The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About031291 CC Agenda~A GENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING TEMECULA TEMPORARY COMMUNITY CENTER - 27475 COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE MARCH 12, 1991 - 6:30 PM Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 90-08 Resolution: No. 90-26 EXECUTIVE SESSION Closedsession pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(c) to discuss initiation of Iit~tation. CALL TO ORDER: Invocation Pastor Gary Nelson Flag Salute Councilmember Birdsall ROLL CALL: Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Muftoz, Parks PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS Proclamation - Peace Corps Day Proclamation - Commending President George Bush and the Troops of Operation Desert Storm PUBLIC COMMENTS A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council- on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council about an item not listed on the Agenda,' a pink 'Request To Speak' form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address. For all other agenda items a 'Request To Speak' form must be filed with the City Clerk before the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. NOTICE TO THI= PUBLIC All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless members of the City Council request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. 211~lndW031281 I 0~07,~ 1 CONSENT CA! ~=NDAR Standard Ordinance Adoorion Procedure RECOMMENDATION 1.1 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. 2 Minutes RECOMMENDATION:. 2.1 Approve the minutes of January 26, 1991 as mailed. 3 4 City Treasurer's Reoort for the Month ending January 31, 1991 RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Receive and file report Resolution Ao~)rovina List of Demands RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CL41MS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A 5 Claim for Damages - Georae Turkmany RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Deny the claim for damages. 2/eeerldMO$12e1 2 03/07/91 6 Acceotance of Public Imorovements - Parcel MaD No. 196~6-1 RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Accept the public improvements in Parcel Map No. 19626-1. 6.2 AuthoriZe the reduction of street, sewer and water system bond amounts and accept replacement Faithful Performance bonds for the reduced amounts. 6.3 Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Accentance of Public Improvements - Parcel Man No, 19626-2 RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 7.2 7.3 Accept the public improvements in Parcel Map No. 19626-2. Authorize the reduction of street, sewer and water system bond · amounts and accept replacement Faithful Performance bonds for the reduced amounts. Direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. 8 Coonerative Aareement for Temecula Valley Via Del Coronado Storm Drain A 183 lot subdivision located south of Interstate 79 South, east of Pala Road. RECOMMENDATION: 8.1 Approve the Temecula Valley Via Del Coronado Storm Drain, Tract Map No. 23267 and a Cooperative Agreement with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and The Presley Companies. 8.2 Authorize the execution and attestation of the agreement in its final form by the Mayor and City Clerk. 9 2/NM1de/O31281 1-15 Over-crossinn Project RECOMMENDATION: 9.1 Approve an extension of agreement with All City Management. 0~07;~1 10 Aceroval of Final Parcel Mao No. P4P39 - Amended No. 1 Three residential lots contained in 4.4 acres located northeast of Avenida de San Pasqual and Sierra Bonita. RECOMMENDATION: 10.1 Approve Final Parcel Map No. 24239, Amended No. 1, subject to the Conditions of Approval. 11 Aooroval of Final Tract Man No. 23992 - Amended No. I A proposal to subdivide 36.24 acres into five lots for construction of 382 apartment/condominium units located at the southeast corner of Interstate 15 and Rancho California Road on the east and west sides of Ynez Road RECOMMENDATION: 11.1 Approve Final Tract Map No. 23992, Amended No. 1, subject to the amended Conditions of Approval. 12 Public Works Bid Procedures RECOMMENDATION: 12.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REGARDING UNIFORM PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION COST ACCOUNTING PROCEDURES. 13 Western Ridgeline Policies RECOMMENDATION: 13.1 Direct Staff to develop interim Hillside and Open space Policies t~o be used as the City of Temecula's Western Ridgeline policy until the General Plan is adopted; and direct Staff to forward said policy to the County of Riverside. 13.2 Forward a recommendation to the county of Riverside relative to Change of Zone 5748 and Tentative Tract Map No. 25980. 2MoendMO31291 4 03/07/el 14 Coooerative A.reement For CalTrans for Oesi.n of Rancho California Road Off and On RECOMMENDATION: 14.1 Authorize the Mayor to execute the Cooperative Agreement with CalTrans for design of the Rancho California Road Off/On Ramps. CSD MEETING - (To I~e held at 8:00 PM) Please see separate agenda COUNCIL BUSINESS 15 Television/Radio Transmitting Antenna Follow-uo Reoort RECOMMENDATION: 15.1 Provide direction to staff regarding issues and development standards criteria the Planning Commission and Planning Department Staff should examine in drafting new zoning regulations for antennas in the City of Temecula. 16 Consideration of Bus Shelters - Temecula Vallev Transit Continued from the meeting of February 26, 1991. RECOMMENDATION: 16.1 Continue to the meeting of March 26, 1991. 17 Establishment and Activation of a Redevelooment Agency RECOMMENDATION: 17.1 Introduce and read by title only, an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 91- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, ACTIVATING THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF TEMECULA AND DECLARING AND DESIGNATING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 21egende/O$1281 6 03/07/91 18 19 20 21 Adoption of the Countv of Riverside Redevelopment Plan RECOMMENDATION: 18.1 Introduce and read by title only, an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO, 91- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECUUI ADOPTING A REDEVELOPMENT PL4N Undergroundino Utilitv Lines alono Winchester Road RECOMMENDATION: 19.1 Receive and file staff report. Stoo Sion Placement - Ynez Road Between Solana Way and Winchester Road Placed on the agenda at the request of Councilmember Mui~oz RECOMMENDATION: 20.1 Receive and file staff report. Reconsideration of Council Committee Assionments Placed on the Agenda at the request of Councilmember Moore CITY MANAGER RETORT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT CITY COUNCIL REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: March 26, 1991, 7:00 PM, Temporary Temecule Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive, Temecula, California 2/eeelde/O312e 1 e 03J07/~1 PROCLAMATIONS Proclamation The City of Temecula WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Temecula wishes to join with the rest of the nation in celebration of the Peace Corps 30th anniversary; and WHEREAS, the Peace Corps turns "thirtysomething' on March 1, 1991; and WHEREAS, from its earliest days, the heart and soul of the Peace Corps has been its spirit of volunteerism; and WHEREAS, Peace Corps volunteers and staff members give of themselves to help others often with little recognition; NOW, THEREFORE, the Temecula City Council of the City of Temecula hereby proclaims March 12 1991, Peace Corps Day in Temecula IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have here hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Temecula to be affixed this 12th Day of March, 1991. Ronald J. Parks Mayor June S. Greek City Clerk February 19, 1991 PEACE CORPS The Honorable Ron Parks Mayor of the City of Temecula P.O. Box 3000 Temecula, CA 92390 Dear Mayor Parks: On March 1 Peace Corps tums thirtysomething. In this time of global political upheaval, we invite you to join us in our celebration of 30 years of working toward world peace. About 130,000 Peace Corps Volunteers, 18,000 from California alone, have worked in more than 100 developing nations throughout the world. To recognize these achievements, we invite you to participate in our celebration by proclaiming "Peace Corps Day" in your city during March. Returned Peace Corps Volunteers who live or work in your city can be on hand to accept the proclamation on behalf of Peace Corps. Bringing back unique skills and a global perspective, returned volunteers inevitably become an enriching pan of community life. Through their ongoing efforts, and your assistance in bringing the word about Peace Corps to the public's attention, our development work can continue. Please advise us of your preferred date for Peace Corps Day in your city as soon as possible. To confirm a date, call us at (213) 575-7444 or (800) 832-0681, or write to Peace Corps, 11000 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 8104, Los Angeles, CA, 90024, attn. Joanne Townsend. We look forward to your participation in our celebration. Sincerely, Joanne Townsend -Public Affairs Manager Philippines '85-'88 Linda L. Lane Recruitment Specialist Colombia '71-'73 11000 Wilshire Boulevard · Suite 8104 · We~t Los Angeles, CA 90024 · (213) 209-7a. 4a. The City of Temecula WltEREAS, on August 2, 1990, the Republic of Iraq invaded the neighboring Country of Kuwait without provocation or cause; and, WltEREAS, the Congress of the United States authorized the President to commit this country's armed forces, to join with allied forces of the United Nations, to serve in combat in the Persian Gulf; and WHEREAS, President George Bush exemplified the finest qualities of statesmanship and courage in conducting affairs of state and serving as Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces during the Persian Gulf crisis; and WHEREAS, the men and women serving in the military units sent to the war zone distinguished themselves with courage and honor during "Operation Desert Storm", NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Temecula hereby proclaims as follows: Section 1. That the City of Temecula extends its profound thanks and congratulations to President George Bush for his superior leadership at a time when aggression and tyranny threatened the peace and security of the free world. Section 2. That the City of Temecula recognizes with sincere gratitude and pride the patriotism and valor of the members of the United States Armed Forces. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have here hereunto set our hands and caused the Seal of the City of Temecula to be affixed this 12th Day of March, 1991. Ronald J. Parks, Mayor Patricia H. Birdsall, Mayor Pro Tem Karel Lindemans, Councilmember Peg Moore, Councilmember J. Sal Mufioz, Councilmember ITEM NO. 1 ITEM NO. 2 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL HELD FEBRUARY26, 1991 A regular meeting of the Temecula City Council was called to order at 6:36 PM at the Temporary Temecula Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive, Temecula, California. Mayor Ron Parks presiding. PRESENT 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore Also present were City Attorney Scott F. Field, and City Clerk June S. Greek. Mayor Parks recessed at 6:37 PM Government Code Section 54956.9 Intercable vs City of Temecula. to a closed Executive Session pursuant to to discuss litigation in the matter of Jones Mayor Parks reconvened the City Council meeting at 7:14 PM. INVOCA T/ON The invocation was given by Pastor Sean Nelson, Rancho Christian Church. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Councilmember Mu5oz. PRESENTATIONS/ PRO CLA MA TIONS Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer, presented the California Society of Municipal Finance Officers Award to the City of Temecula, received for excellence in Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Jimmy Moore, 41747 Borealis Drive, presented the City of Temecula with a plaque for the outstanding regional United Way campaign, to be displayed at City Hall for the next year. Hi nut es\OZ\Z6\91 - 1 - 03/0/,/91 City Council Minutes February 26, 1991 PUBLIC COMMENTS Bob Taylor, 31130 General Kearny Road, introduced Wallace Best who is on the Board of Directors of the International Lincoln Association. Mr. Wallace Best, Executive Vice President of the International Lincoln Association, invited all Councilmembers and Citizens to participate in the organization of a program on April 15, 1991, which would be called "The First American for the Ages Day". John Dedovesh, 39450 Long Ridge Drive, asked that the proposed ordinance prohibiting trucks from parking on City streets, include boats and other trailers. James Marpie, 19210 St. Gallen Way, Murrieta, presented the Council with information from National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). He stated he attended a meeting put on by this organization and urged the Council to address non-point source pollution immediately, and he advised that in the near future this will be mandated by law. CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Lindemans requested removal of Item No. 6 from the Consent Calendar. He also asked the reason behind the street name of Motorcar Road. Doug Stewart, Deputy City Engineer, stated this name was established by the County because it runs through the auto dealerships. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to approve Consent Calendar Items 1-5 and 7-10. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks None Moore NOES: 0 ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: #inutes\02\26\gl -2- 03/04/91 City Council Minutes 1. Standard Ordinance Adoption Procedure 1.1 Minutes 2.1 2.2 February 26, 1991 Motion to waive the reading of the text of all ordinances and resolutions included in the agenda. Approve the minutes of February 5, 1991, as mailed. Approve the minutes of February 12, 1991, as mailed. Resolution Approving the List of Demands 3.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 91-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A Second Reading7 of Ordinance Amending7 Chapter 6. 10 Regardin~l Solid Waste 4.1 Read by title only and adopt an ordinance entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 91-07 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 6. 10 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING SOLID WASTE Revised Travel Policy 5.1 Approve the revised Travel Policy included as Exhibit A Authorize Release of Faithful Performance Warranty Letter of Credit for Public Improvements in Tract 20879- I 7.1 Authorize the release of the Faithful Performance Warranty Letter of Credit for public improvements in Tract 20879-1 and direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. #inutes\OZ\g6\91 -]- 03/04/91 City Council Minutes 8. 10. Release of Monument Bond for Tract No. 20643 8.1 February 26. 1991 Authorize the release of monument bond for Tract No. 20643 and direct the City Clerk to so advise the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Summary Vacation of Access and Sewer Easement Dedicated on Parcel Map No. 19145 9.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 91-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA VACA TING A SEWER AND ACCESS EASEMENT City Hall Tenant Improvement Budqet 10.1 Amend the City Hall Tenant Improvement Budget to $487,000. Traininq and Education Policies Councilmember Lindemans stated he does not believe a limit should be set upon educational reimbursement and it is vitally important to job performance. Councilmember Mu~oz said that since this policy covers not only seminars but school, these limits are proper and necessary. Councilmember Lindemans suggested that he would not object to the limit if the City Manager is given the authority to raise this limit if necessary. Mary Jane Henry, Finance Director, stated that a natural limit would be budgetary constraints under which all department heads must manage their departmental budgets. Mayor Parks suggested that additional funds could be made available through appeal to the City Manager. Hinutes\02\26\91 -4- 03/04/91 City Council Minutes February 26, 1991 It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Mu~oz to amend the Tuition Reimbursement Section to read "authorization of funds in excess of $400 may be presented on appeal to the City Manager". The motion was carried by the following vote: NOES: 0 ABSENT: 1 AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks None Moore COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Mu~oz to approve the Training and Educational Policies included as Exhibit A, as amended. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore PUBLIC HEARINGS 11. Appeal of Planning Commission Denial - Parcel Map No. 25607 Mayor Parks announced he would be abstaining from this item because he lives within 1,100 feet of the project, and turned the meeting over to Mayor Pro Tern Birdsall. Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, stated that the applicant has requested a continuance of this item. Mr. Thornhill recommended, however, that testimony be taken from citizens who came to speak on this issue. Mr. Thornhill requested that the public hearing be continued after taking testimony, to the meeting of April 9, 1991. Minutes\O2\26\g1 -5- 03/04/91 City Council Minutes Februarv 26, 1991 Mayor Pro Tem Birdsall opened the public hearing at 7:41 PM. Basil Tallent, 30680 Santiago Road, stated he did not have enough information on this project to know whether he is for or against it, and asked how it would affect property values. Gary Thornhill advised Mr. Tallent to contact the Planning Department and they would provide him with a staff report on this item. It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Mu~oz to continue this item to the meeting of April 9, 1991. 12. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore ABSTAIN: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Parks Tentative Parcel Map 24038 Planning Director Gary Thornhill introduced the staff report. Mayor Parks opened the public hearing at 7:47 PM. Mayor Parks stated he received a call from Larry Markam, representative for the applicant who stated he would not be able to attend this evening and if any questions 'needed clarification, he requested the matter be continued for two weeks. Councilmember Lindemans stated that in the interest of fairness he wanted the Council and the public to know that the applicant is working toward constructing the proposed motel in another location. Councilmember Mu~oz asked if any arguments were presented to the Planning Commission. Gary Thornhill answered that all issues were satisfied and the Planning Commission recommended approval. Mayor Parks closed the public hearing at 7:50 PM. Minutes\O2\Z6\91 -6- 03/0~/91 Citv Council Minutes February 26. 1991 It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Mu~oz to adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 91-23 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 24038 TO SUBDIVIDE A 4. 99 ACRE PARCEL INTO THREE COMMERCIAL PARCEL S L OCA TED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF MORENO ROAD, BETWEEN MERCEDES STREET AND I- 15 AND KNOWN AS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 921-070-022 The motion was carried by the following vote: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks AYES: NOES: 0 ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: None Moore Councilmember Lindemans stated he voted yes with the understanding that the applicant is working toward relocating the proposed motel. COUNCIL BUSINESS 13. Consideration of Bus Shelters- Temecula Valley Transit City Attorney Field introduced the staff report and recommended that this item be continued off calendar to allow staff time to review the business plan which was delivered to the City offices late Monday afternoon, February 25, 1991. Councilmember Mu~oz stated he would rather continue this to a time certain since the program needs to move forward. Brian Sampson, 40655 Calle Medusa, presented the Council with a petition from the Calle Medusa homeowners, stating their opposition to a bus route on Calle Medusa due to the excessive use of this residential road by school buses and through traffic. Minutes\OZ\Z6\91 -?- 03/0~/91 City Council Minutes February 26, 1991 R. Jane Vernon, 30268 Mersey Court, spoke in favor of the proposed shelters and bus service, stating this service is badly needed by the residents of Temecula. She asked why this project was being met with delays and asked that it be expedited. Tom MindJoia, 45644 Master Drive, asked that the Council expedite this matter so revenue can be generated and bus service can begin. He stated he would distribute a letter from UMTAH that states its support for this program. He further stated that Calle Medusa was originally on the list for bus service, however it has been taken off due to concern of the residents. Mayor Parks asked if he was requesting approval of 100 locations. Mr. Mindiola stated that originally 45 bus shelters would be installed, but approval of 100 is requested. Councilmember Mu~oz stated he would expect to see a map of the City indicating where these shelters would be located. Mayor Parks called a break to change the tape at 8:13 PM. The meeting was reconvened at 8:14 PM. Councilmember Birdsall stated there are many issues to consider and believes that a public hearing should be held allowing the public to voice their opinions on the location of bus shelters and other issues involved. She suggested placing this matter on the agenda of March 26, 1991. Mayor Parks stated he would like to see a pilot program in the City, explaining it is hard to visualize. Doug Stewart, Deputy City Engineer, stated that bus shelters are set up for future bus stops and traffic and safety issues must be addressed. City Attorney Field said that the agreement provides that each shelter must obtain an encroachment permit. Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, asked if the Council has a concern over the appearance of the shelters, stating that shelters vary considerably from community to community. It was the consensus of the Council that appearance is important and Mr. Mindiola should work with staff on this issue. Councilmember Birdsall stated her only concern is that Mr. Mindiola get a map with proposed shelters to staff as soon as possible. Minutes\0Z\Z6\91 -8- 03/04/91 City Council Minutes It was moved Lindemans to continue this to the meeting of March 12, 1991. The motion was carried by the following vote: February 26, 1991 by Councilmember Mufioz, seconded by Councilmember AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Parks 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None I COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore NOES: ABSENT: Mufioz, RECESS Mayor Parks called a recess at 8:26 PM. The meeting was reconvened following the CSD meeting at 8:56 PM. 14. Greenbelt Committee Request for DWR Funding7 Deputy City Engineer Doug Stewart introduced the staff report. James Marpie, 19210 St. Gallen Way, Murrieta, representing the Murrieta Creek Greenbelt Committee, presented the Council with information from National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). He stated if a pilot program is developed in Temecula, further funding would be available next year to aid in this effort. He stated that property owners along the Murrieta Creek have been contacted, and very favorable response has been given for donating a strip of property to the City to produce a greenbelt. Councilmember Lindemans asked how the grant money would be administered. Doug Stewart, Deputy City Engineer stated that the funds would be administered by the City. Hi nutes\OZ\26\91 -9- 0~/0~/91 City Council Minutes Februarv 26, 1991 It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Linderoans to: 14.1 Adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 91-24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ENDORSING AN APPLICATION FOR AN URBAN STREAMS RESTORATION GRANT, CONDITIONALL Y ACCEPTING GRANT IF OFFERED AND DESIGNATING CONTRACT MANAGER AND FISCAL AGENT The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore 15. Duties and Role of Boards, Commissions and Committees City Clerk June Greek introduced the staff report. Councilmember Mu~oz questioned whether action minutes would be adequate for the Councilmembers to receive sufficient information and insight into the matters covered at a commission meeting. Ms. Greek stated that unless verbatim minutes are taken, minutes in a form other than action minutes are subject to the interpretation of the person taking those minutes. Councilmember Birdsall stated that a recap and general synopsis is given in action minutes, as well as opposing viewpoints of dissenting votes. Gary Thornhill, Director of Planning, suggested rather than make the minutes too extensive, that staff expand agenda reports on items coming before the Council to include points of view of commissioners on dissenting votes. Councilmember Mu~oz also asked that on the last paragraph of Page 6, "If differences cannot be resolved by this method, the Mayor and/or City Minutes\OZ\26\91 -10- 03/0~/91 City Council Minutes February 26, 1991 16. Manager"... be changed to read "... the Council Liaison for each Commission and/or City Manager should then be consulted in an effort to resolve the matte r." It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemarts to approve final version of Handbook for Boards, Committees and Commissions with the modification in the last paragraph on Page 6 changing "Mayor" to "Council Liaison". The motion was carried by the following vote: NOES: 0 ABSENT: I AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks None Moore COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: Integrated Waste Management RFP Review Committee Joe Hreha, Manager of Information Systems, introduced the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Lindemans, seconded by Councilmember Birdsall to appoint Councilmember Lindemans and Councilmember Moore to serve on the Integrated Waste Management RFP Review Committee. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, MuRoz, Parks None Moore NOES: 0 ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: 17. Electricity Franchise - Southern California Edison Company City Attorney Field introduced the staff report. Mayor Parks called a break at 9:33 to change the tape. reconvened at 9:34 PM. The meeting was Hinutes\OZ\Z6\91 -11- 03/04/91 City Council Minutes It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, Lindemans to adopt a resolution entitled: 18. February 26, 1991 seconded by Councilmember RESOLUTION NO. 91-25 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DECLARING THE CITY COUNCIL 'S INTENTION TO GRANTAN ELECTRIC FRANCHISE TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: CDBG Fundin9 Recommendations Birdsall, Parks None Moore Lindemans, Mu~oz, Shawn Nelson, Director of Community Services, introduced the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to approve staff recommendation for CDBG Funding. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore ABSENT: I 19. Ad Hoc Assignments for Council/Commission Liaison and Committees City Clerk June Greek introduced the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Mu~oz to approve Committee assignments and Council/Commission Liaison assignments, adding Councilmembers Lindemarts and Moore to Integrated Waste Management Committee and designating Councilmember Moore as the alternate on the General Plan Committee. Minutes\02\26\91 -12- 03/04/91 City Council Minutes February 26, 1991 The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Linderoans, Mu~oz, Parks NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore 20. Resolution in Opposition to Senate Bill 2557 Mayor Parks introduced the staff report, explaining the WRCOG recommends that each community adopt a resolution in opposition to Senate Bill 2557 and return it to WRCOG no later than March 1, 1991. It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Lindemans to adopt a resolution entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 91-26 · 4 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECUL,4 ,4DDRESSING THE IMP,4CTS OF SEN,4TE BILL 2557 (M,4DDY) The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Mu~oz, Parks NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: I COUNCILMEMBERS: Moore 21. Request for Support- Veterans Day Parade Mayor Parks introduced the staff report, asking the Council for concurrence on whether it would like the Veterans Day Parade to be held in Temecula again this year. He explained the people who organized the parade last year would be unable to participate this year and have approached the City to see if it is interested in organizing this year's parade. He stated the Elks Club are very interested in participating in this event. City Clerk Greek stated that Rick Sayre, Chief of Police, reported cost to the City in police and road fees last year was $2,000. Minutes\OZ\Z6\91 -13- 03/0~/91 City Council Minutes February 26, 1991 ShaWn Nelson, Director of Community Services, stated he would be willing to "spearhead" this event. With concurrence from Council, this item was referred to staff. CITY MANAGER REPORTS Doug Stewart, Deputy City Engineer, stated that street improvements on Winchester and Nicolas should be completed by next week. CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS City Attorney Field stated the Redevelopment Ordinances and Resolution would be on the next agenda for consideration by the Council. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Mu~oz requested that the matter of the stop signs on Ynez Road near Advanced Cardiovascular Systems be placed on the next agenda. Councilmember Lindemans on behalf of Councilmember Moore requested an update on the status of the Business License Ordinance and the status of the Sign Ordinance. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Councilmember Birdsall, seconded by Councilmember Mu~oz to adjourn at 10:13 PM, to a meeting on March 12, 1991 at 7:00 PM at the Temporary Temecula Community Center. The motion was unanimously carried with Councilmember Moore absent. ATTEST: Ronald J. Parks, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk #inures\02\26\91 -14- 03/04/91 ITEM NO. 3 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECUI. A AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer March 12, 1991 City Treasureds Report as of January 31, 1991 RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council receive and file the City Treasurer's report as of January 31, 1991. DISCUSSION: Reports to the City Council regarding the City's investment portfolio and receipts, disbursements and fund balance are required by Government Code Sections 53646 and 41004 respectively. Accordingly, the City's investment policy includes these Government Code Sections as an integral part of City policy for which our portfolio is in compliance with as of January 31, 1991. FISCAL IMPACT: None ATTACHMENT: City Treasurer's Report as of January 31, 1991 CITY OF TEMECULA CITY TREASURER'S REPORT As of January 31, 1991 Cash Activity for the Month of January: Cash and Investments as of January 1, 1991 Cash Receipts Cash Disbursements Cash and Investments as of January 31, 1991 $6,341,022 2,223,857 (440,825) $8,124,054 Cash and Investments Portfolio as of January 31, 1991: Type of Investment Institution Demand Deposits Demand Deposits Treasury Service Shares Petty Cash Certificate of Deposit Local Agency Investment Fund Overland Bank Security Pacific Pacific Horizons N/A Overland Bank State Treasurer Cash and Investments as of January 31, 1991 Notes: (1) Balance includes outstanding checks. Prepared by Danelle Gray. Yield 4.500% N/A 6.770% N/A 8.250% 8.164% Maturity N/A N/A N/A N/A 8/31/91 N/A Balance as of 1/31/91 $78 (25,220) (1) 298,746 450 100,000 7,750,000 $8,124,054 ITEM NO. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ALLOWING CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT A THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the following claims and demands as set forth in Exhibit A have been audited by the City Manager, and that the same are hereby allowed in the amounts of $537,078.10. SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED, this 12th day of March, 1991. ATTEST: Ronald J. Parks, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk [SEAL] 3/Resos 148 0 L C 0 Ou -0 ~) ("1 C'I 0 0 C.I P'I b') b') C"I ('"1 0 0 ,~ 0 r~ r,, t.') t,) o o 0 O ,D ,D ,D CO ~ b~ b3 'D 0 z ~ ~, g W W 03 I.L II. W I- ,~' b. N Z '"'" N 0 Z :;' ,? T f_) ~) a O) U v ~ z fJ 0 Z I~ ' n 0 0 h F- 0 0 0 0 ¢'1 b~ '0 0 ,O 0 0 ,4 d d 0 -r ~) 0 t- 0 ~ 0 ~- 0 ~' 0 ~ 0 Z 0 J 0 I- 0 W h- W b') b') h t Z v o ~ 0 Z 0 r..) ,~ I-0 LLI~ 0 U I- I- no, 0 · .., fq 0 0 ,.0 i 0 ~ 0 ~ © (,rio ¢q ZO Z 0 ~-0 0 0 0 I~ ["1 0 ~q 0 ~0 ZO ' tO : 0 fJO 0 0 0 0 0 0 fq ~ Z ~ 0 ~ N ~ 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ Z ~ W~ W~ ~ © 0 0 © 0 0 © 0 © W~ 0 (q ,;, 0 0 ~ J (q RIO O~ ~0 Z~ J ..JO >- I- i-4 J~ 0 · 0 0 0 0 0 d ,S ¢'.1 U') b'~ r',,. ~1 b') K, 0 O ':D 0 O O C, d d d d d ,:, ,-; 0 0 0 0 0 'O ,~, 0 ,:D 0 ~, 0 ,'", f"l I~) b') bl b'l t.3 r-. 3:: 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 Z 0 U ~ U > U ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Z~ O~ Z -r . L) Z ' ,.-,a 0 0 0 W _J ~'.; WO W m O~ Z~ 0 0 (~ ("l © n L r' 0 U m L 0 QI ~ U Ol 0 'h 0 0 b3 I0 m ~0 i~ r,. 0 0 0 0 O d d d 0 0 0 ~ ll') b~ 0 0 ,:D 0 0 ,:D 0 © 0 0 0 ,5 d d ("I >- U I 1- W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C, 0 0 0 0 U -r h ,¥ .l I L.] 0 Z 0 I~l 0 ' 0 I-- 0 FF r~ I-- 0 t-- <Z U I-- U UJ U ~- u ¢'1 0 ::)('4 0 £ -I '~l~ ("1 .l~ ("1 l}. ('.1 ('4 0 g U n U 01 0 Z (q 0 I- , I~1 , 0 0 ,? 0 0 0 l~ I~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,:D 0 ,4 d ,4 r,i {'.1 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 d ,'~ d d d d Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d d d 0 0 0 U h 0 C, 0 ,4 ,4 ,-: ("1 ('1 O' U 7 0 x zg '"~ Z 0 x O~ z~ ¢'1 0 0 g ,o ¢'1 0 Z 0 J W Z.~ O' Z~ '~.0 ~-.~ 0 Z ; 0 J ZO' 0 0 0 0 © , ~'1 ZO n,' 0 il 1.4 J · -.* (q 0', 0 0 9 W~ U Z Z 0 0 ~'.1 0 0 0 0 0 d .4 d 0 0 C. 0 C, C, ,5 C, C, C, d d d ,-: ,4 ,S ,4,.4,4 0 C' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 h") m 0'. 0 0 0 0 0 "" ~ 0 Cl 1.'3 tO 0 0 ,-*,0 -I 4J ~ 0 0 I-- hi U v Z '/ U ,:Z U r- I~ m,m Z ,-, Z W W Z W ~': -?. -Z -~ '-~ f'l h, ("1 t"3 Z 0 0 0 ,5 H ..J 0 C, C. I (q f~ O! C'I ("I 0 0 C' 'C, Z (,~ ~ J b'] b") b') '¢~ I ~' ...... · W '-~ ~[ t") I') I I I ~ 0'0" ('4 ('.l 0~ 0 ' C, '~' · L U In 0 U GI ~(..) 0 ~on Z'~ L 8 0 m v U r' 0 0 0 d o C'.I 0 0 d d 0 0 0 0 0 f"l Cq <~ Z 0 ~J 0 O' O- U r- 0 0 U) Z n, U~ U.O or-9 ,3 z 0- 0 <~-~ 0 O' 0 § © 0 0 0 0 0 0 U OI r- (J J J ~q © 0 0 d Ld h I Cq Z Z U Cq Cq O~ 0 0 ,..5 0 ,3 0 0 0 0 0 0 d d 0 0 0 0 ~q U -00 r90 OD b') 1'9 '.00 ~b") I I L) ~C) U) Z I ~ Z ~. '~. ~00 O0 J [COO m O0 "~ 0 ,0 O' ~!' 0 t') 0 O0 0 0,~00000000000 O0 0 ~0 0 000000000,~©00 ~ ~l.') 00 O000~ OOP) [-.1 U m .C 0 ~') ,-~ I~. IJ. I~. ~ b. b. I~. ,-~ Z ('q t-9 b. ZZZ ~W~ ~Z 000~ ~Z ZZZZ~ 00000 Zel~C.4~ ~00000 Z ~10~ 00000 Z ~~ZZ Z~ O0.-~OWUO ZZ~ ZZ~ O0~OO~ ~iW~ ~0~00 ZZ~OZ~ 00~00~00 O0 00~00 00000000 -I <~ b3 b3 F9 ~D '5 0 b"J ~' r,.. O) F3 0 U-Ob')lf)l"-Ofq--~O)O ~(',l('.l,~r O' 0 O00000000000 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 U O0 r-. ~.1 d O0 ~0 ZZ ,~C (0(9 ZZ ZZ O0 WW b3 b3 ~ C'4 ~.1 Z ' JC, O Z , Jgg O0 Z mm ~b3 ~ 0 0 0 '5 '5 0 0 0 ,3 0 W W ~ W 0 Z ZO 0 <I t") L) C, N r<, c, o c, o ,5 ,5 ,5 ,3 o Z hi O0 Z 00' Z 0 0 ~) © © Z t-- ILl W -I 0 0 r 9 K~ c, o~ O~ u m 0 U ..~ 0 U 0 L U OJ r~O L $ 0 U i- 'D ~J 0 F- v U fi, ,= 000000 000000 o~oooo I 0 ~ .~ 1'1 · -."~ W '¥' Z Z~ O~lJJ IJ.I t~ TZ,'Y ~1~ ~ · .'~ ,¥00 OlD O~W~WZ O~'!0000 ~000000 0 0 ~0~0~ 000000 Z ~ ~ {'.1 ~ 0 ~ tO ("1 0 {',1 0 r 0~0000 0 C' ,O 000 000000 0~0000 U') I',. ('.1 {",1 ~. "r "r mm ~'LL · C'.l ~.Old ...... ~ I- ,--Z I~W ~1~ ~Z I~ {'4 ("1 f'l tO 000000 I Z ~'~ ~' 0113 ~ _1.0.0.04)-0-0 ~ t") t/) if) F') I:::l 01 ("1 {"4 I~,1 I I I I I I 0 © D- 0- 0 0 ,::D ,,.4 0' 0 0 b. W Z W n x ~ h 0 0 Z Z 0 tO 0 © b3 t,, 0 {'1 P) tO 13D 000 ', ,-, C, b'] 0 bl ZZZ Ul 0'} 010~ 0 vvv U OC, O x If} ; 0 ' h'3 0 U 0 .J .%, ~0 b. . Z , i-3 0 -0 0 U r' ,,0 i",, m 00 O0 dd O- 0 I-- U r' 'D C, ,:D 0 =3 . ZL} ,3¢:3 UU ZZ [dO-O- r.n o, o _j J 0 0 0 O0 O' t") tO 0 0 0 U C. ,~ 0 0 C, 000 d d ,_~ d 0 ,D :#: I- U 0 ~ Z u {JZ~ 1:3 C,C C'I I.-~. ZO I..1 Z 0 >- '-r 124 © Z I:".1 .,.4 0 C, © U U :g Z Z 0 ~J h )- m Z Z I-- ,'2,-, ~0' · "" ¢"1 0'0 (J © 0 0 *5 Z C, 0 0 U C, ,D d C, 0 L 0 L 0 v U r- fJ ~ 0 2> > C, 0 hi W W W '1' W *-4 0 0 0 I- v U Z J ,wm 0 000 d ~ d 0 (90 'C, 0 f'.J ~*.1 ,:::> tQ t") ,'; O, O0 0 ~,; d d ,=; 0 f'*l 0 ('1 0 O'D,DO'D O'D 0 0 00 'D 0 0 00000,D 00 0 'DO 0 0 0 ,~,~oo,~,~oo X o,~ ~ o ,~ I ~oo~oom Iiiiiiii ~oo~oo~ ~wwwwwww ~www~ww~ zzzzzzzz ~w~ww W~W~ WW 0000000 0000000 n [tl Z J I-- (_1 ,-,. f'4 ('l 0 0 ('1 ("l 0 :> J 4~ 0 b_ 0 ~- 0 I- v I-- v U Z U r- ~ ,-,- Z /: W t~ 0- , ,0 0 © 0 Z 0 U~ W 3: ._J W h 0 rno 0 0 0 ~ t":, W O 0 t/) O '5 'D '3 © ,0 r' bJ _1 -0 ~ 0'- ul ul o L~ C 0 o u .j u ,-1 ,~o Z~ o $ 'o u c 4J [/ nl U ,0 o o I~- 0- (,I c.J ('-1 1U W n z w n W W ,0 o o 03 o o ._1 z o u v ,¥ hi J 0 Q ~ Z ~ ZZZ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 U ~ U ~WW U ~ U ~ U ~ u w u ouu u u uo~ u m 0" © © z w w zo u 0. z <3: ~1"- I".- ,o o 0 z o zcq :DO 0 W~ zo z~ ~o o Jo u · i j~ u~. d~ u~ o ol Q , o; o: ; ; I¢3 1~3 C'l tr], f'.l I~ ~ ~, 0 I~. I~ o o © o o o o dd d,fdd x I oo u. lc ~..I- 1:3 llJ 0. I-- ~..,¥ w I f"l 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 d dd _,L-:d b.I I- >. ~- -~ o z h ~ · ,-~m ~-.W ~ tub. Z LO .-. ~. bJ · ..~z I Z 0 ~ ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 Q U Z~ u u JJ U o u h J~ o J (q o 1.3 113 o t;J t.