
however, Where the fictitious name is used, it must be so indicated in the signature.
SUBSTITUTED SECURITY. In accordance with Section 22300 of the Public Contracts
Code, CONTRACTOR may substitute securities for any monies withheld by the CITY to
ensure performance under the Contract. At the request and expense of the CONTRACTOR,
securities equivalent to the amount withheld shall be deposited with the CITY or with a
State or Federally chartered bank or an escrow agent who shall pay such monies to the
CONTRACTOR upon notification by CITY of CONTRACTOR's satisfactory completion of the
Contract. The type of securities deposited and the method of release shall be approved by
the City Attorney's office.
RESOLUTION OF CLAIMS. Any dispute or claim arising out of this Contract shall be
arbitrated pursuant to Section 10240 of the California Public Contracts Code.
NOTICE TO CITY OF LABOR DISPUTES. Whenever CONTRACTOR has knowledge that any
actual or potential labor dispute is delaying or threatens to delay the timely performance of
CONTRACT CA-5 pwOS\cip~projects~pw93-01 \bidpkg Rev: 07-07-93
22.
23.
24°
25.
the Contract, CONTRACTOR shall immediately give notice thereof, including all relevant
information with respect thereto, to CITY.
BOOKS AND RECORDS. CONTRACTOR's books, records,and plans or such part thereof
as may be engaged in the performance of this Contract, shall at all reasonable times be
subject to inspection and audit by any authorized representative of the CITY.
UTILITY LOCATION. CITY acknowledges its responsibilities with respect to locating utility
facilities pursuant to California Government Code Section 4215.
REGIONAL NOTIFICATION CENTERS. CONTRACTOR agrees to contact the appropriate
regional notification center in accordance with Government Code Section 4216.2.
TRENCH PROTECTION AND EXCAVATION. CONTRACTOR shall submit its detailed plan
for worker protection during the excavation of trenches required by the scope of the work
in accordance with Labor Code Section 6705.
CONTRACTOR shall, without disturbing the condition, notify CITY in writing as soon
as CONTRACTOR, or any of CONTRACTOR's subcontractors, agents, or employees
have knowledge and reporting is possible, of the discovery of any of the following
conditions:
ii.
The presence of any material that the CONTRACTOR believes is hazardous
waste, as defined in Section 25117 of the Health and Safety Code;
Subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site differing from those
indicated in the specifications; or
iii.
Unknown physical conditions at the site of any unusual nature, different
materially for those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as
inherent in work of the character provided for in this Contract.
Pending a determination by the' CITY of appropriate action to be taken,
CONTRACTOR shall provide security measures (e.g., fences) adequate to prevent
the hazardous waste or physical conditions from causing bodily injury to any person.
CITY shall promptly investigate the reported conditions. If CITY, through, and in the
exercise of its sole discretion, determines that the conditions do materially differ, or
do involve hazardous waste, and will cause a decrease or increase in the
CONTRACTOR's cost of, or time required for, performance of any part of the work,
then CITY shall issue a change order.
In the event of a dispute between CITY and CONTRACTOR as to whether the
conditions materially differ, or involve hazardous waste, or cause a decrease or
increase in the CONTRACTOR's cost of, or time required for, performance of any
part of the work, CONTRACTOR shall not be excused from any scheduled
completion date, and shall proceed with all work to be performed under the contract.
CONTRACTOR shall retain any and all rights which pertain to the resolution of
disputes and protests between the parties.
CONTRACT CA-6 pwOS\cip~projects~pw93-Ol~bidpkg Rev: 07-07-93
26.
INSPECTION. The work shall be subject to inspection and testing by CITY and its
authorized representatives during manufacture and construction end all other times and
places, including without limitation, the plans of CONTRACTOR and any of its suppliers.
CONTRACTOR shall provide all reasonable facilities and assistance for the safety and
convenience of inspectors. All inspections and tests shall be performed in such manner as
to not unduly delay the work. The work shall be subject to final inspection and acceptance
notwithstanding any payments or other prior inspections. Such final inspection shall be
made within a reasonable time after completion of the work.
27.
DISCRIMINATION. CONTRACTOR represents that it has not, and agrees that it will not,
discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of race, creed, religion, national origin,
color, sex, age, or handicap. "
28.
29.
GOVERNING LAW. This Contract and any, dispute arising hereunder shall be governed by
the law of the State of California.
WRITTEN NOTi'CE. Any written notice required to be given in any part of the Contract
Documents shall be performed by depositing the same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid,
directed to the address of the CONTRACTOR as set forth in the Contract Documents, and
to the CITY addressed as follows:
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590-3606
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Contract to be executed on the date
first above written.
DATED:
CONTRACTOR
By:
Print or type NAME
Print or type TITLE
DATED:
CITY OF TEMECULA
By:
J. Sal Mu~oz, Mayor
CONTRACT CA-7 pwOS\cip~projectB~pw93-O1~bidpkg Rev: 07-07-93
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Scott F. Field, City Attorney
ATTEST:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
CONTRACT CA-8 pwO5~eip~projects~pw93-O1~bidpkg Rev: 07-07-93
ITEM NO. 13
APPROVAl
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
/{~Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
September 14, 1993
Renewal of Annual Street Striping Contract FY 93-94
PREPARED BY: Brad Buron, Maintenance Superintendent
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council extend the Street Striping Contract with Orange County Striping and
Stenciling, Inc. for a period of one year (September 29, 1994) and authorize the Mayor to
execute the contract.
BACKGROUND:
At the regular City Gouncil meeting of September 8, 1992 the Street Striping and Stenciling
Contract for FY 92-93 was awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, Orange County Striping
and Stenciling, Inc. Four bids received from a total of ten bid packages sold.
The original contract contains provisions that allows the contract to be extended on a yearly
basis by mutual agreement of both parties for up to one year. Since the original contract was
executed, the City has hired a Lead Maintenance Worker and Maintenance Worker, and is in
the process of purchasing a stencil truck to perform all stencil work, red curb and new
installations of stencils in-house to eliminate this work specified in the original contract.
-1 - pwl 5%egdrpt~,93%0914%0914ehrd
Orange County Striping and Stenciling, Inc. has performed satisfactory work during the past
year and has responded efficiently in all emergency situations during FY 92-93. Orange
County Striping and Stenciling provided maintenance services and new installations to the City
for a total cost of $136,442 for FY 92-93. The total cost of service was allocated as follows:
New and Repainted Striping
Sand Blasting
New and Repainted Legends
687,1 O0 Lineal Feet
34,860 Lineal Feet
1,560 Each
TOTAL COST FOR FY 92-93
$136,442
Representatives of the Public Works Department have met with representatives of Orange
County Striping and Stenciling, Inc. and have mutually agreed that all of the unit prices for
striping that were effective in FY 92-93 will remain in effect with no unit price increases in
FY 93-94.
The Public Works Department is satisfied with the work performance of Orange County
Striping and Stenciling, Inc. and recommends that the City Council extend the Street Striping
Contract for one year.
FISCAL IMPACT
The budget for FY 93-94 has adequate funds in account #5410 available to stripe the
following estimated quantities this year.
Descriotion Lineal Feet Cost Total
4" Broken Lines
4" Solid Line
4" (Two) Double Solid
8" Solid Lines
6" White Solid Line
6" White Dashed Lane
One-Way Barrier
Two-Way Left Turn Lane
150,000 $ .045 $ 6,750
100,000 .055 5,500
62,500 .125 7,812'
30,000 .095 2,850
100,000 .06 6,000
10,000 .06 600
6,000 .12 720
63,000 .12 7.56(;)
TOTAL $37,792
Attachment: Correspondence from Orange County Striping and Stenciling, Inc.
-2- pwl 5~agdrpt~93~O914%0914a.brd
ORANGE COUNTY STRIPING SERVICE, INC.
183 N. PIXLEY STREET
ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92668
(714) 639-4550
FAX 639-6353
License # 346095
AUGUST 9, 1993
BRAD BURON
CITY OF TEMECULA
43174 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE
TEMECULA, CALIF. 92590
RECEIVED
AUG 1 Z 1993
CITY OF TEMECULA
ENGINEE~;r.'-.
RE: ANNUAL RESTRIPING MAINTENANCE CONTRACT
DEAR BRAD,
VEN DURING THESE TOUGH ECONOMIC TIMES AND THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY
CRUNCH, WE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE TIME TO THANK YOU FOR THE SUCCESSFUL
WORKING RELATIONSHIP WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MAINTAIN BETWEEN ORANGE COUNTY
-STRIPING AND THE CITY OF TEMECULA.
WITH THIS IN MIND, WE FEEL THAT IT'S POSSIBLE TO OFFER OUR SERVICES TO YOU
FOR ANOTHER YEAR AT THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT PRICES, WITHOUT ANY INCREASES.
WE HOPE THAT THIS WILL HELP WITH YOUR DECISION ALLOWING US THE OPPORTUNITY
TO CONTINUE SERVING THE CITY'S STRIPING NEEDS FOR AN ADDITIONAL YEAR.
THANK YOU AGAIN.
SINCERELY,
CHUCK LOCKWOOD
PROJECT MANAGER
CL/mb
ITEM NO. 14
APPROVAL ~~_
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER _
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
September 14, 1993
Completion and Acceptance of Margarita Road Interim Improvements
Project No. PW92-04
PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council accept the street improvements on Margarita Road from Winchester
Road to Solana Way, Project No. PW92-05, as complete and direct the City Clerk to:
File the Notice of Completion, release the Performance Bond, end accept a six
(6) month Maintenance Bond in the amount of 10% of the contract, and
Release the Materials and Labor Bond seven (7) months after the filing of the
Notice of Completion if no liens have been filed.
BACKGROUND:
On August 25, 199'2, the City Council awarded a contract for the interim street improvements
on Margarita Road from Winchester Rd. to Solona Way, Project No. PW92-04 to R. J. Noble
Company· The Contractor has completed the work for the construction of the interim 2 lane
improvements on Margarita Rd. from Solana Way to Winchester Rd. including the realinement
of North General Kearney and storm drain improvements. All the improvements were
performed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and completed within the
allotted contract time.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The contract amount for this project was $511,500 with a contingency of $51,150.
The project was constructed within the contract amount plus contingency and the four
approved contract change orders for a total contract amount of $659,337.75. The City will
be repaid from RDA bond proceeds for those improvements on Margarita Rd. from Winchester'
Rd. to North General Kearney.
pwO4~agdrpt~93~0914~pw92-O4.ecc 0902
FIrCORDING REQUESTED BY
AND RETURN TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF TEMECULA
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
SPACE ABOVE THIS UNE FOR
RECORDER'S USE
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
1. The City of Temecula is the owner of the property hereinafter described.
2. The full address of the City of Temecula is 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula,
California 92590.
3. A Contract was awarded by the City of Temecula to R.J. NOBLE COMPANY to
perform the following work of improvement: PW92-04 MABGARITA ROAD INTERIM IMPROVEMENTS.
4. Said work was completed by said company according to plans and specifications and
to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works of the City of Temecula and that said work was
accepted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof held on September
24, 1993. That upon said contract the FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY was surety for the bond
given by the said company as required by law.
5. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of
Temecula, County of Riverside, State of California, and is described as follows: PROJECT PW92-04.
6. The street address of said property is:' INTERSECTION OF MARGARITA ROAD AND
NORTH GENERAL KEARNEY.
Dated at Temecula, California, this __ day of
,1993.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
CITY OF TEMECULA )
SS
JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, California and do hereby certify under penalty of
perjury, that the foregoing NOTICE OF COMPLETION is true and correct, and that said NOTICE OF
COMPLETION was duly and regularly ordered to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of
Riverside by said City Council.
Dated at Temecula, California, this day of
· 1993.
JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk
FonadC[P-001 P, ev. 12-5-91 pwO4\cip\projects\pw92-O4%completn.not 091493
CHUBB GROUP OF INSURANCE COMPANIES
r'~v Jersey nT~e'
FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
MAINTENANCE BOND
Bond No. 8133-7/4.-37
Amount $655, z+98.70
That we, R.J.
Know All Men By These Presents,
NOBLE C01~A_t~Z
(hereinafter called the Principal),
as Principal, and the FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Warren, New Jersey, a corporation duly organized under
the' laws of the State of Indiana, (hereinafter called the Surety), as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto
CITY OF TEMECULA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
(hereinafter called the Obligee),
jr. sum of SIX HUNDRED FIFTY-FIVE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED NINETY-EIGHT TMOUSAND/Dg~O0
($ e~55,498.70 - - -), for the payment of which we~ the said Principal and the said Surety, bind ourselves, our
heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
Sealed with our seals and dated this
A.D nineteen hundred and 93
6th day of AUGUST
WHEREAS, the said Principal has heretofore entered into a contract with said Obligee dated
19 93, for MARGARITA ROAD INTERIM IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT PW92-O4
AUGUST 31,
; and
WHEREAS, the said Principal is required to guarantee the
installed under said contract. against defects in materials or workmanship, which may develop during the period
Form 1S-02-0075 (nev tbg0) (Over) I~RINTED
IN
UeA
NOVV, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if the Principal shall faithfully carry
out and perform the said guarantee, and shall, on due notice, rapair and make good at its own expense any and
all defects in materials or workmanship in the said work which may develop during the period
or shall pay over, make good and reimburse to the said Obligee all loss and damage which said Obligee may sus-
tain by reason of failure or default of said Principal so to do, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise
shall remain in full force and effect.
R.J. NOBLE CON2ANY
~_~ r~,~,ncipal
By: ~~
PAUL H. CLE PRESIDENT
FEDER,,L INSU CE MPANY
By: 'E '- '-
I'3HAE D G ATT N ~ IN FACT
["] Admowledgmsnt of Principal
~ Aeimowl~lgm~nt of Surety (Attorney-in-Fact)
STATE OF C,aLmORNXA
Co~ty of RIVERSIDE
On AUGUST 6,1993 befo~em,
(here insert nine and title of the officer). persona3ly appes2td
ROSEMARY STANDLEY
MICHAEL D. STONG
personsfly know to me (or proved to me on the buis of uatisfactor7 evidence) to be the pemon(s) whose tume(si
is/are subscribed to the within instnunent and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the stone in hid
her/their authori--ed capacity(ies), &ud that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the
entity uuon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instn2ment,
WITNESS my hL, td erRclad seal
Si[nature - (Seal)
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDOMENT
State of CALIFORNIA
County of OP~NGE
On 8/6/95 before me, M. A. GROSKOPF
,
DATE NAME, TTTLEOFOIqqCEFI-E.G.,'JN~EDGE. NOTARYPUBUC'
'~' PAUL H. CLEARY, JR., PRESIDENT OF
~X]C3 personaXy known to me - OR - [] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence
to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/ars
subscribed to the w~hin instrument and ac-
knowledged to me that he/she/they executed
the same in his/her/their authorized
No.
m OPTJONAL SECTION m
CAPACrrY CLNMED BY SIGNER
Th°ugh/mumd°m'mmquimmoN°lerYt°
~ll ln the data below, cloing~me/Imwe
invakmUletopemonereJyingonte__,~__-Mm.
[] INDIVIDUAL
E~3RPORATE OFFICER(S)
[] PARTNER(S) [] UMITED
[] GENERAL
[] ATTORNEY-IN-FACT
[] TRUSTEE(S)
[] GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
, pacity(ies), and that by his/her/their [] OTHER:
ii M.A. GROSKOPF nature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
,- COMM. 1986488 t~~rsoe entity upon behalf of which the
Notary Public - Calilornien(s) acted, executed the instrument.
ORANGE COUNTY -' SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
My Cornre. Exp. Apt. 21,199//ITNESSmy hand and official seal. .,ME OF PE,SO.~ O, ENTnYC~S~
.~~" PAUL H. CLEARY, JR.
T},,,/~/~,_./.' -"- FKhblUPN 1
OPTIONA TENANCE BOND
THIS CERTIFICATE MUST BE ATTACHED TO TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
THE DOCUMENT DESCRIBED AT RIGHT:
NUMBER OF PAGES 2 DATE OF DOCUMENT
Though the data requested*hem is not require0 by law,
I V
it couk:l prevent fraudulent resttachment Of mis form. S GNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABe E
Olgg2 NA~AL NOTARY ASSOCIATION · 8236 I~ Ave., P.O. Box 7184 · C~ Pad~ CA 91308.,7184
POWER OF ATTORNEY
Know all Men by thele Prellntl, That the FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, 15 Mountain View Rome, Warren, New Jersey, an It. dana Corpora*
don, has constituted and appointed, and does hereby constitute and appoint Michael D. Scone, Macheal A. Quigley and Sheri L.
:hilcoat of Riverside, California-
each its true and lawful Attorney·n-Fact to execute under such designation in its name and to affix its corporate seal to and deliver for and on its behalf as, .y
:herdon or otherwise, bonds of any of the tollowing classes. to-wit:
1. Bonds and Undertakings (other than Boil Bonds) filed in any suit, matter or proceeding in any Court. or filed with any Sheriff or Magistrate, for the doing
or not doing of anything specified in such Bond or Undertaking.
2. Surety bonds to the United Sties of America or any agency thereof, including those required or permitted under the laws or regulations ralatin.g. to Customs
or Internal Revenue; License and Permit Bonds or other indemnity bonds under the laws. ordinances or regulations of any State, City. Town, Vdlage, Board
or other body or organization. punic or private; bonds to Transportation Companies, Lost Instrument bonds; Lease bonds. VVorkers' Compensation bonds,
Miscellaneous Surety bonds and bom~ on pehaff of Notaries Public, Sherifffi, Deputy Sheriffs and similar public officials.
3. Bonds on behalf of coreractors in connection with bids, proposals or contact·.
o=,he~o,,.,~,,, 17th .eof August m92
:orporam i '
/eNeemlL~ ~ VleeleVleele~ /
;TAI~ Olt NEW JEaIEY
:ounty of Somerset
~~~feeffiI'
; TATE~~
SS.
Aclu~Uedgld end Seem to belofe me
No.
Commission IFxoires Oc&ober
;ounty of Somerset
L me unaers;gne~. Asmstant Secretary of the FEDERAL iNIURANCE COMPANY. be I~ cerldy the the tollederie m · true ee::eq~ ~ thl 8y-Llwl Of the
n MarCh 2. 1990 end that thms 8y-Llw ~ in furl tome and
"ARTICLE XVIII.
Secuo~ 2. All ~s. undertamng$. CONrlCts end Olhe~ inltrumentl mr than IIm Ira' Ind mt bahill Of ,re Cornpiny which it il luth~eld By Ilw Or itl Charter to
~n the name and On I)ehalf Of the Comolny e,ther I~/the Chilrmin or the Vice Chadman or rne Proemant or a Vte Pmm4:lem, jointly with the Secretary or an
designations. excef)t that any one or more Oftm or Iltl~mtlcl ~e~gnlte(I ;n Iny reiNdim of N BOIRI of ~ or ~e Executrve Co~ or in Nty power
for :n Secl:on 3 IDatow. may execute any such IIX)~I, unbelieving or Offier olden II pmvtON:l m ~ felo4utm or.power of
~3 N~p~ve~Of~t~rneytof~nd~n~)e~.~N~the~t~y~n~N1N~;e~cui~mt~ten~t~1de1~3it~fOfNC~g~ny~eit~1et~M~11t~norNVceCn~ewt~n~r~hePf~or~VmF~it~e1~
~ranAssm~ntVece~res~ent~n~yw~th~heSecre~ryoran*%~Sec~ry~ndert~e~re~)~N~i~gn~cn~LT~t~g~1~umOf~gOf1~¢ef`mmeyee~pnnt~Qor~i~hoBr~D~t~(~The~ga~tmOf~eh
Of the k)41owmg officePl: Chlmrmin. Vte CNunltln.
Pow~anomeyormoanyc~nffmnm4mmngtheretolZlx)mritmngAimllmnlSicml~NmorNl.vneyt
s:gnmure and tacitre,Is leal sn all I~e vale and andtrig upon fits Coml)lny whh telpact to any ~ or uf~lellkmg to which it m Inlcne~."
Ltheunaermgne¢~/~emmantSecmtwyOfFE~)ERA~N~URANcEcoi~NkNY~hem~;"/cOr1ey~ha~tefm1~amgP~wefOfA~tomey~m~uit~e=ean(~Of~ct.
Gmvanur~ermyhen(landtheleNOfll~lCompin,/ifqNirren, NJ..thm
6th
AUGUST .,s 93
Iqq~NO
USA
ITEM NO.
15
APPROVAT.
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
'AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council/City Manager
/l'~im D. $erlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
September 14, 1993
Contract Amendment No. 4 to Community Facilities District 88-12
Engineering Services Contract with J.F. Davidson Associates, Inc.
PREPARED BY: Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council approve Contract Amendment No. 4 to provide additional engineering
services for CFD 88-12 by J.F. Davidson Associates, Inc. in the amount of $32,676.00.
BACKGROUND:
The additional costs detailed in the following section were arrived at during the design
coordination process with several of the property owners within the District, utility companies
serving the District, and Caltrans.
Advance Planning Studies and Falsework Designs
The advent of new Caltrans requirement to include Advance Planning studies to
determine the type of bridge and the corresponding falsework designs for all three
projects within the Project Report. Under previous Caltrans procedures, Advance
Planning Studies were not required within Project Reports. In addition, falsework
designs were also not required to gain approval of the Project Report.
Proposed Additional Cost
$10,976.00
-1 - pw05%agdrpt%93%0914'~CFD88-12.Ad4 090793
II.
Addition of Temporary Lanes to I-15 at Overland
The additional design of temporary pavement within 1-15 to accommodate the
construction of Overland Drive due to changes in the falsework clearances just recently
required by Caltrans.
Original requirement allowed for e 14'-6" clearance which was designed for during the
Project Study Report. This was a critical control since the gradient along Overland as
it approached Jefferson Avenue was a great concern to Caltrans. This concern created
a long delay in graining approval of the PSRo
The current standards now require a 15'-0" minimum clearance. Given that the
gradients on Overland Drive are static, and that Caltrans is requiring that 4-lanes of
traffic be maintained on I-15 at all times, additional temporary pavement will be
required along I-15 to direct traffic away form the critical clearance area at Overland.
This event will create the need for us to add new sheets to the PS & E package to
provide for proper traffic controls in constructing this temporary pavement area
through the construction zone. This will also add to our effort in the areas of adding
information to layout plans, pavement delineation plans, typical sections, quantities,
and specification additions. (Additional two sheets)
Proposed Additional Cost
$9,320.00
III.
Ynez Road Sewer Extensions
The need for extensions of various sewers to serve various undeveloped properties has
been presented. This sewer design work and the subsequent installation will do away
with installing sewer extensions and laterals after Ynez Road improvements are
completed.
The sewer extensions are approximately as follows:
1. 8-inch Sta. 64 + 50 to Sta. 69 + 00
2. 8-inch Sta. 74+70 to Sta. 87+10
3. 15-inch Sta. 101 + 00 to' Sta 110 + 00
All work is to be coordinated with Eastern Municipal water district (E.M.W.D.)
E.M.W.D. has expressed their desire to expedite the Plan Review process and
subsequent bidding and installation.
A construction cost proposal will be requested from the Contractor for these sewer
improvements. The cost will be recovered from the individual property owners.
Proposed Additional Cost $12,380.00
-2- pwOS~gclrpt~,93~0914%CFD88-12.Ad4 090793
FISCAL IMPACT:
All of the above costs are eligible for funding through Community Facilities District 88-12.
Adequate funds have been reserved within budget of the District. The total cost of this
element of the project is summarized below:
A. Original Contract (Approved 12-18-90) ~431,275.00
B. Amendment No. I (Approved 8-27-91) e56,100.00
C. Amendment No. '2 (Approved 6-23-92) ~ 53,434.00
D. Amendment No. 3 (Approved 2-9-93) el 7,151.00
E. Proposed Amendment No. 4 ~3~.676.00
Total $590,636.00
-3- pw05%egdrpt~93%O914%CFD88-12.Ad4 090793
ITEM 16
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY ~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
September 14, 1993
Substitution of Improvement Bonds in Tract No. 23267-4
PREPARED BY: 4~ Albert K. Crisp, Permit Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council accept substitute Surety Bonds for the improvement of streets,
drainage, sewer and water systems, survey monuments, and for Labor and Materials as
substitutes for bonds submitted to City Council on December 10, 1991, for Final Revised
Vesting Tract No. 23267-4 and to direct the City Clerk to release the original bonds.
BACKGROUND:
On December 10, 1991, the City Council approved Revised Final Vesting Tract Map No.
23267-4 and entered into subdivision agreements with:
The Presley Companies
15010 Avenue of Science, Suite 201
San Diego, CA 92128
for the improvement of streets, drainage, and sewer and water systems, and survey
monuments, and Labor and Material securities.
The bonds on file were furnished by American Motorists Insurance Company; the substituted
bonds are furnished by The American Insurance Company.
Faithful Performance
Amount Original Bond Substitute Bond
Streets/Drainage
Water System
Sewer System
TOTAL:
$327,000
130,500
76,500
$534,000
3SM77256500
3SM77256500
3SM77256500
111 2720 2809
111 2720 2809
111 2720 2809
Survey Monuments
$ 11,650 3SM77256600 111 2716 9941
1 ~egdrpt~93~0914~23267-4
Labor &Materials Amount Original Bond Substitute Bond
Streets/Drainage $163,500 3SM77256500 111 2720 2809
Water System 65,100 ' 3SM77256500 111 2720 2809
Sewer System 38,100 3SM77256500 111 2720 2809
TOTAL: $266,700
While the streets and related improvements are not being accepted at this time, the streets
within the subdivision are Via Poquito, and a portion of Avenida De Missions, Corte Veranos,
and Calla Los Padres.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None
Attachments:
Vicinity Map
Substitute Surety Bonds
2 %agdrpt~93%0914%23267-4
'T,40'
~~ 1'1'
STATE _/HIGHWAY 79 __
· 5 e~~<, ~ 'DGG 0'7 OS
~ ~ I 3,~ . e
TEMECULA C, EEEIC -
VICINITY
N.T.S.