-') 11'3 r.. o o o o o 0 0 ,D 0 0 ,.: _x ,-: ,~ t0 d d ~ ("1 u.i Ltl Z ._1 ~z ,-, : 000 w ~000 U z ooo o tO 0o ~ o u /,D j f,) :>,-' 0 LIJ~ U~ I- (q <1: C"l ~' , I ('1 tO ~'0 . - 0 0 o t o o o o o © 0 u ~r UI 0 C 0 L U I/I n ~0 n 0 01 T3 U :> > r' U rJo ~ C' 'D 0 r- ILl Ullbl WO 0 Z bl 0 0 0 ~0 C' 0 0 0 hi,,. c~ O' I-.- b'l ~0 0 n 1-(:0 '~bl 0 bl 0 0 0 C, 0 0 'D .D (..l bl F'.~ ~q ~0 b') 0 v U r- Z 0 0 x x hl 0 .4' m 0 r,, ,,0 0, ,:t' b') 0 I- 0 I I'.") ,,-4 II C 0 U U > C ..C I- ITEM NO. 5 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Manager/City Council City Clerk March 12, 1991 Claim for Damages - George Turkmany APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFIC~ CITY MANAGER -~%'~! RECOMMENDATION: Deny the Claim for Damages BACKGROUND: This claim was reviewed by the City's Liability Insurance Carrier who recommends the City Council deny the claim of George Turkmany. Received by CITY OF TEMEC~A, CALIFORNIA CLAIM FOR DAMAGES (For Damages to Persons or Personal Property) Via [ ]-U.S. Mail [ ]-Over the Counter A CLAIM MUST BE FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA WITHIN SIX (6) MONTHS AFTER WHICH THE INCIDENT OR EVENT OCCURRED. BE SURE YOUR CLAIM IS AGAINST THE CITY OF TEMECULA, NOT ANOTHER PUBLIC ENTITY. Where space is insufficient, please use additional paper and identify information by paragraph number. Completed claims must be mailed or delivered to: The City of Temecula Attention: City Clerk 43172 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92390 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council, The City of Temecula, California The undersigned respectfully submits the following claim and information relative to damage to persons and/or personal property pursuant to the provisions of Section 900 through 915.2 of the Government Code. NAME OF.CLAIMANT: a. Ad~s~ of Clai~nant: qz3qo bo eo Telephone Numbers:-~l ~- -oq S~ty Numar: 14 Driver's Licen~ Number: evening Claim for Damages Page 2 Name, telephone and/or post office address to which claimant desires notices to be sent if other than listed above: Occurrence or event from which the claim arises: C~ ~ Time: a. Date: b./~ PJace (exact and specific location):, . How and under what circumstances did damage or injury occur? Specify particular occurrence, event, act or omission you claim mused the injury or damage: -FHE HOlE tU~T'I-i THE fI~iv~is .~,"hE -F'~cm-- h-tBF d/~u~:NC- de What particular action by the City, or its employees, mused the alleged damage or injury: Claim for D~m~ges Page 3 Give a description of the injury, property damage or loss, so far as is known at the time of this claim. If there were no injuries, state "No injuries". Give the n...~ of the City employee(s) causing the damage or injury: Name and address of any other person(s) injured: Name and address of the owner of any damaged property: Damages claimed: a. Amount claimed as of this date: b. Estimated amount of future costs: c. Total amount claimed: d. Basis for computation of amounts claimed (include copies of all bills, invoices, estimates, etc.) Claim for Damages Page 4. Names and addresses of all witnesses, hospitals, doctors, etc. 10. Any additional information that might be helpful in considering claim: WARNING: IT IS A CRIMINAL OFFENSE TO FILE A FALSE CLAIM. (PENAL CODE SECTION 72; INSURANCE CODE SECTION 556.L). CLM-020 .58 ~.~ :CO-LORADO ,. _':~.,,~.'-',~. ~,.-_- .-,,~; .......~,,.,.-~¢~.- ~-,~.' ....... ~.-;~ .~-"-,~-y _ -~ .: ~*~,~_~., · PASADENA.'-CA .c/~.~07 :~, ,--.,'"~'. -_.; , ,'. ;'.: , -,.81B-7'9:3-,38.~8 . :- '?sYi;,?j'---::; :-=: .::, .'. '~. ':,~ :::L?;-~ RENTAL AGREEMENT 01-1, THIS CONTRACT SUBJECT .TO FINAL AUDIT ITEM NO. 6 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Engineering Department ~ March 5, 1991 Acceptance of Public Improvements in Parcel Map No. 19626-1 PREPARED BY: Albert Crisp RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council ACCEPT the public improvements in Parcel Map No. 19626-1, AUTHORIZE the reduction of street, sewer, and water bond amounts, ACCEPT Replacement Faithful Performance bonds (Subdivision Warranty Bond) for the reduced amounts and the Subdivision Agreement Amendment, and D I R ECT the City Clerk to so advise the clerk of the Board of Supervisors. DISCUSSION: On January 10, 1989, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors entered into subdivision agreements with: Omdahl Enterprises, General Partnership 28275 Rancho California Road Temecula, California 92390 for the improvement of streets, and the installation of sewer and water systems. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds issued by: Insurance Company of the West as follows: Bond No. 1132156 in the amount of $188,000.00 to cover street improvements. Bond No. 1132156 in the amount of $25,500.00 to cover sewer improvements. Bond No. 1132156 in the amount of $45,000.00 to cover STAFFRPT\PM19626.1\mb 1 water improvements. The following items have been completed by the developer or his engineer in accordance with the approved plans: Required street, sewer, and water improvements. The inspection and verification process relating to the above items has been completed by the County of Riverside Road Department and City Staff, and the Engineering Department recommends the reduction in the subdivision improvement bonds. Therefore, it is appropriate to reduce these bond amounts as follows: Streets: $169,200.00 Sewer: $ 22,950.00 Water: $ 40,500.00 The remaining ten per cent (10%) of the original faithful performance bond amounts are to be retained for one (1) year guarantee period as follows: Streets: $18,800.00 Sewer: $ 2,550.00 Water: $ 4,500.00 Total: $25,850.00 The developer is submitting the attached Subdivision Warranty bond in substitution for the bonds currently posted with the clerk of the Board of Supervisors. AKC:mb Attachments: Location Map Warranty Bond and Subdivision Agreement Amendment STAFFRPT \ PM 19 6 2 6 . 1 \ mb 2 YICI~IITX jec/BND10630 BOI~ NO. 113 21 56a CITY OF TEMECULA SUBDIVISION WARRANTY BOND WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California (hereinafter designated as 'City'), OHDAm.~R~SES, A and GENERAL PARTNERSBIP (hereinafter designated as 'Principal') have entered into an agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements, which said agreement, Project PARCEL HAP19626-1 , is hereby referred to and made a par~ hereof~ and WHEREAS, Principal is required to warranty the work done under the terms of the agreement for a period of one (1) year following acceptance thereof by City against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished, in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the estimated cost of the improvements~ NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal and INSU~A~CECOMPAF~OF TBE~EST as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum of $25,850.00 , lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. -1- j ~c/BND10630 The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above-bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated~ otherwise, this obligation shall be and remain in full force and effect. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the 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 obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, e~cension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such-Change, e~cension of time, -2- STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS.: CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) n this 4T~I day of MARC~ 19 91 , before me, the undersigned Notary Public in and for the State, personally appeared JEROIJ) D. RATJ. a person known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence), to be the person who executed the written instrument as Attorney-in-Fact on behalf of the corporation therein named and acknowledged to me that the corporation executed it. Given under my hand an¢ My commission expires ~_ ?.--~.~ OFFICIAL SEAL .J~-~'~A VALERIE U. PEARCE SAN DI~GO COUNTY Commission Expires J~.unr~ 10, I~D 91 Partnership Acknowledgment STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF Riverside SS. On March 5, for said County and State, personally appeared Howard Omdahl , 19.9.~, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and known to me to be ~n~= of the partners of the partnership that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such partnership executed the same. Notary Seal Notary Public in and for said County and State. ~.W,TNEC~..~.y hand and official sealh ('T-t 23 O STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUN~ OF Riverside I . On March 5, 1991 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally al:~:~eared Myrna A. Bravender personally known to me ~(~;:~¥aYc{)~]~]~[t~i[i[~a~,~.~Y~Y~]~Xto be the i~rson whose name is subscribed to the within instrument as the Attorney in fact of Dorothy $. Omdahl, Trustee and acknowledged to me that he/she subscribed the name(s) of Dorothy J. Omdahl, Trustee ~' '~.~ OFF[C~,'~ "~~ NOTARY PUBUC - C~F~ thereto as ~rinci~l(s), and his/her own n~me as A~orney in S~ture ~~ ~~/~~ ~ ~his area for official notarial sea~ Sanall W~lger j ~c/BND10630 alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work or to the specifications. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on ~A~CH4 , 19 91 . (Seal) (Seal) ~,L."RETY J~O~ D. ~A~.I. (Name) A~O~- ~-FA~ (Title) Howard Omdahl, General Partner (Name) (Title) Omdahl Ridge Limited Partnership, ~~ Gene. ral Partner DorothfJ. O~dahl~ Trustee of the Dorothy J. Omdahl~rust dated 9/29/86 (Name) General Partner (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: SCOTT F. FIELD City Attorney -3- INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST OFFICE: SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA POWER OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: ThoC INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST. = Corporation duly authorized and existing under the lm, s of the State of Cali?ornia and having its principal office in the City of San Diego. Califom~ia. does here~y nominate. constitute and appoint: Jetold D. Hall tCs true and lm~'ul A~Cornoy(s)-in-FacC, wi~ ?u11 pMr and authority hereby con?erred in its name, place and ste~d, to execute, seal, acknowledge and deZ~ver any and a[Z Donds, unae~ak~ngs, ~Kogn~zances or other ~Cen oD[~gaC~ons ~n ~e nature ~s P~r o~ A~orney [s g~nCed and ~s s~gned and s~[ed ~y ~acs~m~Ze under and by ~he authority o~ ~he ~o[Z~ng Resolution adopted by ~he Board o~ O~rec~ors o~ [NS~RXNCE COMPANY 0F THE ~EST a~ a NeC~ng duly c=[Zed and ~t[d on [hi S~xt~ ~ay of Fe=~a~, 1973, ~c~ sa~d Resolution has noC =Nn aMnded or rescinded and o~ ~h~cn [he ~o[[~ng [sa ~e, ~u[Z, and c~[eCe copy: "RESOLVED: Thq~ the P~es~denC or S~reC=~ ~y ~r~ ~N Co ~N appo~n~ Fac~ co represent and age Tar and on Di~oZ~ o~ C~e C~qny, and e~[~er ~he President S~reC=~, C~e Booed o~ O~ec~o~s o~ ~uCive C~ee ~y QC any tin r~ve suc~ RESOLVED: ThoC the At~orney-~n-F~cC ~y ~e g~ven full pMr [o ex~u~e ~or end nw o~ ~nd on ~e~o[~ o~ ~e ~qny ~ny ond ~[[ ~onds end un~e~a~ngs os the bus~ness t~e C~qny ~y r~u~re, and ~ny suc~ ~onds or unde~ak~ngs ex~u~ed ~y ony suc~ At~orney- ~n-F~cC s~o[[ 0e es 0~nd~ng upon C~e C~any os ~ s~gned ~y c~e Pres~enC ~nd s~[ed end aCCosted ~y ~e [N ~[~ESS ~HEREOF, ~NSURANCE C0~FANY 0F THE ~EST ~as caused ~s o(Ttc~a[ s~[ ~o ~e unto a(~ixed and ~hese presence Co be signed ~y i~s duly authorized o~icers this 20th day of July, 1990 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ~: On this 20t_h day of July, 1990 before the subscriber, a Notar~ Public of the State of Coli?ornio, in and for the County of San Diego, duly con~issioned and quol£fSed, came BERNARD M. FELDMAN, President of INSURANCE CO~ANY OF THE WEST, to m~ personally kn~n Co be ~e indlvldual end of~Icer described in end ~ exKu~ed ~e p~eGing insCruMnC, ond ~e ac~n~ledge~ ~e ex~u~ion o~ t~e s~, and ~eing ~y N ~uly s~rn, ~eposeth and saic~, p~edlng instruct is ~e Corp~Ce S~1 o~ t~e said Corpo~Cion, and cnac the said sat~ insc~Mnc ~y ~e ~uc~oricy an~ dlr~C/~ of t~e said Corpo~Cion. ZN W~ESS ~EOF, Z h~e he~nCo sac ~ hand and =fflxed Son Diego, the day and year first oOove written. NORMA PORTER ~AN 01EGO COUNTY ~.~.~ ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO . ~: I, the undersigned, JAh~S W. AUSTIN, III, Secretary of INSURANCE COt~PANY OF THE WEST, do hersOy cerci?y thaC the original POWER OF ATTORNEY. of ~mic~ the ?oregoing is a ?uZl, true and correct copy, is in full force and effiGt, and has noC Dean revoked. ) .N WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name as Secretary, and af?$xed the Corporate Seal of the Corporation, this 4'13]. ~ay o~ ~ 199[ ~~ Secretary AGREEMENT REGARDING SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into between the CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called"CITY", and Ce4D~ ]~1~R[$]~S hereinafter called "CONTRACTOR". WlTNESSETH: WHEREAS, the County of Riverside and CONTRACTOR have entered into a series of agreements and CONTRACTOR has submitted a series of bonds in connection with consideration by the County of Riverside of final map approval pR.~c~. H/Lt~ 19626-1 ; WHEREAS, the City of Temecula incorporated on December 1, 1989; WHEREAS, in order to expeditiously process the acceptance of improvements pursuant to the final map, the CITY has permitted subdivlders to use the existing County Subdivision Agreement and Bond forms in lieu of CITY forms; WHEREAS, certain references in the County forms incorrectly refer to County positions instead of City positions; NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between CITY and CONTRACTOR as follows: 1. All references to the "County of Riverside" contained in of the documents between CITY and CONTRACTOR concerning TcIge~ PR.~c:!~ [v~p 19626ace now defined as referring to the "City of Temecula". 2. All references to the "Riverside County Road Commissioner" contained in any documents between CITY and CONTRACTOR concerning ~ P.M. 19626-1 are now hereby defined to refer to the "City Engineer". STATE OF CALIFORNIA ISS. COUNTY OF Riverside On March 5, for saidCountyandState, personallyappeared Howard Omdahl , 19 9__1. before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and known to me to be 0Me of the partners of the partnership that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such partnership executed the same. NotarV Seal TNE~~~.~ancl and officia~ sla~- Sandi ~ inger ~ _ Notary Public '~Land for said CounCy and State. OFFICIAL SEAL SANDI WINGER o o STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF Riverside On March 5. 1991 said State, personally appeared Myrna A. }s~ } , ~fom me, the undemigne~ a Notaw Publ~ in and for Bravender personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument as the Attorney in fact of Dorothy ~T. 0mdahl ~ Trustee and acknowledged to me that he/she subscribed the names) ~ .... ~ ~ - of Dorothy J. Omdahl, Trustee i~ ' SANDI WINGER · NOTARY I:~JBUC - CALJFORNLA thereto as principal(s), and his/her own name as Attorney in O~bI~NGE CO~ Fact. ~ My Comm. Expires Aug. 7, signa~a~ Wi~/~__ - -- -- ~~~- ¢his area for omcial notarial seal) di 3. All references to any other Riverside County offices or positions contained in the Agreements or Bonds concerning Tract P_M_ 19676-1 now hereby refer to the equivalent CITY offices or positions. Dated: ~- ~- ?/ By.: ~~' ~/,~~P~ CITY OF TEMECULA DA~: 9-29-86, ~P~ Dated: RON PARKS. MAYOR Dated: DAVID F. DIXON. CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: SCOTT F. FIELD. CITY ATTORNEY C I TYENC\C,a 2 ITEM NO. 7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Engineering Department ~ March 5, 1991 Acceptance of Public Improvements in Parcel Map No. 19626-2 PREPARED BY: Albert Crisp R ECOMMEN DAT ION: That the City Council ACCEPT the public improvements in Parcel Map No. 19626-1, AUTHORIZE the reduction of street, sewer, and water bond amounts, ACCEPT Replacement Faithful Performance bonds (Subdivision Warranty Bond) for the reduced amounts and the Subdivision Agreement Amendment, and DIRECT the City Clerk to so advise the clerk of the Board of Supervisors. DISCUSSION: On January 17, 1989, the Riverside County Board of Supervisors entered into subdivision agreements with: Omdahl Enterprises, General Partnership 28275 Rancho California Road Temecula, California 92390 for the improvement of streets, and the installation of sewer and water systems. Accompanying the subdivision agreements were surety bonds issued by: Insurance Company of the West as follows: Bond No. 1131239 in the amount of $138,000.00 to cover street improvements. Bond No. 1132339 in the amount of $16,000.00 to cover sewer improvements. Bond No. 1132339 in the amount of $29,000.00 to cover STAFFRPT\PM19626.2 1 water improvements. The following items have been completed by the developer or his engineer in accordance with the approved plans: Required street, sewer, and water improvements. The inspection and verification process relating to the above items has been completed by the County of Riverside Road Department and City Staff, and the Engineering Department recommends the reduction in the subdivision improvement bonds. Therefore, it is appropriate to reduce these bond amounts as follows: Streets: $124,200.00 Sewer: $ 14,400.00 Water: $ 26, 100.00 The remaining ten per cent (10%) of the original faithful performance bond amounts are to be retained for one (1) year guarantee period as follows: Streets: $13,800.00 Sewer: $ 1,600.00 Water: $ 2,900.00 Total: $18,300.00 The developer is submitting the attached Subdivision Warranty Bonds in substitution for the bonds currently posted with the clerk of the Board of Supervisors. AKC:mb Attachments: Location Map Warranty Bond and Subdivision Amendment STAFFRPT\PM19626.2 2 $17'~' ~'~ WCIAIITX bY~7~ ·/JOT jec/BND10630 BONI) NO. 113 23 39a CITY OF TEMECULA SUBDIVISION WARRANTY BOND WHEREAS, the City of Temecula, State of California (hereinafter designated as "City"), OMDA~.ENTERPRISES, A and GENERALPARTNERSHIP (hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements, which said agreement, project PARCELMAP 19626-2 , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required to warranty the work done under the terms of the agreement for a period of one (1) year following acceptance thereof by City against any defective work or labor done or defective materials furnished, in the amount of ten percent (10%) of the estimated cost of the improvements; NOW, THEREFORE, we the Principal and INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Temecula, California, in the penal sum of $ 18,300.00 , lawful money of the United States, for the payment of such sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally. -1- j ec/BND10630 The condition of this obligation is such that the obligation shall become null and void if the above-bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns, shall in all things stand to, abide by, well and truly keep, and perform the covenants, conditions, and provisions in the agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to his or their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City of Temecula, its officers, agents, and employees, as therein stipulated; otherwise, this obligation shall be and remain in full force and effect. As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the 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 obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in anyway affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, -2- Partnership Acknowledgment STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF Riverside SS. On March 5, for said County and State, personally appeared , 19 9___.1, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and ~ hand and official seal.. Notary PublicJn and for said County and State, Howard Omdahl known to me to be One of the partners of the partnership that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such partnership executed the same. Nora _r,/Seal ~ ~ ~" ,'~"~; ~ ~NGE ~OUN~ e~TE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS.: CiTY AND COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) On this 4TB day of MARC~ 19 91, before me, the undersigned Notary Public in and for the State, personally appeared JEROLD D. HALL a person known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence), to be the person who executed the written instrument as Attorney-in-Fact on behalf of the corporation therein named and acknowledged to me that the corporation executed it. Given under my hand and Notarial Seal this 4TM My co~ission expires day of MAltC~ A.D., 19 Notary Public 91 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ",ss. COUNTY OF Riverside I On March 5, 1991 ,beforeme. the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Myrna A. Bravender personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument as the Attorney in fact of Dorothy J. Omdahl, Trustee and acknowledged to me that he/she subscribed the namers) ~/ .~/,..--J"b'""~,~. OFFICL-',L SF~A~ of~ Dorothy J. Omdahl, Trustee ( ~;~Z~ SAI!DIWINGER ¢, I'~ ~.,~-",.'~-~ ~_~R ,NOTARY PUgL~C' C,A. LIFORNIA % ~---. ,.~-%'_ '~ ~/~ O,::~NGE COUNTY th .reto as principal(s), and his/her own name _.a,s Attorney in {;~ ~ C'o~nm. ~.~pir~$ A~g. 7, ~g~'l Fact. . ,WI'TNESS my fficial seal. ' ; (This area for official notarial seal) Sandi Winger j ec/BND10630 alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work or to the specifications. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on MARCH 4 , 19 91 . (Seal) (Seal) SU/2,.ETY INSURANCE By: JE~ ATT( :co~m~.. :OF U~E ILD D. ~AI.L (Name) ~-IN-FACT (Title) PRINCIPAL Howard Omdahl, General Partner (Name) (Title) F~mdmhl R'~cl~,~ :,irnitpcl Pmmtnershio, / (~) General Partne~ ~orot~y J. 0mdahl ~s TruCe of the Dn~mrhy .T. :]mdahl Trust dated 9/29/86 (Name) General Partner (Title) APPROVED AS TO FORM: SCOTT F. FIELD City Attorney -3- INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST HOME OFFICE: SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA Certified Copy POWER OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: Tha~ INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST, a Corporation duly authorized and existing under the laws of the State of California and having its principal office in the City of San Diego, California, doee hereby nominate, constitute and appoint: Jetold D. Hall its true and lm~'ul Attorney(s)-in-Foct. with full po~er and authority hereby conferred in its n,me, place and ste~d. to execute. se~l. acknowledge and deliver any and all bonds, undertakings, recognizances or other written obligations in the nature thereof. This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed and sacled by facsimile under and by the authority of the following Resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST a~ a ~eeting duly called and held on the Sixth day of February, 1973, which said Resolution has not been .mended or rescinded and of which the following is a true, full, and complete copy: "RESOLVED: That the President or Secretary may from time to time appoint Attorneys-in- Foo~ to represent and act for and on behalf of the Company, and either the President or Secretary, the Bo~rd of Directors or Executive Committee m.y at any time remove such Attorneys-in-Fact and revoke the Power of Attorney given him or her; and be it further RESOLVED: That the Attorney-in-Fact m.y be given full power to execute for and in the name of and on behalf of the Company any and al1 bonds and undertakings as the business of the Company may require, and any such bonds or undertakings executed by any such Attorney- in-Fact shall be as binding upon the Company as if signed by the President and sealed and attested by the Secretary." IN WITNESS WHEREOF, INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST has caused its official se~l to be here- unto affixed and these duly authorized officers this 20t-h day o~ July, 1990 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO presents to be signed by its ~~~ I~TA~AN~E COMPANY OF THE WEST I - eSiQen~ 0n this 20~h day of Jctly, 1990 before the subscriber, a Notary Public of the State of California, in and for the County of Son Diego, duly commissioned and qualified, came BERNARD M. FELDNAN, President of INSURANCE CO. ANY OF THE WEST, to me personally known to be the individual and officer described in and who executed the preceding instrument, and he acknowledged the execution of the s.me, and being by me duly sworn, deposeth and saith, that he is the said officer of the Corporation aforesaid, and that the seal affixed to the preceding instrument is the Corporate Sea1 of the said Corporation, and that the said Corporate Seal and his signature as such officer were duly affixed and subscribed to the said instrument by the authority and direction of the said Corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, of San Diego, the day and y..r first above written. OFF~IAL SEAL NOR~ PORTER Nom~ SAN OIEGO COUNTY STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO Z, the undersigned, JANES W. AUSTIN. IZZ, Secret=ry of INSURANCE CONPANY OF THE WEST, do hereby certify that the original POWER OF ATTORNEY, of which the foregoing is a ~u11, true .rid correct copy, is in full force and effect. and hal not ~een revoked. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Corporate Seal of the Corporation, this ICW CAL ~7(REV. 5/87) ~/~ I have hereunto subscribed my nQme as Secretary, and affixed the 4TH day of MAECH 19 91 AGREEMENT REGARDING SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into between the CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called "CITY", and C~l~r. ~PRT~S hereinafter called "CONTRACTOR". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the County of Riverside and CONTRACTOR have entered into a series of agreements and CONTRACTOR has submitted a series of bonds in connection with consideration by the County of Riverside of final map approval P~R(3~ M~P 19626-2 ; WHEREAS, the City of Temecula incorporated on December 1, 1989; WHEREAS, in order to expeditiously process the acceptance of improvements pursuant to the final map, the CITY has permitted subdividers to use the existing County Subdivision Agreement and Bond forms in lieu of CITY forms; WHEREAS, certain references in the County forms incorrectly refer to County positions instead of City positions; NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between CITY and CONTRACTOR as follows: 1. All references to the "County of Riverside" contained in of the documents between CITY and CONTRACTOR concerning ~ ?.M. 19626-'9 are now defined as referring to the "City of Temecula". 2. All references to the "Riverside County Road Commissioner" contained in any documents between CITY and CONTRACTOR concerning:~i:~i~ P.M. 19626-2 are now hereby defined to refer to the "City Engineer". Partnership Acknowledgment STATE OF CALIFORNIA } SS. COUNTY OF Riverside On March 5, for said County and State, personally appeared Howard Omdahl , 19__~.~before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and known to me to be On~ of the partners of the partnership that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such partnership executed the same. Notary Seal Wk.~FC,c, my bend and official seal. Sandi Win~er \ Notary Public i'r'~ a,~d for said County and State. L~ 0 ¥ STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF Riverside On March 5, 1991 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Myrna A. BrRv~ndar personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument as the Attorney in fact of DC~T'f~l~.hy J'. and acknowledged to me that he/she subscribed the name(s) of Dorothy J. Omdahl, Trustee thereto as principal(s), and his/her own name as Attorney in Fact. ~\ WIT fficial seal. Signa;ur~ ~/ ~.-~ ~-~ Sandi Wing~r SA~DI WINGER NOTARY PU81JC - CAIJFORNIA C~ANGE COUNTY My Comm. Expires Aug. 7, (This area for official notarial seal) 3. All references to any other Riverside County offices or positions contained in the Agreements or Bonds concerning ~ ?.M. 19626-2 now hereby refer to the equivalent CITY offices or positions. Dated: RON PARKS. MAYOR Dated: DAVID F. DIXON. CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: SCOTT F. FIELD. CITY ATTORNEY ITEM NO. 8 APPROVAL C TY CI~ ~AGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Engineering Department ~ March 12, 1991 Cooperative Agreement RECOMMEN DAT ION: That the City Council approve the Temecula Valley Via Del Coronado Storm Drain, Tract Map No. 23267 Cooperative Agreement with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and the Presley Companies; and authorize the execution and attestation of such agreement in its final form by the Mayor and City Clerk. DISCUSSION: The County of Riverside Board of Supervisors on October 20, 1988 approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267. As a requirement of developing the subdivision was the improvement of flood control facilities within the Temecula Creek channel adjacent to the project site. The required facilities to be constructed include approximately 2,200 lineal feet of underground reinforced concrete pipe, illustrated in Exhibit "A". Pursuant to the Cooperative Agreement, the developer will construct, and the County Flood Control District will assume ownership and responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the channel improvements. As such, County review, approval and inspection of all construction plans will also be completed. Participation of the City includes the acceptance and holding of performance and payment bonds, granting of rights to the County to operate and maintain flood control facilities within City right-of-way, and City operation and maintenance of inlets/connector pipes within City right-of-way. Following City Council adoption of the Cooperative Agreement, it will be sent to the County Flood Control District for their approval and for County of Riverside Board of Supervisors approval. Following these actions, final map approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 23267 may be commenced. GH:ks STAFFRPT\ ENG- 019 1 Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Flood Control Improvements (Exhibit "A") 3. Tract Map No. 23267 Cooperative Agreement STAFFRPT\ENG-019 2 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 AGREEMENT (Tract No. 23267) The RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT, hereinafter called "DISTRICT", the CITY OF TEMECULA, hereinafter called "CITY", and THE PRESLEY COMPANIES, a California corporation, hereinafter called "DEVELOPER", hereby agree as follows: RECITALS A. DEVELOPER has submitted for approval Tract No. 23267 in the city of Temecula, and as a condition for approval DEVELOPER must construct certain flood control facilities in order to provide flood protection for DEVELOPER'S planned development; and B. The required facilities include approximately 2,200 lineal feet of underground reinforced concrete pipe, hereinafter called "PROJECT", as shown in red on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof; and C. DEVELOPER desires DISTRICT to assume ownership and responsibility for the operation and maintenance of PROJECT. Therefore, DISTRICT must review and approve the plans and specifications and subsequently inspect the construction of PROJECT; and D. DISTRICT is willing to review and approve the plans and specifications prepared by DEVELOPER for PROJECT, and is 24 willing to inspect the construction of PROJECT; and E. DISTRICT is willing to assume ownership and 26 responsibility for the operation and maintenance of PROJECT, 27 excluding inlets and connector pipes within CITY rights of way, 28 - 1 - 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 15 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 21 24 25 26 provided, (i) DEVELOPER complies with this agreement, (ii) DEVELOPER deposits with DISTRICT the amount specified herein to cover DISTRICT'S construction inspection costs for PROJECT, (iii) DEVELOPER pays DISTRICT the amount as specified herein to cover DISTRICT'S operation and maintenance costs for PROJECT, (iv) PROJECT is constructed in accordance with plans and specifications approved by DISTRICT, and (v) DEVELOPER obtains and conveys to DISTRICT the necessary rights of way for the operation and maintenance of PROJECT as set forth herein; and F. CITY is willing (i) to accept and hold faithful performance and payment bonds submitted by DEVELOPER for PROJECT, (ii) to grant DISTRICT the right to operate and maintain PROJECT within CITY rights of way, and (iii) to accept responsibility for the operation and maintenance of PROJECT inlets and connector pipes within CITY rights of way, provided PROJECT is constructed in accordance with plans and specifications approved by DISTRICT and CITY. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows: SECTION I DEVELOPER shall: 1. Prepare plans and specifications for PROJECT in accordance with DISTRICT standards and submit the plans and specifications to DISTRICT for its review and approval. 2. Deposit with DISTRICT the sum of $8,300.00, the estimated cost of providing construction inspection for PROJECT, at - 2 - 1 the time of providing written notification to DISTRICT of the start 2 of construction as set forth in Section 1.8. herein. 3 3. Pay DISTRICT (Zone 7 Maintenance Trust Fund No. 4 732-64-950-3211), upon execution of this agreement, the one time 5 cash sum of $14,750.00, the agreed upon DISTRICT estimated cost for 6 operation and maintenance of PROJECT through the year 1998. ? 4. Secure all necessary licenses, agreements, permits and 8 rights of entry as may be needed for the construction, inspection, 9 operation and maintenance of PROJECT. DEVELOPER shall furnish 10 DISTRICT, at the time of providing written notification to DISTRICT 11 of the start of construction as set forth in Section 1.8. herein, 12 or not less than twenty (20) days prior to recordation of the final 13 map for Tract No. 23267, or any phase thereof, whichever occurs 14 first, with sufficient evidence of DEVELOPER having secured such 15 necessary licenses, agreements, permits and rights of entry, as 16 determined and approved by DISTRICT. 17 5. Provide CITY, at the time of providing written 18 notification to DISTRICT of the start of construction as set forth 19 in Section 1.8. herein, or prior to recordation of the final map 20 for Tract No. 23267, or any phase thereof, whichever occurs first, 21 with faithful performance and payment bonds, each in the amount of 22 100% of the estimated cost for construction of PROJECT as determined by DISTRICT. The surety, amount and form of the bonds shall be subject to the approval of DISTRICT and CITY. The bonds shall remain in full force and effect until PROJECT is accepted by DISTRICT as complete; at which time the bond amount may be reduced - 3 - 1 to 10% for a period of one year to guarantee against any defective 2 work, labor or materials. 3 6. Obtain and provide DISTRICT, at the time of providing 4 written notification to DISTRICT of the start of construction of 5 PROJECT as set forth in Section 1.8. herein, or not less than 6 twenty (20) days prior to the recordation of the final map for ? Tract No. 23267, or any phase thereof, whichever occurs first, with 8 duly executed Irrevocable Offer(s) of Dedication to the public for 9 flood control purposes, including ingress and egress, for the 10 rights of way deemed necessary by DISTRICT for the construction, 11 inspection, operation and maintenance of PROJECT, as shown in 12 concept cross-hatched in red on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and 13 made a part hereof. The Irrevocable Offer(s) of Dedication shall 14 be in a form approved by DISTRICT and shall be executed by all 15 legal and equitable owners of the property described in the offer. 16 7. Furnish DISTRICT when submitting the Irrevocable 17 Offer(s) of Dedication, with Preliminary Reports on Title, dated 18 not more than thirty (30) days prior to date of submission for all 19 the property described in the Irrevocable Offer(s) of Dedication. 20 8. Notify DISTRICT in writing (Attention - Michael D. 21 Rawson) at least twenty (20) days prior to the start of 22 construction of PROJECT. Construction shall not begin on any 23 element of PROJECT, for any reason whatsoever, until after DISTRICT has issued to DEVELOPER a written Notice to Proceed authorizing 24 DEVELOPER to initiate construction. 9. Construct, or cause to be constructed, PROJECT at - 4 - 1 DEVELOPER'S sole cost and expense in accordance with plans and 2 specifications approved by DISTRICT. 3 10. Upon completion of construction of PROJECT, and 4 acceptance of all "on-site" street rights of way by CITY as deemed 5 necessary by DISTRICT and CITY for the operation and maintenance of 6 PROJECT but prior to DISTRICT acceptance of PROJECT for operation ? and maintenance, convey, or cause to be conveyed to DISTRICT: 8 flood control easement(s), including ingress and egress, in a form 9 approved by DISTRICT, for the rights of way shown in concept 10 cross-hatched in red on Exhibit "B". 11 ll. At the time of recordation of the conveyancing 12 document(s) set forth in Section 1.10., furnish DISTRICT with 13 policies of title insurance, each in the amount of not less than 14 fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) for each parcel to be conveyed 15 to DISTRICT, guaranteeing DISTRICT'S interest in said property as 16 being free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, assessments, 17 easements, taxes and leases (recorded and unrecorded), and except 18 those which, in the sole discretion of DISTRICT, are acceptable. 19 12. Pay, if suit is brought upon this contract or any bond 20 guaranteeing completion of PROJECT, all costs and reasonable 21 expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys' fees, and 22 acknowledge that, upon entry of judgment, all such costs, expenses 23 and fees shall be taxed as costs and included in any judgment 24 rendered. 25 13. Furnish DISTRICT with final mylar plans for PROJECT 26 and assign their ownership to DISTRICT. - 5 - 1 SECTION II 2 DISTRICT shall: 3 1. Review and approve plans and specifications prepared 4 by DEVELOPER for PROJECT, prior to the start of construction. 5 2. Provide CITY an opportunity to review PROJECT design 6 plans prior to DISTRICT final approval. 7 3. Record, or cause to be recorded, the Irrevocable 8 Offer(s) of Dedication provided by DEVELOPER pursuant to Section 9 1.6. 10 4. Upon execution of this agreement record, or cause to 11 be recorded, a copy of this agreement in the Official Records of 12 the Riverside County Recorder. 13 5. Inspect the construction of PROJECT. 14 6. Upon DISTRICT acceptance of PROJECT as being complete, 15 and upon recordation of the conveyancing documents described in 16 Section 1.10., accept ownership and responsibility for the 17 operation and maintenance of PROJECT, excluding inlets and 18 connector pipes within CITY rights of way. 19 7. Keep an accurate accounting of all DISTRICT 20 construction inspection costs, and within thirty (30) days after 21 DISTRICT acceptance of PROJECT as~being complete, submit a cost 22 statement to DEVELOPER. If inspection costs should at any time 23 exceed the deposit as set forth herein, DEVELOPER shall pay such 24 additional amount as may be deemed necessary by DISTRICT to cover 25 its remaining inspection costs, upon demand by DISTRICT. If the 26 deposit(s) exceeds said inspection costs, DISTRICT shall reimburse - 6 - DEVELOPER the excess amount within forty-five (45) days after DISTRICT acceptance of PROJECT as being complete. 8. Provide CITY with final reproducible "as-built" mylar 4 plans for all PROJECT facilities constructed within CITY rights of 5 way, upon DISTRICT acceptance of PROJECT as being complete. 6 SECTION III ? CITY shall: 8 1. Review and approve plans and specifications prepared 9 by DEVELOPER for those portions of PROJECT within CITY rights of 10 way, prior to the start of construction of PROJECT. 11 2. Accept the DISTRICT and CITY approved faithful 12 performance and payment bonds submitted by DEVELOPER as set forth 13 in Section 1.5., and hold said bonds as provided herein. 14 3. Accept ownership and responsibility for the operation 15 and maintenance of all PROJECT inlets and connector pipes within 16 CITY rights of way, upon DISTRICT acceptance of PROJECT as being 17 complete. 18 4. Grant DISTRICT, by execution of this agreement, the 19 right to construct, inspect, operate and maintain PROJECT within 20 CITY rights of way. 21 5. Not grant any occupancy permits for any unit within 22 Tract No. 23267, or any phase thereof, until construction of 23 PROJECT is complete, unless otherwise approved in writing by 24 DISTRICT. 25 SECTION IV 26 It is further mutually agreed: 27 1. All work involved with PROJECT shall be inspected by - 7 - 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 DISTRICT and shall not be deemed complete until approved and accepted in writing as complete by DISTRICT. 2. CITY and DEVELOPER personnel may observe and inspect all work being done on PROJECT but shall provide any comments to DISTRICT personnel who shall be responsible for all quality controi communications with the contractor during the construction of PROJECT. 3. Construction of PROJECT shall be completed by DEVELOPER within twelve (12) consecutive months after execution of 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 2~ 24 25 26 27 28 this agreement and within thirty (30) consecutive calendar days after commencing work on PROJECT. It is expressly understood that since time is of the essence in this agreement, failure of DEVELOPER to perform the work within the agreed upon time shall constitute authority for DISTRICT to perform the remaining work anc require DEVELOPER'S surety to pay to CITY the penal sum of any and all bonds. In which case, CITY shall subsequently reimburse DISTRICT for DISTRICT costs incurred. 4. At such time in the future that PROJECT is extended downstream, and PROJECT alignment is altered in such a manner as to eliminate the need for DISTRICT'S need for all or portions of the rights of way shown in red on Exhibit "B", as determined and approved by DISTRICT, DISTRICT shall quitclaim to DEVELOPER all it~ rights, title and interest in all or any portion of such rights of way which, in the sole discretion of DISTRICT, may be deemed unnecessary for the continued operation and maintenance of PROJECT by DISTRICT. - 8 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5. DEVELOPER and DISTRICT, knowingly and voluntarily, waive the provisions of Government Code Section 65913.8, relating to fees and charges. Such waiver is accomplished with the understanding that DISTRICT is voluntarily undertaking the obligation to accept ownership and responsibility for the operation and maintenance of PROJECT, and DEVELOPER is not required by DISTRICT to enter into this agreement. 6. DEVELOPER shall, during the construction period for PROJECT, provide Worker's Compensation Insurance in an amount required by law. A certificate of said insurance policy shall be provided to DISTRICT and CITY at the time of providing notice pursuant to Section 1.8. 7. DEVELOPER shall, commencing on the date notice is given pursuant to Section 1.8., and continuing until DISTRICT accepts PROJECT for operation and maintenance: (a) Provide and maintain comprehensive liability insurance coverage which shall protect DEVELOPER from claim from damages for personal injury, including accidental and wrongful death, as well as from claims for property damage which may arise from DEVELOPER'S construction of PROJECT or the performance of its obligations hereunder, whether such construction or performance be by DEVELOPER, by any contractor, subcontractor, or by anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them. Such insurance shall name DISTRICT, CITY and the County of Riverside as additional - 9 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 26 27 28 insureds with respect to this agreement and the obligations of DEVELOPER hereunder. Such insurance shall provide for limits of not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000.00) per occurrence. (b) Cause its insurance carriers to furnish DISTRICT and CITY, at the time of providing written notification to DISTRICT of the start of construction as set forth in Section I.$., with certificate(s) of insurance showing that such insurance is in full force and effect and that DISTRICT, CITY and the County of Riverside are named as additional insureds with respect to this agreement and the obligations of DEVELOPER hereunder. Further, said certificate(s) shall provide that the issuing company shall give DISTRICT and CITY sixty (60) days written notice in the event of any cancellation, termination, non-renewal or reduction in coverage of the policies evidenced by the certificate(s). In the event of any such cancellation, termination, non-renewal or reduction in coverage, DEVELOPER shall, forthwith, secure replacement insurance meeting the provision of this paragraph. Failure to maintain the insurance required by this paragraph shall be deemed a material breach of this agreement and shall authorize and constitute authority for DISTRICT, at its sole - 10 - discretion, to proceed with performing the remaining work on PROJECT pursuant to Section IV.3. 8. In the event that any claim or legal action is brought 4 against DISTRICT, CITY or the County of Riverside in connection 5 with this agreement because of the actual or alleged acts or 6 omissions by DEVELOPER, DEVELOPER shall defend, indemnify and hold ? DISTRICT, CITY and the County of Riverside harmless therefrom, 8 without cost to DISTRICT, CITY or the County of Riverside. Upon 9 DEVELOPER'S failure to do so, DISTRICT, CITY and the County of 10 Riverside shall be entitled to recover from DEVELOPER all of their 11 cost and expenses, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees. 13 9. DEVELOPER shall defend, indemnify and hold DISTRICT, 14 CITY and the County of Riverside, their respective officers, 15 agents, employees and independent contractors free and harmless 16 from any claim whatsoever, based or asserted, pursuant to Article 17 I, Section 19 of the California Constitution, the Fifth Amendment 18 of the United States Constitution, or any other law or ordinance 19 which seeks to impose any other liability or damage whatsoever, for the design, construction or failure of PROJECT or from the diversion of the waters .from the natural drainage patterns, save and except claims and litigation arising through the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of DISTRICT, CITY or the 24 County of Riverside. DEVELOPER shall defend DISTRICT, CITY and the County of Riverside without cost to DISTRICT, CITY or the County of Riverside, and upon DEVELOPER'S failure to do so, DISTRICT, CITY and the County of Riverside shall be entitled to recover from - 11 - 1 DEVELOPER all of their cost and expenditures, including, but not 2 limited to, reasonable attorneys' fees. 3 10. DEVELOPER for itself, its successors and assigns 4 hereby releases DISTRICT, CITY and the County of Riverside, their 5 respective officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims, 6 demands, actions, or suits of any kind arising out of any ? liability, known or unknown, present or future, including, but not 8 limited to, any claim or liability, based or asserted, pursuant to 9 Article I, Section 19 of the California Constitution and the Fifth 10 Amendment of the United States Constitution, or any other law or 11 ordinance which seeks to impose any other liability or damage, 12 whatsoever, for the design, construction or failure of PROJECT, or 13 the discharge of drainage within or from PROJECT. Nothing 14 contained herein shall constitute a release by DEVELOPER of 15 DISTRICT, CITY or the County of Riverside, their officers, agentSof 16 and employees from any and all claims, demands, actions or suits 17 any kind arising out of any liability, known or unknown, present or 18 future, for the negligent maintenance of PROJECT, after the 19 acceptance of PROJECT by DISTRICT. 20 11. Any waiver by DISTRICT or by CITY of any breach of any 21 one or more of the terms of this agreement shall not be construed 22 to be a waiver of any subsequent or other breach of the same or of 23 any other term hereof. Failure on the part of DISTRICT or CITY to 24 require exact, full and complete compliance with any terms of this 25 agreement shall not be construed as in any manner changing the terms hereof, or estopping DISTRICT or CITY from enforcement hereof. - 12 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 23 24 25 26 27 28 12. If any provision in this agreement (with the exception of Section IV.5.) is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way. Should it be held by a court of competent jurisdiction that any portion of Section IV.5. is invalid, void or unenforceable, the provisions of Government Code 65913.8(b) shall apply. It shall, therefore, be determined that this fee is extended through the year 1998. 13. This agreement is to be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 14. Any and all notices sent or required to be sent to the parties of this agreement will be mailed by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the following addresses: RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Post Office Box 1033 Riverside, CA 92502-1033 CITY OF TEMECULA Post Office Box 3000 Temecula, CA 92390 THE PRESLEY COMPANIES 15010 Avenue of Science, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92128 15. Any action at law or in equity brought by any of the parties hereto for the purpose of enforcing a right or rights provided for by the agreement shall be tried in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Riverside, State of California, and the parties hereto waive all provisions of law providing for change of venue in such proceedings to any other county. - 13 - 16. This agreement is the result of the negotiations between the parties hereto, and the advice and assistance of their respective counsel. The fact that this agreement was prepared as a matter of convenience by DISTRICT shall have no import or significance. Any uncertainty or ambiguity in this agreement shall not be construed against DISTRICT because DISTRICT prepared this agreement in its final form. 17. The rights and obligations of DEVELOPER shall inure to 9~ and be binding upon all heirs, successors and assignees. 10 18. DEVELOPER shall not assign or otherwise transfer any 11 of their rights, duties or obligations hereunder to any person or 12 entity without the written consent of the other parties hereto 13 being first obtained. In the event of any such transfer or 14 assignment, DEVELOPER expressly understands and agrees that they 15 shall remain liable with respect to any and all of the obligations 16 and duties contained in this agreement. 17 19. This agreement is intended by the parties hereto as a 15 final expression of their understanding with respect to the subject 19 matter hereof and as a complete and exclusive statement of the 20 terms and conditions thereof and supersedes any and all prior and 21 contemporaneous agreements and understandings, oral or written in 22 connection therewith. This agreement may be changed or modified 23 only upon the written consent of the parties hereto. 24 // II II 27 28 - 14 - STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On /~ ~ /~ 0 , beforeme, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Gerald P. Nordeman and Wm. B. Probert, personally known to me (or proved on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the persons who executed the within instrument as Sr. Vice President and Vice President on behalf of the corporation therein named and acknowledged to me that such corpora- tion executed the within instrument pursuant to its bylaws or a resolution of its Board of Directors. 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.a..qjLL_v:~J~r,j~,, Signature C~ C~~ :'~_~ SAN OIEGO COUNTY My commission expires 12-18-93 1,_. 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 !1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement on . (to be filled in by Clerk of the Board) RECOM~4ENDED FOR APPROVAL: RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT KENNETH L. EDWARDS Chief Engineer By Chairman, Board of Supervisors APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: WILLIAM C. KATZENSTEIN County Counsel Deputy Dated {~/% \ / GERALD A. MALONEY Clerk of the Board By Deputy (SEAL) CITY OF TEMECULA By APPROVED AS TO FORM: By.... ,:,.( .;: Oa.~'~d .3-.~-~/ SVG:MDR:pln:bjp agrmt548 12/06/90 ATTEST: By City Clerk (SEAL) THE PRESLEY COMPANIES a Cal~rnia corporation . Title '~. ~/c~_ (NOTARY) - 15 - EXHI BIT A See Exhibit B ~ :, o~ ~ EXHIBIT . . I of 2 B M4 TO~ WlTt. I fiG, FILTER ./ BLANKET !' TtlK P£R ~i~ DW~. D-40 ¢5EE 5~ iVC~ I0' !0' I0' DRI~ :X'IST. 12'WATF_.,RLINE 7'0 E~ T&MPO~'II~'y t.11GN~. IIV~ DETOU,~ OI/E'~ STORM DIP_.41N LI~E. EXHIBIT B 2 of 2 ITEM NO. 9 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICE)%~[ CITY MANAGER '~' CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council/City Manager Rick Sayre Chief of Police March 12, 1991 1-15 Over-crossing Project RECOMMENDATION: BACKGROUND: FISCAL IMPACT: That the City Council approve an extension of the agreement with All City Management for the continuance of the 1-15 Over-crossing project. On May 1, 1990, the City entered into an agreement with All City Management Co. for the purpose of providing traffic directors. The terms of the initial contract needs to be amended as noted on the attached agreement. Approval will allow the services provided by All City Co. to continue. The F.Y. 90-91 police budget contains funding for the continuance of the 1-15 Over-crossing Program. Since January 1, 1991, community donations equaling $25,000 have been donated as .matching funds. ATTACHMENT: Agreement amending contract. First Amendment to Agreement Regarding Private Security Traffic Program The Agreement dated May 1, 1990 by and between the City of Temecula, a Municipal Corporation ("City") and All City Mangement ("Corporation") (hereinafter, the "Agreement") is herby amended as follows: Section 1. On Page 8 of the Agreement is revised to provide that the term of the Agreement is extended to June 30, 1992, without the requirement of matching private funds. Section 2. The paragraph at page 10 of the Agreement, entitled "Compensation" is amended to read as follows: "Compensation Compensation for providing Traffic Control Staff services by the CORPORATION at an hourly rate not to exceed $16.84 per hour, a total of 28.5 hours per day, Monday through Friday." Section 3. All other terms of the Agreement to remain the same. Date ATTEST: Ronald J. Park, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk Approved as to Form Scott Field, City Attorney Date Ron Farwe!l, President All City Management Company CC: Police ITEM NO. 10 APPROVAL/'~-~ CITY ATTORNEY~b~ FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Engineering Department ~ March 12, 1991 Final Parcel Map No. 24239 PREPARED BY: Douglas M. Stewart R ECOMMEN DAT I ON: That the City Council approve Final Parcel Map No. 24239, Amended No. 1, subject to the Conditions of Approval. DISCUSSION: Parcel Map No. 24239 was originally submitted to Riverside County Planning Department on December 12, 1988. The Parcel Map Amended No. 1 was approved by the Director of Planning May 8, 1989 and was received and filed by the Board of Supervisors on May 3, 1989. Parcel Map No. 24239 contains three (3) residential lots, each a minimum of 1.4 acres, within 4.44 acres. The project site is located northeast of Avenida de San Pasqual and Sierra Bonita. The developer is Dave Asmus. The following fees have been paid (or deferred) for Parcel Map No. 24239: Signal Mitigation Fee Area Drainage Fee (Deferred to Building Permits) Fire Mitigation Fee $ 450.00 5,310.00 1,200.00 This Parcel Map is not part of a Specific Plan nor is it governed by a Development Agreement. Requirement of Quimby fees I Park and Recreation) were not historically Conditions of Approval by the County of Riverside until some time on or after June, 1988. Requirement of Quimby fees were not adopted as part of the tentative tract map approval process and are not recommended as part of this staff report. Section 66474.1 of the Subdivision Map Act stipulates that "A legislative body shall not deny STAFFRPT\PM24239 1 approval of a final or parcel map if it has previously approved a tentative map for the proposed subdivision and if it finds that the final or parcel map is in substantial compliance with the previously approved tentative map." Final map review was based on the tentative tract map conditions of approval and the final map is in compliance with development conditions. Street/drainage, water, and sewer improvements have been completed for the project. Therefore, a letter of credit and agreements for the following have been posted for Parcel Map No. 24239: Warranty Survey Monuments $1,700. O0 1,584. O0 SUMMARY: Staff recommends that the City Council APPROVE Final Parcel Map No. 24239 Amended No. 1 subject to the Conditions of Approval. GH:ks Attachments: 2. 3. 4. 5. Development Checklist Location Map Copy of Map Conditions of Approval Fees & Securities Report STAFFRPT\PM24239 2 CITY OF TEMECULA DEVELOPMENT FEE CHECKLIST CASE NO.: Parcel Map No. 24239 The following fees were reviewed by Staff relative to their applicability to this project. Fee Habitat Conservation Plan (K-Rat) Parks and Recreation ( Quimby ) Public Facility ( Traffic Mitigation ) Public Facility ( Traffic Signal Mitigation ) Public Facility (Library) Fire Protection Flood Control (ADP) Condition of Approval Condition No. 16 (Planning) N/A N/A Condition No. 6 (Roads & Surveyor) N/A Condition No. 12 (Planning) Condition No, 11 (Planning) STAFFRPT\PM24239 AUTO Scenic Viewpore · ! ~ · 't , ,in[s$ '~ Elev 1887 Ft Admm Ctr ~ ~ ,/SOL brar¥ MEADOWVIEW '~ sr VEL~GE WIN[ Project Site DATE TO: Ma~ 30, i989 Surveyor Road Building & Safety Flood Control Health Fire Protection RIVERSIDE COUNTY RO~kg DEPARTN1ENT RE: TENTATIVE~/PARCEL MAP NO. 24239, Amd. ~1 REGIONAL TEAM NO. One The Riverside County I-']Planning Director/[~-~Board of Supervisors has taken the following action on the above referenced tentative map: XX APPROVED tentative map subject to the attached conditions (no waiver request submitted) DENIED tentative map based on the attached findings. APPROVED tentative map subject to attached conditions and DENIED request for waiver of the final map. APPROVED tentative map and APPROVED request for waiver of the final map. APPRDVED : Extension of Time to all previously approved condlti.ons. ) ~ ~: ~.. APPROVED ki Extension of :Fime all previously approved conditions and the attached additional conditions. . .. , ( c; 'Y ) .[.. DENIED Extension of T-ime, ,:'-" .. . --, ,_ .- APPROVED withdrawal of ~Le..ntatqve-map.. APPROVED Minor Change to rev~i.se or_igipally approved conditions as shown (attached). APPROVED Minor Change to revise originally approved map (attached). subject to subject to __DENIED request for Minor Change. __APPROVED Minor Change to waive the final map. DW:lgg Very truly yours, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Jo.seph A. Richards, Planning Director Kim Jarreq'l Johnson, Senior Planner SURVEYOR - WHITE ROAD - BLUE (m,,. ~/,~) HEALTH - PINK BUILDING & SAFETY - GREEN FIRE PROTECTION - GOLDENROD FLOOD- CANARY 4080 LEMON STREET, 9TM FLOOR RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) 275-3200 79733 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, SUITE BERMUDA DUNES, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342-8277 i~PINKS SU~MITI'AL TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS C( ~TY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CAUI :NIA FROM: Planning Department SUBMITTAL DATE: May 15, 1989 SUB3ECT: 'Notice of 0ecision of Tentative Parcel Map acted on by the Planning Director on May 8, 1989. RECOMMENDED MOTION: RECEIVE AND FILE the Notice of Decision for the following tentative parcel map acted on by the Planning Director on May 8, lg89. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 24239 - Dave Asmus - First Supervisorial District - Rancho California Area - 4.44 Acres - 3 Lots - Schedule H - R-R Zone: ADOPTED the Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 33562 and APPROVED the tentative map. The decision of the Planning Director is considered final and no action by the Board of Supervisors is required unless, within 10 days after the Notice of Decision appears on the Board's agenda, the applicant or an interested person files an appeal accompanied by the fee set forth in Ordinance No. 460, unless the Board orders the matter set for public hearing before the appropriate appeal board. DW: bc 5/8Z g og~_~S.~ Stree:e , ~ ' i~e~. Agn. ref. Depts. Comments Dist. AGENDA NO. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S HEARING ! :: CASE SUMMARY May 8, 1989 CASE NO. Parcel Map No. 24239, Amended No.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION: The applicant is requesting to subdivide 4.44 acres into 3 Schedule H parcels with a minimum lot size of 1.40 acres gross. The site is located north of Santiago Road a~d east of Avenida de ! San Pasqual. kREA: Rancho California SPHERE OF INFLUENCE: None GENERAL PLAN: a. LAND USE: Category II b. OPEN SPACE/CONS.: Not Designated As Open Space c. COMMUNITY POLICIES: Rancho California/Temecula ZONING: a. SITE: R-R b. ADJACENT: R-R LAND USE/AREA DEVELOPMENT: a. SITE: Vacant b. ADJACENT: Scattered single family homes and vacant land. RECO~(ENDATION: ADOPTION of a Negative Declaration for E.A. 33562 and APPROVAL of Parcel Map 24239 Amended No. ! based on the following The proposed project is consistent with the general Plan and with Ordinances Nos. 348 and 460. The proposal will not have a significant effect on the environment. 5 PLANNZNG DIRECTOR'S APPIK)VAL DATE: RIVEKSID[ COUKT~ PUgmING DEP~ COlE)ITIONS OF APPIIOVAL TENTATIVE PARCEl. NAP NO. 24239 Amended No. I 1. The subdivider shall defend, tndenmtfy, and hold hapless the County of Riverside, 1as ·gents, officers, and employees frem any clatm, actton, or proceeding ·gatnst the County of Riverside 1as ·gents, officers, or employees to attach, set astde, votd, or annul ·n approval of the County of Riverside, 1as ·dvtsory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 24~3~ Amd.! vhtch actton ts brought wtthtn the ttme pertod provtded for tn California Govez~ment Code Sectton 66499.37. The County of Riverside wtll promptly nottry the subdivider of any such clatm, actton, or proceeding agatnst the County of R~verstde and cooperate ful]y tn the defense. If the County fatls to promptly nottry the subdivider of any such clatm, actton, or proceeding or fat]s to cooperate fully tn the defense, the sulxltvJder sha11~not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, Indemnify, or hold harmless the County of Riverside. 2. The tentative parcel mp shall confom to the reclutrenents of Ordinance 460, Schedule ~ unless mdtfted by the conditions 11sted below. Thts approved tentatT~--p~cel map v111 exptre tvo years after the Board of Supervisors approval date unless extended is provtded by Ordinance 460. ~e ftnal map shall be p~pared by a regtster~ ctvtl engtneer or ltcensed la~ surveyor subject to all the ~qutr~nts of the $tat~ of C~lltfornta $u~tvtston Hap ACt, ~tverstde County ~M, tvtston Ordinance 460. All road easemnts shall be offered for dedication to the publlc and shall conttnue tn force unttl the governing body accepts or ·bandons such offers. All dedications shall be free frm all encumbrances is approved by the County BO~d Commissioner. Street names shall be sub~ect to approval of the Road Con~tsstoner. S. Easements, Sen e~lutred for roadray slopes, dratnage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be sho~n on the ftnal map tf ~tthln the land dtvtston boundary. All offers of dedication sM11 provtde for nonexclusive ~bllc road and uttlt~access. All easements, offers of dedication and conveyances shall $ubattted and recorded ·s dtrect~d by the Riverside County Surveyor. 0 Legal ICClIS IS fl(~|lld by Ordinance 460 shall be provtded frm the parcel map bound·r~ to · Count~ mtntatned road. All deltmlue~t property taxes shall be patd prtor to recordation of the ftn·l gill). TENTATIVE PARCEL HAP NO. 24239 Conditions of Approval Page 2 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Prior to any grading, a Grading Plan in compliance with the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, as amended by Ordinance 457, shall be submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety. The subdivider shall comply with the street improvement recommendations outlined in the County Road Department's letter dated March 2g, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The subdivider shall comply with the environmental health reconmmnda- tions outlined in the County Health Department's transmittal dated March 23, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The subdivider shall comply with the flood control recomnendations outlined in the Riverside County Flood Control District's letter dated March 27, lg89, a copy of which is attached. If the land division lies within an adopted flood control drainage area pursuant to Section 10.25 of Riverside County Land Division Ordinance 460, appropriate fees for the construction of area drainage facilities shall be collected by the Road Commissioner prior to recordation of the final map or waiver of parcel map. The subdivider shall comply with the fire improvement recon~endations outlined in the County Fire Department's letter dated March 2g, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The subdivider shall comply with the recon~endations outlined in the Building and Safety Department: Land Use Section's transmittal dated March 31, 1989, a copy of which is attached. The subdivider shall comply with the recomnendations outlined in the Building and Safety Department: Grading Section's transmittal dated March 30, 1989, a copy of which is attached. Grading plans shall conform to the Hillside Development Standards as presented in the Comprehensive General Plan. All cut and/or fill slopes, or individual combinations thereof, which exceed ten feet in vertical height shall be modified by an appropriate combination of a special terracing :(benching) plan, increased slope ratio (e.g. 3:1), retaining walls, and/or slope planting combined with irrigation. All driveways shall not exceed a 15% grade. Prior to the'issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall comply with Ordinance No. 663 by paying the fee required by that ordinance which is based on (the gross acreage of the pa~els proposed for development). Should Ordinance No. 663 be superceded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fees required by Ordinance No. 663, the applicant shall pay the fee required under the Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented by County ordinance or resolution. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 24239 Conditions of Approval Page 3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: 17. Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the R-R zone. 18. All lots created by this land division shall have a minimum area of 1.40 acres gross. When lots are crossed by major public utility easements, each lot shall have a net usable area of not less than 3600 square feet, exclusive of the utility easement. 20. All lot length to width ratios shall be in conformance with Section 3.8C of Ordinance 460. 21. Prior to recordation of the final map the land divider shall execute a certificate of noncontiguous ownership. PRIOR TO THE RECORDATION OF THE FINAL I~AP: 22. A copy of the Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINT SHEET CONDITIONS: 23. An Environmental Constraints Sheet (ECS) shall be prepared with the final map to delineate identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the office of the County Surveyor. Prior to the recordation of the final map, a copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department and the Department of Building and Safety. The following note(s) shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet. "The property is located in the Hazardous Fire Area. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a water system for fire protection must be provided as follows; either, ~) a domestic water system with an approved fire hydrant within 500 feet of the driveway entrance, or 2) a private well system with a water storage tank of sufficient size, accessible to Fire Department.vehicles." I~:lgg 5-2-89 OFFICE OF I~OAD COMMISSIONER & COUNTY SURVEYOR Le. Ro¥ D. Smoot March 29, 1989 P.O. BOX I090 ~ CALJTOl~t~ 92502 0'14) 787-6554 Riverside County Planning Commission 4080 Lemon Street Riverside, CA 92501 Re: Tentative PM 24239 - Amend #1 Schedule H - Team 1 - SMD #9 Ladies and Gentlemen: With respect to the conditions of approval for the referenced tentative land division map, the Road Department recommends that the landdivider provide the following street improvement plans and/or road dedications in accordance with Ordinance 460 and Riverside County Road Improvement Standards (Ordinance 461). It is understood that the tentative map correctly shows acceptable centerline profiles, all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses with appropriate O's, and that their omission or unacceptability may require the map to be resubmitted for further consideration. These Ordinances and the following conditions are essential parts and a requirement occurring in ONE is as binding as though occurring in all. They are intended to be complementary and to describe the conditions for a complete design of the improvement. .All questions regarding the true meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Road Commissioner's Office. o The landdivider shall protect downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns, i,e., concentration of diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities including enlarging existing facilities and/ or by securing a drainage easement. All drainage easements shall be shown on the final map and noted as follows: 'Drainage F, usement - no building, obstructions, or encroachments by land fills are allowed". The protection shall be as approved by the Road Department. The landdivider shall accept and properly dispose of all offsite drainage flowing onto or through the site. In the event the Road Commissioner permits the use of streets for drainage purposes, the provisions of Article XI of Ordinance No. 460 will apply. Should the quantities exceed the street capacity or the use of streets be prohibit[d for drainage purposes, the subdiv£der shall provide adequate drainage facilities as approved by the Road Department. C~J'NTY ~~ CENTER · 4080 LEHOJq STREET · ~ CALIFORNIA 9ZSO1 Tentative PN 24259 - knend ~] Narch 29, 1989 Poge 2 3. The required improvements as reflected in the following conditions shall be completed or a performance Security in lieu thereof shall be posted in accordance with Riverside County Ordinance No. 460, Article XV, prior to recordation of the final map. The improvements are required based on the following findings: The improvements are a necessary prerequisite to the orderly development of the surrounding area· b® The improvements are necessary for the public health and safety. Corner cutbacks in conformance with County Standard No. 805 shall be shown on the final map and offered for dedication. 0 The landdivider shall provide utility clearance from Rancho California Water District prior to the recordation of the final map. Prior to the recordation of the final map, or the granting of a waiver of the final map, the developer shall deposit with the Riverside County Road Department, a cash sum of $150.00 per lot as mitigation for traffic signal impacts. The maximum centerline gradient and the minimum centerline radii shall be in conformance with County Standard #114 of Ordinance 461. 8. All centerline intersections shall be at 90° or as approved by the Road Department. 9. Avertida de San Pasqual shall be improved with 24 feet of acceptable Aggregate Base (0.33' thick) on a 32 foot graded section within a 60 foot full width dedicated right of way · s approved by the Road Commissioner. 10. Sierra Bonita shall be improved with 24 feet of acceptable Aggregate Base (0.33' thick) on a 32 foot graded section within a 60 foot full width dedicated right of way as · pproved by the Road Commissioner. 11. Improvement plans shall be based upon a centerline profile extending · minimum of 300 feet beyond the project boundaries ·t · grade and alignment as approved by the Riverside County Ro·d Commissioner. Completion of road improvements does not imply acceptance for m~intenance by County. Tentative PN 24239 - Amend '#arch 29, 1989 Page 3 13. 14. 15. An access road to the nearest road maintained for public use shall be constructed with a 24' graded section within a minimum 40' part width right of way in accordance with an approved centerline profile as approved by the Road Commissioner. Standard cul-de-sacs shall be constructed throughout the landdivision. Landdivisions creating cut or fill slopes adjacent to the streets shall provide erosion control, sight distance control and slope easements as approved by the Road Department. The landdivider shall install street name sign(s) in accordance with County Standard No. 816 prior to recordation of the final map as directed by the Road Commissioner. EB:jw Very truly yours, Subdivision Engineer Our recomendattons Rev'~.ed/Amended/Hl,,u~- I:h.,n~e Hap No. are stil'l current for dated Date Title RIVERSIDE. eLANN!NG .COUNTY OF I'~IVERSIDE DEPARTHEHT OF ~ ENVIRONME' '~L ilEALTII SERVICgS DI' ' ~.AND USE SECTION 3.57.5 Eleventh Street Hall R£vers£de, CA 92.501 l EA L'rll ,qlON PARCEL HAP SC!IEDULE ~/ WAIVER REQUEST? AREA/Di~'fgIC'A' ORD. 460 'lie DEPARTI'UZNT OF !IEAL'rll !IAS Ill.:VII!HI:l) TIlE HAl' DI':SCRlI~liI) AI;OVE. IF 'HERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNIiIU TIllS TIb~NSH1TTAL, COltrACT 787-6543. ,UR tLECOMMENDATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS: - ? ;% ,R EF. PUI'Y DIRE, C'IOR OF ALTH FOR K[NNETH I.. [DWARD~ MARKIT ITRS[T BOX 10~3 T~I.[P#ONE (714) 71?.~:01B RIVERSIDE: COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATE:R CONSERVATION DISTRICT Riverside County R,v-.,=. c.u.o~.,^ ..~= P1 inning Department County Admi nt stratt ve Center Riverside, Cmlifornia Attention: Regional Team No. Area: we have reviewed this case and have the following connents: Except for nuisance nature local runoff which may traverse portions of the property the project is considered free from ordinary storm flood hazard. However, a storm of unusual magnitude could cause some damage. New construc- tion should comply with all applicable ordinances. The topography of the area consists of well defined ridges and natural water- courses which traverse the property. There is adequate area outside of the natural watercourses for building sites. The natural watercourses should be kept free of buildings and obstructions in order to maintain the natural drainage patterns of the area and to prevent flood damage to new buildings. A note should be placed on an environmental constraint sheet stating, 'All new buildings shall be floodproofed by elevating the finished floors a minimum of 18 inches above adjacent ground surface. Erosion protection shall be provided for mobile home supports.' This project is in the drainage plan fees shall be paid in accordance with the applicable r~lesArea and regulations. The proposed zoning is consistent with existing flood hazards. Some flood control facilities or floodproofing may be required to fully develop to the iKol ted density. The Distrtct's report dated J~UkRC,~l~)l~e)c)ts still current for this project. The District does not object to the proposed minor change. The attached comments apply. Very truly yours, KENN~H L. i~]MAPI)S /Cht&f Engineer /,OH~ ". KASHUBA ~entor Civil Engineer DATE: I~ ?