MAP
Bond No. Ill 2720 2809
Premium $4,806.00
CI'I~ OF
SU~DrgT. SION F3.~ls~ I~RI~RN3~C~ BOND
WHEREAS, ~hs City of Tamsouls, S~a~e of California,
and The Preslev Companies (hereinafter designated as
'Principal') have en~ermd into' an agreement whereby
Principal agrees to' install and complete cemin designated
public improvements, which said agreement,
dated le__, and iden~ified as
Project Tract 23267-4 , is hel~tby 'referred tu
and made a par= hereof~ and "
~/S, Principal is required under ~he terms of
~he agreement to furnish a bond for the Fai~hfu/Performance
of =he aqreemen~
NOW, THEREFORE, we ~he Principal and The American Insurance
Company
as sure=F, are held end ~irml~ bound url. t~ =he City of
Ternsouls, California, in the penal sum of $534,000.00---
lawful m~ney of =he United States, for the payment of such
sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs,
successors, executors and adminisT_Tators, JoinC!y and
severally.
The condition of this obliqa~ion is suc~. =hat ~h~
oblige=ion sAall become null and void if =he above-~ounded
Principal, his or its hears, executors, administrators,
successors, or assigns, shall in all things s~:and to, abide
by, well and truly keep, and perform the asvermnts,
condi~ions, and pravisione in ~,he aqreemen~ and arry
a~era~ion ~hereo~ made as ~herein provided, on b~s or ~2eir
pa~c, to be kmp~ and performed a~ ~he ~ime and in ~he manner
therein specified, and in all respects a~cordlne ~ his or
their ~rue in~en= and meaning, an~ shall indemnify and save
harmless =he Cit~ of Tamecuba, its officers, agents, and
employees, as ~hersin s~ipula=ed7 otherwise~ this obliga~ion
shall be and remain in full force and effect.
As a par= of the obligation secured hereby and in
addition to the face amoun~ specified ~herefor, =here shall
be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees,
including reasonable a=torney's fees, in~Lrrsd by City in
successfully enforcing such obliga~ion, all =o be =axed as
costs and included in shy Judgment rendermi.
The surety here~y stipulates and tgrses that no
change, extension of time, al=erm~ion or addition to the
terms of =he agreement or to ~he work =o be per=ormed
~hereunder or the specifications accompanying ~he same shall
in anyway affect its oblige=ions ~n Tails ~nd, and i= does
hereby waive no=ice of an~ such change, extension of time,
alteration or addition to =he terms of =he agreement or Uo
Jec/BND10615
-2-
On Deceml~er 4th · D 92 ,
(Seal)
SURETY The American Insurance
Company
Victoria H. CamDbe~
A=tornev-In-Fact
(Title)
I~tDICZ3~AL The-Presley Companies
(NaBs}
(Tit. Is)
(Tt=le|
SCOTT F. YIELD
cit7 A=Corney
jec/BNDIO61S
-3-
ATTORNEy IN FACT ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~ ~".
Cmly ef ORANG~ m.
On this 4th amy of December in the yur- 1992
OP, JkNGE ' . before me. a Noilry Public in and for said
_County, Slate of C.~liforul~ residiaI therein, duly comalLt$ioaed and sworn. PersotmJly
appeared VICTOR.IA M. C~MPR~..T.T. ~]immamm~Ykmmmmmma, r']ptmmim~m~mfimbmim~f_~.fw_~.:~
to he the p~rmon who~ mm~ is subscribed to this instrument ms th~ mitoru~y in fiu:t of T~I~. AMi~T~AN TNRIr~AWY~. ~r~!WPAN~
and acknow|mi$'-q3i to m~ that r'{ he [~ dme sub$cribmd the name of ~ AM'~'~Tr'IM T~']~'~(~' ~C)lw~,~ thei~iom$
surly, and ['] hb ~ her own nmm~ as attorney in fact.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto se( my hand and affixed my official mml, the day and y~m' mated in this certiikaie above.
PR~OI:FIC~ IN ~
~'lelaallallllllllllllalllllellllllalal:
Notary Public
My cornsissies expires
STATE OF CALIFORNIA } SS.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO }
Public in and for said Site, personlily appeared Ga;. {d P, Ilevlm...-- and John
H. Nabore, Jr.. personally known to me (or proved on me basis of antim'acton/
evidence) to be the persons who executed the ~thm instrument as ~
Pe,,;~L. nt. and Vice President on behalf of the corporation therein named and
ackno~edged to me that such corporation executed the within instrument pursuant
to its bylaws or a resolution of its Boan:t of Directors.
IN WITNESS THEREOF. I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal,
in and for said County and Site. the day and year first above wntten.
Signature ' )//~/ ~,:' · ~__~~
My commission e}~;ms~6/94 U=
FOR NOTARIAL STAMP
Bond No. 111 2720 2809
Premium included in Performance
Bond
WHERAS, Re Cit7 of Teaecula, S~ate of California,
and The Presley Companies (hertJ~af~er desiqnated as
wPrincipalw~ have enter~ ~to an a~e~ ~er~
~incipal agees ~o install a~ ~le~e ~min deei~aCed
p~ltc ~p~ets, ~i~ said
Trac~ 23267-~ ~ is ~rey re~e~ed tc and
~de a ~ her~f; and
~~, under ~e tens of ~id a~eeen=,
Prinuipal is re~ir~ bef~e enE~ upon ~e ~rfomnce
or =he work, to file a g~ ~ suffiu~en~ ~n= ~d wi~
~e Ci=y of Temecula, =o s~n ~e claims ~o ~ich
reference is ~de in T~le 15 (c~cing wi~ Section 3082)
of Pa~ 4 of D~visi~ 3 of ~e Civil C~e o~ ~e Sta=e of
California~ and
NOW, ~FO~, we ~e Principal and The ~erican Insurance
· Compan7
as Surety, ~e held and f~y b~d
Temecula, ~lifo~ia, a~ all con~nc~ors, s~con=ra~rs,
· laborers, ~eria!~n, ~d o~er ~rmons
per~c~nce o~ ~e afore~id a~eemet and
Title 15 of ~e Civil C~e, ~ ~e penal su o~ ~ 266,700.00-
lawful money of ~e Un~t~ States, =or ~erials f~ish~
or labor VJlereon of azTy ~t,~d, or for amounts due ~der
Un~lo~en~ I~ance ~ wi~ ~ep~ to su~ work or
l~or, ~a~ su~ty will ~y ~ sm in an ~= n~
exce~g ~e amo~ ee~
~ a ~ of ~e o~ligation seared hereby and
addition =o ~e face a~un= a~cified ~erefor, ~ere shall
be incl~ed cos~s a~ reaeon~le ~e~e ~d fees,
includinq reason~le a~=omeF's fees, in~ed ~y City in
successf~l~ enfo~ing su~ ~li~i~, all to ~ ~axed as
cos~s ~d includ~ ~ any Jud~ ren~r~.
I= is her~ e~esly s~ipulat~ ~ agreed ~a~
~is bond shall inure =o ~e benefit of ~ ~d all persons,
c~panies a~ contagions en=i=l~ =o file cla~ ~der
Title 15 (c~e~in~ wi~ Se~ion 3082) of P~ 4 of
Division 3 of ~e Civil C~e, so as =o give a right of
action =o ~ or =heir assi~s ~ an~ s~t brought upon
~is bond.
If ~e condition of ~is bond is f~ly ~r=omed,
~en ~ls o~liga=lon s~all ~c~e null and void; o~e~ise,
l= shall be ~d r~ in f~ll force
~e Surt~ her2y s=l~at~ ~d agrees ~a= no
chugs, ~snsion of time, alteration
=e~s of the agreement or ~ ~e wor~
=~eundor or ~e specifications accounting ~e s~e shall
in an~a~ affect i~s ~liga=io~ on ~is bond, and
J ec/BND10620
(seal) (Seal)
~TRETY The American Insurance
Company
Victoria M. Campbell
(Nmm)
Attorney-In-Fact
(Title)
PP__TNCIPAL The Presley Companies
(Nan)
(Title)
(Name)
APFROVED AS TO FORM:
SCOTT F. FIZLD
Jec/BND10620
-3-
ATTORNEY IN FACT ACKNOWLEDGMENT
~TjkTE OF CALIFORNIA ~ u.
On ~i~ /~th d~y of December
ORANGE
a~pea~d VICTORIA M. C~PR~.T.
to be the person whose n~me is subscribed to this instrument as the attorney in flct of ~ A?,rI~RTCAN TN,clTTRANC~ Cr!M'PAI4~r
tad acknowledSed to me that [] be ~ sir subscribed the name of ~ AMI~?T r'A N INS U1~Jk NCI:' C0broj NY
surety, ud I'1 bil I'~ her own nilne as ~ttomey hi flct.
[N WITNESS WHEREOF. I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my of~ci~ seal. the day and yelu- stated in this certificate above.
· in the yur 1992 . before me, m Nolm'y Public in ~ad for ~
_County. State of C~liform~, midinl ther~n. duly commissioned ~nd swam, pers4x~lly
JCllm, mmmlly. klMmmlomm, r=llfwwm!lomemt~mtlmlild_/' 'f '-..rffldmmce
My conmission expires
thereto as
STATE OF CALIFORNIA } SS.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO }
Public in ~d for M~ S~, Nm~
H. Neon, Jr., ~ ~
e~) ~ ~ ~e ~s ~ ~u~ ~e ~in ms~em u a- ,~
~t and V~e Pr,~t on ~ of ~ ~m~ ~mm ~m~ ~d
a~o~d to m ~t such co~m~n exe~d ~e ~in ins~mnt
to ~s bylaws or a re~lu~ of ~ ~a~ of Dimram.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal,
in and for said County and State, the day and year first above written.
My commission expires 6/319~t L.
FOR NOTARIAL STAMP
IL
GENERAL
~-'tom~Y THE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That THE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, l Corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of
New Jersey on February 20, 1846, and redomesticated to the State of Nebraska on June 1. 1990, and having its pnncipai office in the City of Omaha. State of
---'4ebraska. hts made, constituted and appointed. and does by these presents make, constitute and appoint
---VICTORIA H. CAM?BELL---
and all bonds, ondermking, r~. i,=no~ or other w~tten obligafiom in tl~ nature meteof
/"" · hereunto affixed this
STATE OF CA. LIFORNIA
COUNTY OF IvlARIN
and to bind the Corporation thereby u fully and to the same extent as if such bonds were siCned by the Presidmt, sealed with the corporate seal of the
Corporation and duly attested by its $eereta~, hereby ratifying and conf'mnin! all that the mid A~s)-in-Fact may do in the premises.
This power of attorney is granted pursuant to Article VII, Seaions 4S and 46 of By-laws of TH~ AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY now in full for~ and
effect.
· ' Anide VH. Appodutmtst ud Aathwlty of Resldeat Seamstits, Aria, __:, ir fsa ud Atettts to tctept L4tsl Procat ud Make A~
Seelion 4~. Ap~o~tm~t. The Clmirman of the Board of Dir~tm, tb~ Pt~id~nt, my Vi~.Pt~idm! or am,/oOm' mn audam~aml by One Boani of
IMr~ton, t~ c~,Im,, of Ihe Board of Db~ton, One Pnsld~m ot amy Vle~-Prnid~n may, from ~ to Om~, aR~alnt ResM0mt Arabmat ~ and
An~mey~.~bFaet~t~ta~daetf~rand~b~alf~f~b~C~qM~a~amdAg~ts~a~tkga~pt~c~mandmake~~rw~~fk
Coq~'ation.
SeGion46. Aeaoriry. The aulhofity ofsu~ReddntAmbmmt Se:~mdn, Allo, :, ~ Fael amd Ag~msdmB heas pt~serib~d fm the insmam~at,..'de-'q
Ondr ap.MinUneut. Any such appointmen and all nmthod~ gram~ thttd~ may he evoked at any k by OM~ Board of Dir~tors ot by any IMnon mpow~d to
m,ke sutl np~ointmnt:
This power of attorney is s/Fed and seakd onder and by the authority of the following Resohition adoped by the Board of Directors of THE AMERICAN
INSURANCE COI~PANY at a meetjug duly curled and hetd on the 31st day of July, 1984, and said Resolution has not been amended or repealed:
"RESOLVED. that the signature of any Vice-President. Assistant Secrnar~, and Resident Assistant Secretary of this Corporazion. and the setl of ~
Corporation may be affixed or printed on any power of attorney. on any revocation of any power of attorney, or on any certificate re_l_a!L~g thereto, by faoimik.
and any power of attorney. any revoention of any power of attorney. or efftificate bearing such facsimile s/gnatur~ or fans/mile ~ shaU he vflid and binding
upon the Corporation:'
IN WITNESS WHEREOF. THE A~ER[CAN INSURANCE COMPANY ha~ caused these presents to be s/grind by iu Vice-President. and its corporat~ ~ to
].S~ dayof June , 19 90
THE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
By '~~~'~ '~"' ' ~
R. D. Farnsworth
Outhis ] .~r dayof .T,n~ 19 qf~ - before me penonally came
to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say: that he is Vice-Pres/dent of THE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, the Cotporati~
described in and which executed the above instrument; that he knows the smi of said Corlx~fation; that the seal afruted to the said instrument is such corporate
setl; that it was so affixed by order of the Board of Directors of said ~on and that he signed his name thereto by like order.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal, the day and year herein fwst above written.
IIIIlllllllilllllllNIIIIIIIllllluu~! .... I,,,l~li~ss,,,~m
OFFICIAL SEAL
NOTARY PUBLIC- CALIFORNIA
lnsae~nitiemneeeeelesl~nmmlmslu~ ~l ~1~
CO~ OF
~ for~oing ad a~ PO~R OF A~Y r~ m f~ f~ ~ ~ m ~ rwok~: ad f~ at ~ VII. ~om 4~ ad ~ of ~e
By~ of the ~raUon. ad the R~iudon of ~e ~d of ~ ~ f8 ~ ~e Pow~ of ARoma. ~ n~ ~ for~.
Si;~ad~atthe~o~tyofM~.D~the ~ ~yof December .19 92 .
360711-TA.-6-90 (REV)
CITY OF TEMECULA
SUBDTV:XSl ON ~ BOND
Bond #111 1925 7225
Premium: $105.00
WHERFat2, ~he. Cl~y of Te2ecula, S=ate of CalifDrnia.
and THE PRESLEY COMPANIES (~re~f~r desi~a~ed as
· ~inci~l') ~ve ended ln=o ~ a~~ wherey
~incipal ~s pres~=ed =o ~e Ci=y for i=s appr~al a Final
S~lvislon ~P, whl~ ~P caries ~he ~ineer's or
Su~eyor's ce~ifica~e ~a= ~e Mnmn~s will be se~ on or
before a s~cified laEer ~te, ~ said Agreuent dated
, 19__, and identifi~ as proJ~
T~CT #23267-~ , iS herey referr~ to
and made a ~ hereof~ end
~~n, said ~inci~l shall ins~e ~e settinq of
mon~en~s a~ to ~arantee pa~= to ~e E~ineer or
Su~eyor Zor se=ting such ~nmn~ in said S~lvision. and
as a prere~lsite =o ~e spproval of said F~al Su~ivision
THE ~RIC~
NOW, T~FO~, ~ ~e Pr~ci~l a~ INSU~C~ CO~A~
as Sure~y, a~ held and filly bo~d ~ ~he Cl~y of
Teme~la, ~lifomia in ~e ~1 s~ of $11.650.00'* ,
lawZul ~ney oZ ~e Uni~ S~, for ~e pa~ent of su~
s~ well and =mly to M Mde, we bind ourselves, ~ heirs,
successors, executors and a~inis~ra~ors. Jointly and
severally ·
The condition of this obligation is such r_~at the
obligation shall become null and void if T~e above-bounded
Principal, his or its heirs, executors, adminis~ra~ors,
successors, or assigns, shall in all =hinge stand to, abide
by, well and truly. keep, and perform the covenants,
conditions, and provisions in the a~, ,,~ent and any
alteration thereof made as ~heretn provided, on his or their
par=, to be kept and performed at =he time and in the manner
=herein specified, and in all respects according to his or
their V~ue intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save
harmless ~he City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and
employees. as =herein stipulated; otherwise, this obligation
shall be and remain in full force and effect.
As a par~ of ~he ~bligation secured hereby and in
addition =o =he face amount specified therefor, there shall
be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees,
including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by City in
successfully enforcing such oblige=ion, 511 ~o be taxed as
costs and included in ~ny judgment rendered.
The surety hereby stipulates and agrees =ha~ no
change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the
terms of the agessent or to =he work to be performed
thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall
in anTway aZfect its obligations on this t~nd, a~d it does
hereby waive no~ice of any such change, extension of time,
Jec/BNDI0610
alteration or ,ddition to the ~erms of =he aVreemwnC or to
~ work or ~o ~ s~ciZi~tions.
ex~utsd by ~s ~incipal ~d s~sty ~vs n~sd,
on October 26, .
(Soaz) (seaz)
SURETY
THE AI~P, ICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
VICTORIA 14, CAHPBELL
(Name)
ATTORNEY- IN-FACT
(Title)
THE PRESLEY COMPANIES
(Title)
(Name)
(Title)
APPROVED AS TO FORN:
SCOTT F. FIELD
C=ty Attorney
-3-
J ec/BND10610 :
ATTORNEY IN FACT ACKNOWLEDGMENT
~TATI; OF CALIFORNIA
Coamy of OtLANGF. m.
Onmis 26th d=yof October .inthcycar 1992 .beforeme. a Noury Public in and for said
OP,~NGI~ County. State of CaliforNI. residing therein, duly commi,ioned and sworn, personally
appeared V1:CTQRTA Z,t'. CAIvfPRI~.T.T. I'~pmeell~kaeeweloeee, l'lleeqaedleeeeeetbeimebel~---
to be the person whose name is subscribed to this instrument as the attorney in fm of TEE AJf!~,ZCAN INSURANCE COEPANY
and acknowledl=d to mc that F'I be:~ she subscribed th= namc of ~m..AMI~RZCAN ZNSUP, ANCE COHPANY mereto as
surety, and [] Ilil [] her own nlme Is attorney in flct.
My commission expilt, s
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO }
o. //_ / b - ~-C- . b.~r. m., Ne.W U. W.b.. a No~
Pubhc in and for ~ Stl, Nm~l~ aPm~ ~-- 'i F. [lae~...-~ ~d J~n
H. N~, Jr.. N~J~ ~m
e~e) ~ N ~e pemns ~o ex~u~
o,--:~-nt a~ ~e Pr~t on N~ of ~ ~mb~ ~emm Mm~ ~d
amoM~d to me ~m such co~mbon e~i
m its bylaws or a m~lu~on of ~ ~affi of Dimcram.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal,
in and for said County and State. the day and year Iirst above wntten,
FOR NOTARIAL STAMP
My commission exp~s6/~~ U'
Arrom~rt, THE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That THE AMERICAN [NSURANC~ COMPANY, a C..ot~otauon m~or~ollted unOef ille taw~ of the State of
New Jersey on Feimmry 7.0. 18~6, anti rmommU~at~i to the State of Ne~ratla on Jun~ 1, 1990, and having its prumpal offi~z m me City of Omaha, State of
.._.Net~aska. has mOe, consutured and al~mnted, and don by OMse pfesmu ma~e, ~onnitute an0 aDpomt
~ be he~a~mto aff~cat this
a~dt~bi~dth~C~`~ntbe~y~fu~l~md~the~am~t~t~ifsu~/~ig~d~~~~~~f~
~nanddu~uest~lbyits~a~/~h~.~t~tifyingande~fmmnga~lth~t~ss~/dA~ng~4D.Fmmy~m~~.
This power of anorne,/ is grantsd pm'suant to Anid~ vII, Smiom4Sandd6ofB,/4a, nofTt~AMF, RlCAN INSURANCXCOMPANY now in full fot~and
eff~:t.
Seetlomd6. Aealordy. Tbe~mbotityof!ldIRelldemABilmmt,Sel:mah~A~'L. ,.' Fml2amdAgelmsklllbeasplllmbldimll~; ~, t,~6d_
,.k, sea .ppoiatm.at."
This power of attorney is siS~ed asd seded u~ter a~t ~r/the aumori~/of the foUowial ~oludea ado0ted t~, tbc Board of Directors of ~ AM~itlCAN
INSURANC:E COMPAhrY at a meeting duly caWed and held on the ) ls~ day of Jdy, 1984, ad said Rmolution has not been amended or rqN~ed:
'RF.~OLVF~, ~ax me silaamre of aF/Vice-Praide~ AsaSta~t $e:rem'F, ad .9,,~,,,, Arestam Sectear/of tbb Corporao~ and the seal of this
Corpotluon may be affixal or prwlm:l on ally F:)wer Of attorn~, on any mvo~ltion of any ptNFer of allothey, or on nny c~fieate relating th~,~to, by fa,,imile,
and any power of attorney, any ~-vomtion of any pow~ of attornm/, or agrtifm bcanng suEh f,,,~,,~u- silsmm~ or faaimile s~l shall be valid and binding
upon me CorporaUon;'
IN WlTNE~~OF, TI-~CAN INSURANCeCOMPANY hasmmsd tbmEpasgmsto besigazl by iu Vi~--Ptuidmt, andiuo~porazssmi to
lS~ dayof June x9 90
STATE OF C. AJ,.~O R.N[A
COLTN'r'Y OF MARIN
St,
By
R. D. Farnswonh
Onthis q ~r dayof T,ns~ - 19
to me kno-m. who. being by me duty sworn. did del)o~ and
sea~:thatitwass~tf~Ludby~t~r~fth~B~ara~fDim:t~n~fsaidC-~t~n~rm~nmt~bE~i~sm1hisnams~by~
~HWITNF=~WHrd~F~1hav~h~zunt~s~myhandandaf~xedmy~f~iaismi.r~dayandyear~umms~n~~
J. M. YANDEVORT
{ NO'TAR UBLIC- CALIFORNIA
Pnncq~l Officm in Mann nW
Y P c°um
;l lllilel/llllllNl~{,. '.re!Ill'!/'IIII4CI~IIII--, NIllINING
:STATE OF CALIFORNIA } ss.
COUNTY OF MARIN
tl~ for~oulg tnd sl:tlcala2[ POWI~R OF ATII}RNET r
l~-Isws of the Coqx~rsaon. ~ ~E RSuUoa of t~ Bosra of ~; ttt fanIs m tl~ Pm~r of Anoint, at~ now in force.
Signed and seaJed at the County of Marin. Dated the
26th dayof October - x9 92
360711-TA-6.90 (REVI
ITEM
17
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAl ~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
A~Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
September 14, 1993
Changes to the Orders Ynez Road Widening Project,
PW92-05, CFD88-12
PREPARED BY:
Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approved Contract' Change Order No. 12,
13, 15 and 16 for Ynez Road Widening Project, PW92-05 for labor end equipment for various
items of work, in the amount of $39,425.78.
BACKGROUND:
During the construction of the Ynez Road Widening Project the following 'tes of work have
I m
resulted in a change to the contract:
Chanqe Order No. 12 (Reimbursed by RCWD)
Several water districts facilities were encountered in the excavation of the existing road bed
and had to be rel0cated including a 2 inch and 1½ inch copper water service, and the
replacement of unsuitable backfill material for the installation of the 20 inch water main dip
section required to go under the new storm drain.
Subtotal: $6,510.78
Chanae Order No. 13
The project plans, which were based on the most recent record drawings, showed that an
interconnect conduit existed across Winchester Road just west of Ynez Road, but the
contractor was not able to locate this conduit. To complete the traffic signal interconnect
system on Ynez Road from Winchester Road to Palm Plaza the contractor will need to bore
a 2" interconnect conduit from the south side to the north side of Winchester Road.
The plan also showed the traffic signal conduits and pull boxes as existing. These items
however could not be located in the field, the contractor will install the appropriate conduits
and pull boxes.
pwO5%egdrpt%93%0914%pw92-05
Also, the traffic signal electrical service at the intersection of Ynez Road and Solana Way was
designed to remain in place. However, the new location was in conflict with the new curb
location. Therefore, the contractor will relocate the existing traffic signal service.
Change Order No. 15 -
$ubtotah $13,200.00
The contractor was prepared to construct curb and gutter in continuous pours throughout the
project. Since some of Southern California Edison (SCE) facilities were not relocated prior to
the curb and gutter construction, the contractor had to provide openings for SCE. After SCE
complete the pole relocations the contractor will pour the remaining curb and gutter.
Subtotal: $630.00
Chanoe Order No. 16
During the design phase of the project, the construction plans were modified to include a left
turn only median opening for north bound traffic on Ynez Road. However no design
information was available for the driveway into the Toyota site. Design information is now
available to construct the driveway along with the street widening.
Subtotal: $19,085.00
The total amount of the contract changes listed above is $39,425.78.
FISCAL IMPACT:
On January 26, 1993, the City Council awarded a contract for the construction of Ynez Road
Widening from Rancho California Road to Palm Plaza, to Vance Corporation for
$2,612,811.29. Contract Change Order No.'s 01 through 11 were approved for · total
amount of $289,534. Contract Change Order No.'s 12, 13, 15, and 16 are in the amount
of $39,425.78. Therefore, an additional $39,485.78 must be appropriated for the Ynez Road
Widening Project from CFD 88-12. There are adequate funds available in the CFD 88-12
construction account.
pwOS%agdqat%93%0914%pw92-05
ITEM
NO.
18
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT;
APPRO;O_~
CITY ATTORNEY ~
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
PI nn
Gary Thornhill, Director of a ingb;;>'
September 14, 1993
Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Tentative Tract Map No. 25338,
Amendment No. I - A 28 Unit Condominium Project on 2.56 Acres
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council:
Adopt a resolution entitled:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DENYING
THE APPEAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25338, AMENDMENT NO. 1,
UPHOLDING PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO DENY TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 25338, AMENDMENT NO. 1, TO SUBDIVIDE A 2.56 ACRE
PARCEL INTO A 28 UNIT CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-330-050.
BACKGROUND
Tentative Tract Map No. 25338, Amendment No. 1 was denied by a 5-0 vote by the Planning
Commission at their meeting on August 2, 1993. The application was submitted to the
Riverside County Planning Department on September 20, 1989 and the project was
transferred to the City of Temecula Planning Department on April 19, 1990. The application
has remained incomplete for approximately four (4) years. Some of the unresolved issues
include the following: lack of a current grading plan for the site, need for an updated traffic
analysis, and no hydrology and hydraulic analysis was submitted. Due to the lack of
cooperation on the part of the applicant with respect to these unresolved issues, staff brought
the application forward to the Planning Commission with a recommendation of denial without
prejudice.
The Planning Commission had concerns regarding the amount of time that the project had
been in review with little resolution of identified issues. They also discussed the possibility of
granting the applicant an additional month to submit the materials that Staff had requested;
however, the applicant could not agree to this time frame due to his current economic
condition. The Commission also had concerns regarding the impact of project traffic and
buffering between the site from existing, adjacent single-family uses.
R:\S\STAFFRPT~2533gTM.CC 913/93 klb 1
A number of citizens spoke in opposition to the proiect. Concerns raised at the public hearing
by various property owners included: additional traffic congestion in an already congested
area, impacts upon existing school facilities which were already overburdened, and impacts
upon park/recreation facilities. Concerns were also expressed over placing additional multi-
family units within this area.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
Resolution No. 93- - Page 3
Draft Planning Commission Minutes, August 2, 1993 - Page 8
Planning Commission Staff Report, August 2, 1993 - Page 9
Exhibits - Page 10
R:~\STAF~338TM.CC 9/3193 klb 2
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO. 93-
R:\S\STAFF~33gTM.CC 9/3/93 klb ~
ATrA~ NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOL~ON OF ~ CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY
OF TEMECULA DENYING ~ APPEAL OF TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. 2~338, AMENDMENT NO. 1,
UPHOI.DING PLANNING COMMIgSION'S DECISION TO
DENY TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 2~338, AMENDlV!E~
NO. 1, TO SUBDIVIDE A 2.56 ACRE PARCEL INTO A 28
UNIT CONDOMINIUM DEVI~J.OPIVIENT KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-330-050.
WItERI~.&S, Leigh Waxman and Dan Sterik fried Tentative Tract Map No. 25338,
Amendment No. 1 in accordance with the Riverside County l~nd Use, Zoning, Planning and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WI-IFJ~EAS, said Tentative Tract Map application was not processed in the time and
manner prescribed by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing pertaining to said
Tract Map on August 2, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either
in support or opposition to said Tentative Tract Map;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission denied said
Tentative Tract Map;
WHEREAS, Leigh Waxman and Dan Sterik fried an Appeal of the Planning
Commission's decision to deny Tentative Tract Map No. 25338, Amendment No. 1 in
accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and Subdivision Ordinances,
which the City has adopted by reference;
WHEREAS, said Appeal application was processed in the time and manner prescribed
by State and local law;
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing pertaining to said Appeal on
September 14, 1993, at which time interested persons had opportunity to testify either in support
or opposition to said Appeal; and
WHEREAS, the City Council received a copy of the Staff Report regarding the Appeal.
NOW, THEREFORE, ~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
R:'~S\,qTAFFRPT~25338TM.CC 9/3193 klb 4
Section 1. Findines. That the Temecula City Council hereby makes the following
f'mdings:
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shah
adopt a general plan Within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-month
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or the
requirements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the
following requirements are met:
general plan.
The city is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of the
2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action
proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which
will be studied within a reasonable time.
b. There is little or no pwbability of substantial detriment to or
interference with the future adopted general plan ff the proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan.
c. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state hw and local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as amended by the Southwest Area
Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecula as
the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan
guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General
Plan.
C. Pursuant to Section 7.1 of County Ordinance No. 460, any subdivision may be
denied if any of the following findings are made:
and specific plans.
That the proposed land division is not consistent with applicable general
2. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is not
consistent with applicable general and specific plans.
3. That the site of the proposed land division is not physically suitable for the
type of development.
4. That the site of the proposed land division is not physically suitable for the
pwposed density of the development.
RfiSXSTAFFRPT',2533gTM.CC 9/3/93 klb 5
5. That the design of the proposed land division or proposed improvements
are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantin!iy and unavoidably injure fish
or wildlife or their habitat.
· 6. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements
are likely to cause serious public health problems.
7. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements
will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through, or use of,
property within the proposed land division. A land division may be approved if it is found that
alternate easements for access or for use will be provided and that they will be substantially
equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to
easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent
jurisdiction.
D. The City Council, in denying proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 25338,
Amendment No. 1, makes the following findings, to wit:
1. There is reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map No. 25338,
Amendment No. 1 proposed will be consistent with the General Plan proposal being considered
or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. The draft General Plan Land Use
Designation for the site is Medium Density Residential (7-12 dwelling units per acre). The
project proposes a residential density of 10.9 dwelling units/acre and is therefore is likely to be
consistent with the General Plan upon its adoption.
2. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan. The draft General Plan Land Use Designation for the site is Medium Density
Residential. Land uses surrounding the site have been identified as residential, with medium
density residential designations to the east and west· of the site, low-medium density residential
land uses to the north and high density residential uses to the south.
3. The proposed use or action does not comply with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances. The project as proposed is inconsistent with
Sections 5.1 and 5.3 of Ordinance No. 460. In addition, submittal requirements have not been
met.
4. That the site of the proposed land division may not be physically suitable
for the type of development. The preliminary title report indicates that the property is impacted
by flooding, by a natural stream course, and has restricted access across the entire frontage of
Solana Way. No support documents have been received to provide additional information on
the easements and other constraints.
5. That the site of the proposed land division may not be physically suitable
for the proposed density of the development. The preliminary title report indicates that the
property is impacted by flooding, by a natural stream course, and has restricted access across
the entire frontage of Solaria Way. No support documents have been received to provide
R:\S\STAFFRPT~2533$TM.CC 9/3~93 klb 6
additional information on the easements and other constraints, therefore, the site may not be
suitable for the proposed density.
6. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements
may be likely to cause serious public health problems. The preliminary ti~e report indicates that
the property is impacted by flooding. No support documents have been received to provide
additional information on this constraint, therefore, the site may be likely to cause serious public
health problems.
Section 2. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 14th day of September, 1993.
ATTEST:
J. SAt, MU' OZ
MAYOR
June S. Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
STATE OF CALr~ORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA)
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, HI~ERY DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Resolution No.93- was duly introduced and placed upon the agenda of the City
Council of the City of Temecula on the 14th day of September, 1993, and that thereafter, said
Resolution was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Temecula on the 14th day of September, 1993, by the following roll call vote:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBEr:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
J'LTNE S. GIH~-I~3C
CITY CLERK
R:XSX,qTA~33gTM.CC 9/3/93 klb 7
A'I'I'ACHMENT NO. 2
DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
AUGUST 2, 1993
R:\S~STAFFRPT~25338TM.CC 9/3/93 klb 8
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
AUGUST 2. 1993
11.
It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Blair to close
the public hearing at 7:20 P.M. and approve the Conditional Use Permit, subject to the
amendments set forth by the City Attorney, allowing the use of the Temecula
Showgrounds for motorcross and off-road events including practice and races.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES:
5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland and Fahey
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
Tentative Tract MaD No. 25338. Amendment No. 1
A proposed 28 unit condominium subdivision on 2.56 acres.
Planner Matthew Fagan presented the staff report stating that Planning Staff has
provided written correspondence on numerous occasions giving explicit resubmittal
requirements and has had numerous telephone conversations with the applicant and
one meeting. Staff's concerns included the request for a current grading plan outlining
the topography of the site, an updated traffic analysis, a hydrology and hydraulic
analysis of the site and an amended tentative map. The deadlines set by staff were
agreed to by the applicant, but the applicants resubmittal was not received. Planning
Staff therefore recommended denial of the project, without prejudice, based upon the
analysis and findings in the staff report.
To clarify the term "without prejudice," Assistant City Attorney John Cavanaugh
stated that without prejudice means that the applicant has the right to reapply within
a one year period of time. Commissioner Hoagland inquired as to whether the
applicant would have to begin the permit process from the beginning or could he apply
for a one year extension of time. Mr. Cavanaugh stated that the project would have
to be submitted over again as a new project.
The applicant, Mr. Leigh Waxman, stated that he had not received a copy of the staff
report until the day of the Planning Commission meeting. He also stated that the
project was originally approved through Riverside County and then transferred to the
City of Temecula. Upon the City's recommendation of changing the number of units
from 32 to 28, the applicant complied and had plans redrawn to meet the request.
The applicant commented on the frequent change in City staff assigned to his project,
referring to the Case Planner Mark Rhoades and Engineer Bob Righetti.
The applicant requested a one year extension of time, but the Commission reminded
Mr. Waxman that the project had not been approved and therefore could not be
granted the extension.
Commissioner Ford looked at the letter sent to the applicant on October 22, 1993
regarding the submittal requirements in order for Planning Staff to continue its review
of the project. Mr. Waxman stated that he had not seen the letter before.
R:\S\PLANCOMM~PCMINB-2.93 9~2~93 tj~ 7
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 2. 1993
12.
Commissioner Fahey suggested · one month extension in order for Mr. Waxman to
clarify with City staff the status of the project. Mr. Waxman requested e two month
extension.
Chairman Ford opened the public hearing at 7:40 P.M.
Jean Clement, 29822 Windwood Circle, Temecula, spoke in opposition to the project
due to the increased number of multi-family units along Solana Way which would
present an increased problem with traffic flow. Ms. Clement requested single family
detached homes be placed on the property instead of the proposed condominium
project. She also pointed out that there was a lack of playground facilities in the area.
Gail Edwards, 29741 Windwood Circle, Temecula, spoke in opposition to the project
stating that the proposed project location was the only "buffer zone" between her
home and commercial development. Ms. Edwards commented on the high level of
multi-family housing congestion in the area as well as the lack of view and decreased
value of the homes in the area. She also stated that the areas elementary school had
to add temporary classrooms to accommodate the increased number of children. Ms.
Edwards expressed great concern over the lack of funds the project would contribute
to the school system.
Susan Osborn, 41967 Sherwood Court, Temecula, spoke in opposition to the project
stating that she would like to see the area designated as a park area.
The applicant addressed each of the concerns of the opposed speakers and stated that
his project was in compliance with the City's plan for the area. He emphasized the
proposed school fees to be paid for the project equaled 9200,000 in fees.
Commissioner Fahey expressed concern over the congestion the proposed project
would bring ~o the area.
It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Blair to close
the public hearing at 8:00 P.M. and to approve staff's recommendation to deny the
project without prejudice based on the findings contained in the staff report.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES:
5 COMMISSIONERS: Blair, Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland and Fahey
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Gary Thornhill stated that the next General Plan Meeting will be held August 17, 1993.
Delays in the project are due to conflicts the City Council has had with certain
meetings.
R:\S\R,ANCO~NB-2.93 9/2/93 tie 8
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
AUGUST 2, 1993
R:\S\STAFFRPT~25338TM.CC 9/3/93 k.lb 9
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING
CITY OF TEMECULA
PLANNING COMMISSION
August 2, 1993
Case No.: Tentative Tract Map No. 25338, Amendment No. 1
Prepared By:
RECOMMENDATION:
Matthew Fagan, Assistant Planner
ADOPT Resolution No. 93- denying Tentative Tract
Map No. 25338, Amendme'~'No. 1 without prejudice,
based upon the Analysis and Findings contained in the
staff report.
APPLICATION INFORMATION
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
Dan Sterick and Leigh Waxman
Same
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
PROPOSED ZONING:
EXISTING LAND USE:
A 28 unit condominium subdivision on 2.56 acres.
The southeast corner of Solana Way and Rycrest Drive.
R-2 (Multiple Family Dwellings)
North: R-2
South: R-2
East: R-2
West: R-2
(Multiple Family Dwellings)
(Multiple Family Dwellings)
(Multiple Family Dwellings)
(Multiple Family Dwellings)
Not requested
Vacant
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
PROJECT STATISTICS
North:
South:
East:
West:
Single Family Residential
Vacant
Single Family Residential
Vacant
Proposed Units:
Number of Acres (gross):
Density:
28
2.56
10.9 DU/AC
R:~S%STAFFRPT%25338TM.pC 7/27/93 klb
BACKGROUND
The application for Tentative Tract Map No. 25338 was originally submitted to the Riversi0,
County Planning Department on September 20, 1989. The project was transferred to the City
of Temecula Planning Department on April 19, 1990. The project was originally scheduled
for the Planning Commission meeting of May 6, 1991.
This project was continued off calendar at the May 6, 1991 Planning Commission meeting.
At that meeting, the Commission expressed concerns relative to density, as well as buffering
the site from impacts to adjacent uses. An amended site plan submitted by the applicant
included a reduction of four (4) units to provide a total unit count of 28. The item was
scheduled for a Planning Commission hearing on January 6, 1992 because many items which
were previously brought to the applicant's attention remained unresolved. The project was
continued at this time to the February 24, 1992 Planning Commission meeting. The item was
subsequently continued off-calendar at this meeting due to unresolved issues which remained
unaddressed by the applicant.
Staff provided written correspondence on five separate occasions to the applicant with explicit
re-submittal requirements required in order to process the project. In addition, Staff has had
numerous telephone conversations and one meeting with the applicant regarding these
matters.
Deadlines were set by staff, most of them agreed to by the applicant, only to see the deadline
dates pass without any re-submittal. The last letter mailed to the applicant informed the
applicant to contact the Planning Department by July 14, 1993 to discuss the status of the
project. The letter further stated that if the applicant did not contact the Planning Department
by this date that Staff would schedule the item for a Planning Commission hearing with a
recommendation for denial "without prejudice". This deadline passed without the applicant
contacting Staff.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is comprised of 28 units. The site density is 10.9 D.U./AC. The southeast corner
of the site contains a recreation area for its residents.
ANALYSIS
The Project is inconsistent with Sections of Ordinances No. 348 and 460 and City submittal
requirements. These inconsistencies are outlined in a letter to the applicant dated October 22,
1992 (reference Attachment No. 2). Some of Public Works Department concerns included:
requesting a current grading plan for the site which included accurate topography of the site,
an updated traffic analysis, a hydrology and hydraulic analysis of the site, and an amended
tentative map. Numerous items listed in Section 5.3 (Planned Developments - Residential,
Commercial and Industrial) of Ordinance No. 460 were needed; therefore, this Section was
included in the correspondence to the applicant.
EXISTING ZONING AND FUTURE GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCy
Existing zoning for the site is R-2 (Multiple Family Dwellings). The project is a proposal for
a twenty-eight (28) unit condominium project, which is consistent with the current zoning.
R:\S~STAFFRP'IR25338TM.pC 7/27/93 klb 2
The draft General Plan Land Use Designation for the site is Medium Density Residential (7-12
dwelling units per acre). The project proposes a residential density of 10.9 dwelling units/acre
and is therefore is likely to be consistent with the General Plan upon its adoption.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATIO~i
Tentative Tract Map No. 25338, Amendment No. 1 is statutorily exempt pursuant to Article
18, Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA does not apply
to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSiONS
This project was continued off calendar at the May 6, 1991 Planning Commission meeting.
The item was scheduled for a Planning Commission hearing on January 6, 1992 because
many items which were previously brought to the applicant's attention remained unresolved.
The project was continued at this time to the February 24, 1992 Planning Commission
meeting. The item was subsequently continued off-calendar at this meeting due to unresolved
issues which remained unaddressed by the applicant. Staff has continuously provided written
correspondence to the applicant with explicit re-submittal requirements required in order to
process the project. In addition, Staff has had numerous telephone conversations with the
applicant regarding these matters. Many deadlines were prescribed, most of them agreed to
by the applicant, only to see the deadline dates pass without any re-submittal. Tentative
Tract Map No. 25338, Amendment No. 1 is statutorily exempt Pursuant to Article 18, Section
15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
FINDINGS
e
e
There is reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map No. 25338, Amendment No.
1 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or
studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. The draft General Plan Land
Use Designation for the site is Medium density residential (7-12 dwelling units per
acre). The project proposes a residential density of 10.9 dwelling units/acre and is
therefore is likely to be consistent with the General Plan upon its adoption.
There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference with the
future adopted general plan if the proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan. The draft General Plan Land Use Designation for the site is Medium density
residential. Land uses surrounding the site have been identified as residential, with
medium density residential designations to the east and west of the site, low-medium
density residential land uses to the north and high density residential uses to the south,
The proposed use does not comply with all other applicable requirements of state law
and local ordinances. The project as proposed is inconsistent with Sections 5.1 and
5.3 of Ordinance No. 460. These Sections require information to be shown on and
verified or accompany tentative maps. Many of the items requested were not
submitted. In addition, submittal requirements have not been met.
That the site of the proposed land division ma'y not be Physically suitable for the type
of development. The preliminary title report indicates that the property is impacted by
flooding, by a natural stream course, and has restricted access across the entire
R:\S\STAFFRPT%25338TM.pC 7/27/93 klb 3
frontage of Solana Way. No support documents have been received to provide
additional information on the easements and other constraints.
That the site of the proposed land division may not be Physically suitable for the
proposed density of the development. The Preliminary title report indicates that the
property is impacted by flooding, by a natural stream course, and has restricted access
across the entire frontage of Solana Way. No support documents have been received
to provide additional information on the easements and other constraints, therefore,
the site may not be suitable for the proposed density.
That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements may be
likely to cause serious public health problems. The preliminary title report indicates
that the property is impacted by flooding'. No support documents have been received
to provide additional information on this constraint, therefore, the site may be likely to
cause serious public health problems.
Attachments:
Resolution No. 93- - Blue Page 5
Letter to Applicant ~'~ed October 22, 1992 - Blue Page 10
Exhibits - Blue Page 11
A. Vicinity Map
B. Draft General Plan Designation
C. Zoning Designation
D. Site Plan
R:%S~STAFFRPT~25338TM.pC 7/27/93 klb 4
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 93-
R:~,S~STAFFRPT'~25338TM.pC 7127193 klb 5
ATTACHMI~-NT NO. 1
PC RESOLUTION NO. 93-
A RF~OLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF TEMECUIA DENYING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 25338, AMENI~ME. NT NO. 1
WITHOUT
PRE/ICE TO SUBDIVIDE A 2.56 ACRE PARCEL INTO
A 28 UNIT CONDO1VIINIUM DEVELOPMF. NT KNOWN AS
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-330-050.
WHEREAS, Dan Sterick and Leigh Waxman Fried Tentative Tract Map No. 25338,
Amendment No. 1 in accordance with the Riverside County Land Use, Zoning, Planning and
Subdivision Ordinances, which the City has adopted by reference;
WH'F. REAS, said Tentative Tract Map application was processed in the time and manner
prescribed by State and local hw;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued said Tentative Tract Map on May 16,
1991, until January 6, 1992;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued said Tentative Tract Map on January
6, 1992, until February 24, 1992;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued said Tentative Tract Map on January
6, 1992, until February 24, 1992;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued said Tentative Tract Map off-calendar
at the February 24, 1992 meeting;
WItF..REAS, the Planning Commission considered said Tentative Tract Map on August
2, 1993, at which time interested persons had an opportunity to testify either in support or
opposition;
WItF.~AS, at the conclusion of the Commission hearing, the Commission denied said
Tentative Tract Map;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
TEiVIECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. That the Temecula Planning Commission hereby makes the
following findings:
R:\S\STAFFRPT~25338TM.pC 7/27/93 k|b 6
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65360, a newly incorporated city shall
adopt a general plan within thirty (30) months following incorporation. During that 30-mon ~"'
period of time, the city is not subject to the requirement that a general plan be adopted or tht~
requi/'ements of state law that its decisions be consistent with the general plan, if all of the
following requirements are met:
general plan.
The city is proceeding i~ a timely fashion with the preparation of the
2. The planning agency finds, in approving projects and taking other actions,
including the issuance of building permits, each of the following:
a. There is a reasonable probability that the land use or action
proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered or studied or which
will be studied within a reasonable time.
b. There is little or no probability of substantial detriment to or
interference with the future adopted general plan ff the Proposed use or action is ultimately
inconsistent with the plan.
c. The proposed use or action complied with all other applicable
requirements of state law and local ordinances.
B. The Riverside County General Plan, as mended by the Southwest Area
Community Plan, (hereinafter "SWAP") was adopted prior to the incorporation of Temecuh as
the General Plan for the southwest portion of Riverside County, including the area now within
the boundaries of the City. At this time, the City has adopted SWAP as its General Plan
guidelines while the City is proceeding in a timely fashion with the preparation of its General
Plan.
C. The Planning Commission in denying the proposed Tentative Tract Map, makes
the following f'mdings, to wit:
1. There is reasonable probability that Tentative Tract Map No. 25338,
Amendment No. 1 proposed will be consistent with the general plan proposal being considered
or studied or which will be studied within a reasonable time. The draft General Plan Land Use
Des. ignation for the site is Medium density residential (7-12 dwelling units per acre). The
project proposes a residential density of 10.9 dwelling units/acre and is therefore is likely to be
consistent with the General Plan upon its adoption.
2. There is lithe or no probability of substantial detriment to or interference
with the' future adopted general plan ff the Proposed use or action is ultimately inconsistent with
the plan. The draft General Plan Land Use Designation for the site is Medium density
residential. Land uses surrounding the site have beon identified as residential, with medium
density residential designations to the east and west of the site, low-medium density residential
land uses to the north and high density residential uses to the south.
R:%S'~STAFFRPT%.25338'T'K4.pC 7/27/93 klb 7
3. The proposed use does not comply with all other applicable requirements
of state law and local ordinances. The project as proposed is inconsistent with Sections 5.1 and
5.3 of Ordinance No. 460. These Sections require information to be shown on and verified or
accompany tentative maps. Many of the items requested were not submitted. In addition,
submittal requirements have not been met.
4. That the site of the propoled land division may not be physically suitable
for the type of development. The preliminary ti~e report indicates that the property is impacted
by flooding, by a natural stream course, and has restricted access across the entire frontage of
Solana Way. No support documents have been received to provide additional information on
the easements and other constraints.
5. That the site of the proposed land division may not be physically suitable
for the Proposed density of the development. The preliminary title report indicates that the
property is impacted by flooding, by a natural stream course, and has restricted access across
the entire frontage of Solana Way. No support documents have been received to provide
additional information on the easements and other constraints, therefore, the site may not be
suitable for the proposed density.
6. That the design of the proposed land division or the type of improvements
may be likely to cause serious public health problems. The preliminary ti~e report indicates that
the property is impacted by flooding. No support documents have been received to provide
additional information on this constraint, therefore, the site may be Likely to cause serious public
health problems.
D. As conditioned pursuant to Section 3, the Tentative Tract Map is compatible with
the health, safety and welfare of the community.
Section 2. Environmental Compliance. Tentative Tract Map No. 25338, Amendment
No. 1 is statutotily exempt pursuant to Article 18, Section 15270 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency
rejects or disapproves.
Section 3. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTF. r} this 2nd day of August, 1993.
LINDA L. FAHEY
CHAIRMAN
R:~,S\STAFFRPT\25338TM.pC 7/27/93 k|b 8
I HF-REBy CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 2nd day ~.
August, 1993 by the following vote of the Commission:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
PLANNING COMMISSI. ONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS:
GARY THORNm~
SBCRBTARy
R:\S~.STAFFRPT~25338TM.pC 7127/93 klb 9
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
LETTER TO APPLICANT DATED
OCTOBER 22, 1992
R:%S\STAFFRPT~25338TM.pC 7/27/93 klb 10
CITY
-/
October 22, 1992 '
0
TE
LI
l~r. high Waxnmn
53 Edgar Court
Newbury Park, CA 91320
SUBJECT:
Planning and Public .Works Department Comments For Tentative Tract Map No.
25338 - a twenty-eight (28) unit condominium project located at the southeast comer
of Solana Way and Ryerest Drive
This letter shall serve to provide comments relative to Tentative Tract Map No, 25338. As a result
of our meeting on October 15, 1992, the following items need to be submitted to the P/arming
Deparu'nent in order for Staff to continue its review of the subject project:
Planning Department
1. An amended tentative .map which incorporates the following:
a,
Updated names, addresses and telephone numbers of owners and person preparing
the map. '
b. The date that the map was prepared needs to be located in a conspicuous place.
c. A clearly delineated boundary line.
d. Locations and widths of existing and proposed utility easements.
Any known existing wells on the property or within 220 feet of the subdivision
boundary.
Identification of common areas and open spaces.
g. The ex/sting zoning of property immediately surrounding the tract.
h. Removal of the contour lines.