- e7 ~ (q KINNE'I'H L.. !rDWARDI IIII MARKET ITRm'~:T P.O. BOX 10,3 T/.L. IPHONE (714) 717-I:Ot! RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Rivers i de County P1 anning Department County Admini strati ve Center Riverside, California Attention: Regional Team No. I Re: K;~ .1);+f',~," We have reviewed this case and have the following comments: V/ Except for nuisance nature local runoff which may traverse portions of the property the project is considered free from ordinary storm flood hazard. However, a storm of unusual magnitude could cause some damage. New construc- tion should comply with all applicable ordinances. The topography of the area consists of well defined ridges and natural water- courses which traverse the property. There is adequate area outside of the natural watercourses for building sites. The natural watercourses should be kept free of buildings and obstructions in order to maintain the natural drainage patterns of the area and to prevent flood damage to new buildings. A note should be placed on an environmental constraint sheet stating, "All new buildings shall be floodproofed by elevating the finished floors a minimum of 18 inches above adjacent ground surface. Erosion protection shall be provided for mobile home supports." This project is in the ~urt;,~ ~ef~/~)~c~ ~/(~ ~ · Area drainage plan fees shall be paid in accordance with the licable rules and regulations. The proposed zoning is consistent with existing flood hazards. Some flood control facilities or floodproofing may be required to fully develop to the implied density. The District's report dated is still current for this project. The District does not object to the proposed minor change. The attached comments apply. Very truly yours, !NNETH L. EDWAROS Her, Engtnee ~O~HN H. KASHUBA (~enior Ctvil Engineer DATE: p%.vJ r(( i(~ g~ 46.Z09 01~ Slnd. Sam 405 ~ CA (6S9] ~4~.8886 3-29-89 Pbm~ & rq' - -'-~ 01~ dQBO 1-,-,~ Slmt, Suit~ IlL Riwnid~, CA 92501 (?t4) 787-6~)6 PLANNING DEPARTMENT DAVID gAHLGR~ PARCEL HAP 24239 - ~D ~1 ~tth respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division, the Fire Department recommends the foilsvine fire protection measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County Ordinances and/or recosnized fire protection standards: FIP.~PROTECTION Schedule "H" fire protection approved standard fire hydrants, (6"x4"x2~") located one at each street intersection and spaced no more than 660 feet apart in any direction, with no portion of any lot frontass more than 330 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 GPH for 2 hours duration at 20 PSI. ,,}./ Applicant/developer shall furnish one copy of the water system plans to the y' Fire Department for review. Plans shall conform to fire hydrant types, location and spatins, and, the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be sisned/approved by a resistered civil enslneer and the local water company with the followinS certification: "I certify that the desIsm of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Dept." The required water system includins fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water asency prior to any combustible buildins material heine placed on an individual lot. HAZARDOUS The land division to located in the "Hazardous Fire Area" of Riverside County as shown on amp on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors. Any building constructed on lots created by this land division shall comply with the special construction provisions contained ln Riverside County Ordinance 546. Should the developer choose to defer the fire protection requirements, an Environmental Constraint Sheet shall be filed with the f~aluap containins the foliorinse "The property is located in the Hazardous Fire Area. Prior Co the issuance of a building permit, a water system for flre protection must be provided, either: 1) a dosseric racer systemwith an approved fire hydrant v~thin 500 ft. of the driveray entrance. 24239 Page 2 MITIGATION Prior to the recordation of the final nap, the developer shall deposit with the Rivers/de County Fire Department, a cash sum of $400.00 per lot/unit as nit/gat/on for fire protection impacts. All questions regarding the meaning of the conditions shall be referred to the Fire Departeerie Planning and Engineering staff. RAYMOND H. PEGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By Kurt Kantwell, Fire Safety Specialist March 31. 1989 Administrative Center * 1777 Atlanta Avenue Riverside, CA 92507 Riverside County Planning Department Attention: Dave Wahlgren County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street Riverside, CA 92501 RE: Parcel Map 24239, Amend #1 Ladies and Gentlemen: The Land Use Division of the Department of Building and Safety has the following comments and conditions: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the' developer shall obtain Planning Department approval for all on-site and off- site signage advertising the sale of the Parcel map pursuant to Section 19.5 of Ordinance 348. Very truly yours, , hnician ~ Administr~tion (714) 682-8840 · (714) 787-2020 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE Department of Building and Safety TO: Planning - File FROM: RE: Grading Section INITIAL: _~~ease make the following · condition of ·pproval: Prior to commencing any grading exceeding 58 cubic the owner of that property shalI obtain · grading from the Department of Building and Safety yards~ permit ___b. Prior to ·pproval of this use/subdivision a grading permit and ·pproval of the rough. grading shall be obtaine~ from the Building and Safety Department. ___c. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the property owner shall obtain · gr·ding permit and approval to construct from the Building and Safety Department. ___d. Constructing of material permit. · road, where greater than 50 cubic yards is placed or moved, requires a grading .... The Grading Section has ~o comment on this site FOR ~ GRADI~ PLAN --PLF.,ASE ~ FOI~.A.T AIqD GRADING ~Clq PER ~ ~~ ~: 284-86 . 284-21 2~-120 284~6 (A.C. P~g) :IiVjDiDE county i,L,~nnirl~ DEPAL:tCnlEnC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM: L IqK)JECT INFORM&TION STANDARD EVALUATION Moc)uLE NUMBE;(,): IIC~ DESCRIFTK)N (Inc~uck, r--;:-,. minw,m u ~0 .r.d u....pp,c,~):'"~ ~ulodt~;tc-Y,_. B. TOTAL PROJECT AREA: ACRES ~/. Z.//./: or SOUARE FEET C. ASSESSOR'S ~,'~CEL NO.(,): EXISTING ZONING: PROPOSED ZONING: STREET REFERENCES: //~~ IS THE PIR~ IN CONFORMANCE? IS THE PROPOSAL IN CONFORMANCE? ~ECTION. TOWNSHIP. RANGE DESCRIPTION OR ATTACH A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: BRIEF DF. fGRFT10~ OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL ~ OF THE PROJECT SrTE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS: m ,~,~.l,f ~'~"~'~'3 ~,w'~, '-~1%'¥~" ~"~ '~"' ~.~8,'~'~'"-'" I. C~:)MPREHEN~IVE GENERAL R. AN W Ill)ACE AND ~ONtF. RVATION Chegk Ire ai~l),(,~ixi-'m al~lic~n(~) I)ek~ end prc=.$ .-y~Qi,/. !~ Al(~lWtdlhepn)Jm.Mbin'MNM~mO.n~'. C(~p~e [~cUc~ ,I,W (A, B and D mly).V and Vt. eb(~ Cc.,,Wt 8eclk~ K N (& B, end E mlly~ V Ind VI. ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS AND RE6OURCE$ A~SE~44ENT O#iCll Elsentill NelmlI-High ~ Norroll-Low Rilk HAZARDS Alqu~-Pdo4o Spe(~ mudM or Courdy F~dt ~ Zonel (R0. Vl.1) NA PS U R (Iq0. Vt.3) Uq~dscUc~ Potent~ Zone (F'~0. Vt.1) NA $ PS U R (Irig. Vl.4) Gro~n0 Zone (Fig Vt.1) NA $ I:'S U R Fig. Vl.5) ~ (Riv. Co. 8430 $c,~e Slope Ivl~o,) 15. -- I. and~icle Rik Zone (Riv. Co. ~00 $c~Je NA $ PS U R (Fig. Vt.6) Rockllll 1,4~.lrcl (Of~Jte If~lp lotion) 17. Con,~'vstion Se~viM ~ Surveys) 19. ~ Ero~<~ (U.$.D.A. Soil Con~.vm,:)~ 20. Sewlce Soil Suwe),B) 21. ~ W~KI Er~ & Blowwand (Iq0. Vt.1, 22. Oral. 460, Sec. 142lOrd. M4) 2& r~ ~ k~x~d~bon ~ (Iq0. V~.7) 24. ~ U R 12..J~ Airpod Node (Fig. 11.16.5, U.18.11 · Vt.12 · 1004 AJCUZ Ripoft, M.A.F.B.) ,C~ I~ A B C D (FiO, ~A.11) 13.Rlilro~cI ~ (Iqo. Vt.13 - Vt. 16) j~NA A B C D (Fio. Vt. 11 ) 14. Highwly Noff, e (F~. Vt.17. Vt.29) NA A B C D (Fig, Vt.11 ) Other Noise NA A B C D (Fig, Vt. 11 ) Project G~ted No~e Affecting Node S~mJtJve Utes (Fig. Vt.11) NoM $ef~tive Prodect (Fig. Vt.11 ) Air Ouidity Imp~'ts From Project Wirer Ou~ity Iml~Ct~ FrOm Project ~ ~If~litiv~ tO Water Quidfly HIZArClO~,~ kMter~Js ~d Wlstes I'izJrdou~ F'~ AJt~ (Fig. Vt30- VI.31) Other RESOURCES In MNmMm~/%_mm~m IMIodc ~ ~. VI~ - VL33) ~ ~P~._ VI.32 - VL~ & VIM - VI.M) for Lind Ul4 8ultlblllty and Noise Acceptability bungs my I. MMjllbie R - RMbitl~ A - Geherllly,t;clpLible ~mondy Acaepmbi C - (bristly I.Ir~:Dmp'-qie D - Land UM DicwwNed Go For IN proMc~, inic~Me w~ · yes (Y) or no (N) whelhM e~y public twClitMs IrKI/M letvices ~sues rrkly IJ~fi~c~n~ty ~ Or be Ifflclecl by the p, OC~:111. AJl ~ ~ ire conl~inecl in the Comprehensive 04nerll I~1~. For Iny iliue n~d'k4d yes CO, write c~ sources, ~gencim ~,/kYli~s of bct, &'KI rn~t~tion me~ums unOer Section V. PUBliC FACIUTIES AND SERVICES N.I-IV.11. i k~ Pinned & n;q~,d ~) N.12 - N.13) ~) ~~~) ~ N.18 · w. le) ~ N.l? - N.18) N.1?- N.18) ~ N.17- N.18) 10..~ Ecl~elth;n Trills (Fig N. 19 - N.?.4/ Co. ~X) Sc~e Equ~t. r~n TmJI M~os) / ~ N2S - IV26) :2~3~ Lblde8 (Fig. N.17 - N.18) ~ ~'ln,,ic iI (F~O. N.17 - N.18) 14.J~=L Aiq)om (FIG. ILl&2- 1.1&4. i7' C:~y Sob.n, d k~iwce N. LAND USE DE'TERMINATI~,~, ~. I D.1 ~ born D.2, ~11 Ih~ dlflemnoe be ~i;0~,~d ~t ~ :~ev~le; ,grit ~aOe? Exi~in: 4. C(x'r~v~ily ~ clesignation(s): S. Is the ~c¢~su~f project consisterd with t~e policies and designations of ~ Commu~ Ptan.'? If no(, explain: 6. Ii Ihe ~'c)cx:,eal compatiW with existing and pmooeed aurTounding land uses? II not, explain: ~/~/'~ 7. B~ed off ~ inltiaJ Itudy, is ihe proC01t' ~ with the Comp~mr~sive GeneraJ Pin? I ~ ,IflriY. i by SL'tM~ixliliuINumbirllQllilluisidlntl/yingincx)niitlncis: ~ E. I M Qr iwl (M Ire im;Mc~ Id~ il in m C)mn Sram md ~ ~ CG,~at~ the ~k~v~: ~ ¥. INFORMATION J~I~.IIlICE: qNOING$ OF FACT AND MrtlGATIO A. ADDITIONAL I~IFORMATION RE(~,NRED BEFORE ENVIRONMENTAL AS,~,~MENT CAN BE COM~D: DATE DATE ADEOUACY ~E~/ INFORMAI~ON INFORMATIO~ INFORM~T~N NO. REOUIRED REOUESTED RECEIVED B. For Mch io~ue ~ y~ (Y) un~M Sections IILB ~ IV.B. klenU~ 1he Section I~l i&tue number and 0o the f~fowino. in the format m ehown below: ~ECTION/ NO. ~4JRCES, AGENCIES CONSULTED, FINDINGS OF FACT, MITIGATION MEASURES: ¥. INFC~MATION ~OURCE$, PINDINO$ OF FACT AND MITIGATION MEASURES (oontlnuec~) SOURCES. AGENCIES CONSULTED. FINDINGS OF FACT. MITIGATION MEASURES: VL ENVIIK)NMENTAL IMPAG'r DETERMINATION: CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT PARCEL MAP / TRACT NO. 2q239 DATE 10/16/90 **IMPROVEMENTS FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE SECURITY Streets and Drainaqe $ 4,260. O0 12,437. O0 -0- 17,000. O0 Water $ Sewer TOTAL $ *Maintenance Retention (10% for one year) *(or Bonds if work is completed) Monument Security City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs RCFC Drainage Fee Due Signalization Mitigation Fee - SMD ~9 Road and Bridge Benefit Fee Other Developer Fees Plan Check Fee Due Inspection Fee Due Monument Inspection Fee Fee Paid To Date (Credit) Total Inspection/Plan Check Fees Due MATERIAL & LABOR SECURITY $ 2,130.00 $ 6,219.00 $ -0- $ 8, SO0. O0 $1,700.O0 $ 1,584.00 $ -0- $ 5,910.00 $ 450.00 $ -0- $ -O- $ $ $ $ $ 1,811.00 731.48 -0-- 2,157.20 385.28 All improvements have been constructed. No bonding of improvements is required. STAFFRPT\ PM2 4 2 3 9 VAC. VA¢. ~ ' ' '""'"/ TAR' ',~-,,G.,,~,;~,--,' ' , ~~ - '. GRADED~/CN, PROF BLDG ~ , .. ~'.. _~:. : BANK ,/ · VAC. APTS -I VA¢ I RES RES -, VAC. HILLS V&C. ] ~ I~INCHO CALIF. DEVELOPMENT CO. '- ,Mg4t.m*L ~ BL. e~S Pl- o2 - ~-Id. lt. Pl SSAltM. ~-O-O~ Omen Iv DGT. 4GJ TR23~2 R-R ~ '~C-11C-P EXISTING ZONING R-3-3,000 A-2-20 R-3,-4,000 SP 180 C-11C-P R-3 3-4,300 't ' R-A-5 SP 180 I 3 R '2-3,000 R-2 R-4 R-2 R-R M-SC I"" BOO' · C,,Z 477S SP 180 ule ~7 AC. TO 4 PARC:EL Dist. RANCHO .... -Sep. IXll. ,,,-'"'~d~m'.m', -'P-'XJ~- ·,,-'m~-t"":~ ' '---~-',;';~-:' .""'~'-"" Cire,dMion 15 FREEWAY VAR. Element RANCHO CALIF. ART. 110' Rd. lk. PG. S6AI)lle 2-8-89 I)rmm R-I RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBDIVISION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23992 A~ENDED NO. I DATE: 3-1S-Bg STANDARD CONDITIONS The subdivider shall defend, indomnify, and hold harmless the County of Riverside, its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the County of Riverside or its agents, officers, or ~ployees to attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the County of Riverside, its advisory agencies, appeal boards or legislative body concerning Tract No. 23992 Amendment No. 1 which action is brought about within the time period provided for in California Government Code Section 66499.37. The County of Riverside will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding against the County of Riverside and will cooperate fully in the defense. If the County fails to promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding or fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the subdivider shall not, thereafter, be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the County of Riverside. The tentative subdivision shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act and to all the requirements of Ordinance 460, Schedule A, unless modified by the conditions listed below. This conditionally approved tentative mp will expire tw~ years after County of Riverside Board of Supervisors approval date, unless extended as provided by Ordinance 460. The final mmp shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor sub~ect to all the requirements of the State of California Subdivision Map Act and Ordinance 460. The subdivider shall submlt one copy of · soils ~eport to the Riverside County Surveyor's Office and two copies to the Department of Building and Safety. The report shall address the soils stability and geological conditions of the site. If any grading is proposed, the subdivider shall submit one print of a comprehensive grmdtng plan to the De~rtment of Building and S~fety. The plan shall comply ~tth the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, as amended by Ordinance 457 mnd_.ms may be additionally provided for in these conditions of mpl)roval TEITAI'[¥£ ~ I0. Z3992 ~-nded #o. ! Conditions of Appr~al Page 2 e 10. 11. 12. !3. 14. 15. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Department of Building and Safety prior to cmm~encement of any grading outside of county maintained road right of way. Any delinquent property taxes shall be paid prior to recordation of the t:inml map. The subdivider shall comply with the street improvement recommendations outlined in the Riverside County Road Departamnt's letter dated 12-B-BB a copy of which is attached. Legal access as required by Ordinance 460 shall be provided from the tract map boundary to a County maintained road. All road easements shall be offered for dedication to the public and shall continue in force until the governing body accepts or abandons such offers. All dedications shall be free from all encumbrances as approved by the Road Ca,,,issioner. Street names shall be subject to approval of the Road Conz~issioner. Easements, when required for roadway slopes, drainage facilities, utilities, etc., shall be shown on the final map if they are located within the land division boundary. All offers of dedication and conveyances shall be submitted and recorded as directed by the County Surveyor. Water and sewerage disposal facilities shall be installed in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Riverside County Health Department's letter dated 11-4-BB a copy of which is attached. The subdivider shall comply with the flood control reco~rnendations outlined by the Riverside County Flood Control Otstrict'$ letter dated 12-3-8B a copy of which is attached. If the land division lies within an adopted flood control drainage mrem pursumnt to Section 10.25 of Ordinmnce 460, mpproprtate fees for the construction of mrea drainage facilities si~ll be collected by the ~md C~tsstoner. The subdivider shall comply ~th 'the ftr~ Improvement reconrnendations outlined in the County Fire 14mrshal's letter dated 12-$-88 m copy of which ts attached. Subdivision phasing, Including mny Pro!~.sed comon open space mrea tmprovment phasing, if applicable, snell be subject to Plann!ng Department mpprovml. ~my PrDposed phasing shall provide for mdequmte vehtculmr access to mll lots in each phase, Ind shmll substmnttmlly conform to the intent and purpose of the subdivision approval. TDITATXVE TRA~ B0. 23992 Amnded Mo. 1 Conditions of Approval Page 3 17. The sutxltvtder and all successors tn interest shall comply ~th the provisions of I)evelol~ent Agreement #o. 3 and Specific ~lan 18. Lots created by this subdivision shall comply w~th the following: a. All lots shall have a minimum size of 4.5 acres gross. b. Lots created by this subdivision shall be in conformance with the development standards of the S~ zone. c. When lots are crossed by major public utility easements, each lot shall have a net usable area of not less than 3,600 square feet, exclusive of the utility easement. d. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a weed-free condition and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved by the Director of Building and Safety. e. Trash bins, loading areas and incidental storage areas shall be located away and visually screened from surrounding areas with the use of block walls and landscaping. f. Bike racks in sufficient quantity shall be provided in convenient locations to facilitate bike access to the project area. lg. Prior to RECORDATION of the final map the following conditions shall satisfied: 20. a. Prior to the recordation of the final map the applicant shall submit written clearances to the Riverside County Road and Survey Department that all pertinent requirements outlined in the attached approval letters from the following agencies have been met: /~t~-county Fire Department .... -~ounty Health Department ~F~county Flood Control -~ounty Planning Department Prior to recordation of the final subdivision map, the subdivider shall submit the following docunents to the Planning Department for review, which documents shall be subJect to the approval of that department and the Office of the County Counsel: .... 1) A declaration ef covenants, conditions and restrictions; and A sample document conveying title to the purchaser of an individual lot or unit which provides that the declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions is incorporated therein by reference. TEKTATIVE TRA~ IlO. 23992 AaL~ded No. ! Conditions of Approval Page 4 The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions submitted for review shall (a) provide for a minimum term of 60 years, (b) provide for the establishment of a property owners' association comprised of the owners of each individual lot or unit, (c) provide for ownership of the connon area by either the property owners' association or the owners of each individual lot or unit as tenants in ca,.,~n and (d} contain the following provisions verbatim: "Notwithstanding any provision tn this Declaration to the contrary, the following provision shall apply: The property whets' association established herein shall mmnage and continuously ~mtntain the 'cmznon area', ~re particularly described on Exhibit 'A' attached hereto, and shall not sell or transfer the 'cmznon area', or any part thereof, absent the prior written consent of the Planning Oaractor of the County of Riverside or the County's successor-in-interest. The property owners' association shall have the right to assess the owners of each individual lot or unit for the reasonable cost of maintaining the 'common area' and shall have the right to lien the property of any such owner who defaults in the payment of a maintenance assessment. An assessment lien, once created, shall be prior to all other liens recorded subsequent to the notice of assessment or other document creating the assessment lien. This Declaration shall not be terminated, 'substantially' aMnded or property deannexed therefrom absent the prior written consent of the Planning Director of the County of Riverside or the County's successor-in-interest. A proposed amendnent shall be considered 'substantial' if it affects the extent, usage or mtntenance of the 'common area'. In the event of any conflict between this Declaration and the Articles of Incorporation, the Bylaws or the property owners' association Rules and Regulations, if any, this Declaration shall control.' Once approved, the declaration of cewenants, conditions and restrictions shall be recorded at the same time that the final mmp is recorded. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the developer shall submit a Fuel Modification Plan and/or ¥tldltfe Fire Hazard Reduction Plan to the Fire Deparment and the Planning Department for approval The plans shall be certified by & landscape architect and ~ordtnated '~tth subdivision landscaping plans as necessary. TEWi'ATIY£ TRACT NO. Z3992 Mended No. ! Conditions of Approval Page S The developer shall comply ,(!th the follc~tng parkay landscaping conditions: 1) Prior to recordation of the final map the developer shall file an application with the County for the formation of or annexation to, a parkway maintenance district for Tract No. 23992 in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, unless the project is within an existing parkway maintenance district. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall secure approval of proposed landscaping and irrigation plans from the County Road and Planning Department._ All landscaping and irrigation plans and specifications shall be prepared in a reproducible format suitable for permanent filing with the County Road Department. The developer shall post a landscape performance bond which shall be released concurrently with the release of subdivision performance bonds, guaranteeing the viability of all landscaping whic~ will be installed prior to the assumption of the maintenance responsibility by the district. The developer, assignees, shall maintenance until district. the developer's successors-in-interest or be responsible for all parkway landscaping such time as maintenance is taken over by the 6) The developer shall comply with the standards and exhibits in Specific Plan 180. Z3. The developer shall be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of all slopes, landscaped areas and irrigation systems until such time as those operations are the responsibilities of other parties as approved by the Planning Director. 24.'. Street lights shall be provided within the subdivision tn accordance with the standards of O~dtnance 461 and the following: l) Concurrently with the filing of subdivision tmprovment plans with the bad Deparlsnent, the developer shall secure approval of the proposed street 1tght layout first from the bad Department's trmfftc engineer and then frem the appropriate uttlt~ Furveyor. Following approval of the street 11ghttng layout by the R~ad Oepertment's trafftc engineer,.. the. dev. e.1oper_ shall also file..an application with LAFCO (or nine TOIleTIOn O? & $t~t lighting district, or annexation to a extsttn9 lighting' district, unless the site.is within an existing lighting district. TEM~AlrIVE TRACT I10. Z~J9'Z Amended No. 1 Conditions of Approval Page $ Prior to recordation of the final map, the developer shall secure conditional approval of the street lighting application from LAFCO, unless the site is w~thtn an existing lighting district. 4) All street 1t~lhts and other outdoor lighting shall be shown on electrical pians submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check approval and shall comply with the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No. 655 and the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan. ~25. Prior to recordation of the final map, an Environmental Constraints Sheet (£CS} shall be prepared in conjunction with the final map to delineate ~;~ identified environmental concerns and shall be permanently filed with the' office of the County Surveyor,, A copy of the ECS shall be transmitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The approved ECS shall be forwarded with copies of the recorded final map to the Planning Department and the Department of Building and Safety. 26. The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 'County Geologic Report No. 563F was prepared for this property and is on file at the Riverside County Planning Department. Specific items of concern in the report are as follows: 'ground shaking, faulting." 27. The following note shall be placed on the Environmental Constraints Sheet: 'Structures for human occupancy shall not be allowed in the delineated constraint area.' 28. Prior to the issuance of GRADING PERMITS the follc~dng conditions shall be satisfied: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall comply with Ordinance No. $63 by paying the fee required by that ordinance. Should Ordinance No. 663 be superseded by the provisions of a Habitat Conservation Plan prior to the payment of the fees required by Ordinance #o. 633, the applicant shall pay the fee required under the Habitat Conservation Plan ms Implemented by County ordinance or resolution. th-tor to the issuance of grading permits detatled conanon open space area landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Oepar~nent approval for the phase of developnent in process. The plans shall be certified by a landscape architect, and shall provide for the following: 1. Permanent automatic irrigation systems shall be installed on all landscaped areas ~equtrtng irrigation. TERTATIVE TRACT I10. 23992 JmL-nded No. ! Conditions ~f Ai~roval Page 7 30: 2. Landscape screening where required shall be designed to be opaque up to a minimum height of six (6) feet at maturity. All utility service areas and enclosures shall be screened from view with landscaping and decorative barriers or baffle treatments, as approved by the Planning Director. Utilities shall be placed underground. Parkways and landscaped building setbacks shall be landscaped to provide visual screening or a transition into the primary use area of the site. Landscape elements shall include earth berming, ground cover, shrubs and specimen trees in conjunction with meandering sidewalks, benches and other pedestrian amenities where appropriate as approved by the Planning Department. 5. Landscaping plans shall incorporate the use of specimen accent trees at key visual focal points within the project. Where street trees cannot be planted within right-of-way of interior streets and project parkways due to insufficient road right-of-way, they shall be planted outside of the road right-of-way. 7. Landscaping plans shall incorporate native and drought tolerant plants where appropriate. All existing specimen trees and significant rock outcroppings on the subject property shall be shown on the project's grading plans and shall note those to be removed, relocated and/or retained. 9. All trees shall be minimum double staked. growing trees shal I be steel staked. Weaker and/or slow 10. The plans shall conform to those shown in ~pecific Plan 173. If the project is to be phased, prior to the approval of grading permits, an overall conceptual grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval. The plan shall be used as a guideline for subsequent detailed grading plans for individual phases of development and shall be include the following: 1. Techniques whtch .411 be utiltzed to prevent erosion and sedimentation during and after the grading process. Approximate time frames for gradtrig and identification of areas which may be graded during the higher probability rain months of ~anuary through Parch. TENTATIVE TRACT MO. ~.3992 Jmended No. 1 Conditions of Approva] Page 8 31. 3Z. 33. 34. 35. 36. 3. Preliminary pad and roadway elevations. 4. Areas of temporary grading outside of a particular phase. Driveways shmll be designed so ms not to exceed m fifteen (15) percent grade. Grading plans shall conform to Board adopted Hillside Development Standards: All cut and/or fill slopes, or individual combinmtions thereof, which exceed ten feet in vertical height shmll be ~difted by an appropriate combination of a special terracing (benchang) plan, increased slope ratio (i.e., 3:1), retaining ~r~lls, and/or slope planting combined with irrigation. All driveways shall not exceed a fifteen percent grade. All cut slopes located adjacent to ungrmded natural terrain and exceeding ten {10) feet in vertical height shall be contour-graded incorporating the following grading techniques: 1) The angie of the graded slope shall be gradually adjusted to the angle of the natural terrain. 2} Angular forms shall be discouraged. The graded form shall reflect the natural rounded terrain. 3) The toes and tops of slopes shall be rounded with curves with radii designed in proportion to the total height of the slopes where drainage mnd stability permit such rounding. Where cut or fill slopes exceed 300 feet in horizontal length, the horizontal contours of the slope shall be curved in a continuous, undulating fashion. Igturml features such ms mter courses, speci~mn trees mnd significant rock outcrops shmll be protected tn the siting of individual building pads on final grading plmns. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the developer shall provide evidence to the Director of Building mnd Safety thmt mll adJmcent off-site manufactured slopes have zmcorded slope ~se~nts and that slope m~tntarmnce r~sponstbtltttes hmve been msstgned ms mpprove~ by the Director of Building and Safety. Prior to the tssumnce of grading permits, a qualified paleontologist shall be retained by the developer for consultation and c~,,~nt on the proposed grading Mth respect to potential paleontologtcml impacts. Should the paleontologist find the potential is high for impact to significant resources, m pre-grmde meettrig between the paleontologist and the TERTATIYE TRJ~'T I10. Z3992 h~nded #o. ! Conditions of Approval Page 9 excavation and grading contractor shall be arranged. When necessary, the paleontologist or representative shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of fossils. 37. Prior to the issuance of BUILDING PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: a. The project shall com~ly with the requirements of Agreement No. 3. Development b. All building plans for all new structures shall incorporate all required elements from the subdivision's approved fire protection plan as approved by the County Fire Marshal. c. All dwelling to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed and constructed with fire retardant (Class A} roofs as approved by the County Hre ~rshall. d. Prior to the issuance of building permits, composite landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Department approval. The plans shall address all areas and aspects of the tract requiring landscaping and irrigation to be installed including, but not limited to, parkway planting, street trees, slope planting, and individual front yard landscaping per the requirements of Specific Plan No. e. All dwellings to be constructed within this subdivision shall be designed and constructed with fire retardant (Class A} roofs as approved by the County Fire I~rshal. f. I~of-mounted equipment shall be shielded from view of surrounding property. 38. Prior to the issuance of OCCUPANCY PERMITS the following conditions shall be satisfied: a. Prior to the final building inspection approval by the Building and Safety Departzent, a six foot high decorative block wall shall be constructed along the top of slope at the rear of lots 1 and 2 along Interstate 15 per the requirements of Specific Plan 180 and the acoustical ~eport. The required ~mll shall be subject to the approval of the Director of the Department of Building and Safety and the Planning Dt rector. b. All landscaping and irrigation shall be Installed in accordance with approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. seasonal conditions do no~pemtt plantin§, interim landscaping and erosion control msures shall be utilized as approved by the Planning Director and the Director of Building and Safety. TERTATIVE TRACT frO. ~Jgg2 /mended No. 1 Conditions of Approval Page 10 e® fe he All landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with approved plans and shall be verified by & Planning Department field inspection. Notwithstanding the preceding conditions, the acoustical study shall be adhered to for noise attenumtton purposes appltcmble. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed throughout the subdivision in accordance with the standards of Ordinance 461 and Specific Plan No. 173. Street trees shall be planted throughout the subdivision in accordance with the standards of Ordinance 460 and Specific Plan No. 173. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed throughout the subdivision in accordance with the standards of Ordinance 46! and Specific Plan No. 180. Street trees shall be planted throughout the subdivision in accordance with the standards of Ordinance 460 and Specific Plan No. 1BO. RG:mp:mcb L. LeRoy D. Smoot lode) COmmaSiC*alii · CC)UN~' $UIYeYO~ OFFICE OF ROAD COMMISSIONER 6 COU,VTY SURVEYOR December 8, 1988 Riverside ~unty Planning Co~nission 4080 Lemon Street Riverside, CA92501 Re: Tract Hap 23992 - Amend Schedule A - Team 1 Ladies and Gentlemen: With respect to the conditions of approval for ~e referenced tentative land division map, the Road Department recon~nends that the landdivider provide the following street improvement plans and/or road dedications in accordance with Ordinance 460 and Riverside County Road Improvement Standards (Ordinance 461). It ts understood that the tentative map correctly shows acceptable centerline profiles, all existing easements, traveled ways, and drainage courses with appropriate Q's, and that their omission or unacceptability may require the nap to be resubmitted for further consideration. These Ordinances and the following conditions are essential parts and a requirement occurring in ONE is as binding as though occurring in all. They are intended to .be complementary and to describe the conditions for a complete design of the improvement. All questions regarding the true mantag of the conditions shall be referred to the Road Con~nJssJoner's Office. The landdivider shall protect downstrfim pmperties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns, i.e., concentra- tion of diversion of flow. Protection shall be provideo by constructing adequate drainage facilities including enlarging existing facilities or by securing I drainage easement or bm~p both. M1 drainage easemats shall be sho.n on t~e final and noted as follws: 'Drainage hsemnt - no building, obstmctJons, or encroachfaeries by land ~llls are allowed". The protection shall be ~s approved by tAe Road Department. The lenddivider shall accept end properly dispose of all offsite drainage flm~tng on~or~rough abe site. In tAe event the J~oad Commissioner p emits the use of $tmets for drainage purposes, the I~OVtSions of A~cJcle X! of Ordinance ~. 460 ulll apply. Should the quantities exceed the stmet capacity or the use of streets be prohibited for drainage purposes, the subdivider $hall provide adequate drainage facilities as approved by the Road i)epa~tment. Tracl~ Flap 23gg~ - Amend December 8, ~gBB ~age Z ¸3. Be ge Mmjor drainage Is Involved on this landdivision and its resolution shall be as approved by the Road Department. Tierra Vista Road and "A" Street shall be improved within the dedicated right of way in accordance with County Standard No. 103, Section A. (4¢'/~6'). ¥nez Road shall be Improved within the dedicated right of way in accordance with County Standard No. 101, {76'/100'} (including remainder parcels) or as approved by the Road ConTntssioner. Tne landdivider shall comply with the Celttans recon~endations as outlined tn their letter dated November lB, lgSB prior to the recordation of the final map. The landdivider shall provide utility clearance from Rancho Calif. Water District prior to the recordation of the final map. A copy of the final map shall be submitted to Celttans, District 08, Post Office Box 231, San Bernardino, California g2403; Attention: Project Development for review and approval prior to recordation. The maximum centerline gradient shall not exceed 15%. The minimum centerline radii shall be as approved by the Road Departaent. Rancho California Road shall be Improved with concrete curb and gutter located 43 feet from centerline and match up asphalt concrete paving; reconstruction; or resurfactng of existing paving as determined by the Road Commissioner within a SS foot half width dedicated right of my in accordance with County Standard No. 100. All driveways shall-conform to the applicable Riverside County Standards and shall be shown on the street Improvement plans. Uhen blockvails are req~trod to be constructed on tap of slope, a debris retention mll shall be constructed at the street right of my line to prevent silttrig of sldewmlLl as approved by the Road Commissioner. December Page 3 14. Concrete sidewalks shall be constructed throughout the landdivision tn accordance with County Standard No. 400 and 40! (curb stdewalk). ~tor ~ the recordation of the final map, the developer shall & deposit with the Riverside County Road Department, a cash sum of $1¢0.00 per dwelling unit as mitigation for traffic signal impacts. Should the developer choose to defer the tim of paint, he may enter into a ~rttten agreement with the County deferring said pavement ~ the time of Issuance of a ~tldtng ~rmtt. 16. Improvement plans shall ~ I~sed upon a centerline profile extending a minimum of 300 feet beyond the pro~ect ~x3undarles at a grade and alignment as app~ved by the Riverside County Road ~n~isstoner. Completion of road t~rov~nents does not imply acceptance for maintenance by County. 