A table indicating area and density calculations. The calculation should indicate that
not less than 40% of the net area of the project is used for open area or recreatio,'ml
facilities. The net area shall be determined by excluding all sweets, drives and
automobile storage areas.
R:~.S',STAFFRF~'~s33~DRC. LTR
45 1 T4 5LLSINEZ$ PAOK DRIVE * TEMECULA. C,AUFOI~NIA g95g0 * PHONE (714) 694-198g * F.-u((714) 6g4-1ggg
Page 2
Mr. Waxman
TM 25338
je
"Typical" building setback dimensions.
Trash facilities for the northwest units. These units will need to be sufficiently
screened since they will be located adjacent to Solana Way.
The location and type of proposed fencing, gates and walls.
ms
An Amendment # needs to be included on the tentative map site plan.
submittal shall be referred to as "Amendment No. 1."
All revisions nee~i to be enumerated hi the revision block.
The re-
Zoning for the site is R-2 not R-3.
p- · Provide dimensions of proposed dwellings, buildings and other structures.
A conceptual landscape plan which incorporates the following:
a. Trees along Solann Way should be a min/rnum of 24" box, with twenty-five percent
of the trees being 36" box.
be
Screening for ,the newly located trash facilities. See explanation under No. 1 .k.
Additional screening on the eastern portion of the site which is adjacent to the pool
site. This landscaping shall serve as a buffer to the single-family residences to the
east.
3. The following additional items need to be addressed:
A list of the names and addresses of the owners of real property located within 600
feet of the exterior boundaries of the property to be considered, as shown on the last
equalized assessment roll, and any update issued by 'the County Assessor.
Public Works Department
The applicant is expected to address all of the issuds noted below, and to submit amended maps,
studies, and calculations.
The Tentative Map shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Ordinance No.
348 and Section 5,3 of Ordinance No. 460. (See Attached).
R:~TAFF'd.Y'~2,1331DRC. LTR
Page 3
Mr. Waxman
TM 25338
5
10.
The applicant must provide a preliminary hydrology and hydraulic analysis of the overall ~ite
and the storm drain facilities along the southerly border of the prop.fret. Existing structures
shall be shown and dimensioned from the prbperty boundary. The applicant's proposal to
protect the graded slope and convey stormwater from the adjacent site shall be noted and
described on the tentative map. The estimated peak flows for both the 1-year and 100-year
event shall be noted for runoff entering and leaving the site. The current proposal to use a
rip-rap down drain from the site onto the adjacent property is not acceptable to this
department. Concentrated drainage within the driveways shall be conveyed by concrete
swales or gutters. The limits of the 100-year event storm shall be shown in the earthen
channel adjacent to the southerly boundary. Also, all building pads shall be a minimum of
one-foot above the water surface elevation for the 100-year event as conveyed onsite.
Down slopes from the adjacent properties shall provide for drainage and erosion control. If
walls are to be constructed at the toe of slopes, drainage between the wall and slope shall be
conveyed onsite in concrete swales. An access gate shall be provided for maintenance.
All easements and rights-of-way shall be accurately i~lotted per the latest preliminary title
report and recorded maps. Copies of all referenced documents from the Title report shall
be provided to this department for reference.
No slope shall be greater than 2:1 maximum unless otherwise approved by this department.
The existing topography'as shown on the tentative map shall be current, and shall extend a
minimum of 300 feet both southerly and westerly outside the project boundary. The location
of the existing buildings and other facilities (such as well sites) shall also be shown and
dirnen.sioned within 100 feet of the property boundary line. Existing walls and fences shall
also be noted in relation to the property boundary.
The proposed primary access to.this site shall be a minimum of 200 feet from Ryerest Drive.
An updated traffic analysis shall be prepared per the City's current guidelines and shall
comply with congestion management and air quality requirements. the study shall also
address site distance and turning movements from the proposed driveways and existing
driveways or intersections adjacent to the site. The applicant's traffic engineer should contact
this department for copies of our current criteria. A fee of $780 shall be required for review
of the traffic study by the City.
All references to design standards shall be per the City's current Ordinance No. 9143. All
drainage facilities shall be per the current standard drawings of the Riverside County Flood
Control District.
Private streets shall be designed to match the City;s design requirements.
R:%-S~TA~',~33~ D RC.
Mr. ~axman
T~I 2533~
11.
12.
The area subject to flooding as shown on Parcel Map 13271 shall be indicated on the
tentative map.
All lots shall be numbered except for street right-of-way and barrier Strips, which shall be
lettered lots.
13. The Tentative Map shall be noted as "For Condominium Purposes."
Tentative Tract Map No. 25338 is deemed to be incomplete at this time. Please submit five (5.)
copies of the mended tentative map, three (3) copies of the mended conceptual landscape. plan,
three (3) copies of elevations and floor plans and five (5') copies of mended grading plans within
ten (10) calendar days of the date of thiS letter to the Planning Department. Upon re-submittal, Staff
shall conduct a review of these materials and determine if the above mentioned concerns have been
addressed. As per our discussion at the meeting, you will have sixty (60) days to submit the other
requested materials.
If you have any questions or comments, please call Matthew Fagan at' (714) 694-6400.
Sincerely,
Senior Planner
Bob Righetti, Department of Public Works
Mike Grey, Fire Department
Gary King, Community Services District
Dan Steric
R:~.5~,$TAFFRy~?J33SDRC.LTR
AI~T~ CLE V
SECTION 5.1.
TENTATIVE )~APS -. IXFOP~4ATION. REQUIRED
TENTATIVE ~'UBDIVISlON KAPS. : -.
The' following .information shall be, shown an and ~erified or accmpany
tentative subdivision maps with any other information that the Planning
Director may dee~ necessary and reasonEble.. i' .'
1: Tract number, title of map. A~sessor's parcel n{znber and legal
description of property, not including tract na~e;
2. 'N~ne, adStess and telephone number'of owner ~,nd land divi~er, and -
n~e, address and telephone number of person preparing map;
3. Ownership information on additional property owned adjacent or
contigUous to the 1 and to be suball vi ded.
4. Approximate total acreage of properl~y and lot size, net and gross for
a typical lot and for each irregular lot, overall dimensions, north
arrow, scale and date;
5. Subdivision boundary line and detailed vicinity map showing
tel atl onshi p to surroundtng cC~,.,uni ty;
6. Names, locations, right-Of-way, ~dths and improvenents of.adjacent
streets, alleys, railroads, transmission lines, pipelines, sewers and
existing structures, both a~Dove and below ground;
7. Names, locations, widths of right-of-w~y for proposed streets, alleys
and easenents, and the approximate grades of proposed and existing
streets and approximate'street centerline radii of curves;
8. Streets, alleyes: and right-of-way providing legal access to the
property; .'
S. If private streets are 'proposed. they shall 'be so noted on the
tentative map;
10. Names 'of utility purveyors. locations and widths of existing and
proposed public utility easements: -'
a. When specific areas for subsu~a~e disposal are required, those
areas shal I be deli neared..
22
11.
Any known existing wells on the property or within 200 feet of
the subdivision b~undary shall be indicated on the tentative map.
Water-courses, channels, existing c{~l'verts and drain pipes, including~
existing and proposed facilities 'for contr=l of storm waters;
Land subject im overflow, inundation. or flood hazard;
13. Any land or .right-of-way to be ~edtcated to public use;
14. Identify ccr~non areas and open spaces; :
15. Proposed lot lines and approxima. te dimensions;
16. Adjoining .property and.lot lines;
17. Maximum contour interval shall be four feet. The contour lines shall
extend 300 feet beyond the exterior boundaries of the property when
adjacent property is unimproved or vacant. Copies of U.S.G.S.
topographic maps are acceptable only Men other information is not
available. 'Flood Control and Road DeparU~ent base maps may be
acceptable.
18. Site Gradi rig:
Whenever any area of the proposea subdivision has a gradient of
5% or more, as measured between natural contours, the following-
information shall be shown on, or accompany, the tentative map:
(1) The proposed cuts and fills in the subdivision:
(a) ' All cut and fill slopes or c~binattons thereof shall
be made no steeper than 2:1 (two horizontal to one
vertical), and their height shall be no .greater than
ten feet. Exceptions to these standards may be
permitted as follows:
Cbt Slopes - Slope ratios steeper than-2:1 and slope
heights in excess of ten feet vertically shall be
considered if they are rec~.~'lended to be · safe in a
slope stability report written by either 'a registered
soil engineer or a registered engineering geologist.
The slope stability report must also include
recui.,,endations for erosion control and landscaping of
the proposed grading. -'
feet vertically (on a slope of e
· they ar~-rec=nmended to .be safe. in a slope st~bility
report written by a registered soil engineer. The
slope stability report must also include
reco~nendations for erosion control and landscaping of
the proposed grading.
Based on the slope stability report, fill slopes
greater than ten feet may need to be constructed at a
more gentle slope ratio (e.g. 3:1 or/,:1), in order tO
achi eve stabtl i ty. ..
(b)
Cuts-and fills in areas 'of sd~surface sewage disposal
shall be in accordance with the sewage disposal
feasibili ty report rec~,,,ien~ations.
(2)."The elevations of all individuai building pads 'in the
subdi vision;
(3) The elevations at the perimeter of the subdivision;
(4) The relationship to adjoining land and development.
Where grading will tie into adjacent natural terrain, final
manufactured slopes shall be blended into the existing terrain.
19. Existing use and zoning of property immediately surrounding tract;
20. Existing zoning, and proposed land use of property (single-family,
mul tipl e-f~ily, business, i ndustri al );
21.
A list of the 'names 'and addresses· of the owners' of'real property
located wi;hin 300 feet of the ~xterior boundaries of the property to
be considered, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll, and any
update issued by the County A~sass~r.
Reports and written statenents of the following matters shall acc~npany the
tentati ve map:
Proposed method' of control of storm water, including data as to ~nount
of runoff, and the approximate grade and dimensions of the proposed
·faci I i tl es.
A written statsnent (Land Division Form SA~(53) fr~n th~ Health
Officer stating that:
A water purveyor under permit has agr~-_d in writing to serve all
lots in the land division; or .'
The land divider has an acceptable application.for a water
purveyor permit on file with the Departant of Public Health or
the State Depar~nent of-Health Services.
The land divider has'filed with the Health Depar:ent information
-.regarding the quantity and quality of water of any w~lls existing
on the property, and the estimated current cost of drilling ~
wel 1 on the property.
d. No water systen is provided and is.not required for this land
division. '
3. A written statenent (I~and 'Division Form SAlt S3)-frcrn the Health
Officer stating the type of sewage disposal that will be permitted.
To aid.in this determination, a se~r feasibility letter, or a sewaae
disposal feasibility report and Regional Water Quality Control Boar~i
clearance or other pertinent information shall be required.
If the lahd di-~sion lies within a. special studies zone shown on the map
prepared by the State Geologist pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Geologic
Hazard Zone Act, a geologic report or waiver thereof pursuant to the
provisions of Ordinance No. 547 shall acc=mpany the tentative map.
A program for control. of soil erosion in conformity with Section 14.1 shall
be su~ittad for land divisions in blow sand areas.
SECTION S.2. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAPS.
The following information shall be shown and verified on or acccmpan~ all
tentative parcel maps and any other information that the Planning Director
may dee~ necessary and reasonable.
Parcel Map identification nu-nber, Assessor's parcel nu'nber, title
map, and leg, al description of property but not including 'tract na~e;
Name and address of owner and'land divider and nane and address of
person preparing map;
Approximate total acreage of property and lot size net and gross for a
typical lot and for each irregular lot, overall dimensions, north
arrow, scale and. date;
Land division boundary line and vicinity map showing r~l~ionship to
surrounding con~nuni ty;
Assessor's Map book and page numbers of adjoining land divisions;
Na~es, locations, right-of-way, widths and improvenents of existing.
adjacent streets, alleys, railroads, and existing structures, both
above and below ground; ~
25
11.
12.
13,
14.
1,=.
16.
3.7.
Names, locations,' widths of right-of-way for Proposed st.-~.ets, alleys
and eas~ents, and the approximate grades of Proposed streets and
approximate street centerline radii of curves;
Streets and right-of-way providing legal access to the property;
If the private streets are proposed, it shall be 'so noted on the
tentart ve map,
Na~es of utility purveyors, location and widt~"of existing 'and
proposed known public utility eas~ents:
a. When specific areas for subsurface sewage disposal systems are
required, the disposal areas. .This requir~nent applies to
Schedule mE' parcel maps .only,
'b. Any known existing wells on the property or-within 200 feet of
the subdivision boundary shall be indicated on the tentative map.
Water courses, channels, existing culverts and drain pipes, including
existing and proposed facilities for. control of storm waters;
Land subject to overflow, inundation or flood hazard;
Any land or right-of-way to be dedicated to public use-and
right-of-way for railroads and other'uses;
Identify ccmmon areas and open spaces;
Proposed lot lines and approximate dimensions;
Adjoining p~operty and lot lines;
Maxlinen contour intervals shall be four fe~.t. The controut lines shall
extend 300 fe~_t beyond the exterior 'lxmndaries of the property when .
adjacent property is unimproved or vac=-nt. Copies of U.S.G.S.
topographic maps are acceptable only when other information is not
available. Flood Control and Road Depar~ent b~se maps may be
acceptable; ..
Existing use and zoning of property immediately surrounding tentative
map;
!9. Existing zoning and pro. posed land use (single-family, multi-family,
busi hess i ndustri al );
20. A st~tenent as to whether the' tentative map-includes the enti~e
contiguous ownership of the land divider or only a portion thereof;
26
2Z. A list of the na~es and addresses of the owners of real pro~rty
located ~(thin 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property to
.. be considered, as shown an the last equalized assessaent roll, and any
update issued by the C.ounty Assessor.
Reports and ~ritten statments on the following matters sh~ll acc~pany -.~e
tentati ve map:
Proposed method of control of storm water, including data as to a~ount
of runoff, and the approximaiEe grade and dimensi-ons of th~ proposed'
fact 1 i i~i as. ,'
A written staranent (Form. SAN 53) from the Health Officer, si~attng the
type of sewage disposal ahd water supply that will be permitted shall
be submitted for all cum,,lercial and industrial parcel maps.
If the 'land d~vision lies ~ithin a special studies zone shown on the map
prepared by the State Geologist, pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Geologic
Hazard Zone Act,a geologic report or waiver thereof pursuant to the
provisions of Ordinance No. 547 shall acccmpany all tentative maps.
D. Requests to waive the final map for any parcel map division shall be filed
at the time of the filing of the tentative parcel nap.
E. A progrin for the control of soil erosion in conformity with Section 14.1
et seo. of this ordinance shall be submitted for land developments in blow
san~ areas.
SECTIO~ ;5.3. PLAN~ED DEYELOPHE~(TS - RESIDE?iTIAL, COtiHE.~CIAL ~,~D IItDUSTF~IAL.
A. ~henever a tentative subdivision or parcel map is filed for a planned
residential, coT~nercial or industrial development, as defined in Ordinance
No. 348, the following data shall acccmpany or be delineated on the
t_-ntati ve ~ap
in addition to the data required by Sections 5.! and 5.2 of this
ordi nance:
Locations and.dimensions of proposed d~eIlings, buildings or other
structures. :
Table indicating area and density calculations.
Building setback dimensions.
Driveways, loading and parking areas.
Loc~tlon and type of proposed'fencing, gates and walls.
.27
6. Irrigation and landscaping plans, including plant species-
7. Ft oor pl arts and el evati ons.
8. Location and dimensions of c=~non areas-
9. proposal' for maintenace of cc:~on areas-
!0. · proposed special r~strictions- ..
SECTION 5.4. 'VESTING TENTATIVE M~s-pS- ' ..'
A. This section is.enacted pursuant ~ Section -66498.1 of the .Goverment
Code, and is intended to estaSlish procedures necessary to-tmplenent the
provisions of ~he Subdivision )lap Act and this ordinance- The approval or
conditional a~proval of a vesting tentative map shall confer a vested right
to proceed with development in substantial ccmpliance with those County
ordinances, policies, and standards described in Section 66A74.2 of the
Governnent Code or, if that Section is repealed, with the CoUnty
ordinances, policies, and standards'which are in effect at the time the
vesting tentative map is approved or conditionallY approved- The riohts
conferred by this section shall expire if a final map is not approve~ prior
· to the expiration of' the vesting tentative map. ·Whenever a provision of'
this ordinance requires that a tentative map be filed, a vesting tentative
map may be filed instead-
B. Whenever a vesting tentative map is filed, it shall be processed in the
s~ne manner as a tentative map unless modified by this section, and shall
have printed conspicuously on its face the words 'Vesting Tentative Map."
All vesting tentative maps shall be submitted to 'the Planning Director on
the forms provided by the planning Depariznent and shall be acccmpanied by
the filing fee Set forth in Section 17.1 of this ordinance- In addition
to the data required by Sections 5.1 and 5.2 of this ordinance, the
following data and information may be required by the Planning Director:
i. A site plan, drawn to scale, that shows the following:
(a) Na~e, address and the telephone nu-nber of the applicant and all
owners of the subject property, including evidence..that all
owners agre"- to the appl i.c. atlon...
(b) Location or address of .the property. and Assessor's parcel n~ber.
(c} Boundary and dimensions of property, north arrow, scale and ~ate.
(d) Topography of the propertY- .
(e} Approximate total acrea'qe of property and lot size of each lot,
recreational and open s~ace aria, and paving- Cannon areas and
open space to be identified-
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
EXHIBITS
R:\S~TAFFRP'I'%25338TM.CC 9/3/93 klb 10
CITY OF TEMECULA
ti
\~ _ _ -
SITE
CASE NO.:
EXHIBIT: A
P.C. DATE:
Tentative Tract Map No. 25338, Amendment No. 1
VICINITY MAP
August 2, 1993
R:\S\STAFFRPT~25338TM.PC 7~22~93 klb
CITY OF TEMECULA
.,..j'
I, I
DRAFT GENERAL PLAN - EXHIBIT B
DESIGNATION:
RIll
ZONING - EXHIBIT C DESIGNATION: R-2 (MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS)
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25338, AMENDMENT NO. 1
P.C. DATE: AUGUST 2, 1993
R:\S\STAFFRPT~25338TM.PC 7/22/93 klb
CITY OF TEMECULA
CASE NO.:
EXHIBIT: D
P.C. DATE:
Tentative Tract Map No. 25338, Amendment No. I
August 2, 1993
SITE PLAN
R:\S\STAFFRPT~25338TM.PC 7/22193 klb
ITEM
NO.
19
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
/r,~/Tim D. Serlet, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
September 14, 1993
Speed Undulations - Calle Pir~a Colade
PREPARED BY: Martin C. Lauber, Traffic Engineer
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council consider the installation of speed undulations on Calle P/fie Colada
between Del Rey Road and La Serena Way.
BACKGROUND:
Staff has received a petition from residents adjacent to Calle PiCa Colada between Del Rey
Road and La Serena Way to install speed undulations. This petition must be signed by at least
sixty five percent (65%) of the affected property owners before qualifying for consideration.
The results of this petition have been verified by the City to confirm that 70% of the affected
property owners agree to the requested installations.
The locations for the proposed speed undulations on Calle Pir~a Colada were field located. The
distance between the undulations has exceeded the criteria due to the conflicting driveway
configurations on Calle PiCa Colada. Please refer to Exhibit "A" for suggested locations.
This section of roadway qualifies as a candidate location for speed undulations based on the
existing traffic volumes, speed limit, and percentage of vehicles exceeding the speed limit.
It also meets the required roadway width, length, grade, alignment and number of lanes. The
attached matrix compares the specific policy requirements to the site specific conditions.
Both the School District and the Fire Department have been contacted by phone and written
correspondence. The School District verbally approved the proposed locations and will follow
up in writing. The Fire Department will be reviewing the City's plan and then will be
responding prior to the meeting.
-1 - pwO 15\agdrpt%93%0914c.lau
FISCAL IMPACT:
Estimated costs:
Undulations - Asphalt Paving
Pavement Legends - Bump
Pavement Markings - Cross Hatching
Traffic Signing for Bumps
8@ ~1,000 = ~ 8,000
16@ 8 = 128
8@ 40 = 320
4@ 125 = 500
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
8,948
The actual cost will be finalized after the requested bids have been received and reviewed.
Attachments: Exhibit "A" Speed Undulation suggested locations
-2- pw015%egdrpt%93%0914e.leu
SPEED UNDULATION POLICY
MATRIX
CATEGORY
Signatures of affected
property owners
Average daily traffic
Speed Limit
Percentage of vehicles
exceeding 25 mph
Street width
Number of lanes
Street grade
Minimum roadway
length
Alignment
Truck/Transit Route
Important Emergency
Access Route
On City Circulation Plan
REQUIREMENT
65%
1,200 - 2,500
25 mph
60%
no greater than 40 feet
maximum of 2
less than 5%
1320 feet
Severe vertical or
horizontal alignment
No
No
STUDY AREA
70%
Approx. 1,500
25 mph
70%
40 feet
2
less than 1%
1600 feet
No
No
No
60 TOTAL RESIDENCES AND 42 RESIDENCES SURVEYED
-3- pw015%agdrpt%93%0914o.lau
/
ITEM 20
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
k,
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
Mary Jane McLarney, Finance Officer
September 14, 1993
Consideration of a Recycled Products Purchasing Policy
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider a Recycled Products
Purchasing Policy and provide direction to staff.
DISCUSSION: At the request of Mayor Mu~oz staff has prepared a recycled
products purchasing policy. The purpose of the policy is to create demand for
recycled products and materials. This would complete the recycling process by
providing a market for the materials collected as required by AB 939.
FISCAL IMPACT: Certain recycled products may be more expensive; however,
prices of recycled products vvill decrease as remanufacturing methods are improved.
Attachment:
Procurement Policy on Recycled Products
R: XNORTONL L4 GEND AStRE CYCLEP.,4 G N 08/25/93
Pro.//
Date:
Dept.
Finance
CITY OF TEMECULA
Policies and Procedures
General Subject:
Specific Subject:
PROCUREMENT POLICY
RECYCLED PRODUCTS
BACKGROUND:
Solid waste management poses an increasingly difficult challenge as America's
consumption increases and landfill space becomes more scarce. With the enactment of
the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), recycling is now the
law in California. The City of Temecula and other cities in the area are involved in
implementing recycling services to meet the requirements of the new law and to conserve
natural resources.
The City's implementation of a recycling program, by itself, is insufficient. Recycling
has not truly taken place until the recycled material has been used in the manufacture of
a product and that product has been purchased and placed in use. As processing facilities
and markets become available, additional recycled materials can be purchased by the
City. State and local government purchases account for 12-13 percent of the gross
national product, therefore, Government purchases can have a direct and meaningful
influence on the market place.
PURPOSE:
It is the intent of the City Council that the City of Temecula take a leadership role not
only in recycling its waste products but also in the purchase of recycled products for use
in the delivery of City services. It is the purpose of this policy to provide direction to
staff in the procurement and use of recycled products.
POLICY:
It is the policy of the City of Temecula to purchase and use recycled products whenever
possible except when such use negatively impacts health, safety or operational efficiency.
2. The purchase of products that cannot be recycled or reused is strongly discouraged.
Recycled paper shall be purchased and used at least 50% of the time in all copy machines
that will accept it and shall be used for all printing purposes possible. When feasible,
recycled paper logo or statement "Printed on recycled paper" shall be used.
City departments and divisions shall use recycled paper for their letterhead, envelopes
and business cards whenever possible. A recycled paper designation shall be printed on
all letterhead.
City departments shall examine their purchasing specifications and where feasible,
restructure them to require the use of products that incorporate recycled materials in their
manufacture. Whenever possible, these products shall state they are made of recycled
materials. The Recycled Products List shall include but not be limited to the following:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Paper products
Construction supplies
Automotive, road and highway supplies
Landscape materials and equipment
Janitorial supplies
Plastic materials and equipment
Glass and rubber supplies
A 10% preference, not to exceed $1,000 per contract, shall be given to recycled
products. The preference percentage shall be based on the lowest bid or price quoted by
the vendor or contractor offering non-recycled products.
The City shall cooperate with the County of Riverside, and other governmental agencies
in the development of programs and procedures which will further this policy.
Submittal Date:
To:
From:
CITY OF TEMECULA
CIty Council Agenda Item Placement
8/].7/9:3
city Clerk
Finance Dept. - ~ary Jane McLarney
Aaenda Item
Please place the following Item on the (7' //'/' ¢7 -~
(date)
ITEM TITLE:
Consideration of a Recycled Produces Purchasin8 Policy
City Council Agenda
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the
a~v~rtin~ rn ~-~t:'F.
consider ~ Recycled
Prod, cts P, rch~tr~ Phitry
p~nv~de
PLACE ITEM UNDER THE FOLLOWING HEADING:
Presentations & Proclamations
Consent Calendar
X
Council Business
Staff Reports
Public Hearings**
Written Communications
Unfinished BuSIness
Council Comments.
** If a Public Hearing Is required. the Public Hearing Notice must be provided by the applicant to the City
Clerk's Department by Friday at noon, two and one half weeks prior to the date of the City Council meeting,
with envelopes addressed to all property owners required by law to be noticed, a certified mailing list. and
sufficient postage, If there are special noticing requirements, provide that Information on a separate sheet.
Please send copy. of Agenda and Agenda Report to:
(le, applicant, claimant, appellant, interested persons)
(nemet laaaress)
(ridroe) (aaaress)
(name) (sadtess)
(A~tach separate sheet, If necessary)
FORMSIAGENOA, RQST I 02/O2~O
ITEM
NO.