17. Electrical and commntcmttons trenches shall be provided in accordance with Ordinance 461, Standard 817. 18. 'asphalttc emulsion (fog seal) shall be applied not less than fourteen days following placement of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallon per square yard. Asphalt emulsion shall conform to Sections 37, 39 and 94 of the State Standard Specifications. lg. Corner cutbacks in conromance with County Standard No. 805 shall be shown on the final map and offered for dedication. 20. ~ot access shall be restricted on Rmncho California Road and Ynez Road and so noted on the final mp with the exception of one access opening on Ynez Road opposite and coincident the center line of Tierra ¥tstl ROad. 21. Landdivisions creating cut or fill slopes adjacent to the streets shall provide eroston control, sight distance control and slope easements Is ipproved by the Road Department. 22. All centerline lnter~ecttons shall be at 90' with a mtnlnum SO' tangent masured frun flow line. 23. The strmet design and improvement concept of this project shall be coordinated utth S~ 180, MB ~09/8~-8Z and PP IOSTg. 24. Street lighttrig shall be ~equtred tn accordance with Ordinance 460 end 46! througl)o.ut ~e suIxlivlslon. The CounSy SerYtce Area (CSA) Administrator de~erllnes whether thts p~oposal qualifies under an Tract !~ Z3992 - Amnd #~ i)ece;be~ 8, ~g88 Page 4 26. existing assessment district or not. If not, the land owner shall file an application with LAFCO for annexation into or creation of a "Lighting Assessment District" in accordance with Governmental Code Section 56000. &11 private and public entrances and/or intersections opposite this project shall be coordinated with this project and shown on the street Improvement plans. A striping plan is required for ~ncho C~ltfornia ~ad and Ynez ~ad, me removal of the existing striping shall be the respon- sibility of the appltclnt, Traffic signing and striping shall be done by County fo~es with Ill Incurred costs borne by the applicant, Prior to recordation of the final map, or mny phase thereof, the existing driveway located on the east side of Ynez R~ad approxi- mately 80 feet south of the centerlfne of proposed 'A' Street shall be relocated opposite and coincident the centerline of 'A' Street or shall be closed as approved by the Road Con~nissioner. GH:lh ~1on Engineer Riverside County Flanntng Department · County ~lBIntstrattve' Center RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONS£RVATION DISTRier Rfverstde,.C&11fornt. a : .... ..' Attention: Regtonal Tim No. ~_~' Area: '?'~m.c~l~ V~llex Re: No. I Ve..have revlewed this case and have the following countries: 'Except for nutsance nature local runoff v~tch..may traver~e'porttons"of the property the project Is considered free from ordlnar~ stom flood hazard. Howewere a storm of' unusual m,gnttude could cause some aamage. New construc- tion should comply vlth all applicable ordinances. The topography of the area conststs of well defined rtdges and natural water- courses which traverse the property. There ts adequate Ifil outside Q~thl natural watercourses for building sites. The natural watercourses should be kept free of buildings and obstructions In order to matntatn the natural dratnage patterns of the area and to prevent flood damage to new buildings. A note should be placed Dean environmental constraint sheet stattng, "All new buildings. shall be floodproofed by elevating the ftntshed floors a mtntmum of ]8 tnches above adjacent ground surface. Erosion protection shall be provtded for mobile home supports." Thfs 'project ts'fn the Area dratnage plan fees shall be paid in accordance with the applicable r~les and regulations. The proposed zoning ts consistent wtth extstlng flood hazards. Some flood control facilities or floodproofing may be requtred to fully develop to the tn~11ed density. The Dlstrlct's report dated :T~,¢ ~e, II#1 ts s1111 current for this project. The Distr$ct does not object to the proposed minor change. The attached comehis apply. Very truly ~ours, CO: KENN.~. L. EO~AROS C~t'efjEnglnee,~ ~'HN H. KASHUBA ~nto~ Clvt1 ~nglneer RIVERSIDE COUNTY Fl-OOD CONTROl- AND WATEi~ C:ONSEI~VA?ION DISTIller June 20, 1988 Riverside ~ounty Planning Department County Administrative Center Rive~side, California Attentions. Specific Plans. Kathy ' Ok floral Ladies and Gentlemens Re s Vesting Tract 23371 This is a proposal to divide about 400 acres in the Temecula Valley area. The site is along the east side of Margarita Road between Rancho California Road and La Serena Way. This proJe¢~ is &portion of Specific Plan 199 (gargarita Village). " OffsAte flows from two ma~or watersheds are tributary to the ' site'e northeast and southeast corners. The applicant proposes to accept and convey the flows from,he northeast with a storm drain system, and the flows from the southeast with a golf course grass channel from where the flows cross under Rancho California Road in a culvert. .site flows would be drained into the above two systems with reefs and storm drains according to their natural drainage pat- tern. According to the applicant, the site would be roughly graded with offsite and oneits flows directed into the proposed golf course and temporary drainage facilities. This is allowable if the natural drainage patterns are preserved and the temporary facilities have the 100 year storm capacities. Following are the Dis,ricers reconnendationst This tract is located within the limits of the #urrieta C~ook/Temecula ValleyArea'Drainage Plan for which drainage fees have been adopted by the Board. Drainage fees shall be paid as set forth under the provisions of the 'Rules and Regulations for Administration of Area Drainage Plans', amended February 16, 1988s Drainage fees shall be paid to the Road Commissioner as part of the filing for record of the subdivision final map or parcel map, or if the recording of a final parcel map is waived, drainage fees shall be paid as a condition of the Waiver prior to recording a certificate of compliance evidencing the waiver of the parcel map~ or Riverside County Planning Department -2- June 20, 1988 b. At the option of the land divider, upon filing a re- ~" quired affidavit requesting defermenS of the Paymens of fees, the drainage fees may be paid to the Building Director at the time of issuance of a grad- ing permit or building permit for each approved par- cel0~hichever may be .first obtained. a.fter.'the. recording oft he subdivision finalmap or parcel. amp;' "' provided however, this option to defer the fees may not be exercised for &aM parcel where grading or structures have been initiated on the parcel within the prior 3 year period, or permits for either ac- tivity have been issued on that parcel which remain' active.. . Pads should be elevated at 'least 1 fo~t ahoY0 the'100 year flood plain in the adjacent drainage facilities. Erosion protection should be provided for all fill slopes exposed to the potential erosion hazards. 3.* Hydrological and hydraulic calculations for both the ~m- persty and ultimate drainage facilities should be sulm~tt- ted to the District for approval. -~ 4. Oneire drainage facilities located outside of road right of way should be contained within drainage easements sho~n on the final map. A note should be added to the final map stating, ~Drainage easements shall be:,kept.free' of bulldinge'and,obstructionsU. Offsite drainage facilities should be located within publicly dedicated drainage easements obtained from the affected property o~ners. The documents should be re- corded and a coplf submitted to the District prior to recordation of the final map. 0 All lots should be graded to drain to the adjacent street or an adequate outlet. The lO year storm flo~ should be contained within the curb and the 100 year storm flo~ should be contained within the street right of way. ~hen either of these criteria is exceeded, ad~ltional drainage facilities should be installed. Drainage facilities outlaSting sump conditions should be designed to convey the tributary 100 year storm flows. Additional emergency escape should also be provided. !riverside County Planning Department Rot Vesting Tract 23371 -3- ~une 20, 1988 11. The property*s street and lot grading should be designed ~n s manner that perpetuates the existing natural 'drainage patterns with respect to tributary drainage exea~ .ou~let point's and outlet cond~tions,.otherwise, a drainage easement should be'ob~ained from the.affected:.. property owners for the release of concentrated or di- verted etor~ flows. A COlmY of the recorded drainage easement should be submitted to the District for review prior to the recordation of the final map. If the tract is built in phases, each phase shall.be pro- tected from the' l. in 100 year tributary et0rm flows. ... Temporary erosion control measures should be implemented induedlately following rough grading to prevent deposition of debris onto downstream properties or drainage facilities. ., Development of this property should be coordinated with the development of adjacent properties to ensure that watercourses remain unobstructed and stormwaters are not~ diverted from one watershed to another. This may require the construction of temporary drainage facilities or offsite construction and grading. 13. Evidence of a viable maintenance mechanism should be sub- mitted to the District and County for review and approval prior to recordation of the final map. 14. A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans and final map along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic cal- culations should be submitted to the District via the Road Department for review and approval prior to recorda- tion of the final map. Grading plans should be approved prior to issuance of grading permits. Questions concerning this matter may be referred to Robert Chiang of this office at 714/787-2333, Very truly yours, Stick Engineering Company KENNETH L. EDWARDS ~J~HS a. I<ASHU~;A ~enior Civil Engineer RC~pln Riverside County Plan~n9 D~par trx~t County A~inis~ra~ive itivcrside, ~liforni~ Be: 5Xact 23992 Amc~tcd [*'~o. 2 Fo]lu~9 are the Dis-cricc's reccrm~ndacions: B i verr,.i.,4e County Planning l~~r. A~-.ndc-d I~. 2 ® ~ainagc-. fa:i!i%ies outletting ~ a~ndi~i~ns ~hould be ~c:iLmed c~-~-~y ~ %ribu-.ary 100 y~.r storm flews. cape should also be ~rovided. e ~7~ culverts beneath %~m e~ran~e and the fire acce$~ roads ~ the ~ast side of Yne-- F~d should L~. designed. ~ c~nvcy ~he %ribu~.ry 100 year fl~. co. .~.~. Suite 405 92201 ~2..8886 · 1 COOPERA~ WTTH 11-rE CALIFORNIA D="'PAR1%qENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION RAY HI~RARD 12-6-88 TO: PLANNING DEPARTKENT ~: ~ 23992 - ~~ With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division, the Fire Department rec~ends the folioring fire protection measures be provided in accordance with Riverside County O~dinances and/or recognized fire protection standards: FIRE PROTECTION The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 2500 GPH and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 1500 GPM for hours duration at 20 PSI residual operating pressure. Approved super fire hydrants, (6x4x2x2~ shall be located at each street intersection and spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a hydrant. Applicant/developer shall ~urnish one copy of the eater system plans to the Fire Department for review. Plans shall conior~ to fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and, the system shall meet the fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local eater company eith the followins certification: "I certify that the design of the eater system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Liverside County Fire Dept.'* The required water system tncludtus fire hydrants mhaI1 be Znaca~led and accepted by the appropriate eater agency prior Co any combustible buLldLu~ material being placed on an Individual lot. All queattons resardtng the -shin! of the tomStoLons ahLU be referred to the Ptre Department FXo,~nZ and Eu~naer~.u~ mtL[f. IATHONDR. CbZef Fire Department Planner Georp 3;atun, Deputy Fire llarshal _ FROM: ~.E:: County of Riverside 2tverside County Planning Dept. DATE: December 19, 1988 TRACT HAl' 23992, AI'ii3R)ED NO. I E~viromaental Health Services has raylaved Tract l~ap 23992, Amended No. 1. Our current co. ants rill rain as stated in our letter dated November &, 1988. SH:tac Administrative Center · 1777 Atlanta Avenue Riverside, CA 92507 December 7, 1988 Riverside County Planning Department Attention~ Uzma Siddique County Administrative Center 4080 Lemon Street Riverside, CA 92501 RE: Tract 23992, Amend #2 Ladies and Gentlemen: The Land Use Division of the Department of Building and Safety has the following comments and conditions: If the proposed project is to be "phased," an approved exhibit indicating which structures and on-site improvements are required for each "phase" should be required. An additional plot plan or an approved exhibit for on-site signage will be required. The site is located in a special studies zone. Refer to Geological Study 9G!99. Prior to the issuance of building permits, written clearance is required from the following: · Elsinore Union High School District · Temecula Unified School District Swia~ing pool to be fenced according to requirement specified in Ordinance 421.1. Xf approved elevations are required from the Planning Department the approved plans must be submitted to the Land Use Division concurrently with submittal of structural plans for review. Actministration (714} 682-8840 · (714) 787-2020 Planning Department Tract 23992 Page 2 Prior to acceptance of structural plans for Building and Safety review, one complete set of approved conditions from Planning Department must be attached. Prior to issuance of building permits, lighting must conform with the Mount Palomar Lighting Plan, Zone B per Ordinance 655. Very truly yours, Thomas H. Ingram, Director DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY NormannA. Lostbom, Land Use Division Deputy DirWd t c ¢ount of l l e side DEPAJ~'TT, IEi','T OF BUILDING AND SAFETY Planning - Fil~ Gradir~ - Building and Safety 23992 In order to obtain a grading permit for this project, the following information will be needed. 1. Provide hydrology/hydraulic data verifying that the proposed drainage facili- ies will handle a 100 year Q Storm flow. 2. Observe slope set backs per the Uniform Building Code and Ordinance 457. 3. Any drainage facility located wholly or partly off-site will need a recorded drainage easement for its location. 4. Provide evidence of approval for any existing on-site grading. 5. Conform to Board Resolution BB-61 for properties with in the subsidence area. 6. Please review Building and Safety forms 284-86 and include any applicable information there in on the grading plan. 7. The proposed retaining walls over 6 high or surcharged will need to be engineered. a. Provide a typical and engineered calc's for each wall height. b. A seperate permit is required for each wall height. The following shall be a condition of approval: 'Prior to the 'issuance of any building permit, the property owner shall obtain a grading permit and approval to construct from the Building and Safety Department.' DEPAKTHENT OF B~ILDING AND SAFETY COUNTY OF RIVEKSIDE ~KADING FERM'ITS A GRADING PERKIT I$ P~0UIK~D IF: A grading permi~ is required when at'least $0 cubic yards of earth is cu~, filled, or i~ported. A ~e=hod for es=~n=~g ~0 cubic yards ~s =o ~g~ne ~o full s~ze s=a=ion wagons parked end to ~d, ~d c~le=ely c~ered ~=h d~r=. A GRADING P~fIT I$ NOT I~0UIIt~D FO~: i grading permit is not required for agricultural grading done in connection with the raising of crops or animals, but no~ including grading for buildings or structures that require a building permit. The agricultural grader is required to fill ou~ an "igricultur&l Grading Form", available at all offices of the Department of lulldin~ and Safety, prior to any agricul~ural grading taking place. Other exemptions as outlined in County Ordinance &$7 and Chapter 70 of the Unifox'm Building Code, do no= require a grading permit. E2~VIRON~Eh~AL A$SESS.~'~ REOUI~S: An environ~ental assessment ~y be required accordint to the ~lifo~ia Environmen~al Equality Act of 1970 and any revisions to t~. The dete~a~ton of such ~ill be ~de by the ~verside County Pla~g Depar~en~. FLOOD ~ANA~EM~T EEQU!~TS: Flood ~nagemen= review ~ay be required if the proper=y is located in a 100 year flood zone per any flood m~p adop=ed by the Riverside Coun=y Board of Supervisors. .FEES: The fees for grading plan check and grading permits are based on ~he amount of ~terial ~ha~ is moved as outlined in Chapter 70 in ~he Uniform Building Code. The &cCual calculated fee is determined by using the largest figure of the proposed earth- work quanCi=y. A grading pe~it mmt be obtained before any grading can take place. Xf grading is done ~rAthou~ a pernit, the violator ~s required to eub~it grading plans prepared by &Registered Civil Engineer for grading plan check. · p~nal~y of double the normal fee in addition to an investigation fee of $15.00 per hour will be charged for the ~adtng permit when it is issued. *'As Built" grading plans will be treated as o~L1 aubn~t~L~s ~u the ~Tadin~pLtn check process. PROCKDUR~ TO OBTA~AGRAD~C FE~H~T: 'To obtain a grading permit, · grading plau m~st be submitted. Grading plans indicating less than 200 cubic yards of cu~ or f~l, my be prepared b7 ~he applicant o~ s~tndard plan sheets ¢2~0'x~60') ,~ith a ec~e of I ~nch m 20 fee~, providing that the Ltninum requirements out~Lned belov are met. Grading plans ~ndiceting larger quantities, must b prepared by a b~istered Ci~ ~ineer. 28~-86 ~v: 3/85 GRADING PLAN CHECK LIST Please make the following x marked corrections. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 1. 2. 3. ' LOG d Grading plans shall be on 24'x36' sheets Submit copies of the preliminary soils report/geologic reports. Submit copies of hydrology & hydraulic reports prepared by a R.C.E. Obtain Flood Control, Road Dept., Planning Dept., or ~pprova~-~fore a grading perml"--~t will be tssue~. agency ~, c) approvml . 5. Indicate any special use permit on plan:. a) type , b) number date..._, provide conditions of approval. !I. TITLE BLOCK: 1. Provide a short legal description of property, include Lot/Parcel No. & Tract/PM No. 2. Include name, address, & phone number of: ~er, eingineer, soil engtneer, jeologist on plan. All copieso-Tplans, etc. require a R.C.E wet signature. Include a bar scale. Benchmark: Use Riverside County precise level or Federal agency benchmark; 9ave benchmark No., elev., location & adjustment date. Provide topography source; be specific. Provide a legend. GRADING NOTES: 1. Add circled notes on Form 284-21 to plan. 2. Add paving notes on Form 284-46 to. plan. 3. Provide a earth quantity estimates; provide supporting celt's ----:_4. Not a balanced job. . ]ndicate precise location ofI import source, place~mnt. export SURVEY INFORMATION: 1. ~. 4. 5. Provide a vicinity map. Include a north arrow & scale. Show a distance & bearing or curve data on each property line. Monumentetlon notes, if any. Provide a copy of the street improvement plans. Provide the following street information: street nmmes, edge of pavement & right of way dimensions, direction of fl~& grades of street, TC/FL elevations Show original ground cont~Fs. Show proposed contours, grades, and elevations. Include parcel or lot number. V6RAJ)ING PLAN: ___!- Delineate pad dimensions Z. Show the building foot print. ~3. Indicate elevations of pad & finished ~ioDr. ~4. Show t~ptcal lot dratnage by mrrows (--,-) & spot elevations. -----5. Show dayltght line of Ill cuts/fills. $. Observe Ped elevations per Ord. 457, sectton $hew the Iocatton of benms, s~ales, boThditches, dovndratns & ill'other drainage factltttesofplan. ..__~. $ho~ iocmttDn &detatls of driveways; mmxtmw driveway gride ts 15%. D~AIL$: __1. Show detatls of ill surface & sub-surface dratnage ~aclltttes, walls and drainage protective devtces on plan. (Includes berms, swales, & browditches) .~__2. Show detail of keying & benchtrig on plan. 284-120,.. Rev: 12/86 DEPART~'NT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY COUL'TY OF RIVE-RSIDE PAVING NOTES 1. Minimu~ parking lot grade shall be 1%. 2. Minimu~ grade for ribbon drains shall be 0.35% 3. An approved soil sterilizer shall be used on all subgrade surfaces prior to plac~ent of paving. Aspbaltic emulsion (fog sea1) shall be applied not less than four- teen days following plac~ent of the asphalt surfacing and shall be applied at a rate of 0.05 gallons per square yard, asphalt emulsion shall conform to Sections 37, 39 and 94 of the State S~andard Speci- cations. The subdivider or contractor shall apply to T. he Riverside County Road Depar=ment for an encroac~ent permit for all work within county right-of-way. T~o special inspections are required by the Building and Safety Depar=ment. One inspection a~ the time t. he base is placed and ~he second when the A. C. has been placed. The con~_ractor shall be responsible for the clearing of the proposed work area, and reloca=ion and cost &f all existing utilities. The county shall be informed 48 hours prior to beginning of cons=ruction at (714) 787-2025. A compaction report by a Soils Engineer shall certify 95% compaction of base prior to call for secon~ /nspec=ion and placement of asphalt paving. FUI~IS~ ~NTITY~PAVl~GM~EPJ~LASFOLLO~S: A.C. (TONS) 284-46 Rev. 11/85 JOB LOCAT]ON LEGAL D£$CR[PTZON 6RAD[NG PLAN CHECK NO. · EP/LRII~!ENT OF B~ILDZN~ AND S/LFE'FY COUNTY OF RIVERSZDE CORRECTION SHEET DATE CO. UNITY ASSESSOR'S #0. GRAOING PERMIT FEE $ PLEASE ADD CIRCLED ND'IE5 BELOW 1D. 11. All grading shall conform to the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 70, as amended by Ordinance 457. Minimum building pad and drainage swale slope shall be -1% if cut or fill is less than lO', 2% if cut or fill is greater than 10'. Drainage swales shall be a minimum of 0.2' deep and be constructed a minimum of 2' from the top of cut or fill slopes. Maximum cut and fill slope - 2:1. Provide 5' wide by 1' high berm or equivalent along the top of all fill slopes over 5' high. All grading shall be done under the supervision of a competent soils engineer who shall certify that all fill has been properly placed and who shall submit a final compaction report for all fills over l' deep.' A Registered Civil Engineer shall submit to the Building and Safety Department written certification of completion of rough grading in accordance with the approved grading plan prior to issuance of the building permit. Certification shall be to line, grade, elevation and location of cut fill slopes. Provide a brow ditch, designed to handle 100yr Q Storm flows, along top cut of slope. Final compaction report will be required for all fills greater than one foot. All grading shall be done in conformance with recmendations of the preliminary soils investigation by dated . lwo sets of the final cmkoaction report shall be submitted to the Building and Safety I)epartamnt ~tch shall include foundation design rec~,,,endations and certification that grading bas been done in conformance with the recommendations of the preliminary soils report. The contractor shall cottry the District Butldtng and Safety Department at least 24 hours in advance requesting finish 1or grade end drainage inspection. This in- spectien must be &pproved prior to building periit final inspection for each lot. Cut slopes t. qual to ~r greater than $' tn ~erttcml height end ft11 slopes equal to or greater than 3' in vertical height shall he planted with grass or ground cover to protect the slope from erosion and instability in accordance with Ordinance No. 457 prior to the approval of final inspection. ZB4-2'1 Rev: 12/86 RiV;:DiD (:ourIcY December !, lgB8 Converse ConsultJnts Inland Emptre 118 West At~ort Drive San Bernardino, CA 924[)8 Attention: #r. Leonard T. Evans Mr. Davtd B. Simon SUBJECT: Liquefaction Kaza~ Project No. 88-81-110-02 Tentative Tract 23992 APN: gz3-Sg0-005 County Geologic Report No. 563L I~ncho California Area ~en tl emen: He have reviewed your report entttled 'Liquefaction Evaluation, County Assessor's Parcel No. 9Z3-590-005-05, Portion of C-12 Information Center Site, Parcel ! of Record of Survey 48, Page 72, Rancho California, CA', dated September 22, 1988, and your response to County review dated November 11, 1988. Your report determined that some sofl liquefaction is posstble beneath the stte during a strong earthquake. Near the existing lake the effect of potentially liqueftable soil zones could result in some lateral spreading or lurching toward the lake. In the valley southwest of the lake the estimated magnitude of settlement of the site surface resulting from soil liquefaction is one-fourth inch or less, Ind the differential settlement would be on the order of one-fourth inch in ZO feet. Your report reconmmnded that: A thick blanket of compacted fill between the ltqueflable soils and the building foundations should be provided, To eltmtnite the possibility of ieterll spreading, tt .ould be .ecessmry to eltmtnite the soil slopes by filling in the leke with compicted fill. An mircreative to this ~ould be to provide i setback between buildings Ind the slope sround the like. If the lake is to remain, buildings should be set back it lemst 30 feet from the top of slope iround the like. 4080 LEMON STREET, g~ FLOOR RIVERSID~ CALIFORNIA 92501 (714) ?B7-,6181 46-209 OASIS $Tr-~EET, ROOM 304 INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 (619) 342-8277 Converse Consultants Inland Empty, -~ o December 1, 1988 The future residential development southerly of the Infor, mtion Center will have an access road from the tract to Ynez Road which will cross this $tte on the fleer southerly end of the Riverside County Zone near CPT-1. In order to construct buildings and/or the access road to the tr&ct, the area southerly of CPT-3 end CPT-¢, shomm on Drawing No. 1 and the revised map in ~our November IX, lg88 response letter, should be overexcavated end recoo~oacted in the upper lO feet or to bedrock, whichever is less, below proposed finished grade. Building foundations should then bottom at a depth of two feet or less to have mt least eight feet of co,patted fill beneath the footings. It is our opinion that the report was prepared tne competent manner and satisfies the additional tnformtton requested under the California £nvtronnmntal Quality Act review and the Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan. Final approval of the report is hereby given. We recon~nend that the following note be placed on the Final Flap prior to its recordation: 'County Geologic Report No. $63L was prepared for this property on September Z2, 1988, by Converse Consultants, end is on file at the Riverside County Planning Depmrtnmnt. The specific item of interest is liquefaction.' The recofi~nendattons mmde tn your report for mitigation of liquefaction potential shall be adhered to in the design and construction of this project. Very truly yours, RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Roger S. Streeter- Pl~ning D.irector Steve~.k. ICupferpmn ' /// Engtneerln~ Geo)ogtst/ // CEG.1ZO5 / ' V SJU~:~ Itancho C411fornte Development Co., Cseba F. Norm Lostbom -Butldtng & ~fet~ (2) Pl&nntng Team I - CITY OF TEMECULA ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEES AND SECURITIES REPORT PARCEL MAP ! TRACT NO. 23992 DATE 12/30/90 FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE SECURITY IMPROVEMENTS Streets and Drainaqe $ 524,000.00 76,500.00 47,500.00 646,000.00 Water $ Sewer $ TOTAL $ *Maintenance Retention (10% for one year) *(or Bonds if work is completed) Monument Security City Traffic Signing and Striping Costs RCFC Drainage Fee Due Signalization Mitigation Fee - SMD Road and Bridge Benefit Fee Other Developer Fees Plan Check Fee Due Inspection Fee Due Monument Inspection Fee Fee Paid To Date (Credit) Total Inspection/Plan Check Fees Due MATERIAL $ LABOR SECURITY $ 262,000.00 $ 38,250.00 $ 23,750.00 $ 324,000.00 $ 64,800.00 11,000.00 33,775.80 53,480.00 -0- 1,459.00 21,410.00 21,708.00 40.45 43,077.55 STAFFRPT \ FTM2 3 9 9 2 ITEM NO. 12 APPROVAL F ~A~CE OFFICER CITY MANA GER CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: MEETING DATE SUBJECT: CITY MANAGER/CITY COUNCIL SCOTT F. FIELD, CITY ATTORNEY FEBRUARY 26, 1991 MARCH 12, 1991 PUBLIC WORKS BID PROCEDURES RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 91-XX electing to be subject to the Uniform Public Construction Cost and Accounting Procedures. DISCUSSION: A public works project is any project involving construction, re- construction, correction, alteration, renovation, improvement, demolition and repair work, involving any publicly owned, leased or operated facility, and excludes routine and recurring maintenance and resurfacing the streets and highways in less than one inch. Public works projects must be performed pursuant to the State Public Contracts Code. The City Council previously adopted by Ordinance the "Alternative Bidding Procedures" contained in the Public Contracts Code, which allows public works projects of less than $25,000 to be let by negotiated contract, and projects between $25,000 to $75,000 to be let by informal bid procedures. Absent this election, the City would be subject to the usual public works contract procedures which require that all projects in excess of $5,000 be let by formal bid. Now that the City is beginning to initiate some projects, it is necessary to implement the alternative bidding procedures. This simply requires that the City elects to be subject to the Uniform Public Construction Cost and Accounting Procedures set forth in the Public Contracts Code. These procedures set forth a cost accounting methodology for determining under what circumstances a public works project may be performed by City employees. As a practical matter, at this time the City will not be performing any public works projects by its own employees. However, the law requires that the City make this election in order to be able to use the higher bid limits set forth in the alternative bidding procedures. A TTA CHMENTS: Resolution No. 91-_ regarding Public Construction Costs and Accounting Procedure RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA REGARDING UNIFORM PUBLIC CONSTRUCTION COST ACCOUNTING PROCEDURES. WHEREAS, prior to the passage of Assembly Bill No. 1666, Chap. 1054 Stats, 1983, which added Chapter 2 commencing with Section 22000 to Part 3 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, existing law did not provide a uniform cost accounting standard for construction work performed or contracted by local public agencies; and WHEREAS, Public Contract Code Section 22000 et seq., the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act, establishes such a uniform cost accounting standard; and WHEREAS, the Commission established under the Act has developed uniform public construction cost accounting procedures for implementation by local public agencies in the performance of or in the contracting for construction of public projects; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Temecula, California, hereby elects under Public Contract Code Section 22030 to become subject to the uniform public construction cost accounting procedures set forth in the Act and to the Commission's policies and procedures manual and cost accounting review procedures, as they may each from time to time be amended, and directs that the City Clerk notify the State Controller forthwith of this election. Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption. Section 3. ' The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1991. ATTEST: Ronald J. Parks, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk 2/Re~o~t 149 [SEAL] STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE) CITY OF TEMECULA ) $S I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Temecula at a regular meeting thereof, held on the day of , 1991 by the following vote of the Council: COUNCILMEMBERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS June S. Greek 2/Resos/149 2 ITEM NO. 13 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Planning Department March 12, 1991 Western Ridgeline Policies PREPARED BY: RECOMMEN DAT ION: Oliver Mujica The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council: Direct Staff to develop interim Hillside and Open Space Policies to be used as the City of Temecula's Western Ridgeline Policies until the General Plan is adopted; and direct Staff to forward said policies to the County of Riverside. Forward a recommendation to the County of Riverside relative to Change of Zone No. 5748 and Tentative Tract Map No. 25980. BACKGROUND: On February 11, 1991, the Planning Department received a letter of transmittal from the Riverside County Planning Department regarding their processing of Change of Zone No. 5748 and Tentative Tract Map No. 25980. Change of Zone No. 5748 proposes to change the zoning designation of the subject 71.48 acre site from R-A-20 (Residential Agricultural - 20 Acre Minimum Lot Size) to R-A-5 (Residential Agricultural - 5 Acre Minimum Lot Size). STAFFRPT\WESTRIDG 1 ANALYSIS: Tentative Tract Map No. 25980 proposes to subdivide the subject 71.48 acre site into eleven (11) residential lots. The proposed density is 1 DU/6.50 acre, with a minimum lot size of 5 acres. On February 27, 1991, the Planning Department received a copy of the Final Staff Report, from the Riverside County Planning Department, for Change of Zone No. 5748 and Tentative Tract Map No. 25980 which was scheduled for the Riverside County Planning Commission Public Hearing of March 6, 1991. The recommendation of the Riverside County Planning Department is for denial (see attached report) based on the following: The proposed project is not consistent with the Southwest Area Community Plan and the Comprehensive General Plan. The proposed project is not consistent with Ordinance No. 460. The proposed project's visual impact is currently unmitigated. On March 1, 1991, the City of Temecula Planning Department Staff presented a letter to the Riverside County Planning Department (attached) requesting that -the item be continued to a County Planning Commission Public Hearing date after March 12, 1991, in order to allow the City of Temecula City Council the opportunity to submit a formal response regarding Change of Zone No. 5748 and Tentative Tract Map No. 25980; and forward formal policies of the City of Temecula regarding development on and adjacent to the Western Ridgeline. The Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP) has the following policies: 11. Hillside Policies ae The "Hillside" designation is applied to relatively small isolated topographic features with slopes in areas of 25%. These features should be incorporated, when possible, into the design of development proposals as open space, and/or larger lot sizes. The Hillside designation shall have a minimum lot size of minimum or .2 STAFFRPT\WESTRIDG 2 12. DU/AC for density transfer purposes. Development within the Hillside area shall follow design Policy 12 la). Open Space Policies a. Mountainous The minimum lot size permitted within the Mountainous designation shall be 10 acres, permitting a 5 acre minimum lot size in the Santa Rosa/DeLuz Area, in accordance with policy (12) and (13). (2) Post and beam construction and special foundations designed to resist earthquake shaking shall be encouraged in areas with slopes in excess of 25% to reduce excessive grading. (3) Development in Mountainous areas shall blend into the natural features of the site and shall attempt to avoid an unvaried, unnatural or manufactured appearance. Narrow canyons which might create a significant fire hazard shall be left undeveloped. 15) Structures must be setback a minimum of 30 feet from any slopes greater than 25% and 30 feet in height and, excepting lawns and some ornamentals and groundcovers, natural vegetation shall be cleared for a distance of not less than 30 feet from any structure. (6) Roads and driveways should attempt to try to avoid alignment through areas of natural slopes in excess of 25%. STAFFRPT\WESTRIDG 3 {7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) Roads crossing drainage channels shall provide for proper drainage, and placement of drainage channels which might undermine or erode the roadbed shall be avoided. All driveways shall be constructed with a finished grade of no more than 15%, Building pads may be permitted on hilltops and ridgelines ( excluding the Western Ridgeline, Policy 14), when grading would be minimized, and mitigated by landscaping and/or special treatment. Erosion andsedimentation control shall be encouraged with retention of existing trees, vegetation, planting of cut and fill slopes. construction of retaining walls, dikes, proper cover and an irrigation system calibrated to soil permeability, Within the Santa Rosa/DeLuz Area, land divisions creating parcels less than 10 acres in size shall provide paved roads that are connected to a maintained road system, or shall be required to form an assessment district to provide such paved access, Each proposed lot less than 10 acres in size, within the Santa Rosa/DeLuz area shall be able to provide a minimum 10.000 square foot building pad. unless post and beam construction is to be utilized. STAFFRPT\WESTRIDG 4 DISCUSSION: {13) The boundaries of the Hillside and Mountainous designations are based on general topographical data, Therefore. the lines should not be considered final for the purposes of determining how much of a given parcel is inside or outside the Mountainous or Hillside designation. Development applications located on the edge of the Mountainous or Hillside designations may be accompanied by more detai led topographic data to further define slope characteristics of the parcels in relation to the parcel. (14) Building sites shall not be permitted on the Western Ridgeline as identified on the land use allocation map, Projects proposed within the area of the Western Ridgeline shall be evaluated on a case by case basis to ensure that building pad sites are located so that buildings and roof tops do not project above the ridgeline as viewed from the Temecula Basin. All projects within a 1/2 mile of the western ridgeline shall also be evaluated on a case by case basis to determining if the building site will have an adverse impact to the ridge line as viewed from the basin, The Planning Staff has the following concerns regarding development on the Western Ridgeline: Potential aesthetic impacts as viewed from the City of Temecula basin, Potential inconsistency with the City's future General Plan, if said plan includes Western Ridgeline Policies. STAFFRPT\WESTRIDG 5 R ECOMMEN DAT I ON: Based on the above mentioned proposal that is currently under review by the County of Riverside; due to the fact that the City of Temecula does not have an adopted General Plan; and since the City utilizes the Southwest Area Community Plan as a guideline document only, Staff suggests that the Hillside and Open Space Policies of the Southwest Area Community Plan should be incorporated into interim City policies regarding the Western Ridgeline until the General Plan is adopted. The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council: Direct Staff to develop interim Hillside and Open Space Policies to be used as the City of Temecula's Western Ridgeline Policies until the General Plan is adopted; and direct Staff to forward said policies to the County of Riverside. Forward a recommendation to the County of Riverside relative to Change of Zone No. 5748 and Tentative Tract Map No. 25980. OM: ks Attachments: Riverside County Planning Commission Staff Report (dated March 6, 1991) Letter to Riverside County Planning Department (dated March 1, 1991) STAFFRPT\WESTRIDG 6 FROM RIU CN~V PLANNING DEP~, ~2,27,1991 16:56 N0,16 P, 2 Z~ning Area: S~nta Roa Rancho Suporvisorial District: First E.A. Numbs: 34917 Regional Team No.: Or~e PROIECT PLAN'NI~R: RAI,PH_L. ~VI'LLIAMS CHANGE OF ZONE NO. S748 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 2S91~0 AMI~'DED NO. 1 Planning Commission: March 6, 1991 Agenda Item No.: 2-1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY PLA~LNG DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT 10. 11. 12. Applicant.: Engm~rlRep.: Type of Request: Location: Existing Land Us~ (Exhibit #1): Surrounding Land U~e (Exhibit #1): Existing Zoning (Exhlblt #2i: Surrounding Zoning (Exhibit Comprehensive General Plan: Land Division Data: LeUers (Opposing/Supporting): Sphcr~ of Xnfiucn~: Pct=r and Judy Rosen Markham and Associates Change the zoning on 71.48 acres from R-A-20 to R-A-5 and subdivide the same acreage into 11 lots. Located northcast of Via Horca and north of ~mino Gatitlo Vacant parcel Vacant parcels, groves ired single family residence R-A-:10 R-A-20, R-A-I0, and R-A-5 Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP} I. and Use: Category IV, Residential Densky: 10 acres minimum Open $pace/ConL: ~fount~nous Total Acreage: 71.48' T0~al Lots: 11 DUPcr Acr~: 1 du/6.50 acres Proposed Min. Lot Size: 5 acres Nons received as of this writing Adjacent to City of Temecula R _ECOM~iENDATIONS: DENIAL of CHANGE OF ZONE NO. f7di from R-A-20 to R-A-5 based on the findings and conclusions incorporated in the staff report; and DENIAL. Of TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 25980, AlVlENDED NO. 1, based on thc findings and conclusions incorl~rated in the staff rcpo~t. FROM RIU CNTV PLANNING DEPT, ~2,27,1991 16:56 N0,16 P, 5 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. $748 TENTATIYE TRACT MAP NO. 25980 AMENDED NO. 1 Staff Report Pase 2 Cha~ge of Zone No. 5748 and Tcn~tiv¢ Tract Ma~ No. 25980, ~end~ No. 1 ~re ~cnt r~ucs~ to c~ge ~e ~ntng on ~o~matcly 71.48 acres from R-A-20 to R-A-5 ~d su~Mde the site into eleven rcsid~ti~ ~ls wi~ a minimum of five (5) a~cs. The site is located northeast of Via Heres and north of Camino Gatillo in the Santa Ro~a Rancho Area. 3. The site is designated as Mountainous by the Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP). 4. Th~ project is tubjeer to Category IV L~d u~e policies. The slte Is currently vacant. Current land urns include vacant parcels, groves, and single family reside.nc~. The site is zoned R-A-20. Surroundhag ~nrdng includes R-A-20, R-A-10, and R-A-5. Outstanding scenic vistas and visu~ features, such ~ the ridgelLnc west of Internlate shall be presetreel and protected. The project is within a 1/2 mile of the Western Ridgeline. Based on the Ridgeline policies all projects within a 1/2 mile of the western ridgeline shall be evaluated on a ~ by c~c b~ia to dcmunin¢ if the building site will have an adverse impact to the ridgeline as viewed from the b~!n. Bazd on the infomarion provided by the a~licant nine of the eleven proposed pad sites will have homes visible in profffie from the Temecula Iluin. 10. The current project has not received clearance fwm the Fire Department. I1. Fatvironmenta! concerns included: Fires Services, $chooh, slope, erosion,'hazardous fire area, Mount Palomar, agriculture, wildlife, vegetation, scenic resources, and archaeological ro~ources. 12. The project's visual impact is currently unmitigated. FROM RIV CNT~ PLANNING DEPT, ~2,27,1991 1~:~7 NO,I~ P, 4 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 5745 TENTATIVE TIL~CT MAP NO. 25980 AMEND~r~ NO. 1 S~ff Report ~'~ge 3 CONCLUSIONS: The proposed project is not consistent with the Southwest Area Community Plan and Comprehenfive General Plan. 2. The proposed project is not consistent with Ordinance No. a60. 3. The propo~,,ed proj~t's visual impact is currently unmitigated. ANALYSIS: Project Descdp. tion_ Change of Zone No. 5748 and Tentative Tract Map No. 25980. Amended No. I are concurrent requests to change the zoning on approximately 71.48 acres from R-A-20 to R-A-5 and subdivide the ~u'a¢ acreage into eleven residential pare, els with a minimum of five (5) acres. The site is located nortttea/t of via Herca and north of Camino Oatillo in the Santa Rosa Rancho zoning area. Plan Consistency Are~ Cgmpatibility The $~uthwest Area Community Plan (SWAP) d~signatlon for the project .',itc i~ Mountainous - 10 acres. Five (5) acre parcels are permitted in the Santa Rosa De Luz area if they are able to provide a minimum of 10,000 square foot pad and meet. other grading criteria. The site is located within 1/2 mile of the Western Ridgeline as identified by SWAP. Under SWAP all projects within a 1/2 mile of the Western Ridgeline shall also be evakmted on ~, case by case basis to determin~ if the building site will have an adver~ impact to the ridgeline ~s vlewod from lhe Temecula Basin. Under SWAP's General Design con$idcratio, s "Outstanding scenic vistas and visual feature~ such as ridgeline west of Interstate 15, shall be preserved and protected'. Southwest Area Community Plan 01x:n Space policies ~fountainous - lqo. 14) state '.,. building fires shall not be permitted on the western ridgeline as identified on the land use allocallon map." P.-'ojecta proposed within ~he area of the western ridgeline must be evaluated on a case by case basis to ensure that building pad sil~s am located so that buildings and roof Wps do not project a~ve ~e ridgefine as viewed from the Temecula Basin (see Extttbit B). The information supplied by the applicant ~hotos, partial line of sight profile) and the prominent location of the s~t~ indicates that approximately 9 of the 11 pad sites will have houses visible profile from the Tcmccula Basin. Based on the above Staff finds the project as designated to be tnconsismm with SWAP's Weslorn Ridgeline policies. FROM RIU CNl PLANNING DEPT. 02,27.1991 16:58 N0.16 P. 5 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. $748 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 2~980 AMENDED NO. 1 Staff Report Page 4 The project site is vacant. $urrotmding land uses arc vacant p~cels, grove, and single Hmily residential. The site is currently zoned R-A-20. Surrounding zoning includes R-A-20, R-A-10, and R-A-5, Orcl[nance Conslstgn. cy County Fire Department recommends denlal of Tentative Tract Mip No. 25950, Amended No. 1 per Ordinance 460 section 3.2 (I) (See fir~ letter). Santa Rosa Community Service District indie. at-~:l that the some driveway locations ~hown do not proviclc adcquatc ~ight dis~ace. Environmentat.^ssessm~nl The initial study for Environmental Assessment No. 34917 was completed for the project. The environmental assessment identified the following areas of concern: schools, slopes, erosion, agriculture, hazardous f:re area, Mount Paloma~ Wildlife and vegetation, Archaeological Resources and Sceaic Resources. The environmental assessment concerns have been addressed as follows: Schools: Iml~et~ to the schooI system serving the area will be mitigated through the payment of state mandated fees. Slopes and Erosion: Slope Stability Report No. 269 was prepared for the site to address these concerns: specific recommendations are found in the County Engineering Geologist letter dated July 24, 1990, Hazardous lrtre Area: Ordinance No. 460 requirements for the maximum length of a cul-de- sac in a Hazardous Fire Area have not bccn met. See Fire Departmcnt letter dated December 20, 1990 Mount Palomar: The site is within 45 mil~ of Mr. Palomar Observatory. Mitigation will be through required'conformance with Ordinance No. 655. Agrkuiture: The site is designated unique farmland by the Comprehensi,~'e General Plan. The Site iS v'ac~mt and does not have an), existing groves on site. No mitigation is required. CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 6748 TENT&TI~E TRACT MAP NO. 255)80 AMF. NDED NO. 1 Staff Report Wild!lie and Vegetation: Biological Survey No. 703 was prepared for the site. Specific recommendations and mitigation are includcd in the conditions of approval. Archaeological Resources: Archaeological Survey No. I623 was conduc~:l for the site and no cultural resources constraints erdst and no archaeological resources were found. $cenk Resources: The proposed tentative map will result in creation of building pads along the ridgeline. This impact is currently unmitigated as the project is designed. RLW:lgg 2/22/91 VAC, GROVES ' GROVES -'CZ 5748/TR 25980 LAND USE Z.~e. SANTA ROSA RANCHO Brow, E5 IlIYE!I,~I§E COilNT¥ PLANNIN~ -' · LOGA~ION MAP , , FROM RIV CNTV PLANNING DEPT 82,27 1991 16 T¥, R'-A-'20 i~ii..TEMECULA CZ 57'48/TR 25980 PROPOSED ZONING I Ex, 2 Isu~; z~ne..SANTA ROSA RANCHO [~i~. 15t No~ ........ ........... By: PLAN!ilH~ DEPARTI~IEtIT NO FROM ~IU CNTV PLANNING DEPI, NO,I~ P, 9 $p 'il)O -.% CP-SWAP AGGGSGO/"G 13..14--'"" Bk.-Pg, Zone. ~,a SANTA ROSA RANCHO T~omas '1257D5, ! Date Bros. E5 Draw.') 940-090, 140 (;up. ~_i.s.t _ ' °' 1/31/G1 JOrawn ,~/~ 1"= 2000' RIVERSIDE COUNTY PL.~NNING DEPARTMENT NO6CALE 0 .,.2 U ,, I l~l .......I-i'-i ..... --L '~' ~ ~.-, i ~ ' "% "=: I'-' '.,~'----~.;,· .... .-._k~_i ·.~...~~_.__.._~ ~ i -~ ....i.-- ! I ~ ': "I' :t Ronald J. Parks May~ Patricia H. Birdsall Mayor I~o Tern Karel F, Undemans Councilmember Peg Moore Councilmember J. ~al Mufioz Councilmember David E Dixon City Manager~ 1714) 694-1989 FAX (714) 694-1999 City of Te_mecula 43172 Business Park Drive .Temecula, California 92390 March 1, 1991 Ms. Laurie Dobson, Senior Planner Riverside County Planning Department 4080 Lemon Street, 9th Floor Riverside, CA 92501 SUBJECT: Change of Zone No. 5748; and Tentative Tract Map No. 25980, Amended No. 1 Dear Ms. Dobson: This letter is in response to the Staff Report received from your office on February 27, 1991, regardin9 Change of Zone No. 5748 and Tentative Tract Map No. 25980, Amended No. 1. The City of Temecula Planning Department Staff has the following concerns relative to the proposal: Inconsistency with the Southwest Area Community Plan (SWAP) hillside and open space policies. 2. Potential aesthetic impacts. 3. Potential inconsistency with the City's future General Plan. e Potential inconsistency with the City's future Western Ridgeline Policies. The City Council would appreciate the opportunity to submit a formal written response regarding the project, as well as the City's Western Ridgeline Policies. However, the next available City Council meeting is scheduled for March 12, 1991. It has been noted that Change of Zone No. 5748 and Tentative Tract Map No. 25980, Amended No. 1 are scheduled for the Riverside County Planning Commission Public Hearing of March 6, 1991. Therefore, the City of Temecula recommends that the project be continued to a public hearing date after March 12, 1991, in order to allow the City the opportunity to formally respond to the project. Ms. Laurie Dobson March 1, 1991 Page 2 Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at (714) 694-6400. Respectfully submitted, CITY OF TEMECULA G/ary Thornhill Planning Director CT:ks Cc: Riverside County Planning Commissioners Ralph L. Williams, Riverside County Planning Department David F. Dixon, City Manager, City of Temecula ITEM NO. 14 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY . FINANCE OFFICER~ CITY MANAGER ~' CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT.' City Council/City Manager Douglas M. Stewart, Deputy City Engineer March 12, 1991 Cooperative Agreement for Design of Ramp Modifications on 1-15/Rancho California Road RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the Cooperative Agreement for the design of ramp modifications on the Rancho California Road freeway overpass. DISCUSSION: Under separate cover you will find a Cooperative Agreement from the State of California. The Cooperative Agreement specifies the responsibilities of the City and the State of California. The Cooperative Agreement details design responsibilities of the City and the State related to the improvements at State Route 15 and Rancho California Road. This Cooperative Agreement is the second in a series of four necessary for the signalization and ramp widening project. The signalization and ramp widening of State Route 15 and Rancho California Road is a long awaited project. It is our hope that the improvements will be completed by July 4, 1991. The approval of the Cooperative Agreement is a necessary step in a long list of procedures that we must follow in working with CalTrans to improve the traffic circulation in the City of Temecula. FISCAL IMPACT.' Financial impact upon the City is minimal. The City will enter into a separate agreement with the Margarita Development Group for reimbursement of design and environmental costs. ITEM NO. 15 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER ~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Planning Department March 12, 1991 Radio and Television Transmitting Antennas PREPARED BY: R ECOMMEN DAT I ON: BACKGROUND: Oliver Mujica The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council: Provide direction as to what types of issues and development standards criteria the Planning Commission and Planning Department Staff should examine in drafting new zoning regulations for antennas in the City of Temecula. On January 8, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 90-01, declaring a forty-five (45) day moratorium on the construction and location of radio and television transmitting antennas. The moratorium was based upon the following findings: That the public and City Staff had indicated to the Council that aesthetic and land use problems had arisen with respect to the construction of television and radio antennas within the City. That it is necessary to re-examine all of the land use regulations of Riverside County which the City has adopted by reference, as they apply to television and radio antennas. That it is necessary, pending the conduct of such study, and the enactment of such regulations based thereon, that a moratorium on the construction of any television and radio transmitting antennas be imposed pending the completion of such study and report. Staffrpt\RADIO. ANT\mb 1 ANALYSIS: That if such moratorium were not imposed, construction of such television and radio transmitting antennas would be undertaken which could very well frustrate the zoning proposal to be examined and studied. On February 13, 1990, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 90-03, declaring a ten (10)month and fifteen (15)day extension of Ordinance No. 90-01, which was due to expire on February 23, 1990. On January 8, 1991, the City Council adopted Ordinance 91-01, declaring a one (1) year extension of Ordinance No. 90-01 to January 8, 1992. At that time, the City Council directed Staff to bring this matter back to Council in sixty (60) days to formulate guidelines for proper zoning. Definitions AMATEUR RADIO ANTENNA - Any antenna array and its associated support structure used to receive and/or transmit radio signals on the amateur radio bandwidth, as designated by the Federal Communications Commission. SATELLITE ANTENNA - Any antenna used to receive broadcasts relayed from orbiting communication satellites. TRANSMITTING ANTENNA - Any antenna and its associated support structure used to receive and/or transmit radio or television signals. CELLULAR TRANSMITTERS - Any antenna and its associated support structure used to transmit cellular telephone signals. EXEMPT ANTENNA - Any common skeletal type radio and television antenna used to receive UHF, VHF, AM and FM signals of off-air broadcasts from radio and television stations. Location of Antenna Non-commercial antennas (i.e. Amateur, satellite) are permitted in all zones as an accessory use. Commercial broadcasting antennas are permitted in the R- R and W-2 zones by right. They are also permitted, subject to a discretionary plot plan approval, in the C- 1/C-P, C-P-S, M-SC, M-M and M-H zones. Staffrpt\RADIO. ANT~mb 2 Development Standards Section 18.20 (Non-Commercial) Height Exceptions - Structures necessary for the maintenance and operations of a building and flagpoles, wireless masts, chimneys, or similar structures may exceed prescribed height limits where such structures do not provide additional floor space. Zone: Heiqht: R-R W-2 No other building or structure shall exceed fifty (50) feet in height, unless a height up to seventy-five (75) feet for buildings, 105 feet for other structures, or greater than 105 feet for broadcasting antennas is approved pursuant to Section 18.3q of Ordinance No. 348 M-H M-M M-SC Broadcasting antennas shall not exceed fifty (50) feet unless a greater height is approved pursuant to Section 18.34 of Ordinance No, 348 C-1/C-P C-P-S All buildings and structures shall not exceed fifty ~50) feet in height, unless a height up to seventy-five (75) feet, or greater than 75 feet for broadcasting antennas, is approved pursuant to Section 18.34 of Ordinance No. 348. Section 18.34 For structures other than buildings, an application for a greater height limit in accordance with the limitations of the zoning classification may be made to the Planning Director pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.30 of Ordinance No. 348. If granted, the approved plot plan shall specifically state the allowed height limit. Section 18.30 Plot Plans are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act and require a Public Hearing. Staffrpt\RADIO. ANT\rob 3 DISCUSSION: CONCLUSION: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: OM:mb Staffrpt\RADIO. ANT\mb The chief weakness in the zoning regulations regarding commercial transmitting antennas is that they are permitted in zones too close to the City center and Interstate 15, which may create the potential of aesthetically impacting the City of Temecula and may be inconsistent with the City's future General Plan. In addition, the Zoning Ordinance does not clearly specify development standards for all antennas. Therefore, The Planning Department Staff has the following suggestions: Require a plot plan or conditional use permit approval for the installation of a commercial antenna in any zone. 2. Impose setback limitations from Interstate 15. 3. Minimize the number of zones permitting transmitting antennas. Impose a distance separation between transmitting antennas. Although the current moratorium is for radio and television antennas only, the Planning Department Staff intends to develop an Ordinance that regulates the following antennas since the current Zoning Ordinance (No. 348) does not provide specific standards: 2. 3. 4. 5. Amateur Radio Antenna Satellite Antenna Cellular Transmitters Transmitting Antenna Exempt Antenna Staff is currently researching several Southern California cities said to have a specific ordinance regulating radio and television transmitting antennas. In formulating a "draft" ordinance, Staff will incorporate the input of the City Council as well as the conclusions of the aforementioned city survey. The Planning Department Staff recommends that the City Council: Provide direction as to what types of issues and development standards criteria the Planning Commission and Planning Department Staff should examine in drafting new zoning regulations for antennas in the City of Temecula. 4 ITEM NO. 16 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER /~v TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECUI. A AGENDA REPORT City Council City Attorney March 12, 1991 Bus Shelters PREPARED BY: June S. Greek, City Clerk RECOMMENDA T/ON: of March 26, 1991. That the City Council continue this matter to the meeting BACKGROUND: At the Council meeting held February 26, 1991, a number of questions were asked and issues raised. The applicant provided the City staff with materials addressing some of these matters on Wednesday, March 6, 1991. We are including those documents with this staff report. Staff requires additional time, to study the proposed locations of the bus shelters for impacts on traffic and safety factors as well as to review the asthetics of the proposed shelters. The proposed contract agreement has not been reviewed by the City Attorney's office at this time. ITEM NO. 17 FINANCEOFFICE~,RP~ CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: MEETING DATE SUBJECT: CITY MANAGER/CITY COUNCIL SCOTT F. FIELD, CITY ATTORNEY MARCH 5,1991 MARCH 12, 1991 ESTABLISHMENT AND ACTIVATION OF A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the first reading of an Ordinance, entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 91- "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, A C TIVA TING THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF TEMECULA AND DECLARING AND DESlGNA TING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. ' DISCUSSION: The State Legislature has declared that a Redevelopment Agency exists in each community in the state. A Redevelopment Agency, however, cannot be activated until the Legislative Body declares by ordinance that there is a need for a Redevelopment Agency. Thus, the City Council of Temecula has the authority to activate the Redevelopment Agency of Temecula by adopting an Ordinance that declares that there is a need for the Agency to function in Temecula. Upon the adoption of such an Ordinance, the Redevelopment Agency in Temecula would have all the powers enumerated in the Community Redevelopment Law. The City Council also has the option of designating itself as the Redevelopment Agency or appointing resident electors of the City as the Members of the Agency. The exercise of this option may be made at the time that the Agency is activated, or at any time thereafter. If the Council does not declare itself to be the Agency, then the Mayor appoints five persons as the Agency, with the approval of the Council. If the Agency membership is different from the Council, the Council also has the option of increasing the number of Members appointed to the Agency from five to seven. Aaenda Reoort - Ordinance Activating the Redevelooment Agency March 12, 1991 Paoe 2 Activation of the Redevelopment Agency will not cause any effect on the environment and is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act, SUPPORTING FACTS California Redevelopment Law requires that in order to reutilize the Redevelopment process, specific conditions of blight, including economic and social, must exist within the City. Prior to incorporation, the County Riverside, through its Board of Supervisors, adopted a Redevelopment plan known as the "County of Riverside Redevelopment Plan 1- 1988". One of the targeted areas for Redevelopment activities within that Plan is the Old Town Temecula. Subsequent to incorporation of the City of Temecula, the conditions warranting Redevelopment remain substantially unchanged. The effects of varied and inconsistent planning and land use decisions are apparent in innumerous substandard, or irregular parcels. Commercial endeavors could be more productive and more closely meet its economic potential. In addition, future economic growth in the area may require substantial investment in infrastructure and rehabilitation that private industry alone cannot provide. The use of the Redevelopment Agency will allow for upgrading and approving the project area, ensure proper planning through controlled community development, and provide a basis for private economic revitalization. Redevelopment agencies are designed to meet these objectives in areas where blight is found to exist. DRAFT ORDINANCE The City Attorney has prepared an Ordinance which would activate the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula, designate the City Council has the Agency, and make the findings required under state law. In addition, the proposed Ordinance designates the City Manager as the Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency, the City Clerk as the Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency, and the City Attorney as the Agency's General Counsel. A TTA CHMENTS: Draft Ordinance FISCAL IMPACT: The activation of the Redevelopment Agency will not have a direct, immediate fiscal impact upon the City budget as it is an independent governmental entity. ORDINANCE NO. 91- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA, ACTIVATING THE REDEVELOPM1ZNT AGENCY OF TEMECULA AND DECLARING AND DESIGNATING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF TEMECULA. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33100, there exists in the City of Temecula a separate public body, corporate politic, known as the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Temecula is hereby activated and is authorized to function within the City and transact business and exercise all powers which may be performed or exercised by a redevelopment agency under the provisions of the Constitution of the State of California and Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et sea_., "Community Redevelopment Law"). SECTION 2. DESIGNATION OF CITY COUNCIL AS THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. The City Council shall be the Redevelopment Agency of Temecula and all of the rights, powers, duties, privileges, and immunities vested in a redevelopment agency under the Community Redevelopment Law shall be vested in the City Council. SECTION 3. FINDINGS. A. Policies and Goals. It is the desire and intent of the City Council to promote sound growth, development and redevelopment of the City of Temecula through: (1) Correction and/or elimination of substandard, insanitary, blighted, and deteriorating buildings, structures and conditions within the City; and (2) The clearance, reconstruction, rehabilitation restoration, conservation, with proper planning of those areas of the City where such activity is necessary or desirable; and (3) Encouraging and undertaking public and private improvement programs beneficial to the City and its residence. 2\ORDS\16 I B. Specific Findings. (1) In order to achieve the policies and goals described in this Section, it is necessary and the public interest, convenience and necessity require the Redevelopment Agency of Temecula to be activated and to function within the City of Temecula. (2) Declaring the Council to be the Redevelopment Agency of Temecula will serve the public interest and promote the public safety and welfare of the City of Temecula in an effective manner. SECTION 4. DESIGNATION OF OFFICIALS. The City Manager of the City shall serve as the Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency. The City Clerk of the City shall serve as the Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency. The City Attorney of the City shall serve as the General Counsel of the Redevelopment Agency. Such officials shall have the duties and powers as specified in the Community Redevelopment Law and as may be assigned or delegated to them by resolution of the Redevelopment Agency. SECTION 5. CEQA. The adoption of this ordinance, without the performance of subsequent discretionary acts of the City Council and/or the Redevelopment Agency which have not yet been planned, identified, formulated, or defined will not have any effect on the environment within the scope of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 .el sea_.). In addition, the adoption of this ordinance constitutes the reorganization of local governmental agencies and is therefore exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15320 of Title 14 of the California Administrative Code. SECTION 6. FILING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE. The City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of this ordinance to be filed in the office of the Secretary of State, and in addition, shall certify to the passage of this ordinance and shall cause the ordinance to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 1991. Ronald J. Parks, Mayor ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk 2\ORDS\16 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) CITY OF TEMECULA ) S$. I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. ~ was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the ~ day of , 19__. That thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the ~ day of , 19__, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: C OUNC ILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Scott F. Field, City Attorney 2\ORDS\16 3 ITEM NO. 18 APPROVAL FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: MEETING DATE SUBJECT: CITY MANAGER/CITY COUNCIL SCOTT F. FIELD, CITY ATTORNEY MARCH 5, 1991 MARCH 12, 1991 ADOPTION OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. RECOMMENDA T/ON: That the City Council approve the first reading of the Attached Ordinance No. 91-_ adopting the County of Riverside Redevelopment Plan. DISCUSSION: Prior to the incorporation to the City of Temecula, the County of Riverside through its Board of Supervisors duly adopted a Redevelopment plan, known as the "County of Redevelopment Plan 1-1980." All of the territory included within the County Redevelopment Plan is now within the boundaries of the City of Temecula; therefore, it is necessary to transfer the territorial jurisdiction of the County Redevelopment Agency to the City Redevelopment Agency. Health and Safety Code Sections 33214-33216 set out rules for such transfer authority when all or part of a plan area has been included within the boundaries of a city, by incorporation or annexation, subsequent to the adoption of the Plan by the County. Since all of the territory within the project area is to be transferred, Section 33215 is most applicable and I have set forth the steps to be taken by the City below. Section 33215 provides that if all of the territory included within a County plan is subsequently included within the boundaries of the City, the territorial jurisdiction of the County agency over all of the territory in that project area may be transferred from the County Agency to the City Agency. In conducting the transfer the City must adopt, or have adopted, both the following ordinances: An Ordinance pursuant to Section 33101 declaring the need for an agency to function in the City; and Aoenda Report - Adoorion of Redevelopment Plan March 12, 1991 Paoe 2 An Ordinance adopting the same Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area that was previously adopted by the Board of Supervisors. The effective date of the transfer of territorial jurisdiction is the first day of the fiscal year which begins following the effective date of the latter enacted ordinances described above. After the transfer the following applies: The City Agency has all of the rights, powers and duties to implement the Plan; and, The debts and any other obligations of the County Agency in connection with the Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area are assumed by the City Agency; and, For purposes of this Section including 33670 (relating to division of taxes), the Redevelopment Plan in considered to have been adopted by the City Council on the date the Redevelopment Plan was originally adopted by the Board of Supervisors. A TTA CHMENTS: FISCAL IMPACT: Ordinance No. 91- None at this time. ORDINANCE NO. 91- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA ADOPTING A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Temecula does hereby find, determine and declare, as follows: (a) That the County of Riverside, prior to the incorporation of the City of Temecula, duly adopted a redevelopment plan, known as the "County of Riverside Redevelopment Plan 1-1988"; and, Co) That subsequent to the enactment of that redevelopment plan, the City of Temecula was incorporated; and, (c) That all of the territory to which the redevelopment plan applies is now included within the corporate boundaries of the City of Temecula; and, (d) That it is the purpose and intent of this Ordinance to adopt the said redevelopment plan pursuant to the authority set forth in Section 33215 of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California, and other applicable law; and, (e) That the City Council of the City of Temecula has determined that the public interest, convenience and necessity require the enactment of this Ordinance. SECTION 2. That that certain redevelopment plan adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside on July 12, 1988, by Ordinance No. 658, entitled "County of Riverside Redevelopment Plan No. 1-1988" be, and hereby is, adopted by this City Council. A certified true and correct copy of the County of Riverside Redevelopment Plan No. 1-1988, as enacted by Ordinance No. 658 of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside, and as adopted by this Ordinance, is on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City. SECTION 3. The effective date of the transfer of territorial jurisdiction with respect to the County of Riverside Redevelopment Plan No. 1-1988, shall be July 1, 1991. SECTION 4. That the City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance and cause the same to be published in the manner prescribed by law. PASSED AND APPROVEI~ this day of ,1991. ATTEST: Ronald J. Parks, Mayor June S. Greek, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss. CITY OF TEMECULA ) I, June S. Greek, City Clerk of the City of Temecula, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 91- was regularly introduced and placed upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day of , 19_. That thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the ~ day of , 19__, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: June S. Greek, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Scott F. Field, City Attorney 2\ORDS\ 15 2 ITEM NO. 19 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER ~ CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Douglas Stewart, Deputy City Engineer March 12, 1991 Undergrounding Utility Lines along Winchester Road PREPARED BY: R ECOMMEN DAT I ON: BACKGROUND: Douglas M. Stewart, Deputy City Engineer Receive and File Staff Report regarding undergrounding of utilities along Winchester Road. At the February 26, 1991 Council Meeting I was requested to research and bring back a report on the undergrounding of electric utility lines along Winchester Road in the area currently under construction by AD 161. The existing overhead electric utility lines are as follows: East of Margarita Road, 12KV; West of Margarita Road, 12 KV and 115 KV. Assessment District 161 is not authorized to underground these utility lines. These lines are currently being relocated by AD 161 to allow for the widening of Winchester Road. Attached for your review is County Ordinance 517, which establishes regulations and procedures for the removal and undergrounding of utility lines. This ordinance was adopted by reference in December 1989, when the City incorporated. Ordinance 517 requires overhead electric lines (34,500 volts and smaller) to be undergrounded when located in an undergrounding district approved by the Board of Supervisor's. At the time of writing this staff report it is not known whether Temecula resides in such a district. If it is not, the City Council certainly may create one under this Ordinance, pursuant to the procedures listed in the Ordinance. Under Ordinance 517 the actual undegrounding of the utility is normally required of development adjacent to the affected utility. It is staff's recommendation that the City require development along Winchester Road to accomplish 1 the undergrounding as each property develops. In the case where short frontages exist, cities commonly will exact a deposit from the developer and underground utilities when longer portions maybe accomplished at one time. staff\Win Rd. ORDINANCE NO. 517 AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS AND PROCEDURES FOR THE REMOVAL OF OVERHEAD UTILITX FACILITIES AND THE INSTALLATION OF UNDERGROUND FACILITIES IN UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICTS The Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside, State of California, do ordain as follows: Section 1. Whenever in this ordinance the words or phrases here- inafter in this section defined are used, they shall have the respec- tive meanings assigned to them in the following definitions: a. "Commission" shall mean the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California. b. "Underground Utility District" or "District" shall mean that area in the County within which poles, overhead wires, and associated overhead structures are prohibited as such area is described in a resolution adopted pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 of this ordinance. c. "Person" shall mean and include individuals, firms, corpora- tions, partnerships, and their agents and employees. d. "Poles, overhead wires and associated structures" shall mean poles, towers, supports, wires, conductors, guys stubs, plat- forms, crossarms, braces, transformers, insulators, cutouts, switches, communication circuits, appliances, attachments and appurtenances located above-ground within a District and used or useful in supplying electric, communication or similar or associated services. e. "Utility" shall include all persons or entities supplying electric, communication or similar or associated service by means of electrical materials or devices. Section 2. Public hearing by Board of a. The Board of Supervisors may from Supervisors. time to time call public hearings to ascertain whether the public necessity, health, safety or welfare requires the removal of poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures within designated areas of the County and the underground installation of wires and facilities for supplying electric, communication, or simi- lar or associated service. The County Clerk shall notify all affected property owners as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and utilities concerned by mail of the time and place of such hearings at least ten (10) days prior to the date thereof. Each such hearing shall be open to the public and may be continued from time to time. At each such hearing all persons interested shall be given an opportunity to be heard. The decision of the Board of Supervisors shall be final and conclusive. Ord. 517-1 Report by County Surveyor and Road Commissioner. Prior to holding such public hearing, the County Surveyor and Road Commissioner shall consult all affected utilities and shall prepare a report for submission at such hearing containing, among other information, the extent of such utilities' partic- ipation and estimates of the total costs to the County and affected property owners. Such report shall also contain an estimate of the time required to complete such underground installation and removal of overhead facilities.