21
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager/City Council
June S. Greek, City Clerk
September 14, 1993
Designation of Voting Delegate for the National League of Cities Annual
Congress
RECOMMENDATION:
Designate a voting representative and an alternate.
BACKGROUND: Each year at the Annual Congress of the National League of Cities the
member cities are asked to designate the voting delegate and alternate. Each city is entitled
to one vote in matters affecting League policy. The business meeting will be held on Sunday,
December 5, 1993, at the Congress of Cities in Orlando, Florida. If it is not possible for a
member of the City Council to be present the Council may designate a city official who is
attending the conference.
I have attached the memorandum from the League's Executive Director which further
elaborates on the voting procedures.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENTS:
Memorandum from Donald J Borut, Executive Director
National League of Cities
JSG
R:~gende,rl~t%NLOCvete 1
August 5, 1993
MEMORANDUM
To:
From:
Subject:
National 1301 Pennsylvlnia Avenue N.W.
League Washington, D.C. '
of 20004
Cities (202) 6263000
Fax: (202) 626-3043
City Clerks of Direct tuber Cities
o Vodng I:)e]egates,
C,~snCIsF,.HaC}d
Danl~J. Befut
Annual Congress of Cities, December 2-5, 1993, Orlando, Florida
Due October 8
The National League of Cities' Annual Business Meeting will be held Sunday, December 5,
1993 at the Congress of Cities in Orlando, Florida. Under the Bylaws of the National
League of Cities, each direct member city is entitled to cast from one to 20 votes, depending
upon the city's population, through its designated voting delegate at the Annual Business
Meeting. The table on the reverse side of this memorandum shows the breakdown of votes
by population categories.
To be eligible to cast the city's vote(s), each voting delegate and alternate voting delegate
must be designated by the city using the attached form which will be forwarded to NLC's
Credentials Committee. NLC's Bylaws expressly prohibit voting by proxy. Thus, the
designated voting delegates must be present at the Annual Business Meeting to cast the city's
vote or votes.
To enable us to get your credentials in order and to provide your voting delegates with
proposed National' Municipal Policy amendments and proposed Resolutions prior to the
Congress of Cities, we ask that you return the WHITE copy of the completed form to NLC
on or before October 8, 1993. A pre-addressed envelope is attached. Upon receipt of these
names, NLC will send each voting and alternate voting delegate a set of instructions on
registration and rules governing the conduct of the Annual Business Meeting.
To assist your state municipal league in selecting delegates to cast votes on behalf of the state
municipal league, please forward the YELLOW copy of the credential form to your state
league office and keep the PINK copy for your records.
If you have any questions, please contact Lesley-Ann Rennie at (202) 626-3020.
NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES
ANNUAL CONGRESS OF CITIES
Number of Votes - Direct Member Cities
Article IV, Section 2 of NLC's Bylaws specifies as follows the number of votes which each
member city of the National League of Cities is en~~ed to cast at the Annual Congress of
Cities:
CITY POPULATION (*per 1990 eeimm)
Under 50,000
50,000- 99,999
1 vote
2 votes
100,000-199,999
200,000 - 299,999.
300,000- 399,999
400,000 - 499,999
4 votes
6 votes
8 votes
10 votes
500,000 - 599,000
600,000 - 699,000
12 votes
14 votes
700,000 - 799,000
16 votes
800,000- 899,000
18 votes
900,000 and above
20 votes
Note: Member cities are required by the Bylaws to cast unanimous votes.
ITEM N O. 2 2
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL
CITY A'I'FORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager.
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
September 14, 1993
Discussion of Approval Authority Ordinance
Prepared By:
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to staff relative to amendments to the existing
ordinance.
BACKGROUND
At the City Council meeting of August 24, 1993 the Council requested staff to place this
matter on the agenda for discussion. Because of concerns expressed over the approval
process for a proposed mini-market/gas station, the Council decided to re-examine the
approval authority for this and other potentially controversial uses being proposed.
DISCUSSION
The City Council, in an attempt to streamline the approval process for development projects,
approved Ordinance No. 92-14 on May 26, 1992. This ordinance, as reflected in the attached
Approval Authority Matrix (see Attachment No. 1 ), authorized the Planning Commission and
staff to approved certain projects, depending upon the scale and complexity of the proposal,
that were previously considered at the Council level.
However, in delegating this authority down to the lower levels, the Council desired to retain
the ability to appeal any decision of the staff or Planning Commission. Consequently,
language was included in the ordinance which provided that any councilmember could appeal
a decision within the required 10 day appeal period simply by contacting staff and requesting
that the item be placed on a future council agenda for consideration.
Attachments: 1.
2.
Approval Authority Matrix - Page 2
Staff Report (May 26, 1992) - Page 3
R:\S~STA~PPAUTH.CC2 913/93 kJb 1
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
APPROVAL AUTHORITY MATRIX
R:\S\STAFFRFF'~PPAUTH.CC2 9/3/93 kJb ~)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
APPROVAL AUTHORITY "EXHIBIT A"
ITEM STAFF *PLAN. DIRECTOR *PLAN.
* * * * COMMISSION
~rtificate of Compliance
Change of Zone/Ordinance Amendment.
Conditional Use Permit {Existing Building}
Conditional Use Permit (Not in Existing Building)
Final Map
General Plan Amendment
Parcel Merger
Lot Line Adjustment
Parking Adjustment
Plot Plan for Antennae and Off-Site Advertising
X
X
X
X
X
Recommendation
X
Recommendation
X
*CITY
COUNCIL
X
X
X
13.
14.
1,
25.
27.
28.
11. Plot Plan Under10,000 Sq. Ft.
Exempt from CEQA
12. Plot Plan Under 100000 Sq. Ft.
Non Exempt from CEQA
Plot Plan Over 10,000 Sq.Ft.
Public Use Permit Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Exempt from CEQA.
Public Use Permit Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Non Exempt from CEQA.
16. Public Use Permit Over 10,000 Sq. Ft.
17. Reversion to Acreage
18. Second Dwelling Unit Permit
19. Special Care Facility
20. Specific Plan/Amendment
21. Substantial Conformance
22. Temporary Use Permit (Under 6 Months)
23. Temporary Use Permit (Over 6 Months)
24. Tentative Parcel Map (Residential
Less that 5 Lots)
Tentative Parcel Map (Commercial/Industrial)
Tentative Tract Map (More than 5 Lots)
Time Extension - City Approved Projects
Time Extension - County Approved Projects
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Recommendation
X
X
X
X
· 2~--~ Variance
· Noticed Public Hearing, 300 Ft. for Planning Director Approval, 600 Ft. for Ranning Commission and City Council Approval.
· ·The Planning Director may refer any mat"ter assigned to the Director or Staff to the Planning Commission.
X
SXSTAFF~PPAUTH.CCx
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
STAFF REPORT (MAY 26, 1992)
R:\S~STAFF~PPAUTH.CC2 913193 ~ :3
APPROVAL
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECUIA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Planrdng Department
May 26, 1992
Approval Authority Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council
adopt Ordinance No. 92-__, upholding the Planning Commission's
approval of an ordinance regulating the approval of land use
regulations.
BACKGROUND
In response to past concerns expressed to Staff by the Council relative to speeding up the
processing of development applications, Staff initiated an amendment to the existing approval
ordinance which staff believes will substantially reduce processing time for a number of project
types.
Under County processing requirements, projects (depending on their scale) were approvable by
either Staff, Planning Director with public hearing, Planning Commission, or the Board of
Supervisors. When the. City incorporated December, 1989, the City Council amended the
County procedures.
When the City formed the Planning Commission in June of 1990, approvals were largely
advisory to the Council.
In August of 1990, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 90-19, which outlined approval authority
for all development proposals, (see Attachment 4). This ordinance still did not provide for
Planning Director approvals of discretionary projects and only allowed the Planning Commission
to approve relatively minor projects.
S~$TAFFRP'BAPPAUTH .CCx i
The Planning Commission has reviewed deveAopment applications for the last 20 months. In
addition, consultant Planning Staff has been replaced by City employees. Consequently, the
level of both CommissiOn and Staff experience has risen to a point where additional appwval
authority is warranted.
Prior to scheduling the proposed changes to the approval authority ordinance, Staff presented
the revisions to both the City Coordinating Committee and the Economic Development
Committee. Both committees were enthusiastic about the proposed changes and felt that their
implementation would result in substantially improved processing times.
At their January 27, 1992 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended some revisions be
made. Planning Commissioners' recommendations on Matrix #1 (page 8) were made as shown
on Matrix
Item numbers 3, 18, 22, 23, 24, and 27, on Matrix #1, were moved from Director approval to
Commission approval and are referenced as the numbers 3, 19, 24,' 25, 26, and 29 as shown on
Matrix
Item no. 8, on Matrix #1, was moved to Staff approval from Director approval.
Item No. 21, on Matrix #1, was revised to require temporary use permits beyond six months
to be approved by the Commission. The commission then continued the matter to February 3rd,
for consideration of the revised Approval Authority Matrix with their recommended changes,
and recommended adoption of the proposed amendments to the Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
Attachments:
Approval Authority Matrix
(Planning Commission Recommended) - page 3
Ordinance No 92-__ - page 5
Planning Commission minutes of January 27 and February 3, 1992 - page 9
Planning Commission Staff packet, January 27, 1992, with the Planning
recommended matrix attached - page 10
Letter of support, Temecula, Murrieta EDC dated lanuary 23, 1992 - page 11
Staff
vgw
$XSTAFFRFrXAPPAUTH.CCx 2
ATTAC~NT NO. 1
APPROVAL AUTHORITY MATRIX
S'~"TAFFRFr~PPAUTH.CCx ~
APPROVAL
artificate of Compliance
2. Change of Zone/Ordinance Amendment,
3. Conditional Use Permit (Existing Building}
4. Cond|tional Use Permit (Not in Existing Building)
5. Final Map
6, General Plan Amendment
7. Parcel Merger
8. Lot Line Adjustment
9, Parking Adjustment
10. Plot Plan for Antennae and Off-Site Advertising
AUTHORITY "EXHIBIT A"
STAFF *PLAN. DIRECTOR *PLAN.
** ** COMMISSION
X
X
Recommendation
X
X
X
X
Recommendation
X
*CITY
COUNCIL
X
X
X
11. Plot Plan Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Exempt from CEQA
12. Plot Plan Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Non Exempt from CEQA
13. Plot Plan Over 10,000 Sq.Ft.
14. Public Use Permit Under 10,000 Sq, Ft.
__/---- Exempt from CEQA.
1, Public Use Permit Under 10,000 Sq. Ft.
Non Exempt from CEQA.
16. Public Use Permit Over 10,000 Sq. Ft.
17. Reversion to Acreage
18. Second Dwelling Unit Permit
19. Special Care Facility
20. Specific Plan/Amendment
21. Substantial Conformance
22. Temporary Use Permit (Under 6 Months}
23. Temporary Use Permit (Over 6 Months}
24. Tentative Parcel Map (Residential
Less that 5 Lots)
25. Tentative Parcel Map (Commercial/Industrial)
26. Tentative TraCt Map (More than 5 Lots}
27. Time Extension - City Approved Projects
28. Time Extension - County Approved Projects
2/'--Variance
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Recommendation
X
X
X
X
X
*Noticed Public Hearing, 300 Ft. for Planning Director Approval, 600 Ft. for Planning Commission and City Council Approval.
· *The Planning Director may refer any matter assigned to the Director or Staff to the Planning Commission.
S~STAFFRiqr.~ppAU-rH.CCx Jr
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
ORDINANCE NO. 92-__
SXSTA~PPAUTH.CCx 6
ORDINANCE NO. 92-14
AN ORDIN~4CE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ~ CITY
OF TEMECULA REPELLING ORDINANCE NO. 90-19
ESTABL~gmNG DECISION-MAKING tUTHORITY FOR
SUBDIVISION AND L,~ND USE APPLICATIONS
WHEREAS, on December 1, 1989, the City of Temecnla was established as a duly
organized municipal corporation of the State of California;
Wn~S, pursuant to City Ordinance No. 90-04, the City adopted certain portions
of the non-codified Riverside County Ordinances, including Ordinance No. 348 ('Land Use
Code") and Ordinance No. 460 ('Subdivision Use Code,) for the City of Temecula; .
'WB'F-REAS, on October 9, .1990, the City Council of the City of Temecula adopted
Ordinance No. 90-19 establishing decision-making authority for subdivision and land use
applications in order to provide for a smooth transition from the County of Riverside to the City
of Temecula involving such land use applications;
WHEREAS, in recognition of the faat that most land use applications are now originating
in the City of Temecula, it is the desire of the City Council to make more efficient and to
establish a line of authority for the review and approval process involving development
applications.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
is hereby repealed;
Ordinance No. 90. 19, adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula
Section 2. Riverside County Ordinance No. 348 and Ordinance No. 460, as adopted
by City Ordinance No. 90-04, are hereby amended to adopt the development application
procedures identified in Exhibit "A", attached hereto. '--
Section 3. Where combined development applications are submitted for consideration,
to the extent any portion of the application would be considered for approval by the highest
reviewing body, as set forth in Section 2, then the entire combined application shall be
considered by the reviewing body.
Section 4. Any application for extension of an approved tentative map, parcel map,
or vesting tentative map considered in accordance with the procedures contained herein shall pay
the same fee as if the application were for the original map approval.
5/O~*92-14 -1-
Section 5. Any interested person may file an appeal to a final decision by the
Planning Commission to the City Council. Together with the applicable f~ing fee established
by Resolution of the City Council, such appeal must be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10)
days of the da~ the matter was decided by the Planning Commission. For purposes of this
Section, any City Council member may appeal a decision by the Planning Commission without
payment of any fee-for the appeal.
Section 6. Except as otherwise provided therein, any other land division or
development application may be submitted to the City Planning Director for approval. If the
Planning Director determines that the proposed application is comparable to one of the approvals
described in Section 2, he shall direct that such application be submitted to either the Planning
Commission or City Council for consideration pursuant to the procedures set forth at Section 2.
Section 7. To the extent the provisions of Ordinance Nos. 348 and 460 are not
superseded by the provisions of this City Ordinance, including notice and hearing requirements,
said remaining provisions shall remain effective.
Section 8. The City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause
copies of this Ordinance to be posted and published as required by law.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 9th day of Jun.¢, 1992.
cia H. Birdsall, Mayor
ATfEST:
JuneC~Greek, City Clerk
[SEAL]
5lOrds92-14
-2-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF mVF_aSD~) SS
CITY OF ~CI/LA)
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 92-14 was duly introduced and placed upon its furst reading at a regular
meeting of the City Council on the 26th 'day of May, 1992, and that thereafter, said Ordinance
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 9th day of June,
1992, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: 5
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
COUNCILNmM]]ERS:
Lindemans, Moore, Parks, Munoz,
Birdsall
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
City Clerk
5/0rd,,92-14
-3-
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
The Planning Commission
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning ·
January 27, 1992
Approval Authority Ordinance
The attached approval authority matrix, if approved, would provide for more expedient
processing of applications by City Staff. The proposed revisions and their effect are
summarized below:
Conditional Use Permits (C.U.P.'s) in an existing building (T.I) would be approvable by
the Director rather than the Planning Commission.
Public Use Permits (P.U.P.'s) under 10,000 square feet in size and exempt from CEQA
would be approvable by Staff (Director); P.U.P.'s and P.P. under 10,000 square feet
and not exempt from CEQA would be approvable by the Director (with a public
hearing); P.U.P.'s and plot plans over 10,000 square feet would be approvable by the
Planning Commission. Currently, all P.U.P.'s and plot plans require Planning
Commission approval and/or City Council (in excess of 50,000 square feet) approval.
Second dwelling units would be approvable by the Director with public hearing, rather
than the Planning Commission, per current ordinance.
Substantial Conformance determinations would be approvable by the Director, rather
than Planning Commission.
All commercial and industrial parcel maps and residential parcel maps would be
approvable by the Director at a public hearing· At the present time, the Commission
approves all tentative parcel maps (T.P.M.'s) under 20 acres in size; the Council
approves all T.P.M.'s in excess of 20 acres.
All tentative tract maps would have final approval by the Planning Commission,
regardless of size. Currently, the same criteria as stated above in item 6 applies to
approvals.
S~'TAFFRFI"~.PPAUTH.CCx 7
The Planning Commission
Approval Authority
Page 2
Time extension requests on maps, P.U.P.'s, plot plans, and C.U.P.'s previously
approved by the City would be approvable by the Director with public hearing. Time
extension requests on applications alSproved by the County would require Planning
Commission approval. Currently, time extension requests are approvable by the
Commission and/or Council depending on the size of the project.
The net effect of instituting these changes would, in Staff's opinion, result in a measurable
decrease in processing times; for affected applications, this could amount to four weeks or
more in some cases.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission recommend approval of Ordinance
No. 92-_, an interior Ordinance regulating the approval of land
use regulations.
vgw
S~STAFFRPT~PPAUTH.CCx 8
0
tJ X X X
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
OF
JANUARY 27 AND FEBRUARY 3, 1992
S~TAFFRFI"~PPAUTH .CCx 10
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF PACKET
DATED
JANUARY 27, 1992
WITH PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDED MATRIX ATTACHED
SXSTAFFRIq'XAPPAUTI~.CCx 11
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
LETTER OF SUPPORT
TEMECULA, MURRIETA EDC
DATED
JANUARY 23, 1992
S'~"TAFF~PPAUTH,CC= 12
ITEM N O. 2 3
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
APPRO
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning~-'
September 14, 1993
Report on the Public Noticing Process for PA93-0089, Conditional Use Permit
for an Arco AM\PM Gas Station and Mini-Mart Located at 28231 Ynez Road
Prepared by:
Craig D. Ruiz, Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and File
BACKGROUND:
The City Council, at their August 24, 1993 meeting, directed staff to research and report on
the public noticing for PA93-0089, Conditional Use Permit for an Arco AM\PM gas station and
mini-mart. The Arco project was approved by the City of Temecula Planning Commission on
July 19, 1993.
DISCUSSION:
Pursuant to Section 21092 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), notice of
public hearing shall be given to all organizations and individuals who have previously requested
notice and shall be given by at least one of the following procedures:
Publication, no fewer times than required by Section 6061 of the Government Code,
by the public agency in a newspaper of general circulation in the area affected by the
proposed project.
e
Posting of notice by the public agency on- and off-site in the area where the posting
is to be located.
Direct mailing to the owners and occupants of contiguous property shown on the
latest equalized assessment roll.
Pursuant to Section 65090 of the California Government Code, notice shall be published
pursuant to Section 6061 in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the
jurisdiction of the local agency which is conducting the proceeding at least ten days prior to
the hearing, or if there is no such newspaper of general circulation, the notice shall be posted
at least 10 days prior to the hearing in at least three public places within the jurisdiction of
the local agency. Section 65090 (c) further states that a local agency may give notice of the
hearing in any other manner it deems necessary or desirable.
R:~S\STAFFRPT~89PA93.CC 9/8/93 klb 1
Section 65091 (a) of the California Government Code states notice must be given in all of the
following ways:
Notice of the hearing shall be mailed or delivered at least ten days prior to the hearing
to the owner of the real property or the owner's duly authorized agent, and to the
project applicant.
Notice of the hearing shall be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing
to each local agency expected to provide water, sewage, streets, roads, schools, or
other essential facilities or services to the project, whose ability to provide those
services may be significantly affected.
Notice of the hearing shall be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing
to all owners of real property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll within
300 feet of the property that is the subject of the hearing. In addition, Subsection (4)
(B) of Section 65091 requires that the notice be posted at least 10 days prior to the
hearing in at least three public places within the boundaries of the local agency,
including one public place in the area directly affected by the proceeding.
On June 27, 1993 the subject site was posted with a Public Hearing Notice (see Attachment
No. 1 ). On June 28, 1993, a notice was mailed to all owners of real property as shown on
the latest equalized assessment roll within 300 feet of the subject property (see Attachment
No. 2). In addition, on June 28, 1993, the notice of public hearing appeared in The
Californian newspaper (see Attachment No. 3) and was posted at the Library, the Community
Center and the Chamber of Commerce· Thus, all required noticing was completed at least 21
days prior to the public hearing· Also, in an effort to keep the City Council informed on the
project, the Planning Commission agenda and staff report for the July 19th meeting were
delivered to Council members on July 16, 1993.
Prior to the Planning Commission meeting, staff received no opposition to the project. At the
July 19, 1993 Commission meeting, one person spoke in opposition to the project, expressing
concern about potential increased traffic. Staff explained that the current construction
improvements being performed by Assessment District 88-12 would be sufficient to handle
potential increased traffic.
Following the Commission decision, the Planning Department received several letters and
phone calls in opposition to the approval of the project, most of which were received after the
I O-day appeal period (see Attachment No. 4). Staff explained to all complainants that
Planning Commission decisions can be appealed within 10 days of the decision and that there
is a $351 fee to file an appeal. It was also explained that in-lieu of a citizen filing an appeal,
the City Council may appeal a Planning'Commission decision within the same I O-day appeal
period. All messages received by staff on behalf of the City Council were forwarded to the
Council members.
Attachments:
2.
3.
4.
5.
Notice of Public Hearing and Photo of Posting - Page 3
List of Property Owners Within 300 Feet of the Subject Project - Page 4
Proof of Publication - Page 5
Letters in Opposition of the Project - Page 6
Draft Planning Commission Minutes (July 19, 1993) - Page 7
R:~S~STAFFRFT~89PA93.CC 9/8/93 Idb 2
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND PHOTO OF POSTING
R:\S\STAFFRPT~89PA93.CC 9/3/93 klb 3
Notice of Public Hearing
TIlE CITY OF TEIV[ECTjLA
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA.92590
A PUBLIC HEARING has been scheduled before the PLANNING COMMISSION to consider the
matter(s) described below.
Case No:
Applicant:
Location:
Proposal:
Envizonmental Action:
Planner:
Recommendation:
PA93-0089, Conditional Use Permit
Rancho California Development Corporation
28231 Ynez Road
To locate an AM/PM self-service gas station and mini-mart on
a .68 acre parcel in the General Commercial (C-I/C-P) zone.
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Craig Ruiz
Approval
Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before the hearing(s) or may
appear and be heard in support of Or opposition to the approval of the project(s) at the time of hearing.
If you challenge any of the projects in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing(s). The proposed project
application(s) may be viewed at the public information counter, Temecula Planning 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 the case planner at the City of Temecula Planning Department, (909) 694-
6400.
The time, place and date of the hearing(s) are as follows:
PLACE OF HEARING:
DATE OF HEARING:
TL%'IE OF HEARING:
Vail Elementary School
29915 Mira Loma Drive
Temecula, CA
July 19, 1993
6:00 p.m.
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROJECT
R:\S\STAFFRPT~89PA93,CC 9/3/93 klb 4
921-260-Q02
Bank Of America Nail Tr
Po Box 37000
San Francisco CA 9~1~7
92. 70-026
Bedford Day Co
29761Camino Del ~ol
Temecula CA 92592
921-270-0~0
Rancho Calif Dev Co
Po Box 9016
Temecula CA 92589
Qol-260--02~
Del Taco Restaurant Pro
750 S Terrado P!z 231
Coyira CA 91723
921-270-03~
Safeway Stores Inc
Po Box 9016
Temecula CA 92589
921-270-0~1
Rancho Calif Dev Co
Po Box 9016
Temecula CA 92589
92!-270-O05 ~T. "~,~ '.: '=
Pacific SouChwes~ Realt
Po Box 2097
Los Angeles CA 90051
921-270-037
Bedford Day Co
Po Box 9016
Temecula CA
92589
921-270-0~2
Rancho Calif Dev Co
Po Box 9016
Temecula CA 92589
921-270-0&3
Bedform Day Co
Po Box 9016
Temecula CA
92589
921-320-007
Wells Fargo Bank Nail A
111 Butter 22nd F1
San Francisco CA 9~163
921-320--009
William P Johnson
29~00 Rancho California
Temecula CA 92591
921-320-012
Rednor Landgrant Rancho
11625 Highbluff 212
San Diego CA 92130
921-320-015
Radnor Landgrant Ranebb
12625 High Bluff Dr Ste
San Diego CA 92130
921-320-038
Radnor Landgrant Rancho
11625 Highbluff 212
San Diego CA 92130
92~-,320-0~1
Ra r Landgrant Rancho
12b~5 High Bluff Dr 122
San Diego CA 92130
9&&-330-006
Ranebb Calif Day Co
Po Box 9016
Temecula CA 92589
9&~-330-OOg
eancho Calif Dev Co.
Po Box 9016
Temecula CA 92589
9&~-330-011
Rancho Calif Day Co.
Po Box 9016
Temecula CA 92589
~2!-270-0C5
?aci+ic Southwest Reait
Po Box 2097
Los Angeles CA 90051
921-270-057
Bedford Day Co
Po Box 9016
Temecula CA
92589
92!-270-O~0
Rancho Calif Day Co
Po Box 9016
Temecula CA 92589
92!-320-DD9
William P Johnson
29~D0 Rancho California
Temecula CA 92591
921-320-012
Radnor Landgrant Rancho
11625 Highbluff 212
San Diego CA 92130
921-320-038
Ramnor Lan~grant Ranebb
11625 Highbluff 212
San Diego CA 92130
92~"30-009
Ber, ,rd J Hamry
25381Alicia PRy G
Laguna Hills CA 92653
*** 7 Printe~
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
R:\S\STAFFRPT\89PA93.CC 9/3/93 klb 5
Proof Of Publication
This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp
S~P"~Z OF CALIFORNIA
County o~ Rivex~ide
I am a dtizen of the United States and a resident o~ the
County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years,
and not a party to or interested in the above entitled
matte_r. I am the principal clerk of the printer d
"'l:'he
CALIF()RNIAN
a newspaper o~ general Circulation, published
DaH:~ except Saturday
in the City of Temecula, California 92590, County of
Riverside, Three Lakes Judicial District, and which
newspaper has been adiudged a newspaper of general
circulation by the Superior Court of the County of
Riverside, State of California, under the Date of
February 25, 1982, Case Number 147342: that the
notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in
type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published
in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and
n~t, in any supplement thereof on the following dates,
19 93
June 28
I certify (or decla~) under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA, this
28th - June~' 93
day of .19
-- rety~ ~ssistant to Publisher
City 6f Temecula
Notice of Public Hearing
ProofofPubR2~ond ',
RECEIVED
J O N 3 0 1993
Ans'd ....... - .......