-- Section 3. If, after any such public hearing the Board of Super- visors finds that the public necessity, health, safety or welfare requires such removal and such underground installation within a des- ignated area, the Board of Supervisors shall, by resolution, declare such designated area an Underground Utility District and order such removal and underground installation. Such resolution shall include a description of the area comprising such district and shall fix the time within which such removal and underground installation shall be accomplished and within which affected property owners must be ready to receive underground service. A reasonable time shall be allowed for such removal and underground installation, having due regard for the availability of labor, materials and equipment necessary for such removal and for the installation of such underground facilities as may be occasioned thereby. Section 4. Whenever the Board of Supervisors creates an Under- ground Utility District and orders the removal of poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures therein as provided in Sec- tion 3 hereof, it shall be unlawful for any person or utility to erect, construct, place, keep, maintain, continue, employ or operate poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures in the Dis- trict after the date when said overhead facilities are required to be removed by such resolution, except as said overhead facilities may be required to furnish service to an owner or occupant of property prior to the performance by such owner or occupant of the underground work necessary for such owner or occupant to continue to receive utility service as provided in Section 9 hereof, and for such reasonable time required to remove said facilities after said work has been performed, and except as otherwise provided in this ordinance. Section 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of this ordinance, overhead facilities may be installed and maintained for a period, not to exceed thirty (30) days, without authority of the County Surveyor and Road Com~issio~er in order to provide emergency service. The County Surveyor and Road Commissioner may grant special permission on such terms as the County Surveyor and Road Commissioner may deem appropriate in cases of unusual circumstances, without discrimination as to any person or utility, to erect, construct, install, maintain, use or operate poles, overhead wires and associated overhead struc- tures. Ord. 517-2 Section 6. This ordinance and any resolution adopted pursuant to Section 3 hereof shall, unless otherwise provided in such resolution, not apply to the following types of facilities. a. Any County facilities or equipment installed under the super- vision and to the satisfaction of the County Surveyor and Road Commissioner. b. Poles, or electroliers used exclusively for street lighting. c. Overhead wires (Exclusive of supporting structures) crossing any portion of a District within which overhead Wires have been prohibited, or connecting to buildings on the perimeter of a District, when such wires originate in an area from which poles, overhead wires and associated overhead structures are not prohibited. d. Poles, overhead, wires and associated structures used for the transmission of electric energy at nominal voltages in excess of 34,500 volts. e. Overhead wires attached to the exterior surface of a building by means of a bracket or other fixture and extending from one location on the building to another location on the same building or to an adjacent building without crossing any pub- lic street. f. Antennae associated equipment and supporting structures, used by a utility for furnishing com~unication services. g. Equipment appurtenant to underground facilities, such as sur- face mounted transformers, pedestal mounted terminal boxes and meter cabinets, and concealed ducts. h. Temporary poles, overhead wires and associated overhead struc- tures used or to be used in conjunction with construction projects. Section 7. Within ten (10) days after the effective date of a resolution adopted pursuant to Section 3 hereof, the County Clerk shall notify all affected utilities and all persons owning real orop- erty within the District created by said resolution of the adoption thereof. Said County Clerk shall further notify such affected proper- ty owners of the necessity that, if they or any person occupying such property desire to continue to receive electric, communication, or similar or associated service, they or such occupant shall provide all necessary facility changes on their premises so as to receive such service from the lines of the supplying utilities at a new location, subject tO the applicable rules, regulations, and tariffs of the respective utility or utilities on film with the Commission. Notification by the County Clerk shall be made by mailing a copy of the resolution adopted pursuant to Section 3, together with a copy of this ordina~ce, to affected property owners as such are shown on the last equalized assessment roll and to the affected utilities. Section 8. If underground construction is necessary to provide utility service within a District created by any resolution adopted pursuant to Section 3 hereof, the supplying utility shall furnish that portion of the conduits, conductors and associated equipment required to be furnished by it under its applicable rules, regulations and tariffs on file with the Commission. Ord. 517-3 Section 9. Responsibility of property owneAs. a. Evezy peAson owning, operating, leasing, occupying oz ~ent- ing a building o~ stAuctuAe within a District shall construct and p~ovide that portion of the service connection on his paope~ty between the facilities ~efe~ed to in Section 8 and the termination facility on oz within said building oz struc- ture being seared, all in accoAdance with the applicable ~ules, ~egulations and tariffs of the Aespective utility o~ utilities on file with the Commission. If the above is not accomplished by any person within the time pAovided fo~ in the ~esolution enacted puAsuant to Section 3 hereof, the Coun- ty SuAveyoA and Road Commissioner shall give notice in wait- ing to the peAson in possession of such p~emises, and a notice in waiting to the owneA thereof as shown on the last equalized assessment ~o11, to provide the Aequired undeA- gAound facilities within ten (10) days after receipt of such notice. b. The notice to provide the Aequized underground facilities may be given eithe~ by personal seAvice oz by mail. In case of service by mail on either of such peAsons, the notice must be deposited in the United States mail in a sealed envelope with postage prepaid, addressed to the peAson in possession of such pAemises at such premises, and the notice must be addAessed to the owneA rheA,of as such owner's name appeaAs and must be addressed to such owneA's last known addAess as the same appea~s on the last equalized assessment Aoll, and when no addAess appears, to General Delivery, City of .... . If notice is given by mail, such notice shall be deemed to have been aeceived by the person to whom it has been sent within forty-eight (48) hours after the mailing rheA.of. If notice is given by mail to eithe~ the owner oz occupant of such p~'emises, the County Surveyor and Road CommissioneL shall, within foAty-eight (48) hours afte~ the mailing theme- of, cause a copy thereof, printed on a card not less than eight (8) inches by ten (10) inches in size, to be posted in a conspicuous place on said premises. The notice given by the County SuzveyoA and the Road Commis- sione~ to p~ovide the ~equi~ed underground facilities shall particularly specify what work is Aequized to be done, and shall state that if said work is not completed within thirty (30) days afte~ ~eceipt of such notice, the County Surveyor and Road Commission will provide such zequized unde~gzound facilities, %n which case the cost and expense rhea.of will be assessed against the pAopeAty benefited and become a lien upon such p~ope~ty. If upon the expiration of the thirty (30) day period. the said ~equiAed underground facilities have not been p~ovided, the County Su~veyo~ and Road Commissione~ shall forthwith pAoceed to do the work, provided, however, if such p~emises a~'e unoccupied and no electric o~ communications services aAe being fuAnished thereto, the County SuxveyoA and Road Commis- Ozd. 517-4 ee fe g® sione~ may in lieu of pzoviding the ~equi~ed underground facilities, authorize the disconnection and ~emoval of any and all oyezhead service wiAes and associated facilities sup- plying utility seavice to said pzopezty. Upon completion of the wozk by the County Suzveyoz and Road Commissioner, he shall file a wzitten ~epo~t with the Board of Supe~visozs setting foAth the fact that ~equi~ed undezg~ound facilities have been p~ovided and the cost thereof, togethe~ with a legal descziption of the p~opezty against which such cost is to be assessed. The Board of Supervisors shall thereupon fix a time and place fo~ heazing p~otests against the assessment of the cost of such wozk upon such p~emises, which said time shall not be less then ten (10) days the~eaftea. The County SuAveyoz and Road Commissionez shall fozthwith, upon the time fo~ hea~ing, such p~otests having been fixed, give a notice in wLiting tO the person in possession of such p~emises, and a notice in wziting thereof to the ownez theme- of, in the manne~ hereinabove pzovided foA the giving of the notice to p~ovide the ~equiAed undezgzound facilities, of the time and place that the Boazd of SupeAvisozs will pass upon such ~epo~t and will heaz p~otests against such assessment. Such notice shall also set loath the amount of the p~oposed assessment. Upon the date and houz set fo~ the hea~ing of pzotests, the Board of Supervisors shall heaz and considez the zepozt and all protest, if the~e be any, and then p~oceed to affirm, modify oz aeject the assessment. If any assessment is not paid within five (5) days afte~ its confizmation by the Boazd of. Supezviso~s, the amount of the assessment shall become a lien upon the p~opezty against which the assessment is made by the County SuAveyoz and Road CommissioneA and the County Suzveyoz and Road Commissione~ is directed to tu&n oyez the Assessoz and Tax Collectoz a notice of lien on each of said pzope~ties on which the assessment has not been paid, and said AssessoA and Tax Collectoz shall add the amount of said assessment'to the next ~egula~ bill foL taxes levied against the pLemises upon which said assess- ment was not paid. Said assessment shall be due and payable, and if not paid when due and payable, shall beaA interest at the zate of six pez cent (6) pez annum. Section 10. County shall ~emove at its own expense all County owned equipment from all poles ~equiaed to be aemoved heaeundea in ample time to enable the owne~ oz useL of such poles to aemove the same within the time specified in the ~esolution enacted puLsuant to Section 3 hereof. Section 11. In the event that any act zequi~ed by this ozdinance o~ by a zesolution adopted pursuant to Section 3 hezeof cannot be performed within the time pLovided on account of shoztage of materi- als, waz, ~est~aint by public authoLities, stLikes, laboA dis- tu~bances, civil disobedience, oA any othe~ ci~cumstances beyond the O~.d. 517-5 cont&ol of the actoA, then the time within which such act will be accomplished shall be extended foa a peaiod equivalent to the time of such limitation. Section 12. It shall be unlawful fo& any pezson to violate any p~ovision of this o~dinance. Any person violating any p~ovision of this o&dinance shall be deemed guilty of an infaaction oz' misdemeano~ as he&einafte& specified. Such pe&son shall be deemed guilty of a sepa&ate offense fo~ each and eveay day oa poztion theaeof duzing which any violation of any of the pzovisions of this ozdinance is committed, continued, o& permitted. Any peason so convicted shall be: (1) guilty of an inf&action offense and punished by a fine not exceeding one hund&ed dollars ($100.00) foA a fi&st violation; (2) guilty of an infzaction offense and punished by a fine not exceeding two hundz'ed dollazs ($200.00) foa a second violation. The thi&d and any additional violations shall constitute a misdemeanoa offense and shall be punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollazs ($1,000.00) o& six (6) months in jail, oa both. Notwithstanding the above, a fiAst offense may be chaaged and plosecuted as a misdemeano&. Payment of any penalty he&ein shall not &elieve a person f~om the &esponsibility coa~ecting the violation. Section 13. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phaase of this oadinance is foA any aeason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the Aemaining poAtions of this o~dinance. The Board of Supe~visozs hereby declazes that it would have adopted the o~dinance and each section, sub-section, sentence, clause oz phzase thezeof, izzespective of the fact that any one o~ moze sections, sub-sections, clauses oz phrases be declaaed invalid. ~ ADOPTED: 10-7-68 (Eff.: 11-6-68) 517.1 (Eff.: 5-25-89) Ozd. 517-6 ITEM NO. 20 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFIC~ CITY MANAGER '~ TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT City Council/City Manager Douglas Stewart, Deputy City Engineer March 12, 1991 Interim q-Way Stop Controls on Ynez Road at Motorcar Parkway/Advanced CardioVascular Systems Southerly Driveway. PREPARED BY: Douglas M. Stewart, Deputy City Engineer RECOMMENDATION: Receive and File Staff Report DISCUSSION: On February 23, 1991 at a meeting of the joint Traffic and Transportation/Planning Commission an interim 4-Way Stop Control was approved on Ynez Road coincident with Motorcar Parkway and the southerly driveway of A.C.S. The staff report recommending approval is attached for your review. The stop signs and associated striping were installed on the subsequent weekend. On February 26, 1991, Councilman Munoz requested that the placement of the stop signs be brought before Council for their consideration. Pursuant to further conversation with Councilman Munoz on February 27, 1991, I have included a memorandum discussing other alternative solutions for Council consideration. These alternatives include: Ao Installation of the permanent signal configuration. Temporary flashing beacon (to be used on a part- time basis). Maintain existing 4-Way stop controls, Remove the existing 4-Way stop control. 1 The design work for the signal installation of the permanent signal has been authorized by ACS and is being completed by J.F. Davidson and Associates. The City is prepared to expedite processing of these plans and will assist in fast-tracking the installation of the signal. Installation could occur as soon as 60 days from now. A temporary flashing beacon (and/or a temporary signal) was considered in the approval process for the 4-Way stop control. Since the permanent signal is being fast-tracked, this type of installation could not be installed in a faster time frame than the permanent signal. Maintaining the existing 4-Way stop controls provides the public with the margin of safety necessary for this type of intersection with the projected cross-traffic volumes as presented by ACS. Removal of the 4-Way stop controls with no replacement control is not recommended by staff. staff/A CS- 1 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Doug Stewart, Deputy City Engineer Doug MacPherson, Senior Transportation Engineer February 28, 1991 Traffic Control at Ynez Road and Motorcar Parkway/ACS Driveway Per your request, traffic conditions at the intersection of Ynez Road and Motorcar Parkway and the Advanced Cardiovascular Systems Driveway have been reviewed in an attempt to identify less restrictive methods of traffic control. The alternatives, with associated benefits, costs, and our comments are itemized below: 1. Install ultimate traffic signal improvements a) Construction of traffic signal improvements are currently required of the ACS project. These improvements could be installed by ACS in approximately 60 days utilizing the following schedule: Design 15 days Bidding 15 days Construction 30 days b) Overall traffic delay and congestion should be significantly reduced by the installation of a traffic signal. Specifically, interruption/delay to Ynez Road traffic would be substantially reduced with this alternative. c) Estimated cost: Approximately $10,000 additional cost to ACS for expediting the construction period (including procuring signal equipment). Total signal cost to ACS is estimated to be $120,000. 2. Install temporary flashing beacon for part-time 4-way stop control a) Installation of part-time 4-way stop control is likely to produce the following effects: Minimal reduction in delay to motorists. It is assumed that the 4-way stop control would be in effect during the peak hours of the day, which is the period where delays caused by 4-way stop control are greatest. Removal of the ~-way stop control during off-peak hours results in reduction in delay only when delays are already at a minimum. T R A F F I C\M68 Doug Stewart February 28, 1991 Page ~ e Increase in motorist confusion which may cause an increase in accident potential since the stop control would be in effect only during certain hours of the day. It is estimated that installation of a flashing beacon could be completed in 45 to 60 days. Estimated cost: $25.000 Maintain existing 4-way stop control a) The existing 4-way stop control is warranted by the provisions of the "Traffic Manual", b) Since the installation was completed several weeks ago. the majority of motorists utilizing this intersection are becoming more familiar with the 4-way stop and appear to be adjusting their driving habits and patterns accordingly. Changing the traffic control at this location (to other than the ultimate and optimum traffic control solution, i,e. a traffic signal) will require motorists to go through what we believe would be an unnecessary learning process again. Remove the existing 4-way stop control a) In view of the recent investment in this intersection, this would not be a desirable option unless the original need for this traffic control were to be resolved in another manner. It is our opinion that the costs and time associated with other temporary traffic control alternatives would be better applied to expediting the installation of the traffic signal (Alternative 1 ) which is the ultimate solution to reduce congestion and delay and enhance safety at Ynez Road/Motorcar Parkway/ACS driveway, DM:ks CC: Tim D. Serlet Brian Krcelic Mark Greenwood Ahmed Aburahmah TRAFFIC\M68 CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission/Traffic and Transportation Commission Douglas Stewart, Deputy City Engineer '~ February 13, 1991 Interim q-Way Stop Controls on Ynez Road at Motorcar Parkway! Advanced Cardiovascular Systems Southerly Driveway. PREPARED BY: Douglas Stewart, Deputy City Engineer RECOMMENDAT ION: BACKGROUND: That the Joint Traffic and Transportation Commission and Planning Commission approve the interim installation of 4- Way Stop controls on Ynez Road at Motorcar Parkway/A.C.S. Southerly Driveway and authorize the Engineering Department to change and install Traffic Signing and Striping on Ynez Road Motorcar Parkway and the Southerly Driveway of A.C.S. Parking Facility. A condition of the plot plan approval for Advanced Cardiovascular Systems (Plot Plan No. 1), is to relocate the main driveway to align with the existing intersection of Motorcar Parkway on the east side of Ynez Road. The project is also conditioned to design and fully construct a traffic signal at this location. This signal is conditioned is to be operational prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new construction on site. !n an effort to utilize this driveway as the main point of ingress and egress during construction of the project, A.C.S. has requested to open the driveway prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The primary reason for opening this driveway ahead of schedule is to allow remaining construction to proceed. The construction of the traffic signal remains a firm condition. The signal will be installed and operational prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. staffrpt\WesCorr2 1 DMS! KS: lb attachment Temporarily, all A.C.S. employees will be utilizing the gravel parking site on the east side of Ynez Road and A.C.S. will bus the employees. This comprises approximately 600 employees per day being transported across the intersection. The staging of construction materials and equipment will also take place across the street with construction traffic also passing through the intersection on a regular and frequent basis. City staff agrees with the request and concurs that the use of 4-Way Stop Controls will provide an adequate temporary solution for both the City and A.C.S. The California Vehicle Code does warrant q-Way Stop Controls where installation of a traffic signal is impending. Not only will this interim installation achieve an extra margin of safety for all the employees being bussed through the intersection, it will also provide a safer route for construction traffic and personnel. The installation of the q-Way Stop will also begin programming motorists for the eventual traffic signal intersection. A drawing of the intersection is attached for your review. staffrpt\WesCorr2 2 -I I I ITEM NO. 21 AGENDA TEMECUI A COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT A REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS PUBLIC COMMENTS CONSENT CALENDAR 1 2 3 4 MARCH 12, 1991 8:00 PM Birdsall, Lindemans, Moore, Parks, Mu~oz Minutes RECOMMENDATION: 1.1 Approve the minutes of February 26, 1991, as mailed. Agprove Amendment to Contract With California Landscage RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Approve amendment to contract with California Landscape Maintenance Inc., to provide landscape maintenance services for parks and slopes from March 1, 1991 through June 30, 1991. 4\CSDAgenda~O3! 291 -1- 03/06/91 Tractor Lease/Purchase RECOMMENDATION: 3.1 Award bid to Artesia Implement for a lease/purchase of one (1) tractor for the TCSD. Ai;)grove Extension of Contract - MacKensie Landscape RECOMMENDATION: 4.1 Approve extending contract with Mackensie Landscape for TCSD slope maintenance services. DISTRICT BUSINESS 5 6 7 Sports Park Conceptual Master Plan RECOMMENDATION: 5.1 Approve the Conceptual Master Plan of Sports Park. TCSD Assessment Audit RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Authorize Muni Financial Services Inc., to prepare the TCSD Assessment Audit for FY 1991-92. Approve Park Improvements to the Park Site on La Serena Way RECOMMENDATION: 7.1 'Approve California Landscape Inc. to develop two sand areas at the park site on La Serena Way. 7.2 Approve Miracle Equipment to provide and install two sets of playground equipment to be located in sand areas. COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORTS ADJOURNMENT Next meeting: March 26, 1991, 8:00 PM, Temporary Temecula Community Center, 27475 Commerce Center Drive, Temecula, California 4\CSDAgenda~03129! -2- 03/06191 ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT HELD FEBRUARY 26, 1991 A regular meeting of the Temecula Community Services District was called to order at 8:45 PM. PRESENT: 4 DIRECTORS' Birdsall, Lindemans, Parks, Mu~oz ABSENT: 1 DIRECTORS: Moore Also present were City Attorney Scott F. Field and June S. Greek, City Clerk. PUBLIC COMMENTS None given. CSD BUSINESS 1. Minutes It was moved by Director Lindemarts, seconded by Director Parks to approve the minutes of February 12, 1991, as mailed. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Parks, Mu~oz NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: I DIRECTORS: Moore La Serena Park Fencinq Shawn Nelson, Director of Community Services, introduced the staff report. Director Parks asked if having a local contractor install the fence would negate the warranty. Mr. Nelson responded that the warranty would still be valid. Director Lindemans asked if off-road vehicles would be a problem with the unfenced 11 acres of the park. Mr. Nelson answered he had not had any reports of problems at this time. 4/Minutes/022691 -1- 03/04/91 CSD Minutes February 26, 1991 Director Birdsall asked if this park had been named? Mr. Nelson stated it has not. Director Lindemarts suggested naming it after the first casualty of the war in the Persian Gulf. It was moved by Director Parks, seconded by Director Birdsall to approve staff recommendations as follows: 2.1 2.2 Authorize the TCSD to purchase the Woodcrete Rail System fencing materials for the 2.5 acre park property on La Serena Way from Designer Concrete Products, Inc. Authorize staff to obtain proposals from local contractors for the installation of said fencing materials. The motion was carried by the following vote: AYES: 4 DIRECTORS: Birdsall, Lindemans, Parks, Mu~oz NOES: 0 DIRECTORS: None ABSENT: I DIRECTORS: Moore COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT Mr. Nelson reported that the Conceptual Master Plan of Sports Park would be on the Agenda of March 12, 1991 for Council consideration. He also reported a request would be on the agenda for one member of the Board to be appointed to serve on the Parks and Recreation Master Plan Technical Subcommittee. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT None given, D/RECTORS REPORTS President Mu~oz asked when park land acquisition would be on the agenda. Mr. Nelson reported a report would be coming within the next 60 days. Director Birdsall stated she would be attending the League of California Cities Meeting on March 14, 1991 in Oakland as a member of the Committee on Community Services, and would bring back a report. 4/Minutes/022691 -2- 03/04/91 CSD Minutes February 26, 1991 ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Director Lindemans, seconded by Director Birdsall to adjourn at 8:56 PM to a meeting on March 12, 1991 at 8:00 PM, at the Temporary Temecula Community Center. The motion was unanimously carried by Director Moore absent. Sal J. Mu~oz, President ATTEST: June S. Greek, City Clerk 4/Minut®s/022691 -3- 03/04/91 ITEM NO. 2 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFIC~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS DAVID F. DIXON MARCH 12, 1991 AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT WITH CALIFORNIA LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE INC. PREPARED B~ SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Approve amendment to contract with California Landscape Maintenance Inc., to provide landscape maintenance services for parks and slopes from March 1, 1991 through June 30, 1991. FISCAL IMPACT.' Cost to provide park and slope maintenance services through June 30, 1991 not to exceed $20,000.00 per month. Unencumbered funds for park maintenance exist in 019-190-5250; and for slope maintenance in 019-191- 5510. DISCUSSION: California Landscape Maintenance Inc. is currently providing park maintenance services to Sports Park and Sam Hicks Monument Park, as well as slope maintenance services to various TCSD contracts. The current contract with California Landscape was negotiated through February 28, 1991. With the spring months ahead, there will be an increase of maintenance costs associated with the warmer climate. Therefore, it is requested to amend the existing contract to include those costs to finish out the fiscal year. A 10 percent contingency is also budgeted to cover any required irrigation repairs. ITEM NO. 3 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY ~ FINANCE OFFICER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS DAVID F. DIXON MARCH 12, 1991 TCSD TRACTOR LEASE/PURCHASE PREPARED BY: SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Award bid to Artesia Implement for a lease/purchase of one (1) tractor for the TCSD. FISCAL IMPACT.' Cost to lease the tractor is $10,200.00 per year on a 48 month lease. Unencumbered funds exist in account #019-190-999-44-5610. DISCUSSION: After evaluating the equipment needs of the TCSD, it is recommended to lease one (1) tractor for maintenance needs at the park sites. The lease is for 48 months and will allow the TCSD access to a tractor without the high capital outlay in one fiscal year, and at the end of the lease the tractor is owned by the TCSD. The tractor has a two (2) year warranty on all parts and repairs, and because the vendor is local, repair turn-around time is very good. The tractor will allow the TCSD the ability to complete major renovation projects at various park sites. Although the Massey Ferguson initially costs the City 6.5% more than the Ford tractor, Staff recommends purchasing the Massey Ferguson because of greater service reliability based on the following superior design specifications. 1. Lift Capacity 4. Bucket Capacity M.F. 4923 M.F. I cu. yard. Ford 2800 Ford .75 cu. yard 2. Break-out Force 5. Engine M.F. 7231 M.F. 248 cu. in. Ford 4500 Ford 201 cu. in. Pumping Time M.F. 1.0 sec. Ford 2.4 sec. CITY OF TEMECL~A Bff) OPEN'~G LOG SHEET PROJECT DESCRII~ION: Tg'ccd-'~0~t~ BIDDER: 4~ ~1~ 5c~3. too BID BOND CC: City Clerk's Staff (3) Initiating Department (1) City Manager (1) Signed: Dated: 2\formskbida\B-010 CITY OF TEMECUI.4 43172 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92390 BID SHEET BID DATE AND TIME BID DUE Thursday, February 21, 1991 at 4:00 o'clock DELIVER TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE CITY OF TEMECULA P.O. BOX 3000 43172 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92390 Prices must be listed by individual unit price. indicated along with payment and discount terms. Make: Year: Available delivery date must be Sales Tax: License: TOTAL: Please print or type the following information: = DELIVERY TIME TO BE WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER A WARD OF BID __ Soecif'y delivery dae after orde. r received' / ~ c'~ .AO~./'~ PLEASE SUBMIT COMPLETE WARRANTY INFORMATION CiTY OF TEMECULA 43172 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92390 BID SHEET BID DATE AND TIME BID DUE thursday, February 21, 1991 at 4 o'clock DELIVER TO CITY CLERK'S OFFICE CITY OF TEMECULA P.O. BOX 3000 43172 BUSINESS PARK DRIVE TEMECULA, CA 92390 Prices must be listed by individual unit orice. Available delivery date must be indicated along with payment and discount terms. Make: Ford Model: 260C Year: NEW Color: Yellow Unit Sale Bid Price: $ 29,850.00 Sales Tax: $ 1,940 25 (6.5%) License: $ -o- TOTAL: $ 31,790.25 Please print or type the following information: DELIVERY TIME TO BE WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER AWARD OF BID Soecifv delivery date after order Payment Terms Comoany Submitting Bid: Address: Phone Number: Sales Manager (Print): Authorized Sianature: Remarks: received: 30 days Lease- 48 months McCo¥ Tractor & Equipment ii10 W. Washington Ave, Escondido. (619) 745-8745 Frank Redlet CA q7025 PLEASE SUBMIT COMPLETE WARRANTY INFORMATION TRACTOR SPECIFICATIONS Tractor must be equipped with a four-in-one bucket loader of at least one yard capacity. '/~ Tractor must be equipped with a Gannon H.D. 4480 L.R. Scraper installed with four spool controls. Tractor must be supplied with a two year limited warranty fully covering drive train and major hydraulic components. 7e$ Tractor must be supplied on a four year lease program, interest rate not to exceed 9-1/2%. Tractor must be purchasable at end of lease for no more than 1% of tractor cost. No more than one month's lease payment shall be required to begin lease. City shall have the option to terminate lease aT any time without penalty. Should lease be terminated, City will reimburse supplier for damages to tractor beyond normal construction use. ~/eS Tractor must be supplied with at PTO unit, delivering at least 45 hp. ITEM NO. 4 TO: FROM: DA T£: SUBJECT: APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER~ CITY MANAGER CITY OF TEM£CULA AGENDA REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS DAVID F. DIXON MARCH 12, 1991 EXTENDING CONTRACT WITH MACKENSIE LANDSCAPE PREPARED B~ SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR RECOMMENDA T/ON: That the Board of Directors: Approve extending contract with Mackensie Landscape for TCSD slope maintenance services. FISCAL IMPACT.' Cost per month for slope maintenance services not to exceed $9,870.00 per month. Unencumbered funds exist in #019-191-5510. DISCUSSION: Mackensie Landscape is providing slope maintenance services for various TCSD contracts. It is necessary to extend the contract with Mackensie Landscape to continue those services through June 30, 1991. A ten percent contingency is also budgeted to cover any required irrigation repairs. ITEM NO. 5 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECUIA A G£NDA REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS DAVID F. DIXON MARCH 12, 1991 SPORTS PARK CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN PREPARED BY: SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Approve the Conceptual Master Plan of Sports Park. DISCUSSION: The purpose of the Conceptual Master Plan of Sports Park is to give the TCSD a development plan that can be phased as monies are available. The overall plan is conceptual in nature, and modifications can be made during the development of the construction drawings. This plan includes an overall schematic drawing of Sports Park, a development phasing plan, and a capital improvement budget. The total costs to implement the Capital Improvement Plan at Sports Park is estimated at $13 million. These improvements includes grading, drainage, parking, irrigation, facilities, and park amenities. The main facilities proposed include the Community Recreation Center, 50 meter swimming pool, 500 capacity outdoor amphitheater, maintenance garage, restroom/snack bar facility, and a restroom facility. Amenities include playground areas, picnic shelters, picnic tables, barbecues, drinking fountains, trees, and circulation paths. I have enclosed a reduced copy of the schematic drawing of Sports Park, and a phasing plan for your review. n~m · .,.-.q I::; · _~.~ . / '~ · · ~ I~ ,,, · · ,N c~ )...I 0 ~ I--m ~') .,. I:~l~ ~ · m,,, ~ "'~' · · C.I dd '~ OJ ,--' '--4 · · % ~ ~ I~ ..-,..