- Case No. PA93-0089 etc
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
THEClTYOFTEMECtlLA
43174 Business Pink
APUBUCHEARINGhlsbleesehlduisdbelel'e~ePIwmtngC, om.
CaseNe.:PA93-1N~ComlIe~USePe~It
LOcSliOn: 28231 Ynez Rixid
Pmix)si:Tok,,c~ianAM/PMself-ssn~cegasslalionandff.:.-i-mat
ona.68mpaKslinli'leGeeefaJC4xnmwcig(C-1/C-p)
zone.
· mannen. C.,m~P,~z
! Proposal: me~alT.342mleo(o~ics/wal-
) . nWonm~t~Ac~:~Neg~Oscla-
~ Plar~er:CraeRuiz
·
Case No: PA9~124. Plot Plan
, ~
or sis izalien, war~, ~ dtSldtx~ let new medical
_ I~avw:Saee
. Case No:PAS3-0125, Con4Jlional Use Pm~t
Temecula City linm
- ~:ACoafidkmalUsePenrdalo~W~ltheussot
· ' Naas~
"~/n: Recommend Apeoval
- It,js lics. sinwritlencorresponG~nce{lelivSmdlo~eRannV~
Temecua. CA
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
LETTERS IN OPPOSITION OF THE PROJECT
R:\S\STAFFRPT~89PA93.CC 9/3/93 klb 6
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive ',
Temecula, CA ~2590
:.
Re: Proposed ARCO AH/PH Uini-Hart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
RECEIVED
AUG 11 1993
Ans 'd... ...........
Honorable Councilors:
We want you to understand that this letter is a Compilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter. but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.'
we are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item sincewe do not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed.
lhe entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving~it~ beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful f)owers and
]andscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and-wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do'we really want
our visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart(gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? Ne
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner'. We are aware that once there wa~ a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the o]d hitching post.
2. Please re-examine the traffic report. It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per'hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARCO AM/PH at
Uinchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a,gas
station business. At this proposed iocation"there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PH mart.
3. Police records will show that there is a'widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. 'Stop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in super.rising that goal.. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
Ue believe that future development will be looking at the standards we now set.
Sincerely,
Address: 2'7"//~0
1'¢,,~~
cc: City Manager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
51']~ (00 Phone:
iol) 5.75(,
RECEIVED
A i I 1993
Ans 'd. ....
** .......
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-Mart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable COuncilors:
we want you to understand that this letter is a compilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
We are asking that the Council call this item up. from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since'we do not believe that go~ basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy.Suites, lower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really want
our visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top?
understand it is "not exactly on the corner'. Ne are.aware that once there was a gas station on tl
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per'hour will have no.impact.' A good example should be the ARCO AH/PM at
Winchester and 3offerson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PM mart.
3. Police records Wil) show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. 'Stop and Rob'..
4. ihe three gas stations within 2 blocks Of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
We believe that future development will be looking at the standards we now set.
Sincerely,
Address: C '
cc: Cit~ ~anager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
Phone:
RECEIVED
CiLy Planning
· 43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
AUG 11 1993
Ans'd.._-.. ......
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-Mart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Councilors:
..
We want you to understand that this letter is a compilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings. please do not consider this a form letter. but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
We are asking that the Council. call this item up ~rom the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since.He do not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that Sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and eventhe ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do He really want
our visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? We
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner'.. We are aware that once there was a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is.very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARCO AN/PM at
Winchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress ahd ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PM mart.
3. Police records will show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. 'Stoo and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of th~ Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues ~o take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
~e believe that future development ~il] be looking at the standards we now set.
SincerelY L/~'~
cc: C i t y Manager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
Phone:
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA ?25?0
RECE.WED
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Nini-Mart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road ..
Ilonorabie Councilors:
We.wahl: you to understand that this ]etter is a compilation of opinions offered by.many people at sew~ra)
meetings. Please do not com~ider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
Lake great pride in this community.
We are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since we do not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed·
lhe entrance and gateway tour city is something that He take great pride in. ObviOusly, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preservi~ its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that set~
us apart from most cities. gith the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really want
o,r visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top?'~'I
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner'. ~e are aware ~hat once there was a gas station on ~
site, but we a]so rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is very difficult to believe that a business with a hiqh
traffic/foot'count per hnur will have no impact. ~ good example should be the ARC0 ~H/PM at
Uinchester and ~efferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of unix a aas
station business. ~t this proposed location there is in addition T~0 major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed ~H/PN mart.
3. Police records wi]] show that there is a wi'despread prob]em with mini-marts, due to easy freewax
access. 'Stop and Rob'.
4. 'The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we I~ope that the whole community.continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
tile effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision oF the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
We believe that fut. ure development will be looking at'the standards we now set.
Sincer~.ly, ~ ~~
A(ldress: /'~--~' 4~rC~P)t- i~"
Planner - Craig Rujz
Phone:
City Planning
43]74 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
RECc,,.tVEO
1993
.......... ;
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-Mart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Councilors:
we want' you to understand that this letter is a compilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
Ue are asking that the Council call this item up.from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since we do not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really want
our visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? We
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner". We are aware that once there was a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at t~ old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is.verldifficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/fooL count per hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARCO AM/PM at
Uinchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed ]ocation there is in addition T~ major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PM mart.
3. PoIi'ce records will show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. 'SLop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the who)e community continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goa]. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
ue believe that future development will be looking at the standards we n~ set.
Address:
cc: City Manager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
Phone:
RECEIVED
AU6 11 1993 --,
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Teiecula, CA 92590
Re: Proposed ARCD AM/PH Mini-Hart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Courtlots:
.We want you to understand that this ]etter is a co~Pi]ation of opinions offered by many people .at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
We are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission a~ reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since we do not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and Wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really want
our visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? we
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner'· We are aware that once there was a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post. ~
Please re-examine the traffic report· It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffiC/foot count per hour wi]l have no impact. A good example should be the ARCO AH/PM at
Winchester and 3efferson. The traffic snarl there'is horrendous with egress andingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/~ mart.
3. Police records will show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easx freeway
access. "Stop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
We believe that future development will be looking at the standards we now set.
Sincerely,
Address: ~5 KG-p~LL~
cc: City Manager
)anner - Craig Ruiz
Phone:
7,2-
RECEIVED
AUG 11 1993
Ans'd ..............-.-
Cit-y Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
-t
Re: Proposed ARCD AH/PM Hini-Mart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Councilors:
Ue warit you to understand that this letter is a compilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern oF many residents who
take qreat pride in this community.
ue are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since we do not believe that good basic planning principles
have hden addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a ]ot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. [t is an inviting and unique entry tl~t sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, ToNer Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really want
nut visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? We
understand it is "not exactly on the corner'. We are aware that once there was a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report· It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per'hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARCO AM/Prl at
Winchester and Jefferson. The traffic Snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a qaS
station business. At this proposed ]ocatiqn there is in addition TWO iajor shopping cankers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AH/P~ mart.
3. Police records Nil] show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. 'Stop and Rob'.
The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the R~ncho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal· Please overturn the decision o[ the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that speciat place that we all enjoy so much,
believe thaL future development will be looking at the standards we now set.
S i ;Icere I y,
cr,: City lianaget
.--'Planner - Craig Ruiz
~,,.
· Phone:
City Planning ,
43174 Business Park Drive
TemecuJa, CA 92590 .
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-Mart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Councilors:
~4e Nant you to understand that this letter is a dompilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings· Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
14e are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since.we do not believe that gc~xJ basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateNay to our city is something that .e take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until noN, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. Nith theEmbass~ Suites, lower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and .ild birds, it is most distinctive. go He really
our visitors to be greeted b~ another mini-mart/gas station .ith 30,000 square.feet of black top?
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner'. ~4e are aNare that once there Nasa gas station on the
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARC0 AH/P~ at
Winchester and 3offerson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there js in addition TNO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AH/PN mart.
Police records will show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easx freewax
access· 'Stop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community ·continues to take pride in our city and He do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that He all enjoy so much.
believe that future development will be looking at the standards we non set.
ncere Y
Address: ? ?
cc: City Manager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
Phone:
AUG 12 1993
Ans 'd ............
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-Mart at Ranch8 California Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Councilors:
We want you to understand that this. letter is a Compilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
We are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since we de not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a ]or of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
]andscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really want
our visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? t4e
understand it is "not exactly on the corner'. We are aware that once there was a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them. up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARCO AM/PM at
Winchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition lWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PH mart.
3. Police records will show.that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. 'Stop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho Ca]ifornia off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
in conclusion we hope that the whole community continues' to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
Ue believe that future development will be looking at the standards we now set.
Sincerely,
Address:
')
cc: CLLy Manager /
Planner - Craig Ruiz
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
RECEIVED
AUG 13 1993
s'd ....,,,. ....
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-Mart at Rancho CaLifornia Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Councilors:
We want you to understand that this letter is a compilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents
take great pride in this community.
We are asking that the Counci.] call this item up'from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since we do not believe that goad basic planning principles
have been addressed.
I. The entrance and gateway to our city is something that He take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, ToNer Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do Ne realiX want
our visitors to be greeted bx another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? ~
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner". We are aware that once there was a gas station on t
Site, but .e also rode our horses into'town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
2. Please re-examine the traffic report. It i~:very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per'hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARCO AM/PM at
~inchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PM mart.
3. Police records will show that-there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. 'Stop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goat. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that'we all-enjoy so much.
~e believe that future development will be looking at the standards we now set.
Phone:
co: Citx Manager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 925?0
I
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-ltart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
RECEIVED
AUG 13 1993
.........
Honorable Counselors:
Me want you to understand that this letter is a compi]ation of opinions offered by many people'at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
We are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve ~he subject item since we do not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. ~ith the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really want
our visitors to be greeted bx another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? We
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner'. We are aware that once there was a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our .horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post·
Please re-examine the traffic report. '-It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ~CO AM/PH at
Winchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there'is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business· At this proposed location there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AH/PN mart.
3. Police records will show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. 'Stop and Rob". ..
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Ran~ho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
believe that future development ~ill be looking at the standards we now set.
Address:
Phone:
cc: City Manager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
City Planning
43174 Business Park Orive
Temecula, CA 92590
I
Re: Proposed ~CO AM/PM Mint-Mart at Rancho Ca|tfornta Road
and Ynez Road
AUG 16 1993
bs .....--, ....
Honorable Counselors:
Me want you to understand that this letter is a compilation of opinions offered by many people at several
· meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
Ue are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since we do not believe that goad basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and-wild birds, it is most distinctive. 0o we really want
our visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? We
understand it is 'not exactly on ~he corner'· We are aware that once there ~as a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report· It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARCO AM/PM at
Winchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed ~.M/PM mart·
3. Police records will show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freewax
access. "Stop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho CaJifornia off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our' city and We do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
We believe that future development will be looking at the standards we now set.
Sincerely. ~
Address:
38540 AVE. DE LA BANDOLERO
TEMECULA, CA 92592
cc: City Manager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
Phone:
909/699-5777
'gity Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
I
Re: Proposed ARgO AM/PM Hini-Mart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
RECEIVED
AU6 16 1993
J,m'd ............
Honorable Counselors:
We want you to understand that this letter is a compilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
we are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission a~ reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since we do not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviti~ and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really want
our visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? we
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner'. We are aware that once there was a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our t~rses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARgO AH/PH at
Uinchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition T~ major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AH/PH mart.
3. Police records wi]] show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. "Stop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our city and we do a~reciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecuia that special place that we all enjoy so much.
We believe that future development will be looking at' the standards we now set.
Sincerely,
Address: ~A~,t},-el t4~ Phone:
cc: C i t y lianaget
Planner - Craig Ruiz
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula. CA V2590
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-Mart at Rancho Ca)ifornia Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Councilors:
~e want you to understand that this letter is a dompilation of opinions offered bx many people at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
~e are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since.we do not believe that good basic pXanning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really wa6t
our visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square.feet of black top? We
understand it is "not exactly on the corner'. We are aware that once there was a gas station on ~""
site, but we also rode our horses into town ondirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching poe
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ~CO AM/PM at
Winchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PM mart.
Police records will show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. 'Stop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we a11 enjoy so much.
We believe that future deve]opment will be looking at the standards we now set.
Sincerely,
CC:
City Manager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-Mart at Rancho Ca)ifornia Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Councilors:
Me want you to understand that this letter is a dompilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
takc great pride in this community·
We are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since.we do not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. Nith the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really want
our visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square.feet of black top? Ne
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner'. We are aware that once there was a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per'hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARCO AM/PM at
Winchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition TNO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PM mart.
3. Police records wfll show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. "Stop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continuesto take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that. we all enjoy so much.
believe that future development will be looking at the standards we now set.
Planner - Craig Ruiz
,,..:
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-Mart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Councilors:
Ue want you to understand that this letter is a dompilation of opinions offered bx many people at several
meetings. please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in tnis community.
We are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the ~Ubject item since.we do not believe that gcHxl basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really want
our visitors to be greeted bx another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square.feet of black top?
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner'. we are aware that once there was a gas station on t'
site, but we also rode our horses into town on-dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per'hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARCO AM/P~ at
Winchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PM mart.
3. Police records will show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freewax
access. 'Stop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community Continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
~e believe that future development will be looking at the standards we now set.
Sincerely,
Address:
co= city Manager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
Phone:
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA ?2590
I
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-Mart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Counse]ors:
Ue want you to understand that this letter is a compilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
We are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since ~ do not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed.
lhe entrance and gateway to our city is something that ~e take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful rioHers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive· Do we really want
our visitors to be greeted bx another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? we
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner' Me are aware that once there was a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. tt is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per hour will have no impact. A.good example should be the ARCO AM/PH at
Winchester and 3efferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PM mart.
3. Police records will show that there is a widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy freeway
access. "Stop and Rob'.
4. lhe three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Pianning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
tJe be]ieve that future development will be looking at the standards we now set.
Address:
cc: City Manager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
City Planning
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Re: Proposed ARCO AH/~ Mini-Hart at Ranchd California Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Councilors:
We want you to understand that this ]etter. is'a .compilation of opinions offered by many people at several
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
We are asking that the Counci.l call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since we do not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city iS something that we take great pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most cities. With the EmbassY:Suites, To~er Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really wan. L.,
our visitors to be greeted by another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top?
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner'..We are aware that once there was a gas station on
Site, but we also rode our horses into-to.n on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is'very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per'hour will have no impact.. A good example should be the ARCO AM/PM at
Winchester and Jefferson, The traffic Snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PM mart.
3. Police records will show that'there is a. widespread problem with mini-marts, due to easy' freewax
access. 'Stop and Rob'.
Tile three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
in conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all,enjoy so much,
ue believe that future development will be looking'at the standards ~ now set.
City Planning
43]74 Business Park Drive
Temecu[a*, CA 92590
Re: Proposed ARCO AM/PM Mini-Mart at Rancho California Road
and Ynez Road
Honorable Councilors:
~e want you to understand that this letter is a compilation of opinions offered by many peop)e at severe]
meetings. Please do not consider this a form letter, but rather the sincere concern of many residents who
take great pride in this community.
We are asking that the Council call this item up from the Planning Commission and reconsider their
recommendation to approve the subject item since we do not believe that good basic planning principles
have been addressed.
The entrance and gateway to our city is something that we take ~eat pride in. Obviously, a lot of
thought, until now, has gone into preserving its beauty. It is an inviting and unique entry that sets
us apart from most citieS. With the Embassy Suites, Tower Building, beautiful flowers and
landscaping, the ponds and even the ducks and wild birds, it is most distinctive. Do we really want
our visitors to be greeted bx another mini-mart/gas station with 30,000 square feet of black top? We
understand it is 'not exactly on the corner'. Me are aware that once there was a gas station on the
site, but we also rode our horses into town on dirt paths and tied them up at the old hitching post.
Please re-examine the traffic report. It is very difficult to believe that a business with a high
traffic/foot count per'hour will have no impact. A good example should be the ARCO ~/PH at
Winchester and Jefferson. The traffic snarl there is horrendous with egress and ingress of only a gas
station business. At this proposed location there is in addition TWO major shopping centers with
access onto the same street as the proposed AM/PM mart.
3. Police records will show that there is a widespread pr~lem with mini-marts, clue to easy freeway
access· 'Stop and Rob'.
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the Rancho California off-ramp ought to be sufficient.
In conclusion we hope that the whole community continues to take pride in our city and we do appreciate
-the effort you spend in supervising that goal. Please overturn the decision of the Planning Commission
and keep Temecula that special place that we all enjoy so much.
~e believe that future deve)opment will be looking at the standards we now set.
cc: City Manager
Planner - Craig Ruiz
,/w,,,_~Ph°ne:
SEE IF ~ Cl~ ~IHG D~~ IS ~ O~Y OXE ~ ~S ~I~
~ ~S, ~'
lospecr. fu~iy,
3a-see Do:u, 39625 rdp~ua Way, TemmcuJ. a, CA 92592
909 676-7227
To Sal
non Robett. s
Pac B2.rdsa~,l
ion hrks
Js~tf~rey Scone
Dav4d Dixon - C~.]ry aanqsr
T.e~e'c~J. C~.t1
43174 Buti~ Park Drive
Teecu ta. c~.
Re': Prolx~ iqal 'dl~ nini-fiert at Rancho .California
and TMZ Reid
timarabia Cmmcilors= '.
~ want yes to 'understand that tide letter is a aliatim OF minions offered by mar
samtinge. Nasa do not consider this m rare tatter, bat rather the sincere concern of tm residents Mhe
tab grmt pride in this cosamity.
~ are asktag that the Cooncil call. this item up from the Planning aiMion and remidr their
recmeNsttm to amxM the subject item eimz wa de mt believe thet good tmie miramite prtnctp. ia
I. The erd;mlce mm:J grater to ogr city is snnethjag thet ,e take great pride in. Otwimml7, a lot of
thought, until now, lea gone into presorviag its
us smart from east cities. Math
lendscupiag, the ~,-~ and even the cix;ks and Mild birds, it is soot distinctive. On Me feelit went
our visitors to ha greotzl by meather mini-wart/gas station with 30,000 mrs feet of black tm? tde
understeal tt Is 'not eaactlr on the nornet*. Me are
site, but tm ale.rede our harms into tam on dirt paths reed tied tam'at the aid hitching Dcet.
2. Pinrose rt-mftine the traffic report. it to very difficult to believe that a lamina with a hash
traffic/foot axmt per' bour'utlX heal no ismct. 6 ~ easels sheMid be the NC0 MVP, at
tJtoclmter and Jeffstem. The
catinn blaine. At this prmxMed location there is in addition M taint ~e"sing cellars with
aa:m onto the ease strwt ms the ~j,sed NI/P~ art.
3. Police records .ill stm that there is a widespread prubiea with mini-arts, due to sear iremet
m. '.Stem and
4. The three gas stations within 2 blocks of the b,,~,, ~!ifornia off-ram eight to he surfIciest.
ls~ conclusion ,etm that the dale csnitr ~,~.tams to tale prido irt mtr ~it7 Ind wa do empreciate
the effort 7m spend in superviaiag that 9oral. 'Pi'emse overturn the decisinn of the Piesial Camisaiah
and kee~ Ternscala thet seeoral piece that ,e all enJar ms such.
believe that future dewelement will he looking ~ the starmrds ,e hue set.
Sincerely,
ccs Cltr eWemar
Piemet - Craig Ruiz
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES (JULY 19, 1993)
R:\S\STAFFRPT~BgPA93.CC 9/3/93 klb 7
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
6. PA93-0089. Conditional Use Permit
DRAFT
JULY 19. 1993
Proposal to locate an AM/PM self-service gas station and mini-mart on a .68 acre
parcel in the General Commercial (C-1/C-P) zone. Located at 28231 Ynez Road.
Assistant Planner Craig Ruiz presented the staff report. Mr. Ruiz advised of the
following changes: 1) Page 7, amend title of the Resolution to read "....an ARCO
AM/PM Mini-Market and Self-service Gas Station with concurrent alcohol sales..."; and
2) Page 13, Condition of Approval No. 13, amend condition to require applicant to pay
$50.00 to the Department of Fish and Game and delete the requirement for a
$1,250.00 check to the Department of Fish and Game.
Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 6:35 P.M.
Ida Sanchez of Markham and Associates, 41750 Winchester Road, Temecula,
representing the applicant, expressed concurrence with the Conditions of Approval.
Lee Robertson, 44525 La Paz, Temecula, expressed concern with the traffic impact
the project will have at the proposed intersection which currently suffers from
congestion.
It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Chiniaeff to
close the public hearing at 6:43 P.M. and ADOPT the Negative Declaration for PA93-
0089 Conditional Use Permit and ADOPT Resolution No. 93-17 approving PA93-0089
Conditional Use Permit based on the analysis and findings contained in the staff report
and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval and RECOMMEND to the City
Council Changing of the Draft General Plan Land Use Designation for the Subject Site
from Office Professional to Highway/Tourist Commercial including modification to the
Resolution by staff and amending Condition of Approval No. 13 deleting the request
for a check in the amount of $1,250.00 to the Department of Fish and Game.
Chairman Fahey stated that she has a significant concern regarding permitting alcohol
sales at the mini-market.
Commissioner Ford stated that he also has concerns with the sale of alcohol at a gas
station based on the close proximity of the freeway at this location. Commissioner
Ford stated that he has no problem with the original resolution proposed, however, he
is opposed to the change in the resolution presented tonight.
.Commissioner Hoagland stated that other gas stations are allowed to sell alcohol and
feels it would be unfair to deny the applicant the opportunity to compete fairly.
Planning Director Thornhill stated that one of the reasons the sale of alcohol was
denied on the previously proposed gas station in the Rancho Towne Center was based
on the location of the church which was adj.acent to that project.
PCMIN07119193 -5,- 7121
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
The motion carried as follows:
DRAFT
AYES: 3 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Hoagland, Fahey
NOES: I COMMISSIONERS: Ford
ABSENT: 1 COMMISSIONERS: Blair
JULY 19,1993
Chairman Fahey declared a recess at 6:45 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 6:50 P.M.
PA93-0124. Plot Plan
Proposal to approve a. 43,000 square foot tilt-up industrial building for sterilization,
warehouse, and distribution for new medical products. Located on the east side of
Business Park Drive between Rancho California Road and Rancho Way.
Planner Saied Naaseh presented the staff report.
Chairman Fahey opened the public hearing at 6:55 P.M. There being no requests to
speak, the public hearing was closed.
John Lurkins, President of Medical Design Concept, stated that he concurred with the
staff report and the conditions of approval.
It was moved by Commissioner Hoagland, seconded by Commissioner Ford to ADOPT
Resolution No. 93-18 approving Plot Plan No. PA93-0124, Amendment No. I based
on the Analysis and Findings contained in the Staff Report and subject to the attached
Conditions of Approval and ADOPT Negative Declaration for Plot Plan No. PA93-0124,
Amendment No. I based on the analysis and findings contained in the staff report and
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
Commissioner Hoagland stated that he noticed that the applicant submitted the project
on June 18, 1993 and he hopes that the business community takes notice of staff's
efforts to process these applications in a timely manner.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES:
4 COMMISSIONERS: Chiniaeff, Ford, Hoagland, Fahey
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: I COMMISSIONERS: Blair
PCMIN07119193 -6- 7121113
ITEM NO.
24
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
· APPRO~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
City Council/City Manager
Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning,
September 14, 1993
Status Report on the Regulation of Vending Carts
PREPARED BY:
RECOMMENDATION:
David W. Hogan, Associate Planner
Provide direction to staff on the regulation of vending carts.
BACKGROUND:
On August 24, 1993, the Old Town Merchants Association addressed the Council concerning
the vending cart near the intersection of Front and Main Streets. The merchants requested
that the City provide additional regulations to control vending carts and that no additional
permits be issued. As a result, the Council directed staff to review the issue and to provide
options as to how the City could regulate and/or control vending carts.
DISCUSSION:
Reaulation of Vend/no Carts
Because of the ambiguity of the City's zoning ordinance (Ordinance 348), relative to this
issue, the only requirement for vendors to operate is with the issuance of a City business
license. However, 'the business license program has little land use regulatory authority. Its'
primary purpose is to ensure that local businesses operate in conformance with other City
regulations.
Although Ordinance 348 does not have any specific .provisions dealing with vending carts,
there are two permit processes which could be used to more strongly regulate vending carts
on private property. The two permitting options are the use of Plot Plans in commercial zones
and the use of Minor Outdoor Event Permits. In the past, the City has approved similar
recurring activities, such as the Farmers Market, with Minor Outdoor Event Permits.
Vend/nO Carts and the Old Town Specific Plan
The draft Specific Plan for Old Town Temecula which was approved by the Old Town Steering
Committee and the City Planning Commission contains provisions which would permit vending
carts within the public right-of-way in Old Town.
\HOGAND\VEHDCART.CCI 1
The draft Specific Plan contains provisions which: "
·Allows the Planning Director to determine the locations where carts would be allowed;
· Sets standards for the operation of the business utilizing the vending cart; and,
Requires that all vending carts have a Vending Permit (approved by the Building and
Safety, Finance, Planning, and Public Works Departments).
Staff is 'currently working with the Old Town Merchants Association to address the
Associations' concerns with vending carts. The Merchants Association recommendations will
be presented for the Councils consideration when the Old Town Specific Plan is considered.
In addition, it is the intent of staff to include vending carts into the new Development Code
which is currently under development and will be presented to the Council in early 1994.
OPTIONS:
The following are options as to how the Council could address the regulation of vending carts.
If it is the intent of the Council to allow vending carts without regulation; then
it is recommended that the current system be continued.
If it is the intent of the Council to allow vending carts with some regulation;
then it is recommended that Minor Outdoor Event Permits be required for all
vending carts. This option could include requiring that all existing vending carts
obtain a Plot Plan or Minor Outdoor Event Permit.
If it is the intent of the Council to not allow any additional vending carts; then
it is recommended that no additional licenses or permits be issued for vending
carts.
If it is the intent of the Council to not allow any vending carts; then it is
recommended that no additional licenses or permits for vending carts be issued
and that all existing carts be removed or abated.
\HOOAND\VENDCART.CC1 ~)
ITEM NO.
25
APPROVAl
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
September 14, 1993
City Council/City Manager
Harwood T. Edvalson, Assistant City Manager ~
PROPOSED LEASE-- TEMECULA TOWN ASSOCIATION
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council refer the proposed lease between the City and the Temecula
Town Association to staff for negotiation and resolution of competing requests for
continued use of the Northwest Sports Park.
BACKGROUND:
The continued growth of the City of Temecula and the surrounding valley has created
a growing interest in the Northwest Sports Park for use as a fairgrounds. Staff has
received several requests for temporary use of the site. As pressure increases for use
of the site, increased conflicts in scheduling this resource are anticipated. The recent
conflicts between Shoemaker Productions and the Temecula Town Association are an
example of the need to have a coordinated, planned approach towards the use of the
this facility.
FISCAL ANALYSIS:
No fiscal impact is associated with this recommendation.
Tmcula To n , s ociation
PROPOSAL
February 25, 1992
City 'Council
City of Temecula
43174 Business Park Drive
Temecula, CA 92590
Re: Use of City Park property located at 27225 Diaz Road
near Cherry Street, sometimes referred to as the
Temecula Show Grounds.
Dear Council Members:
INTRODUCTION:
The Temecula Town Association was founded in 1969 and
incorporated in 1970 as a Non-Profit Charitable Organiza-
tion. Our Articles of Incorporation established the
Primary Purpose and General Objectives of the organization to
be as follows:
PRIMARY PURPOSE: The specific and primary purpose for
which this corporation exists is the preservation of the
township of "TEMECULA", the place name "TEMECULA",
the restoration and maintenance of its circa 1890-1920
architecture, and to provide and operate a Community
Center and other community facilities and services.
GENERAL OBJECTIVES: the general objectives of this
corporation are as follows:
(a) To carry out such advertising and promotional
programs and activities as shall be deemed for
the general welfare of the Town of Temecula.
(b) To foster '~ood public relations among the Associa-
tion and its members, and the communities and
organizations in the area.
-more-
RO. Box 435
Temecula, CA 92593
(714) 676-4718
Fax (714) 694-9216
Temecula Community Center
28816 Pujol Street
Temccula~ CA 92590
Temecula Town Association proposal 02/25/93
Pg. '2
ACHIEVEMENT OF PRIMARY PURPOSE:
1. In 1982 the Town Association began construction of a
Community Center building on their property located
at 28816 Pu3ol Street. Built with volunteers and
many donated materials the building was completed and
dedicated in 1984. Funding for the construction came
from Tractor Race profits. a buy a block fund raising
~ program and from private donations.
The 3,200 square foot building consisted of a main
2,200 square foot hall, complete commercial kitchen,
lobby, and limited office area. A fully paved and
striped 175 car capacity lighted parking lot was also
added to the Center, all from private funding.
On the night of December 26, 1990 the Center burned
to the ground. The Town Association immediately
leased another building on Commerce Center Drive in
order to continue providing the community with a
Center on an uninterrupted basis. At the same time
demolition and construction of a new building at the
Pujol Street location was commenced.
The new and present Community Center building was
completed and opened for occupancy on January 14,
1992.
2. Upon completion of the first Community Center build-
in 1984, the Association gave the VFW Post 4089 a
long term, nominal fee lease on a building that was
originally built in 1977 to serve as a Town Hall and
which was affectionately known as "The Tin Barn."
3. On June 1, 1988 the Association leased the site of
the original Tractor Races on Pujol Street to
Rancho BMX who relocated to Temecula from Lake
Elsinore. The BMX track provides supervised bike
racing for our youth and young adults. Again, this
lease is at a nominal monthly fee.
4..More recently the Association has leased a northern
portion of their property on Pujol Street to the
Boys and Girls Club of America at $1.00 per year for
construction of their planned club facilities.
5. The Town Association was instrumental and played a
significant role in saving the place name "TEMECULA"
at the time the city was incorporated in December
-more-
~emecula Town Association Proposal 02/26/93
Pg, 3
1989. This was accomplished through mass mailings
to all registered voters, personal presentations
before other local civic and service organizations,
recorded radio spots, and press releases and stories
distributed to the local news media.
6. Through membership on the Old Town Specific Plan
· steerin( committee and the Historic Preservation
District local review board, the Association has been
actively involved in restoration and maintenance of
the circa 1890-1920 architecture in Old Town and was
instrumental in the installation of paving and
antique ornamental lights on Front Street.
ACHIEVEMENT OF GENEEAL OBJECTIVES:
(a) The Association produces and hosts a monthly 30 min.
Cable TV program titled "Temecula Talks" that reaches
a viewing audience of 48,000 people.
(b) For the past two years the Association's General
Manager has authored a weekly column in the Riverside
Press-Enterprise titled "Temecula Valley Lifestyles"
which feed back indicated had a large readership.
(c) In April, 1989 the Association sponsored and organ-
ized the 130th birthday celebration for the Temecula
Post Office.
(e) Over the years the Associations annual events, ie:
The 4th of July Parade and Country Faire, the Great
Temecula Tractor Race, Pumpkin Run, Chili Cookoff,
and the Temecula PRCA Rodeo have brought many out-
siders to Temecula and has given the area nation-wide
publicity and exposure, even including the Japanese
media. These events have also served as fund raisers
for the Association's operation of the Community
Center.
· At all of ~he'annual events the Association has
provided the 'required security at no cost to the
city.
For the youngsters the Association has included a
Children's Faire at the Tractor Race and has assisted
in producing Christmas Parades.
-more-
Temecula Town Association Proposal 02/26/93 Pg. 4
(f) Year-round weekly bingo games conducted by the Town
Association has provided social and fun evenings for
community residents and also funding for operation of
the Community Center.
These above events have bought money to local motels,
merchants, businesses, and restaurants.
COMM6NITY SERVICE:
1. The Association gives generous donations to'local
service groups and provides opportunities for their
fund raising efforts at our annual events.
2. The Association gives annual scholarships to local
schools from proceeds generated by our annual events.
3. The Association is donating a portion of their land
on Puaol Street for the development of a Rotary
Community Park that will be established 3ointly by
the Sunrise and Noon Rotary Clubs of Temecula.
4. The City of TemeCula used the Community Center for
their Cityhood Incorporation and 1st First Birthday
celebrations. The Association handled the arrange-
ments for both of these events and paid for the
city's first Post Office box.
5. The Community Center has been made available at no
charge to the city for,council meetings, city
sponsored Senior Citizen programs including, line
dancing classes, Social Security assistance, tax
preparation and weekly Senior Citizen meetings. The
Association's board room has also been made available
at no cost for closed session council meetings. The
Center has also been used at no charge for the city
sponsored Mommy and Me program and the modeling
classes.
This free city use of the Community Center facility
.during the past two years represents $53,792 at our
normal rent'~l' rates.
The Center has also been made available at no charge
to other non- profit organizations. This additional
free use represents $6,825 at our normal rental
rates.
-more-
Temecula Town Association Proposal 02/26/93 Pgo 5
6. In addition to the' above the Community Center has
been designated as an official Disaster Relief
Shelter, is used free of charge as an election
polling place, and for periodic blood drives by both
the San Diego Blood Bank and the Riverside/San
Bernardino Blood Bank.
INVESTMENT IN THE CITY PARK (Temecula Show Grounds):
To date the Temecula Town Association has invested
$71,650 in the purchase and installation of equipment,
fencing, power lines, phone lines, water lines, and
grading to make the site safe and useable for our events
described in the foregoing as well as other events that
might take place there.
If the foregoing value of free uses of our Community
Center facility is added to the above, the Temecula Town
Association has contributed $132,267 to the community
and has been a source of volunteers for other local
activities and events.
THE PROPOSAL:
The Temecula Town Association is proposing that the
City of Temecula grant the Association a five (5) year
lease on the park property located at 27225 Diaz Road
for the four months of August, September, October and
November at a lease cost of $1.00 per year.
We are also proposing that the 30 day cancellation
clause be deleted from the lease agreement.
The Temecula Town Association will appreciate your
consideration of this proposal.
Resp/d~tfully/,submitted on behalf of
Ass.'ciat/idn/Board o.f Directors,
/~x_~ '
Ruzs~: ~o~nigV
President
the Temecula Town
cc: Dave Dixon, City Manager
COMMUNITY SERVICES
DISTRICT
ITEM
NO.
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1993
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was called to order
on Tuesday, August 10, 1993, 8:15 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol
Street, Temecula, California. President Patricia H. Birdsall presiding.
PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS:
Muftoz, Parks, Roberts, Birdsall
ABSENT: I DIRECTORS: Stone
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Harwood Edvalson,
City Attorney F. Scott Field, Deputy City Clerk Susan Jones and Recording Secretary Gail
Zigler.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Howard Omdahl, 45850 Via Vaquaro Road, Temecula, representing the Crystal Ridge Business
Park, asked the Directors to consider having the Temecula Community Service District take
over the maintenance of the landscaping of the property and apply the fee to the tax bill. Mr.
Omdahl said that currently the association is having difficulty collecting dues and therefore
is unable to pay for landscaping.
Director Mu~oz asked staff to look at Mr. Omdahl's proposal.
Councilmember Parks asked that staff look at the landscaping bonds as part of the grading
or erosion control.
CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Director Roberts, seconded by Director Muftoz to approve Consent Calendar
Items No. 1 - 3.
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 DIRECTORS: Mu~oz, Parks, Roberts, Birdsall
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Stone
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
CSDMIN08/10193 -1 - 8/13/93
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MINUTES
1.1 Approve the minutes of July 13, 1993;
2. Award of Riverton Park Contract
RECOMMENDATION:
2,1
2.2
2.3
AUGUST 10. 1993
Approve the plans and specifications and award a contract of 6312,000 to
Cunningham-Davis Corporation, for the construction of Riverton Park Project
No. PW 93-04CSD and authorize the President to execute the contract.
Authorize the City Manager to approve change orders not to exceed the
contingency amount of $31,200 which is equal to 10% of the contract
amount, for a total budget of 9343,200.
Relieve Valley Crest Landscape, Inc., of its apparent low bid, due to a clerical
error.
e
Acceotance of Grant Deed for Ooen Soace Areas "The Villages Community Association
No. Two"
RECOMMENDATION:
3.1
Accept grant deed for two (2) mini-parks (Calle Aragon Park and Bahia Vista
Park), and open space areas within The Villages Community Association No.
Two - Tracts 21672-2 through -4 and Tracts 21673-1 and -3.
GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT - Dixon
None
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson
None
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
None
CSDMIN08110183 -2- 8/I 3/93
AUGUST 10. 1993
COMMUNITY SI=RVICES DISTRICT MINUTES
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Mufioz to adjourn at 8:20 P.M. The
motion was unanimously carried.
The next regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District will be held on
Tuesday, August 24, 1993, 8:00 PM, at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol
Street, Temecula, California.
President Patricia H. Birdsall
ATTEST
City Clerk June S. Greek
CSDMIN08110193 -3- 8/13/93
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT'
TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1993
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services District was held on Tuesday,
August 24, 1993, 8:20 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol Street,
Temecula, California. The meeting was called to order by President Patricie H. Birdsall.
PRESENT: 5 DIRECTORS: Mu~oz, Parks, Roberrs, Stone, Birdsall
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Herwood Edvalson,
City Attorney F. Scott Field, City Clerk June S. Greek and Recording Secretary Gail Zigler.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
It was moved by Director Stone, seconded by Director Mufioz to approve Consent Calendar
Items No. 1.
The motion was carried as follows:
AYES: 5 DIRECTORS:
NOES: O DIRECTORS:
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS:
Mur~oz, Parks, Roberrs, Stone, Birdsall
None
None
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of the meeting of July 27, 1993.
GENERAL MANAGER'S REPORT - Dixon
None
CSDMIN08/24/93 -1- 8/30/93
COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT MINUTES
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - Nelson
None
BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS
None
AUGUST 94, 1993
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Director Stone, seconded by Director Roberrs to adjourn at 8:21 P.M. The
motion was unanimously carried.
The next regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District will be held on
Tuesday, September 14, 1993, 8:00 PM, at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol
Street, Temecula, California.
ATTEST:
President Patricia H. Birdsall
City Clerk June S. Greek
CSDMIN08/24193 -2- 8130193
ITEM
NO.
2
APPROVAL/~
CITY ATTORNEY
FINANCE OFFICER
CITY MANAGER
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
Board of Directors
David F. Dixon, City Manager.
September 14, 1993
Southern California Edison Company Easement for Project No.
PW92-29B Community Recreation Center - Phase II
~ ' ' Sawn Nelson, Director of Community Services
PREPARED BY: r~ h
~Don Spagnolo, Principal Engineer - Capital Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board of Directors:
1. Approve the dedication of an easement to SOuthern California Edison Company located
at the Community Recreation Center and authorize the President to sign the easement
document;
2. Director the City Clerk to execute and record the easement.
DISCUSSION:
On December 8, 1992 the Board of Directors approved the plans and specifications and
awarded the construction contract for Phase II of the .Community Recreation Center (CRC).
Phase II of the Community Recreation Center consists of on-site improvements, which
includes the Community Recreation Center building. In order to provide a power service to
the proposed building, Southern California Edison is installing over 1,000 L.F. of conduit, 2
vaults and a service meter to allow Southern California Edison to construct and maintain the
electrical system from the right-of-way to the proposed electrical service location at the
building, it is necessary for them to obtain a 10' wide easement.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There are no costs associated with dedicating the easement to Southern California Edison.
-1 - pwO4~agdrpt~93~0914\pw29b.eas 090293
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO
Real l=roperties and
Administrative Services
430 N. Vineyard Ave., Stdte 2 10
Ontario, CA 91764
Attn: Eastern Region
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S
CITY OF TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICE DISTRICT(hereinafter referred to as 'Grantor'), hereby
grants to SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, a corporation, its successors and assigns (hereinaltar
referred to as "Grantee'), an easement and right of way to construct, use, maintain, operate, altar, add to,
repair,' replace, reconstruct, inspect and remove at any time and from time to time underground electrical
supply systems and communication systems (hereinafter referred to as 'systems'), consisting of wires,
underground conduits, cables, vaults, manholes, handholes, and including above-ground enclosures, markers
and concrete pads and other appunenant fixtures and equipment necessary or useful fir dlatdbuting
electrical energy and for transmiffing intelligence by electrical means, in, on, over, under, across and along
that certain real property in the County of Riverside, State of Califimla, described as follows:
A strip of land 10 feet in width lying within the unincorporated territory of the County of
Riverside, State of California, being those portions of the Rancho Temecula granted by the govemment
of the United States of Amedca to Luis Vignes by patent dated January 18, 1860 and recorded in Book
1, page 37 of patents in the office of the County of San Diego County, California. The centedine of Mid
strip being described as follows:
COMMENCING at the Intersection of the Eastarly line of the 100' Second San Diego Aqueduct
now established and the Southerly line of Rancho Vista Road as now established; thence Southeaateb
along said Southerly line of Rancho Vista Road a distance of 1038 feet to the TRUE POINT O~:
BEGINNING; thence South 18°23'37" West a distance of 87 feet. (See E, zbibit "A" )
This legal descriplion was prepared pursuant to Sac. 8730(c) of the Business & Professions
Code.
The Grantor agrees for itself, ils successors and assigns, not to erect, place or maintain, nor to pen, nil
the erection, placement or maintenance of any building, planter boxes. earth fill or other structures except
walls and fences on the above descdbad real property. The Grantee, and its contractors, agents and employees,
shall have the right to trim or cut tree roots as may endanger or intedere with said systems and shall have
free access to said systems and every part thereof, at all times, fir the purpose of exercising the dghts
herein granted; provided, however, that in making any excavation on said property of the Grantor, the Grantee
shall make the same in such manner as will cause the least injury to the surface of the ground around such
excavation, and shall replace the earth so removed by it and restore the surface of the ground to as near the
same condition as it was prior to such excavation as is practicable.
EXECUTED thi$. day of , 19
CITY OF TEMECULA ~IJNITY SERVICE
DISTRICT
By
PATRICIA BIRDSALL PRESIDENT
By
JUNE GREEK, CITY CLERK/SECRETARY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
SCOTT REID, Crl'Y A'ITORNEY
Gram of F, ssement
6577-2393/3-2302
STATE C:Xc CAUFORNIA )
) s$.
COUNTY OF )
On , before me, ,
personally appeared. and
personally known to me (or ;xoved to me on the basis of Satisfactory evidence) to be the persons whose names
subscribed to the within Instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in their authorized
capacities and that by their signatures on the instrument the persons, or the enUty upon pehaff of which the
persons acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
z
ITEM
NO.
3
CITY ~TTORNEY
FIFANCE OFFICER
CITY F,~N~GER
/~
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FROM:
DAVID F. DIXON, CITY MANAGER
DATE:
SEPTEMBER 14, 1993
SUBJECT:
NAMING OF THE COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER
PREPARED BY: ~
RECOMMENDATION:
SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
That the Board of Directors:
Consider, and if desired, approve the official name of the Community Recreation
Center.
DISCUSSION: The Community Recreation Center (CRC) is located in the
Rancho California Sports Park adjacent to the existing Rancho Vista fields. On May
10, 1993, the Community Services Commission requested that staff receive additional
input from the CRC Foundation concerning the name of this facility. Based upon the
recommendation of the CRC Foundation, the Community Services Commission
recommended that the official name of the CRC be as follows:
1. Thomas H. Langley Community Recreation Center
The Commission cited the thousands of hours that Tom Langley volunteered for this
project and felt that his contributions to the CRC was so significant in promoting
community services in Temecula that naming the facility after him was appropriate.
According to existing policy, the Board of Directors may select this recommended
name or choose any other name desired.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Community Services Agenda Report - August 9, 1993.
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
AGENDA REPORT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
SHAWN D. NELSON ~
AUGUST 9, 1993
NAMING OF THE COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER
RECOMMENDATION: That the Community Services Commission:
Approve the official name for the Community Recreation Center.
DISCUSSION: Pursuant to the City's naming policy, it is the responsibility
of the Community Services Commission to forward recommendations to the Board of
Directors concerning the official name of each park and recreation facility operated by
the City of Temecula. It is therefore recommended that the official name of the
Community Recreation Center (CRC) be identified so proper signage can be approved
as part of the development process.
At the direction of the Commission, staff contacted the CRC Foundation to receive
their input concerning the name of this facility. The recommendations of the CRC
Foundation in order of preference are as follows:
1. Thomas H. Langley Community Recreation Center
2. Community Recreation Center
3. Temecula Community Recreation Center
Pursuant to the existing naming policy, the Commission may select one of the above
names or choose any other name desired to recommend to the Board of Directors.
Attached is information provided by the CRC Foundation and the City's existing
naming policy for your review.
This One's for the Children
President
Thomas H. Langley
Fitst Vice-President
Timmy Daniels
Secretary
Kelly Danaha
Treasurer
Leigh Engdahl
Directors
Melody Bruns~ing
Ruth Chesher
Bob Crow~hers
Geoffrey Goier
Debbie Gu~knech~
Evelyn Harker
Jan Hays
Rocky Hill
John Hunneman
.,.J~ober~ LalDidus
e Machen
.~eane Manning
Joonn Markham
George Mamn
S~ewor~ Morns
Sol Munoz
Lynne Sanders
Vic Saraydanan
Janet Scoot
Dan 5~eDhenson
Dove 5covatl
Alice Sullivan
Laura Turnbow
STeve Turnbow
Dove Wilson
Bear Park And Recreation Commission:
The Cemmntty Recreational Center building foundatton~ould like to suggest the foliowing names
for the recreational center being built on Rancho Vista Way by the city of Temecula:
(In order of preference)
1. Thomas H. Langley
Comaunity Recreational Center
2. lemecula Coemmntty Recreational Center
Our reasons for choice hummet 1 are:
a. The Conmunity Recreational Center building foundation was the brain child and
creation of Mr. Langley.
b. For four years Mr. Langiey has bersonally appeared and appealed to
corporations. small businesses. conm~nity service groups and organizations, homeowner
associations and pertinent government and civic leaders on behalf of the Community
Recreational Center.
c. Currently under the leadership of Mr. Langley the CRC building foundation has
raised $250,000 towards facilitating the building.
d. Ur. Langley has served as president of the non-profit organization for four
years and since its inception.
e. Nr. Langley has personally con~itted thousands of hours to meetings.
organizing groups and fundraising events for the CRC.
f. Mr. Langley and his company La Masters of Fine Jewelry has donated thousands
of dollars to this facility through donations and sponsoring of various events.
g. Nr. Langley was and is still personally involved in construction decisions and
negotiations including:
1. Choice of location.
2. Choice of architect and architectural design.
3. Mitigation of sound and location concern with Honeowner associations.
4. Decisions regarding coa~aunity needs which the facility will proviOe,
and activities which the recreational center will provide.
h. Mr. Langley has donated countless hours to other recreational and youth
oriented projects including: founoer of the Vintage IOK Run, 1987 Chairman of
Community Task Force, Chairman of Parks and Recreation sub-committee of the Temecula
Valley Chamber of Coa~erce, Chamoer Youth Con~nission Chairman 1987-1988, and Co-
Chairman of the1989 Teeecula Valley Balloon and Wine Festival.
Our second choice. and in part. reasons for the continuance of the name Conm~unity Recreational
Center are as follows:
a. The ComwJnity Recreational Center has developed a high profile and
recognizable name.
b. Corporations and associations have donated in the name of the CRC.
c. The CRC building foundation has raised approximately $250,000 towards
equipping this building.
d. The CRC building foundation directors and coamittees continue to lobby and
raise funds for this facility and in .support of other park and recreation progrmns.
27475 Ynez Road, Suite 240 · Temecula, CA 92591
Please understand, that while the entire executive board approved of decision number 1, Mr.
Langley abstained and atso state that he was extremely uncomfortable with our decision. This
is probably the first decision the board has made wtthout asking his advice or consent.
Me how you will consider the reasons for our suggestions valid and sincerely thank you for
the opportunity of providing these suggestions, He have also enclosed a small portion. of the
newsl~aper clippings regarding the CRC which have been accumulatnd over the past four years,
More is available if requested,
Sincerely:
The Executive Board of the CRC
Helody Brunsting
Bob Crowther
Kelly Donoho
Ttmy Dantels
Letgh Engdahl
George Hartin
Dave Wilson
COMMUNITY LIFE
Thursday October 8. 1992
First the vision;.;
now the ceremony
EDITOR°S
· r""qom Langley speech-
less? The guy who has
NOTEBOOK
Eric Grimm
,,_. been on the stump
these past few years with his
jaw cranked into fast for-
ward, his finger.pointing
toward the' future and. his
words'flying around like a
million basketballs trying to ·
score one for the kids? "
Getting up early for sun- !
rise service club meetings '
and staying late going over ~:
plans. organizing volunteers,
grinding out one step at a :.
time. One more fund raiser. One more new idea
One more call on a potential corporate donor. One
more dollar to buy a few nails.
A mystery murder dinner at 'a winery raised
$7,000 two years ago. Pink Day at the Sports Park
in September 1990 generated some contagious'.T
enthusiasm.
It all adds up.
Tuesday night, with the shouts of kids prac-
ticing soccer in the coming dusk and the last notes
of the Temecula Valley High School Band settling
into the grassy Sports Park. Tom was awed.
As the eager president of the 'Community.
Recreational Center Building Foundation, Tom led
his volunteers to raise more than $300,000 toward
the $2.3 million cost of the project-·
He persuaded architect Russell Rumansoff tO
cheerfully volunteer to design the 26,322-square;.'.!
foot vision. The taxpayers chipped in through the
city -- after Tom talked to civic leaders.
Everybody seemed to listen to Tom, give him
a donation. "It'll be good forthe kids;' they would
say. ' . ' '1
a f he~,
He caxried the plans through the city s. l
were on a charger and they were a banner ' th~
plans sparkling with h multi-purpose room,
ing rooms, a gymnasium, teen r~om~ kitchen;'oui~'~
door amphitheater, swimming pool and more.