-... · mmmm · '~. ~ ~., 0 ~J , . :..? .,~ ~ ~ ~t ,.4-, ~ ,~ .,., - ~ mmmmmm · mm · ~ ~O.C ~ ~ · ~ ~ e k m o : · / . ] ~'~ ~ L ,,~ ~AGENDA TEMECULA CITY COUNCIL A REGULAR MEETING TEMECULA TEMPORARY COMMUNITY CENTER- 27475 COMMERCE CENTER DRIVE MARCH 12, 1991 - 6:30 PM Next in Order: Ordinance: No. 90-08 Resalution: No. 90-2l~ EXECUTIVI= SESSION Clos.~ . __ ~.~, o~a,,,,pursuam ~o Government Code Section 54956.9(c) ro o~scuss initiation of Iitigat~n. CALL TO ORDER: Invocation Flag Salute CALL: PRESENTATION$/ PROCLAMATION$ PUBLIC COMMENTS Pastor Gary Nelson Councilmember Birdsall Birdsall, Lindemens, Moore, Mufloz, Parks Proclamation - Peace Corps Day Proclamation - Commending President George Troops of Operation Deserr Storm Bush and the A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the Council- on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Council about an item Q9I listed on the Agenda;? a pink 'Request To ,~oesk" form should be filled out and filed with the City Clerk. When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and address, For all other agenda items a "Revest To Speak" form must be filed with the City Clerk JZQ/Qr~ the Council gets to that item. There is a five (5) minute time limit for individual speakers. NOTICE TO THE PUaZI(; All matters listed Under. Consent Calendar are Considered to be routine and all will be enacted by one roll call Vote. There will be members of the City Council request SPecific no discussion of these items unless Calendar for separate action. ' items be removed from the Consent 500 .T.Z' 2,100 LF 2,200 LF 207,000 SF 10 EA 200 L~ C!te~t: C_t~yof T~mecula C.D.a. #: 90-508 Mobiliza~ Storm Drain Un~e~mn~ng Swale Rs-Routs Swale Refurbishment 18" Diameter RCP lirain.kine Site Work 5btal Lump Sum Lum~ Sum Lum~ Sum L~mg. Sum Lured Sum Lum~ Sum Lum~ Sum 85o.0o/Ex 6o.oo/ $ 500,000. 400,000. 900,000. 110,000. 70,000. 54,000. 250,000. 8,500. 12,000. $ 2,304,500. Suite ('.t).'qa Mesa, (~% 9Z626 FAX ( 714') 7~.7'~46 .~ ~0 Main Ple~anum, ( (.i 15) -1~2-1926 Re)7 D(-i .',tii D.' I(10 Juan 1 Rix'ers~d~. ( ;A 92501 t 71 'i ) 312,790 SF 13,600 2,235 3,250 3 ~A 5,010 ~P 5,090 Lf LF ~a 1,510 LF 10 ~A 1 EA 51,500 10 6,500 2 35 AsDhaltic Concrste Paving w~th Smal C.~aC Pa~ng Lot Striping and m ~w.]d.ng u:a: ~nc=~tm Cub and Gutter ~te Swale Control Fenc~ at Pool Briclc~-30' 5mqgth Calvert and Emmsem~t Ballfield Amanities * e $ t.50/~ $ Lump Sum 9.oo/ 16,00/LF 16.oo/. ' 7.00/LF 9,00/LF 17.50/LF Lump Sum 71,860.00/1~ 4.oo/ 250.00/EA Lt.m~ Sum 5oo.oo/zx 469,1 85. 3,000. 122,400. 35,760. 52,000. 189,000. 35,070. 45,810. 7,000. 55,000. 30,000. 54,360. 718,600 800,000~ 206,000. 2,500. 17,875. 180,000. 17,500. .~ (.~Iifoenla (:twporuUt)rt [ i,-cnsc Numl~r 1 ~,26 · Sl'T~ aMENIT!~ (~) 35 EA I EA 2,600 LF Root Cont_~l Barrier Relocate Existin9 Play Apparatus ~T~d ~nt_rol F~cm Electrical for 7 Fields and Sit~ Park I.D. Sign Driveway 75.00/EA $ 2,625. Lump Sum 25,000 · Lump Sum 7,150. Lump Sum 1,000,000. 6,000.00/EA 12,000. 1,500.00/EA 1,500. $ 4,089,335. Site Amenties Total 1 33% 1 EA 1 EA 1 FA Restm:zr~/gnack Bar Facility Restrocm Facility Mmin~ C~agm ommmr~ty ~u~!d~ng ~$ Lump Sum Lump Sum Lump Sum Lum~ Sum Architecture Total 160,000. 120,000. 200,000. 2,000,000. 2,480,000. FLAY 17 FA 10 F,A 105 EA 20 FA 10 ~A 5 5 F.A Play Aggaratus - 3 Areas ~ $ ALLOW $ 1 50,000. Play ~:fzL~znent Total $ 150,000. ~BL. Litter Can Holders and ar~ 32 Gallon Cans ~RQ Grill Picnic Table and Bench Set Plumbing Aucessorie$ Bike Back @ $ 350.00/EA $ 5,950. 650.00/EA 6,500. 1,200.00/EA 126,000. 750.00/EA 15,000. 2,200.00/EA 22,000. 1,000.00/EA 5,000. 725.00/EA 3,625. Site Furnitur~ Total $ 184,075. 1,410,405 762,880 12 1 1 12 Automatic Irrigation @ $ .80/SF $ 1,128,325. Automatic Slope irrigatzL~n .60/SF 457,730. Enc~ 1,150.00/EA 13,800. Weather Station and Acoessories Lump Su~ 10,000. Phcue Link Concentrator Lu~o Su~ 4,000. Controllers 4,400.00/EA 52,800. Irrigation Total $ 1,666,655. PLANTING ,410,405 762,880 ,262,840 762,880 96,800 50,765 54O 1,880 305 ~ Soil Pr~p./Weed Abata~_nt @ $ .20/SF $ 282,085. SF Slope Weed Akataaent .15/~ 114,435. ~ eeded Turf .06/SF 75,775. SF S~ Hydroseed .06/SF 45,775. ~ Grour~co~r .35/SF 33,880. SF ~dow Mix .06/SF 3,050. EA 5 Gallon Trees - Slope Area 30.00/EA 16,200. ~A 15 C~__llon Trees 85.00/EA 159,800. EA 24" Box Trees 250.00/EA 76,250. Planting Total $ 807,250. 30 Calen _w~__r Day Plant Establishment 60 ~l~dar Day Post Installation @ $ .021SF/M~H $ 43,470. @ $ .02/SF/MTH $ 121,970. 10% CONT!NGENCZ ,184,730. $ 13,031,985. * BALLFIELD AMENITIES INCLUDE: S~EACH~RS AND PLAYER ~NC~ES BRICK DUST, BASES/PLATES, FENCING, Cardoza-DiLallo-Earrington has prepared this statement of probable .constr~ctic~ cost c~ the basis of the materials specified on the drawings and its best professional judgement and experience with the construction ind~t.-y. The statement, however, represents assumptions and opinions of the construction market and contractor's methods of determining actual construction costs over which oam.~oza-DiLallo-F~rrlngton has n~ cc~trol. ITEM NO. 6 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICEP~ CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS DAVID F. DIXON MARCH 12, 1991 TCSD ASSESSMENT AUDIT PREPARED B~ SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Authorize Muni Financial Services Inc., to prepare the TCSD Assessment Audit for FY 1991-92. FISCAL IMPACT: Cost for the complete parcel audit, database development, and tax levy will not exceed $49,000.00. Unencumbered funds exist in FY 1990-91 operating budget as follows: 1. TCSD $24,501.00 2. Information Systems 10,000.00 3. Planning 4,833.00 4. Engineering 4,833.00 5. Finance 4,833.00 DISCUSSION: The TCSD assessments for FY 1990-91 included erroneous parcel charges to property owners due to misinformation provided by the County of Riverside concerning parcel land uses. Further, the methodology inherited from the County to assess property owners for slope maintenance and street lighting services needs to be revised. It is therefore imperative to develop the TCSD assessments for FY 1991-92 based on accurate parcel information. The objective is to create a fair and equitable assessment based on benefit to individual property owners. The TCSD Assessment Audit will include an inventory of every parcel within the City boundaries to ensure accurate parcel land uses; development of a software program to administer the assessments and track any mid-year mergers, subdivisions, and apportionments; and prepare the levy tape for the FY 1991-92 tax roll. A selection committee interviewed prospective consultants and reviewed cost proposals to determine the lowest qualified bid. The TCSD Assessment Audit Selection Committee consisted of Mary Jane Henry, Finance Officer; Joe Hreha, Information Systems Manager; Gary King, Park Development Coordinator; and Shawn Nelson, Director of Community Services. After reviewing the proposals, the Selection Committee is recommending that Muni Financial Services Inc. be awarded the contract based on their expertise and cost estimate. The cost estimates submitted are as follows: 1. Muni Financial Services Inc. 2. FRA Services, Inc. 3. BSI Consultants, Inc.~ $48,400.00 99,010.00 Incomplete Submitted an incomplete cost estimate based on time and materials which was unacceptable. I have enclosed a copy of the proposal provided by Muni Financial Services for your review. Muni Financial ,Services Inc. PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE SPECIAL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION SYSTEMS AND SERVICES FOR THE TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT FEBRUARY 1991 Muni Financial Services, Inc. 42217 Rio Nedo suite A203 Temecula, CA 92390 (724) 699-3990 Fax: (714) 699-3460 1440 Francisco St. San Francisco, CA 94123 (415) 441-3550 Fax= (415) 441-1401 Muni Financial Services Inc. 42217 Rio Nedo Suite A203 Temecula, CA 92390 t 714) 699-3990 Fax: (714) 699-3460 1440 Francisco Street San Fransciso. CA 94123 1415) 441-3550 Fax: 1415) 441-1401 February 25, 1991 Mr. Gary L. King Park Development Coordinator Temecula Community Services District 43172 Business Park Drive Temecula, CA 92390 RE: Proposal to Perform Financial Administration Systems and Services. Dear Mr. King: We are pleased to submit our qualifications and information describing administrative systems and consulting services available to the Temecula Community Services District (TCSD). Muni Financial Services, Inc. (MFS) was established with a single purpose in mind: to help public agencies administer special districts and debt. Our team of consulting professionals includes former public administrators, registered financial advisors, civil engineers, a certified public accountant, programmers and system engineers. This accumulation of expertise enables us to offer the most complete support service available. Our hands-on experience administering community services districts and maintenance districts, conducting full parcel audits, and developing custom administration software for public agencies uniquely qualifies us for this project. No other firm in the state has experience in each of these areas, all of which, is necessary to complete this important project. Financial Consulting and Administration Mr. Gary King Page 2 We appreciate the opportunity to present our credentials and approach to special district administration. If you have any questions or desire additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at (714) 699-3990. HC/nec:cf TCSD.SYS Very Truly Yours, MUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. David Keltner, P.E. Director, Special District Services TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Proposed Service .................................... i II. Reason to Select Muni Financial Services, Inc ....... 1 A. Local Presence ................................ 1 B. Specific Knowledge for this Project ............ 1 C. Corporate Philsosphy .......................... 2 III· Scope of A. Phase 1: B. Phase 2: C. Phase 3: D. Phase 4: E. Phase 5: F. Phase 6: G. Phase 7: Services .................................. 3 Audit and Database Development ....... 3 Fiscal Year 1991/92 Levy ............. 5 Review of Policies and Procedures .... 5 Administrative Software .............. 6 User Manual .......................... 7 Installation and Training ............ 7 Optional Annual Services ............. 8 IV. Hardware Requirements .............................. 8 V. Project Team Exhibit A - Organizational Chart .................. 10 VI Fee Proposal ...................................... 11 Attachment A ........................................... 12 I. PROPOSED SERVICES Our approach to the TCSD administrative consulting services and software system development project would be implemented in five phases as follows: Phase 1: Parcel Audit and Preparation of Database Phase 2: FY 1991/1992 Levy Report Phase 3: Review of Policies and Procedures Phase 4: Development of Administrative Software Phase 5: User Manual Phase 6: Installation and Training Phase 7: Optional Annual Services II. REASONS TO SELECT MUNI FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. Local Presence Eight of the MFS employees involved in this project reside within the City of Temecula. Our Managing Director, Harry Clark, was actively involved in the TCSD special assessment levy last year and was instrumental in ensuring compliance with California State Law with regard to proper notification. Our proximity and familiarity with the local area will substantially increase our effectiveness and enable the TCSD to "hit the ground running." Project Phases 2 and 5 will require close coordination with City and MFS staff. Because MFS is a local and very qualified firm the opportunity for immediate access to answer questions and respond to problems within minutes will greatly improve communications and save significant costs to the City by minimizing travel expenses. B. Specific Knowledge for this Project MFS is the only firm in California possessing the necessary experience for this project: a. Complete parcel audits b. Prior CSD and maintenance district administration c. Related software design, development and support Other firms may have experience in one or two of these areas, but no one else can offer the specific knowledge and experience required for this project. This is our area of expertise and we are the industry leader in California. We are one of the most experienced providers of customized special district administration software in California. We have developed systems for the following public agencies: · Escondido · Palm Desert · Victorville · Fresno · County of Placer · Livermore · County of San Bernardino · Chino Hills Managers Ofc · Big Bear Lake · Hayward · Pleasanton · Long Beach Corporate Philosophy 1. Personalized Service Our success is founded upon a corporate philosophy emphasizing personalized service. We attempt to meet with clients at least once every month, or more often if necessary. With a project as important and as complex as the TCSD, clear communication between client and consultant is essential. Telephone conversations and correspondence are valuable, but cannot replace the need for personal presentation. Our strong client relationships are a result of constant communication and a commitment to excellence. Our primary objective is to free up limited staff time by reducing the TCSD workload and responsibilities. This approach allows us to function effectively as an extension of your staff. 2. Educational ApDroach Our adjunct philosophy is that you should understand what we do. To achieve that goal we schedule meetings to review our reports page by page. We review the basis of our calculations and provide full documentation of the laws and implications relative to special district administration. 3. Our Knowledge is Yours We encourage at least one staff member to review our calculations in depth and acquire a detailed understanding of the approach and methodology employed. We want to make the client as comfortable as possible with our performance by taking the 'mystery' out of what we do. 4. Ability to Respond As indicated in the first section of this proposal MFS is capable of immediate response and swift completion of the outlined tasks. We feel certain that no one can respond as quickly as we can and still provide the City with an accurate and comprehensive approach. MFS is prepared to complete Phase I within 45 days of the authorization to proceed. III. SCOPE OF SERVICES Our approach to the TCSD administrative consulting services and software system development project would be implemented in six phases as follows with Phase 7 providing optional follow-up services: A. Phase 1: Audit and Data Base Development City to provide most recent update (at least as current as March 1, 1990) of the County parcel basis data. (MFS can provide this for $200.00) city to provide tape of most recent tax roll submitted for last year's levy. City to provide copies of all current assessor's parcel maps (APN maps). (MFS can provide this for $600.0o) City to provide a boundary map of the Temecula Community Services District. City to provide a low level area photograph of the City of Temecula to be used in the parcel audit survey. (MFS can provide this at cost.) e 10. 11. City to provide copies of maps and other documents prepared by the California Edison Company to identify any meter locations and numbers for street lights and irrigation controllers. Consultant will cross-reference the existing data base against the County parcel data basis data using bi-directional cross-referencing and to identify any miss-matches from this comparison. Consultant will resolve any miss-matches, research assessor's parcel records and provide an up-dated list of any APN corrections. This will include research of existing subdivision activity. Consultant will extract any correct data available from the County and incorporate any corrections discovered in the audit process and provide a correct up-dated data base including only information essential and appurtenant to the levy calculations. Consultant will verify landuses, vacancies aerial photography. from Consultant will field inspect any questionable areas identified by inspection of the aerial photography and make appropriate changes to the data base. 12. Consultant will identify parcels which reflect inconsistencies with record information. 13. Parcel audit shall include four meetings with City staff and any additional meetings will be billed at hourly charge rates. Additional optional Audit Services Consultant can expand the audit to include a verification of newly developed areas to ascertain any gross differences in assessed value versus current assessed valuations. Those parcels with questionable valuations will be identified and provided to the City for further investigation. Consultant can expand the Audit to include an investigation of all subdivision activities for the prior year and any current subdivision activity which could cause a recordation to occur prior to March 1, 1991. 4 Phase 2= Fiscal Year 1991/1992 Levy Consultant will calculate the levy for each parcel using information gained through an examination of the maintenance budget and administrative cost recovery analysis. Consultant will prepare a levy report which details a complete explanation in clear terms of all aspects considered in the preparation of the levy calculations. This report will be suitable for a public information report and/or Engineer's Report as required by law if applicable. Consultant will prepare a 9-track levy tape or disk to be used by the County Auditor for placement of the parcel levies on the 1991/92 property tax roll. Phase 3: Review of Policies and Procedures Consultant will quantify City staffing needs and the procedures used by the City staff in administering the district. A maximum of three days of interviewing, observing, and recording City procedures will be included. Consultant will examine current City procedures to accept and respond to citizen complaints and correct tax bills. Consultant will review and recommend changes to City fees associated with annexations and other requests which affect the district. The City will provide the most recent report used to assign individual assessments including the methodology and calculations used for each assignment. Consultant will review existing reports and exiting methodology used in the prior annual levy. Consultant will analyze the appropriateness and complexity of calculations used for the prior year and make recommendations to simplify the process. Consultant will analyze cost recovery of district including personnel costs, equipment costs, and calculate any City administrative costs associated with the administrative process. Be Consultant will prepare procedures manual outlining the administrative process and recommending any changes. Consultant will examine the revenue history of the district and recommend any procedural changes to improve revenue and cash flow. Consultant will formulate recommendations for alternations to all City procedures. 10. Consultant will establish a financial model for calculating the individual annual assessments. Phase 4: Administrative Software Consultant will provide custom software package to update and automate the city's CSD in a timely fashion. Consultant will provide the ability to calculate annual levies for each parcel and identify the elements combined to determine individual levies and aggregate district totals, ie lighting, landscaping, etc. The system shall be designed to operate on a network micro-computer system and support interfaces with many computer platforms and geo- based data. The software will include the ability to provide reports and custom formats using variations of the built-in data base. The software system will include user-friendly menus to facilitate easy use and minimize errors in data entry. e The software system will include an "un-do" feature to reverse the effects of calculations made in an unappropriated manner. The software system will include on-line help screens to facilitate use. The software system will allow for a comparison of assessments from prior years revealing percentages of increase or decease of assessment within each category. E® The software system will provide creating of a data file, formatted in the County's designated format, to be used for the annual levy. Phase 5: User Manual A manual will be provided to document the software system software and will provide a tutorial to facilitate the training process. The manual will include easy-to-use tips to facilitate use. Documentation shall include a Table of Contents and Indices to facilitate use and understanding of the documentation. Documents shall include reproductions of the screens used in the software to ease the use of such documentation. Phase 6: Installation and Training Consultant will install software and provide on- site training for one day or a maximum of eight hours. Consultant will provide unlimited technical support for the first year and any subsequent year for the proscribed annual fee. Fees for basic annual support will be increased annually in step with the consumer price index, Los Angeles area, for clerical workers. Annual programming updates of the software system shall be included in the annual maintenance fee. Automatic extension of the annual warranty will be included upon payment of the annual maintenance fee. e Updates will include programming changes to reflect changes in the law and how it is applied to the CSD. Updates will include revisions to the user manual. Software enhancements will be available to the TCSD for the additional fees. 7 Phase ?= Optional Annual Services Annual services sill be provided to prepare a nine- track data tape to be used in the delivery of the parcel levies to the County Tax Collector for inclusion in the property tax bills. Annual services will be provided to prepare a computerized printout of the parcel information used to prepare the levy. Annual services will be provided to compare the City's data base from the prior year against the current County basis data to identify all mismatches and APN numbers and landuses as a check against City records for subdivision activity and landuse revisions. A licensed copy of the source code, system documentation, and usury documentation will be placed in escrow after each annual revision. An executed copy of the escrow agreement will be provided to the City. IV. HARDWARE REOUIREMENTS A standard IBM/AT compatible based system is recommended. Minimum requirements include a 40 megabyte hard disk drive, one megabyte of expanded memory, a 1.2 megabyte 5.25" or 720k 3.5" floppy disk drive, and a 2400 BOD to 9600 BOD modem. Monochrome or color monitors, math co-processors and specific printer specifications are left to the discretion of the TCSD. V. PROJECT TE~%M A project team consisting of a Project Manager, at least one Senior Associate, and a Systems'Designer/Programmer has been identified below to provide initial system customization and installation. A overview of team member qualifications is presented in Attachment A. Any future changes in this team will be subject to your approval. The Project Manager on this project will be David Keltnet, P.E., a partner of the firm. He will be responsible for the day-to-day communications with you and will be actively involved in each step of the project to ensure success. His involvement will include supervision of the parcel audit, development of the database and assistance in the policies and procedures review. Mr. Keltner will 8 be assisted by Sandra Neely, a senior assessment engineer formerly with Willdan Associates, and Carla Stalling, an MFS associate. Our Managing Director, Harry Clark, will be responsible for providing any necessary financial advisory support and assisting with the design of the software. Linda Clark, Director of Client Services, will be responsible for overseeing and coordinating data entry. She will also be assisting with the training of system users as needed. Our Director of Product Development, Ken Van Tassel1, will be responsible for the overall system design and programming. The relationships between team members is presented graphically in an organizational chart provided as Exhibit A. Exhibit A MUN~ F~NANC~AL SERVICES, ~NC. ORGANIZATIONAL CHART PUBLIC AGENCY MANAGING DIRECTOR Harry Clark 1972/CFD Administration 1911/1915 Act Administration Arbitrage Rebate System Design Programing David Keitner, PE Norm McPhail Sandra Neely Carla Stalling Linda Clark Norm McPhail Thelma Perkins Chuck Levine Rick M. Knopf I Gay Eichhoff Ed McCIoud, CPA Karolyn Cline Ken Van Tassell Rick M. Knopf Support Services I ~NI FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. February, 1991 Cindy Fox Nancy Collins 10 MFS VI. FEE PROPOSAL The following fixed fees and schedule are proposed to accomplish the scope of work as set forth in Section III assuming a commencement date on or by March 7, 1991. Phase Descriotion Completion Time Completion Dates Fee 1. Parcel Audit 45 days April 22 $ 12,000 2. 91/92 Levy Report 22 days May 15 $ 12,900 3. Policies and Procedures 30 days April 30 $ 5,000 4 Software 60 days May 1 $ 10,000 5. Procedure and User Manual 60 days May 1 $ 5,000 6. Installation and Training (one day) May $ 1,000 For optional services MFS is proposing to perform the described services as per the then current hourly rate plus expenses. Annual maintenance of the administrative software system will be performed for 15% of the current price of the software. The cost of printing, reproduction, posting, publication, noticing, advertising, mailing and postage, and other "out-of- pocket" expenses where provided by consultant shall be reimbursed to consultant at consultant's direct cost, said amounts not to exceed $2,500. 11 ATTACHMENT A STAFF RESUMES HARRY CLARK is the Managing Director of Muni Financial Services, Inc. In that capacity he is responsible for the daily operations of the firm in addition to providing client support services. For the past five years Mr. Clark has focused his efforts on the administration of special districts and has gained considerable expertise in the laws and problems related with the administration of municipal debt. Mr. Clark was previously a Senior Associate with the largest independent financial advising firm in California specializing in the implementation of a wide variety of debt instruments, CIP plans, long range financial plans, bonding capacity studies, reassessment engineering and rate and fee studies. Mr. Clark was also a Senior Public Sector Consultant for two "Big Eight" accounting firms. He has been involved in projects for the State, numerous counties, cities and special districts. Mr. Clark has a Bachelors of Science and Masters in Business Administration from California State University, Long Beach. He has also written numerous articles including "10 Ways to Avoid Debt Management Headaches" published in Western in November 1990. DAVID KELTNER, P.E. is the Director of Special District Services for Muni Financial Services, Inc. He supervises all engineering efforts for special districts which include: · Project cost accounting and confirmation · Incidental engineering services such as right-of-way acquisition, platting, and project management · Formation services such as engineering reports, spread methodology, assessment roll preparation, and R.O.I. coordination · Public bid packaging and specifications · Contract administration · Assessment reports and Annexations · Reimbursement and/or acquisition planning Prior to joining MFS, Mr. Keltner served as principal and chief engineer for a multi-disciplined civil engineering design firm emphasizing the planning and design of major public works facilities and financing plans including the implementation and planning for numerous assessment districts including assessment engineering and special tax formulation. Mr. Keltner has 22 years of experience in public works planning and engineering. Early in his career, Mr. Keltner worked as a design 12 engineer for the County of San Diego and the City of La Mesa preparing plans and specifications for public improvements. He has also worked as a project manager in the planning and design of major residential communities, and in this capacity specialized in infrastructure planning and design for major communities. Mr. Kelther holds a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering from San Diego State University. NORMAN K. McPHAIL has been underwriting tax-exempt bonds in California since 1966. He has authored several articles on public finance management and is widely recognized as a leader in municipal bond consulting and underwriting. Mr. McPhail speaks regularly to industry and public agency groups on subjects related to municipal bond consulting and underwriting and has underwritten over 175 bond issues including bond issues and other capital improvement project financings. Mr. McPhail has pioneered innovative bond financing techniques which can be used in several ways to improve security and cut interest costs. He has served as a City Manager and holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from San Jose State University in Public Administration. LINDA CLARK is Director of Client Services for Muni Financial Services, Inc. and has responsibility for the management of client accounts. This includes an ongoing analysis of assessment district activity, coordination with transfer/paying agents for bond calls, research for title companies, and preparation and follow-up on the annual assessment levy. Additionally, Linda is an expert with our software and will be providing training and on-going support for our administrative software clients. Ms. Clark was previously a Senior Consultant with a "Big Eight" accounting 'firm as an efficiency and operations expert. She was also a Vice-President of Client Services for a nationwide health care cost containment firm responsible for all client relations and analysis of client accounts. Her responsibilities included management of a large telecommunications system and a conversion from a WANG to a DEC computer system. Ms. Clark has strong organizational skills and has been instrumental in auditing and entering large amounts of agency information onto the MFS system software for easier, more manageable administration. Ms. Clark holds a Bachelors of Science degree from the University of Utah and a Masters in Public Health Administration from San Diego State University. 13 LbiFS EDWARD MCCLOUD, ¢PA is a Senior Associate of Arbitrage Rebate Services for Muni Financial Services, Inc. and is responsible for the management of all arbitrage rebated work. Mr. McCloud has over 20 years experience in accounting and data processing. He was formerly with the national auditing firm of Alexander Grant and Company where he earned his Certified Public Accountant Certificate and License. Prior to joining MFS, Mr. McCloud served a controller for the investment banking firm of Bancroft, O'Conner, Chilton and Lavell, Inc., a major underwriter of municipal bonds. Mr. McCloud has taught numerous courses on accounting through several colleges in Southern California. Mr. McCloud has a Bachelor of Arts in Accounting and Master of Science in Taxation from California State University, Fullerton. KEN VAN TASSELL is Director of Product Development for Muni Financial Services, Inc. and is responsible for all software design, implementation, support and enhancements. Mr. Van Tassell has an extensive background in system design and analysis involving micro-, mini- and mainframe computer systems. Mr. Van Tassell has been a Senior Systems and Programming Engineer for a major U.S. defense contractor. His experience as Network Administrator of a large IBM computer network provided a wealth of opportunities to interface divergent computer systems. Mr. Van Tassell's experience in quality control and assurance includes the design and implementation of integrated document tracking systems, development of a custom graphics package to monitor company-wide variables, and the establishment of an electronic network to automate numerical control machines. Mr. Van Tassell has also managed data acquisition and process control projects for offshore oil drilling in Korea and the North Sea. Mr. Van Tassell has a Bachelor of Science in Computer Science from San Diego State University and is constantly updating his credentials through seminars and graduate level course study. SANDRA NEELY is Senior Associate of Special District Services for Muni Financial Services, Inc. and is responsible for the management of special district formation efforts with bond counsel, financial advisors, underwriters and public agency staff. Prior to joining MFS, Ms. Neely served nine years as Project Manager for Willdan Associates providing research, mapping layout and report preparation in conjunction with the formation, 14 implementation and updating of public finance districts. During her tenure at Willdan Associates Ms. Neely worked directly with the Chairman, Bill Stookey, on the development of Mello-Roos and Assessment District projects. Her background includes ten years of experience as a public administrator including development plan review, checking of subdivision maps, improvement and grading plans, inventory audits, definition of incidental costs, method of assessment/apportionment and generating spread. Ms. Neely has a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration and Management from the University of Redlands in California. C~ARLES LEVINE is a Senior Associate with Muni Financial Services, Inc. and is responsible for the management of client accounts in Northern California. This includes working directly with public agencies and providing an ongoing analysis of their special district activity. Mr. Levine is a Certified Financial Planner registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and holds an insurance license issued by the State of California. Mr. Levine had been a geologist with a Bay Area consulting, engineering, geology firm and the United States Geology Survey. Prior to his experience with municipal finance he acquired a broad background in the use and structure of assessment district bonds working for the investment banking/brokerage firms of Wulff, Hansen and Company and Smith Barney, Harris Upham and Company, Inc. Mr. Levine has a Bachelors of Art and a Masters of Science degree from Southern Illinois University. He has published environmental geology papers on the feasibility of sand and gravel dredging of the California coast and fault movement along the Hayward fault. GAY EIC~OFF is a Senior Associate of Arbitrage Rebate Services and as such is responsible for the annual reporting of arbitrage rebate liability. Her responsibilities include monitoring and analysis of bond proceeds and investment earnings. Ms. Eichhoff has spent the past 14 years working closely with executive management developing and administering financial, accounting and personnel operations. She was previously the Assistant Chief Financial Officer for a five million dollar health care firm. Her experience in financial analysis and organizational skills are fundamental to our arbitrage rebate efforts. Ms. Eichhoff has a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of California at Santa Barbara. 15 -:5tFS RICK KNOPF is an Associate with Muni Financial Services, Inc. and has responsibility for administration and special projects including the design and implementation of quality control systems. Mr. Knopf was previously a compliance manager and secondary market analyst with a multi-million dollar national real estate syndicator in the all cash, commercial triple-net lease arena. Prior to his experience in the securities industry he was the microcomputer systems manager for an international non-profit charitable health organization based in San Diego, California. Mr. Knopf is a registered representative with the National Association of Securities Dealers. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Bethel College in St. Paul, Minnesota and has completed coursework towards a Master of Arts degree at Biola University in La Mirada, California. ITEM NO. 7 APPROVAL CITY ATTORNEY FINANCE OFFICER CITY MANAGER TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF TEMECULA AGENDA REPORT BOARD OF DIRECTORS DAVID F. DIXON MARCH 12, 1991 PARK PROPERTY ON LA SERENA WAY PREPARED B~ SHAWN D. NELSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Directors: Approve California Landscape Inc. to develop two (2) sand areas at the park site on La Serena Way, and approve Miracle Equipment to install two (2) sets of playground equipment inside the sand areas. FISCAL IMPACT.' Cost to develop the two (2) sand areas including concrete curbing is $11,775.00, and the cost to purchase and install the two (2) sets of playground equipment is $21,800.00. Unencumbered funds exist in account #029- 190-108-44-5804. DISCUSSION: On February 26, 1991, the Board of Directors authorized staff to install concrete perimeter fencing to the park site along La Serena Way to enhance the safety and welfare of the participants using that site. The final steps necessary to create a functional, safe neighborhood park facility are to develop two (2) sand areas with concrete curbing and install playground equipment to the sand areas. A Standard of Care Safety Inspection Program will be implemented to ensure a high level of maintenance to the equipment and sand surface. Staff is recommending the lowest responsible bid for the development of the sand areas, and the purchasing and installation of playground equipment. If approved, both projects will be completed within thirty (30) days of the Notice to Proceed. I have enclosed a copy of the park site illustrating the playground areas for your review.