A promise of a haven away from the more bni~
tai aspects of modern civilization that kids co .u]~
call their own. :.. -' , : ' ' n;i '
Then came Tuesday? Tom was awed. S li
through his beard. The time had come' for :cere-
mony. Surrounded by city council 'members and
community leaders, Tom lifted his shovel with the
rest of. them, broke some ground then threw som~.
dirt that seemed to rise'up as mystical clouds ofi~
community spirit catching those long .last rays of
the day.
SPECIAL REPORT:
A SALUTE TO MURRIETA
REAL ESTATE ~ INFORMATION
Marketing & Manage- Tecknology
ment MARKETING
GOVERNMENT Public Rdations
& The Lzgal Syst~ns HEALTH NEWS
FINANCIAL ; RETAIL NEWS .
Manage. m~nt = EDUCATION
INSURANCE Totlay & Tomorrow
Pm~tins A l)team COMMUNITY
pERSONNEL Events . ...
Fects &Issues :;
Volume 3, No. 2 Febmnry 1991
The Valley'Business .Journal
Salutes ...Tom Langley
t off
~ is
ling
lard
:hey
i'ost
rsis
The
lem
per
)urn
ybe
.:.
ilem
: or-
heir
st of
,cd,
:her
'ish
;
}re
at
'Tom Langley, a name and face
we all recognize! Tom is co-owner
of La Masters of Fine Jewelry in the
Tower Plaza. Tom is also the "brain-
child" behind the CRC, i.e., Com-
munity Recreational Center, of which
hc has helped to raise over $100,000
for this very worthwhile cffon--r
"This Onc's for th~ Children."
Tom has been a Chamber of
Commerce Board of Director for over
three years (being re-elected to his
second three-year term in November
'89), and is ac-
tivc in many civic
and Chamber ac-
tivities through-
out the commu-
nity. In 1986 he
founded the
Growth Aware-
ness Committee.
Prior to his
opening his business of La Masters
of Fine Jewelry, Tom worked for
Intemational Rcctifier, where he was
the company contact with the corn-
munity. Tom also was chairman of
the original Temecula Community
Plan Task Force that did the study of
revitalization of standards for Old
Town.
Tom Langley has been a member
of Rotary since 1986 and joined the
Sunrise Rotary in 1989. He was
chainan of the annual 10K Run.
Tom al so was vote, d the 1990 "Friend
of the Optimists."
Tom was born and :raised in
Modesto, California, and graduated
from the DeVry Institute in Mesa,
Arizona. He is married to Artira and
has two daughters, Shannon and
Michelle. When Tom was in Tempe
and Mesa, Arizona, he was active ~n
youth programs, such as junior high
basketball, little girls' soccer, hnd
softball.
Since I've met Tom, I've found
him to be areal go-getter, a sensitive,
caring man who has done a lot for
this community.
"Let's take our hats off to Tom
Langley" and salute this fine man for
all of his public service and vol-
unteerism that helps to make this
such a fine community. Thank you,
Tom!
And the Winners
Are...
BUSINESS OF THE YEAR
Advanced Cardiovascular Systems
(ACS)
SMALL BUSINESS OF THI~
YEAR
Maurice Printers
PKESIDENT'S AWARD ·
Larry Markham
AMBASSADOR OF TH~ V1:: a D
This One's For The Children
A Child's Dream Is Being Built By Men With Vision
There is a spirit
in Temecula which
the casual ob-
server often mis-
ses. It's the spirit
which built a 'i':
Sports Park strict- .["'i '
ly from volunteers
and donations. It's
a spirit which
bands together to
solve growth
problems like con-
gested traffic. And
it is this spirit on
which the mem-
bers of the Community Recrea-
tional Center's (CRC) building
foundation thrive.
With a 52-member board of
d;-ectors and dozens of sup-
ing members, the CRC
i~udding Foundation has set a
two year goal which is
entwined with local youths'
needs. Their dream is to build
a 26,522 square foot children's
recreational center on the un-
developed land Df the
Temecula Sports Park.
Most cities have one - a
recreational facility where the
youth of the community can
gather, play board games,
team sports, and learn new
skills. In the newly-incor-
porated city of Temecula,
where the population has
doubled in the last three years,
our youths have no such cen-
ter.
"We want to build a facility
which will provide an indoor
.gymnasium for basketball and
volleyball as well as a place for
Hemet.
Russell Rumansoff explains details of the CRC models to
Leigh Engdhal, CRC 7vreazurw
our youth to meet," stated
Tom Langley, CRC President.
The proposed CRC building
will have a large gymnasium
for indoor sports, special meet-
ing rooms for arts and crafts. a
game room for the youth as
well as a nutritious snack bar.
The gymnasium will do
double duty with a stage
which can be opened to an out-
door amphitheater or an in-
door auditorium.
The CRC Foundation has ear-
marked land at the Temecula
Sports Park for the $2.5 mil-
lion center and has committed
to raise a minimum of
$500,000 in private donations
over the next two years. The
remaining $2 million will
come from state and county
funding programs.
"In our first six months,
we've already raised $100,000
in donations and pledges,'
stated Langley.
This money has been raised
through sponsorships, busi-
ness contributions,
fund raisers and
private donations.
In addition, the
CRC has received
thousands of dollars
in professional ser-
vices, printing, and
silk screening.
Architectural
renderings, floor
plans and models
have been donated
to the CRC by Her-
ron and Rumansoff,
Architects, Inc. of
"It's something were proud
of," stated Russell Rumansoff,
.whose firm has designed build-
ings such as the Rancho Cal~p~''
nia Garden Center and the ~
original Rancho California Plaza~
"We've been involved in this
community since-1978 and
watched it grow," Rumansoff
commented about his
company's donation.
"The people here have a real
sense of community. They
want to preserve this idea of
being a 'town'. So, when we
were given this opportunity to
become involved we immedi-
ately decided to just DO IT.'
Rumansoff added.
Herron and Rumansoff have
provided the CRC with every
possible elevation, rendering
and model needed. The
models show both the interior
and exterior of the building,
delineating the places for craft
October, 1990 TVN[
cont, from pg. I3
~" DinS, me,eting rooms, several
· v011eyball courts and; administra-
tive office. A u-shaped struc-
ture, the CRC plans display a
center courtyard ideal for
youth activities and gatherings-
'fo keep the youth of any
area interested and involved
in a community, you have to
give them a place that is their
own," Rumansoff added-
~Ve currently have teens,
youth, adults, non-working
parents and senior citizens
who would donate their time
to supervise youth activities.
We also have organizations
such as YMCA, Boys Clubs,
H.EA.R.T. Foundation and Ser-
vice Clubs who have a sincere
desire to help the youth of the
community, BUT, We have no
facility," Langley explained.
Langley has engaged in a
personal mission of speaking
before all the local service or-
ganizations and clubs. Toting
the floor plans and models,
Langley has appealed for sup-
port both financial and in spirit,
to'hundreds of local citizens.
The end result has been
several fund raiserS'including
the extremely successful Mur-
der Mystery Dinner at Clos Du
Muriel, the CRC Awareness
Rally, Callaway Benefit Lunch-
eon, Poster Contest and the
Temecula Town Association's
Golf Tournament and 10K
Pumpkin run to be held in Oc-
tober.
A recent needs assessment
survey performed
by the Economic
Development
· Committee of the ..
Country
Estate
7he ValL,,y Most C. omp e
lnterior Design and Consulting Center
28545 Felix V'aldez ~ - a,.. 9-.~
~ (714) 676-6131
Temecula Valley
Chamber of Com-
merce listed more
recreational
facilities as one of
the top four re-
quests- In fact,
9?-~g of those ques-
tioned agreed that
the Temecula Val-
ley needed more
recreational out-
lets for children
and teens.
This need is
not merely a
result of
Temecula's ex-,
plosive growth-
There has been
an overwhelming
lack of youth ac-
tivities for years.
"As-our children
grew up in
14
Temecula, we were fortunate
to have a pool and large
property for all of their: tds
to hang around,' stated b, ace
Claude, a CRC director.
Claude said that he always
encouraged his children to
bring their friends home since
there were no recreational
facilities locally.
~l'he CRC is a much needed
good idea,' Claude added.
Claude, an eight-year resi-
dent, is .President of U.S. Ther-
tooplastic, Inca Temecula-based
firm which provides precision
molded parts for industrial
applications- U.S. Thermoplas-
tics is one of seven corporate
sponsors of the CRC. Others
include the Press Enterprise,
Advanced Cardiovascular Sys-
tems (ACS), Rancon Real
Estate, Lorenz, Aldahaff &
Oggl- Attorneys, Hewon and
Rumansoff- architects, and
the Prestige Group. °~
The CRC Building F
tion board of directors reads
like a Who's Who of Temecula:
Deanne Manning, Vice Presi-
dent; Kelly Donoho, Secretary;
Leigh Engdahl, Treasurer, and
directors A1 Anderson, Bill
Bopf, Tom Leevers, Larry
Markham, Hugh Stites, Allan
McDonald, Vic Saraydarian,
Mike Whitaker, Stewart Morris,
Timmy Daniels, Rocky Hill,
Dan Stephenson, Carole
Walsh, Robert Lapidus, Sue
Thompson, ]anelle Denham,
Ruth Chesher, Kellie Illengo,
MaryAnn Viracl~ Sal Munoz,
Tom Maples, Pare ]andt,
Glenn Richardson, ]on Hays,
Earl Shaw and Evelyn
Harker. ~
by Melodll Brunsting of
The Ad Works
October, lD9
CRC spons*0~ !:Youth Rally .at' Temecula'
'The 'CRC '(Commurdty"RecreatJonal Cerater)'!Youth Rally, orBS-
nized by the CRC youth commission, will begin at 11:30 8.m. Saturday
at the Temecula Sports Park on Margarlta Road, Temecula, At 9:30
· 8.m.. children and adults in five dll~erent Taeighborltoods surrounding
· the Sports Park will be asked to joLn In e maf~ to the Sports Park
and'rally: Participants are asked;to wear pink shirts, T-shifts. and'
hats, .The rally win irkdude five entertainment, downs, jugg]ers, food,
a min i-]dds fair, games, a party jump, and tocai omclais wiU speak on
the need for the recreational center. ~The objective Is 'to. buUd
awareness and support for the CRC, Thei CRC has a two-year plan to
ram: $300,000':of,.the '$2.3 million: project through-' ptlvato and
corporate sponsorships, So far, the. CRC Buncling Foundation-has
· raised '$100,000.. in donations and pledge.. "' "~: ;' ~ ......... ""
Elks 9.rants:,for .voca~on,,al students available "-:
:::cer te ....,:,i-:ra!l -,
~on~willbein~o ' ' '-~>" '
:F :"'~"iic°'"'"~"i~'~:?:=' i:i''' ~,v.~a.~i~..,.~ ':' i:".~[=.~2::
· !:: ~,0bjective 'is to builc~ aware e,,l~n~m ;-"Z! trying'to build a recreational '~2!; ~ .~"::
~: -,~.snd support.for the:CRl3. :'! ' ::: center for our children,'.,-::., ,.:iT :: '
;: '.-.~ d Children and adOits are '," Daniels said about the rslly. ;:.,. ':
: supl~rt to achieve .our goals,' -_'I .L ' .
'if :"' 't-shirts and hats and: ~;' "" ] , '.
· "' ::': ..... ~ ~ ::
'::'./:~;l~re on PaubaRoad,andVilla; ' ] h
. , .v ~: The CRC _an a two year
='-:"~' Alturas north and iiouth, at "! plan to raise $300,000 ofthe .-i "
i": :P-q'-'Vail School at Mira Loma. :,. . private and corporate =:. :i
-' - .' · and Rancho Vista and" .'
, . :.t ~tvenida De LarReina.-The ' ''~ i sponsorships. So far the,
Z , ='~: building foundation has raised '~'
! :' L t-Rally will be2in'at 11:30 a.n~ .. :i $100;000 in donations and
.:'j' -""fist "A:mass of pink shirts, : pledges.. ~:~ '
;:'2 ~veatshirtsaudt-ahirtswillbe'.:i ' ' '.-" ""! '
,.;; :e'-" ~arching towards the Sports ;.! Preliminary oo p ,
-!.. ~nd live entertainment,: i stage and amphitheater.'"
· · .' ='=~lowns, the Kiwanis dunking I indoor stage, gymnasium for
' -' ': .v. booth, food. Wiv' yan Go will' '~ basketball and volle,yball. '
"" !
!"?Howwould u~e~'
" e B~m ~d'~f~!;~ '. heirs ~u, ~ ~e~ i ~= '~ ;=lsyChsm~ of~ne~e BeaCh
~ om~n's Or~tion: of .~e~,~ ~ ~ve ~ ~em .on,~ ~o~, ~ phone j. ;Bo~ '~conce~'?~sP~oa[' Boshes~.
~ . . ,
~ ~esting 'phOqy 'felons~ Ffrom '9 :"" ~ ;'It'S ~' chBce 'for people"ta"; :BPW/CRC ~: i~ no e~cep~on:.
' Fundraiser . wo~hwhileCause."saidMonics
' JoSa~,B Wp~sid~t. i. ~ champagne;bmn~h'ho(ilr~-':
'; ' ' ' "~ ' ":-...i-' : ' ' *~ ' . : ':" loon flight for ~ on Di~nd
~: JSil ~d ~il ~ ~- To arrest a n nd or foe, a Air Fligh~t and-~ hou~.
Community RecreationaI:- complaint form must be ~lled out ; !DJ. serviC~fwm.Tim ;D ]
' ' and a $S check sent to the BPW. ' ucfio.~s...] '~i :":.
. .'That
why the phony felon should: be . oughtto'make One eatZ,
Center Building ' "~; !
F, oundation .: · -.:. ;...~
~ WHO: Business,'and arrested and where the a.rrest' .breakoutparty.".Said..'I?mnn)
' I C
Professional Women's should tak.e p ate. ;., ~:-/'.' ~ ..~.:.?'~. Daniris, RC
WHEN: Friday, Apri126..i.,'. .aSolfcourse. Justf~lbutabrm la
.... Comp intiar~s~to~s
· " 'i PhO~, felbns win b~'tak~n]o ::.' avanable at the',.Tem~'uhlV~-l~.~
one of three jail sites, Butteffi.eld [.: Chamber
'Bank. ~There, the 'phony talon
will be!given:, phone and pledge ~. ' ·: "' "~- ' ' '~'
:TIME: 9 a.m.-4 p.mj .~.'.
...WHERE: Jail sites~:will:.''
be at Butterfield Square,
Tower Plaza, or Overland
'.'Bank"': "[ .~! .....-':~ '!; "'
· INFORMATION:".:Kelly"
Donoho at 676-5090
.,
THE· VALLEY BUSINESS JOURNAL
PAGE
g! ,iD0ubletree,iigaises: M oney
· : .:: .: :..:-.:....;':i;;i::.: .'..: .... ::. 2':'.'7::':.'
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :.:-i,~-:,i:!;:ii::i..:, :'ii.~".
"!~??~i~:.!~ig;::.':The Community. Rccr. ational Centci' (CRC) received a sweet dona-
i;.,iiillni;:from:.!the-;Doubletrcc Suites. As a' first anniversary
:i).::'DoUbleu~ .g~ncral manager Joseph A. Bann designated February 25 as
:;~i:.'CRC Day;.!' .:~.~.: ........ .......~ ......' , ·' ' ' '
!! !: .. Recentiy i~B~5~iilli~:~!~iii:;:-CRi2!:,iV~ith:-~,.::a~,! $535 ~chccli from' the-
': ?fUndraising actiVi~gS h~la:th.ii':claY.: :-:.:,:.;i;;.!!:.:.:,:!-.: .,.~ i: ............... ............
!;' ~:i' ':A potion of all the sales at the Doubletrcc on that day were
ii.::.for the .CRC::~In. addixi~ni' all sales' on: theDoubletrcc!.s f~u:s:: .Ch~l.a..tc.'::f;:Si':!:)i~;
!'::chip cookies'-',vcrc:.donatcd''ui'~,thej;cRC~}:~!':!'!':'g ' "
i .-: The cRcFounastion~s'r~ $1vo;000 of · $100;000 cornmiunent
; forfacilitatingth¢cealc/~!:iiPrcliminarY.Planscaltf°ra26,000'squarc;f°°t
-: facility and includei:.~asium;,;lockc~roorn. snack b~r. game rooms.
,. amphithcater. andt~:~m;~,:~i:::.i2~!::i iS!.:?.,!.~":i;"~! ..'
.' .U ":' ':" ::' .. :"'::" ' ' " ·
~ ~. .. .::- --. ....
,.' B-IO ~..ThaCalitomian :. Fx~clay, ~lxusry 2'1, Ic~
"iS :
~-.
"' -'.! Not only can car buyen
', who shop in Temecula feel
., ~ 8ood about supportinZ the
l::!! ' local economy, butalso N ~
they can Help the Commu-
· -~i: "ni~y Recreational Center i
~ BuildinZFoundation... i~
.-,, '~ ' I)urin2 She month of;.;, '~,
~ t%bruary the Toyota deSl-
i ership is helping Temecula
,,, ,
residents ,Buy a Square
i i
Foot' by donatinZ $100 to
CRC for every car pur--, .k
· .: -.~
customer buyin~ the car,'
and will be included in the
'Buy A Square Foot' CRC
fund-raising program.
Donations are limited to
Temecula'residents only.
Doubletree Suites has~l-
so included CRC in its an-
niversary celebration. On
Tuesday, for any purchase
made within the hotel --
'the Harvest Cafe, the '
lounge, hotel rooms or gift
shop, a donation will be
made to the CRC.
The Doubletree's
scrumptious cookies will be
available with all sales be-
ing donated to the CRC~
The 'Buy a Square Foot'
program is part of CRC:s
push to raise the $300,000
necessary. to facilitate the
recreational center. For the
$100 donation, individuals
receive permanent name
recognition with the racili-
For more information~on
CRC, contact Kelly Dono-
ho at 676-5090.
9NI. ZIO9 · SgSV..,TIEcY .~Mg~N · S'gDV>!3Vd 7VNOI. ZOI/IIO~!d · Safg. Z.ZETS'MgN · SDOTV. Z V3 s ~'.~b'lTH3Ob',g
RESOLUTION NO. C$I) 92-08
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE TE1VIECULA COMMUNITY 'SERVICES
DISTRICT ADOPTING A POLICY FOR NAMING
PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
WIfERE&S, on April 23, 1991, the Board of Directors (th~ "Board") adopted a policy
for naming parks and recreation facilities; and
WI:fRRR&S, the Community Services District and the Parks and Recreation Commission
requests that the aforementioned policy be adopted by resolution;
NOW, THEREFOr, ~ BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEMECULA
COMMIJIClTY SERVICES DISTRICT DOES tlRRRRy, IH~-~OLVE, DETERMINE AND
ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the policy for naming parks and re~'eation faciliries as set forth on
Exhibit "A' is adopted establishing a uniform policy and procedure that identifies criteria for
the naming of parks and recreation facilities.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of September, 1992.
Ronald I. Parks, President
ATTEST:
,&~iGr~k, City
Rcsos CSD 92-0i
STATE OF CALmORNIA)
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) SS
CITY OF TEMECULA )
I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the :City of Ternec,_,J~, FA~I~y DO CERTIFY that the
foregoing Resolution No. CSD 92-08 was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the Ci~ of Temecula on the 8th day of Sepmmber 1992 by the following roll call vote.
AYES: 5 DIRECTORS: Bird.sail, Moore, Lindemans, Mu~oz
Parks,
NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None
ABSENT: 0 DIRECTORS: None
~u" S~C'~~
ne k
P, eeos C~D
EXhibit "A"
CULA CONINgjNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
Naming Parks m'xd Recreation Facilities'
PURPOSE
To establish a uniform policy and procedure that identifies
criteria for the naming of parks and recreation facilities.
POLICY
The Park and Recreation Commission will be responsible for the
selection of names for parks and recreation facilities. Once a
name is selected, it will be forwarded to the Board of Directors
for ratification. Staff will be responsible for encuuraging
citizens and community organizations to suggest possible names that
will then be forwarded to the Commission for consideration.
At a minimum, each park and community building will be designated
a name. Naming of specific areas within a park (garden, swimming
pool, lake, ballfield, etc.) is acceptable but should be kept to a
minimum to avoid confusion. No park shall be given a name which
might be perceived as controversial by the community. All names
selected shall be acceptable and meaningful to a majority of the
neighborhood/community where the park or recreation facility is
located.
Priority in naming sites shall be given to geographical locations,
historic significance or geologic features. No park shall'be named
for a person, except where an individual has made a significant
financial contribution toward the acquisition and/or development of
the park or facility, or has been an outstanding long-time
.community leader who has supported open space and recreational
activities.
All park and recreation facilities will be designated a formal name
within six months of acquisition or construction. All parks shall
have an entrance sign. Buildings wilt have an entrance sign and a
plaque inside the facility for name identification.
The name of a park or recreation facility may be changed only after
a hearing is held by the Commission to receive community input and-
direction. No name shall be changed unless there is significant
justification and support by the community.
RESPONSI'BU .ITY ACTION
Depar'cment
Parks and
Recreation
Commission
Depar%ment
Acquires a new park or recreation
facility.
Solicits possible names from community.
Forwards suggested names to=he Parks and
Recreation Commission for considara=ion.
Receives any additional community input·
Selects a name for the new park or
recreation facility.
Forwards name
ratification.
City Council for
Installs =he appropriate naming sign or
plaque.
RE'DEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
ITEM
NO.
1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1993
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order on
Tuesday, August 10, 1'993, 8:20 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol
Street, Temecula, California. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Ronald J. Parks
presiding
PRESENT: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Mur~oz, Roberts, Parks
ABSENT: 1
AGENCY MEMBERS: Stone
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Harwood Edvalson,
City Attorney F. Scott Field, Deputy City Clerk Susan Jones and Recording Secretary Gail
Zigler.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
AGENCY BUSINESS
1. Minutes
It was moved by Agency Member Parks, seconded by Agency Member Roberrs to
approve staff recommendation as follows:
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of July 13, 1993;
The motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: 4 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Mur~oz, Roberrs, Parks
NOES: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: I AGENCY MEMBERS: Stone
2
Exoenditure Limit of Tax Increment Revenue
City Manager David Dixon presented the staff report.
RDAMIN08/10193 -1 - 8/'13/93
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES AUGUST 10, 1993
Agency Member Mur~oz asked the City Attorney if 8 change of circumstance has been
defined, as required for the motion to increase the tax increment.
City Attorney Field said that if the Redevelopment Agency concludes that there is
reason to go forward, that will be presented to the court.
Chairperson Parks said that he feels there has been a reasonable change in
circumstances and would like staff to proceed to see if there is any interest in
removing the limits contained in the judgement.
Agency Member Muftoz requested that staff prepare an itemized list of the projects
that the City intends to spend Redevelopment funds on.
Agency Member Birdsall and Roberts agreed that they also would like to see an
itemized list.
It was moved by Agency Member Birdsall, seconded by Agency Member Mufioz to
direct staff to compile a list of projects to be discussed and open the dialogue with the
proponents of Dawes vs. City of Temecula.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES:
4 AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Mur~oz, Roberts, Parks
NOES:
0 AGENCY MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 1
AGENCY MEMBERS: Stone
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
City Manager David Dixon advised that the Redevelopment Advisory Committee met on
August 3, 1993 and voted in favor of the Agency's direction to issue a bid on the Rancho
West Apartments on Pujol Street, offered for sale by RTC. City Manager Dixon advised that
he has not heard of the final outcome at this time.
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
None
RDAMIN08/10~93 -2- 8/13/93
.--.- REDEVELOPMFNT AGENCY MINUTES AUGUST 10, 1993
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Agency Member Birdsall, seconded by Agency Member Roberts to adjourn
at 8:45 P.M.
The next regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula will be held
on Tuesday, August 24, 1993, 8:00 PM, at the Temeculs Community Center, 28816 Pujol
Street, Temecula, California.
Chairperson Ronald J. Parks
ATTEST
--" City Clerk June S. Greek
RDAMIN08110/93 -3- 8/13/93
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 1993
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Redevelopment Agency was called to order on
Tuesday, August 24, 1993, 8:21 P.M., at the Temecula Community Center, 28816 Pujol
Street, Temecula, California. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Ronald J. Parks.
PRESENT: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Birdsall, Mufioz, Roberrs,
Stone, Parks
ABSENT: 0
AGENCY MEMBERS: None
Also present were City Manager David F. Dixon, Assistant City Manager Harwood Edvalson,
City Attorney F. Scott Field, City Clerk June S. Greek and Recording Secretary Gail Zigler.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
AGENCY BUSINESS
Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of July 27, 1993.
It was moved by Agency Member Stone, seconded by Agency Member Mufloz to
approve the minutes of July 27, 1993.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS:
NOES: 0
ABSENT: 0
AGENCY MEMBERS:
AGENCY MEMBERS:
Birdsall, Mufloz, Roberts,
Stone, Parks
None
None
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,$ REPORT
None
RDAMINO8124/93 -1 - 8/30/93
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MINUTES
AGENCY MEMBER'S REPORTS
None
AUGUST 24, 1993
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Agency Member Roberts, seconded by Agency Member Stone to adjourn at
8:21 P.M. The motion was unanimously carried.
The next regular meeting of the City of Temecule Redevelopment Agency will be held on
Tuesday, September 14, 1993, 8:00 PM, at the Temecula Community Center, 28816,
Temecula, California.
Chairperson Ronald J. Parks
ATTEST:
City Clerk June S. Greek
RDAMINOW24193 -2- 8/30/93